Why all the crying about CR and EL?

[scadgrad]

arbados,

I assume that perhaps my 3.5 session thread might have spawned this so I'll interject.

I've DM'd for 24 years now so it's not exactly like I'm a complete newbie. Aaron hits the nail right on the head. One of the fundamental precepts of the game is that the EL/CR system is a reasonably functioning engine to spur the game on in terms of experience & appropriate level of challenge for the average group of PCs.

I think MM 3.5 is vastly improved in this regard & as I stated several times in my thread, it's only a first blush observation after one 6-hour session.

There is a difference between criticism & whining.

 

[heimdall]

I can see both sides. As someone who has over 20 years of DM experience myself, I don't use CR and ECLs much, nor do I really use them to base experience. But then again, I worked out what was too weak and too tough, as well as what was too much and what was too little, over that time. So intuitively I know what a party can handle and how much experience to give out for the rate of advancement I want in my campaign. It's close to what you'd get with the CR system, but not exactly.

However, I am a player in a campaign where the DM doesn't have said experience and I can see where the CR really helps him out. He relies on it, and for the most part it has proven pretty workable for him. If he didn't have the CR, he'd be struggling pretty hard to decide what monsters really are appropriate. He's doing his best to be a good DM and every little tool helps.