Earlier last year it was stated by WotC that they were going to provide a tool to calculate CR for homebrew monsters like the one in the 2014 DMG (but isn't in the 2024 DMG/2025 MM). Is that still happening? And, if so, when can we expect that to happen?
So you spend hours perfecting your own custom monster, creating actions, spells, custom legendary actions never seen before, assigning stats, sprinkling lore, perfecting a prompt so AI can spit out an image of your creation.
And after all that you want someone to pick your CR for you, based on your made up stuff ?
So you spend hours perfecting your own custom monster, creating actions, spells, custom legendary actions never seen before, assigning stats, sprinkling lore, perfecting a prompt so AI can spit out an image of your creation.
And after all that you want someone to pick your CR for you, based on your made up stuff ?
Really?
That would be useful, to take the boring part that isn't part of creating the monster and automate it for you, yes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
That would be useful, to take the boring part that isn't part of creating the monster and automate it for you, yes.
Honestly, if you're designing custom monsters the main important thing to do is evaluate how dangerous they are against your PCs. This somewhat correlates with CR, but CR is a really blunt instrument, if you know the capabilities of the PCs and the encounter setup you can be a lot more accurate than CR will ever give you. As such, CR is mostly of academic interest if you aren't planning on publishing your monster.
If you have a strong feel for how encounters balance according to the various stats. Not everyone has that. In my experience, more don't than do.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
If you have a strong feel for how encounters balance according to the various stats. Not everyone has that. In my experience, more don't than do.
For me with starting to design my own monsters those guidelines are helpful with giving an overall idea for "okay, how will this play?" without needing to do a ton of testing beforehand. Lets me get the monster readied without needing to read tons of theory.
not to pick CR for you, but to double check that the damage/health/etc are all within appropriate range for a party of certain level.
also, you wanna talk about someone doing work for you, yet talk about using AI to make the art? wild
I mean you bring up a good point, have AI come up with your CR for you. It will be more accurate than some arbitrary rules system that cant possibly look into the future at what your legendary actions are doing.
It will not be accurate. It will rely on some stolen data from a random forum and when you ask it to fact check it'll go sorry here's the real answer and do the same thing.
As far as I can determine, the standards are not dramatically changed from 2014
Hit Points: for CR <1, average HP = 30 * sqrt(CR). For CR 1-19, average HP = 15 * (CR+1). For CR 20+, average HP = 45 * (CR-13). This is less than the value in the 2014 DMG but matches published monsters fairly well.
Armor Class: 13 + CR/3.
Attack Bonus: 4 + CR/2. This is more than the value in the 2014 DMG but matches published monsters fairly well.
Damage: for CR < 1, average dpr 12 * sqrt(CR). For CR 1-19, average dpr 6 * (CR+1). For CR 20+, average dpr 18 * (CR-13). Area attacks treated as hitting 2 targets. DPR is averaged over the first three rounds of combat. This matches the 2014 DMG but actual published monsters in 2014 were less, 2024 monsters seem to actually hit the benchmark.
Most of the other modifiers from the 2014 DMG can be ignored.
My suspicion is that they've having trouble coming up with a set of rules that are both usable and good.
They should have taken this slower then. Should have just done a D&D 6E for a 2030 release. AFTER tackling and addressing all the major flaws from 2014 - Onward D&D
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Enjoy your slop. I'll be enjoying good products elsewhere.
My suspicion is that they've having trouble coming up with a set of rules that are both usable and good.
They should have taken this slower then.
The importance of monster design rules is greatly overstated. People have been successfully doing it without the benefit of special rules for fifty years, they don't suddenly need it now.
Making monsters from scratch in D&D is just hard - most DMs won't even attempt it and even fewer will be able to do it well. There's too many moving parts (actions, bonus action, reactions, HP, AC, proficiencies, passive traits, resistances, vulnerabilities, etc.) They could have done a section on it like they did in 2014, but I suspect they realized that just wasn't up to the task. It certainly wasn't a good system back then. Custom monster creation rules really need a whole chapter to do it right, which may not have been the best use of space in a core rulebook. Maybe it will make it into a future supplement.
Creating a monster manual with the sheer number of statblocks that they did was a good compromise in my opinion.
Can I suggest Forge of Foes? The new XP/Challenge list falls more in line with the this 5th edition supplement. It was designed to make better, more challenging monsters from scratch and it worked great for me! If you noticed most challenges through 1-6 levels just shifted over one category. Medium becoming Low, hard becoming Moderate, Deadly becoming Hard. After that it is less blatant, but close enough for government work. It suggest several things you can do to make you monsters more challenging by add more reactions, nerfing player abilities among other suggestions. Many things that have been added to in the new MM and some things that haven't . I can't say enough good things about Michael Shea's books like this and The Lazy DM's books. I hope this helps.
Can I suggest Forge of Foes? The new XP/Challenge list falls more in line with the this 5th edition supplement. It was designed to make better, more challenging monsters from scratch and it worked great for me! If you noticed most challenges through 1-6 levels just shifted over one category. Medium becoming Low, hard becoming Moderate, Deadly becoming Hard. After that it is less blatant, but close enough for government work. It suggest several things you can do to make you monsters more challenging by add more reactions, nerfing player abilities among other suggestions. Many things that have been added to in the new MM and some things that haven't . I can't say enough good things about Michael Shea's books like this and The Lazy DM's books. I hope this helps.
I keep meaning to check out FoF.
I was just curious if WotC were still going to follow through, like they previously said, with providing the community with the tools that they used.
My suspicion is that they've having trouble coming up with a set of rules that are both usable and good.
They should have taken this slower then. Should have just done a D&D 6E for a 2030 release. AFTER tackling and addressing all the major flaws from 2014 - Onward D&D
I'd much rather have the new books we have now than wait another 6 years.
The guidance they give here ("find a close-enough monster and use that, here are some tweaks you can consider that usually won't change its CR") is eminently functional.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Earlier last year it was stated by WotC that they were going to provide a tool to calculate CR for homebrew monsters like the one in the 2014 DMG (but isn't in the 2024 DMG/2025 MM). Is that still happening? And, if so, when can we expect that to happen?
Probably in another book they expect full price for.
My suspicion is that they've having trouble coming up with a set of rules that are both usable and good.
So you spend hours perfecting your own custom monster, creating actions, spells, custom legendary actions never seen before, assigning stats, sprinkling lore, perfecting a prompt so AI can spit out an image of your creation.
And after all that you want someone to pick your CR for you, based on your made up stuff ?
Really?
That would be useful, to take the boring part that isn't part of creating the monster and automate it for you, yes.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Honestly, if you're designing custom monsters the main important thing to do is evaluate how dangerous they are against your PCs. This somewhat correlates with CR, but CR is a really blunt instrument, if you know the capabilities of the PCs and the encounter setup you can be a lot more accurate than CR will ever give you. As such, CR is mostly of academic interest if you aren't planning on publishing your monster.
If you have a strong feel for how encounters balance according to the various stats. Not everyone has that. In my experience, more don't than do.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
For me with starting to design my own monsters those guidelines are helpful with giving an overall idea for "okay, how will this play?" without needing to do a ton of testing beforehand. Lets me get the monster readied without needing to read tons of theory.
So certainly has utility for me.
This is a signature. It was a simple signature. But it has been upgraded.
Belolonandalogalo, Sunny | Draíocht, Kholias | Eggo Lass, 100 Dungeons
Talorin Tebedi, Vecna: Eve | Cherry, Stormwreck | Chipper, Strahd
We Are Modron
Get rickrolled here. Awesome music here. Track 48, 5/23/25, Immaculate Mary
not to pick CR for you, but to double check that the damage/health/etc are all within appropriate range for a party of certain level.
also, you wanna talk about someone doing work for you, yet talk about using AI to make the art? wild
I mean you bring up a good point, have AI come up with your CR for you.
It will be more accurate than some arbitrary rules system that cant possibly look into the future at what your legendary actions are doing.
Don't have AI/LLM do anything for you.
It will not be accurate. It will rely on some stolen data from a random forum and when you ask it to fact check it'll go sorry here's the real answer and do the same thing.
As far as I can determine, the standards are not dramatically changed from 2014
Most of the other modifiers from the 2014 DMG can be ignored.
they specifically said they weren't going to provide that.
Guide to the Five Factions (PWYW)
Deck of Decks
Where/when did they specifically say there weren't going to provide the resource to calculate homebrew monsters' CR?
They should have taken this slower then. Should have just done a D&D 6E for a 2030 release. AFTER tackling and addressing all the major flaws from 2014 - Onward D&D
Enjoy your slop. I'll be enjoying good products elsewhere.
The importance of monster design rules is greatly overstated. People have been successfully doing it without the benefit of special rules for fifty years, they don't suddenly need it now.
Making monsters from scratch in D&D is just hard - most DMs won't even attempt it and even fewer will be able to do it well. There's too many moving parts (actions, bonus action, reactions, HP, AC, proficiencies, passive traits, resistances, vulnerabilities, etc.) They could have done a section on it like they did in 2014, but I suspect they realized that just wasn't up to the task. It certainly wasn't a good system back then. Custom monster creation rules really need a whole chapter to do it right, which may not have been the best use of space in a core rulebook. Maybe it will make it into a future supplement.
Creating a monster manual with the sheer number of statblocks that they did was a good compromise in my opinion.
Can I suggest Forge of Foes? The new XP/Challenge list falls more in line with the this 5th edition supplement. It was designed to make better, more challenging monsters from scratch and it worked great for me! If you noticed most challenges through 1-6 levels just shifted over one category. Medium becoming Low, hard becoming Moderate, Deadly becoming Hard. After that it is less blatant, but close enough for government work. It suggest several things you can do to make you monsters more challenging by add more reactions, nerfing player abilities among other suggestions. Many things that have been added to in the new MM and some things that haven't . I can't say enough good things about Michael Shea's books like this and The Lazy DM's books. I hope this helps.
I keep meaning to check out FoF.
I was just curious if WotC were still going to follow through, like they previously said, with providing the community with the tools that they used.
I'd much rather have the new books we have now than wait another 6 years.
The guidance they give here ("find a close-enough monster and use that, here are some tweaks you can consider that usually won't change its CR") is eminently functional.