Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level = Challenge Rating
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="NotAYakk" data-source="post: 9337454" data-attributes="member: 72555"><p>No, that is completely not how it works? You are describing a system that isn't 5e and then pretending that is how 5e works then objecting that it isn't your system.</p><p></p><p>And a CR 7 monster may have a defensive CR of 1 through 13 - their HP could vary over more than a factor of 2. A monsters Challenge Rating is a very roughly a measure of roughly how much damage it will do <strong>before it is killed</strong> in a fight. So a monster with more HP needs less damage for the same CR, and a monster with less HP needs more damage for the same CR.</p><p></p><p>(Here, damage is a proxy for "threat or bother to PCs": a monster that petrifies might have that petrification "count as damage").</p><p></p><p>You cannot, and should not, map existing monster CR to an expected amount of HP or DPR. That is explicitly not how 5e existing monsters work.</p><p></p><p>And if you constrain your system for designing monsters to making something playable by a PC, you are throwing out huge chunks of monster design space and doing a bad thing.</p><p></p><p>You should split your <strong>measuring monsters</strong> and your <strong>designing monsters</strong> problems from each other. Having a system to <strong>design monsters</strong> is one thing, but unless you want to throw out all existing monsters, you will want a <strong>measuring monsters</strong> system that is more flexible (or flexible to handle existing monsters).</p><p></p><p>Existing monsters <strong>are not designed to be measured 1:1 with PCs</strong>, but meant to be measured against PC parties. This is why they (especially higher CR ones) sometimes have inflated HP compared to damage output: the HP they have determines the length of the fight, and if they don't have enough HP the fight ends after too few rounds to be interesting.</p><p></p><p>Meanwhile, lower CR monsters are often envisioned as being more than 1 foe. Using the 5e encounter balancing system this is mainly restricted to CR 3 and under outside of very high level PCs. Note that most 5e games end by level 10; so monsters of CR 4 and above are rarely in packs.</p><p></p><p>If you are creating a monster Level system meant to be measured 1:1 with PCs, existing monsters won't fit all that well. And that is ok. These monsters need not and should not be forced to emulate PC HP and damage output. They should be designed <strong>to make an encounter with an interesting level of challenge</strong> when used close to 1:1 with PCs.</p><p></p><p>This means their damage output should be calibrated to PC defences and HP to PC offence, not the other way around.</p><p></p><p>As noted, you can usually take a monster and half its HP and double its damage output to get a monster with a "similar" total threat. You do have to be careful that you don't end up with a monster that can one-shot a PC if it wins initiative, and gets one-shot if it loses initiative, as that isn't a super interesting encounter.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Your accuracy is your attribute bonus plus your proficiency bonus plus other modifiers. As designers of monsters, we get to pick how they compare.</p><p></p><p>Your chance to hit factors in AC. As designers of monsters, we get to pick if their AC is higher or lower than equivalent PCs.</p><p></p><p>So yes, we have tools to control accuracy.</p><p></p><p>If you assume magic items on the side of the PCs (which most tables have) and not the monsters, we have even more accuracy tools.</p><p></p><p>What more, as "a single huge foe" is a fun thing to fight, you'll want math to handle a single monster suitable for 3-4 PCs of level X. In 5e that is a monster of CR X to 1.5X, as monsters are designed (mainly) as solo-against-a-party creatures. With a "pure" monster level system, it is likely to be level 2X-3X or something ridiculous: and that 3X monster will probably have too much single-target damage and not enough HP to make an interesting solo encounter. If you assume a linear progression of stats and proficiency it will also have an insanely high ATK modifier and save DCs.</p><p></p><p>OTOH if you permit an elite/solo sub-mechanic on top of level you can get a lower level foe which "counts as" more than one monster.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="NotAYakk, post: 9337454, member: 72555"] No, that is completely not how it works? You are describing a system that isn't 5e and then pretending that is how 5e works then objecting that it isn't your system. And a CR 7 monster may have a defensive CR of 1 through 13 - their HP could vary over more than a factor of 2. A monsters Challenge Rating is a very roughly a measure of roughly how much damage it will do [b]before it is killed[/b] in a fight. So a monster with more HP needs less damage for the same CR, and a monster with less HP needs more damage for the same CR. (Here, damage is a proxy for "threat or bother to PCs": a monster that petrifies might have that petrification "count as damage"). You cannot, and should not, map existing monster CR to an expected amount of HP or DPR. That is explicitly not how 5e existing monsters work. And if you constrain your system for designing monsters to making something playable by a PC, you are throwing out huge chunks of monster design space and doing a bad thing. You should split your [b]measuring monsters[/b] and your [b]designing monsters[/b] problems from each other. Having a system to [b]design monsters[/b] is one thing, but unless you want to throw out all existing monsters, you will want a [b]measuring monsters[/b] system that is more flexible (or flexible to handle existing monsters). Existing monsters [b]are not designed to be measured 1:1 with PCs[/b], but meant to be measured against PC parties. This is why they (especially higher CR ones) sometimes have inflated HP compared to damage output: the HP they have determines the length of the fight, and if they don't have enough HP the fight ends after too few rounds to be interesting. Meanwhile, lower CR monsters are often envisioned as being more than 1 foe. Using the 5e encounter balancing system this is mainly restricted to CR 3 and under outside of very high level PCs. Note that most 5e games end by level 10; so monsters of CR 4 and above are rarely in packs. If you are creating a monster Level system meant to be measured 1:1 with PCs, existing monsters won't fit all that well. And that is ok. These monsters need not and should not be forced to emulate PC HP and damage output. They should be designed [b]to make an encounter with an interesting level of challenge[/b] when used close to 1:1 with PCs. This means their damage output should be calibrated to PC defences and HP to PC offence, not the other way around. As noted, you can usually take a monster and half its HP and double its damage output to get a monster with a "similar" total threat. You do have to be careful that you don't end up with a monster that can one-shot a PC if it wins initiative, and gets one-shot if it loses initiative, as that isn't a super interesting encounter. Your accuracy is your attribute bonus plus your proficiency bonus plus other modifiers. As designers of monsters, we get to pick how they compare. Your chance to hit factors in AC. As designers of monsters, we get to pick if their AC is higher or lower than equivalent PCs. So yes, we have tools to control accuracy. If you assume magic items on the side of the PCs (which most tables have) and not the monsters, we have even more accuracy tools. What more, as "a single huge foe" is a fun thing to fight, you'll want math to handle a single monster suitable for 3-4 PCs of level X. In 5e that is a monster of CR X to 1.5X, as monsters are designed (mainly) as solo-against-a-party creatures. With a "pure" monster level system, it is likely to be level 2X-3X or something ridiculous: and that 3X monster will probably have too much single-target damage and not enough HP to make an interesting solo encounter. If you assume a linear progression of stats and proficiency it will also have an insanely high ATK modifier and save DCs. OTOH if you permit an elite/solo sub-mechanic on top of level you can get a lower level foe which "counts as" more than one monster. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level = Challenge Rating
Top