According to the Dungeon Master's Guide Chapter 9, when making a monster and determining its damage output per round:
"If a monster’s damage output varies from round to round, calculate its damage output each round for the first three rounds of combat, and take the average. For example, a young white dragon has a multiattack routine (one bite attack and two claw attacks) that deals an average of 37 damage each round, as well as a breath weapon that deals 45 damage, or 90 if it hits two targets (and it probably will). In the first three rounds of combat, the dragon will probably get to use its breath weapon once and its multiattack routine twice, so its average damage output for the first three rounds would be (90 + 37 + 37) ÷ 3, or 54 damage (rounded down)."
This has me very confused. First off, the assumption that the Young White Dragon will use its breath weapon once and its multiattack routine twice is very misleading. Since the breath weapon is already charged at the start of the fight, the dragon only needs to roll for turns 2 and 3. This means the dragon has a 4/9 chance of using the breath weapon once (supposedly for an average of 54 damage), a 4/9 chance of using it twice (for an average of 72 damage), and a 1/9 chance of using it thrice (for an average of 90 damage). These are huge changes in damage tantamount to changing the dragon's effective challenge rating, but even the lenient scenario (54 average damage) the DMG describes sees the dragon punch above its challenge rating.
On the other hand, if we consider the 30 foot cone to hit just one creature, the calculated damage output according to the DMG's formula drops to a much more reasonable 39 (rounded down) damage, bringing the dragon's challenge rating down to 6, which is the listed challenge rating. The same goes for the Mind Flayer and the Adult Red Dragon, where the challenge rating only makes sense if we assume that the 60 foot cone only hits one person. But other AOEs, such as the Demilich's Howl, HAVE to hit multiple creatures to satisfy the challenge rating. What's going on here? How big does an AOE need to be to be assumed to hit two creatures?
If my players are in an aoe of any kind they all take the full damage unless they make the saving throw. There is no mitigating the damage if one person takes the brunt of the s attack. But each DM should do what they feels right for their story.
I'm not talking about the battle. I'm talking about the assumptions made when calculating a monster's challenge rating. Specifically, when calculating the average amount of damage a monster would deal in one round, what kind of AOE would be ASSUMED to hit two creatures?
I'm not talking about the battle. I'm talking about the assumptions made when calculating a monster's challenge rating. Specifically, when calculating the average amount of damage a monster would deal in one round, what kind of AOE would be ASSUMED to hit two creatures?
Any size AOE hits two creatures, both of whom fail the save...this is the standard calculation rule. This doesn’t mean this always occurs but it sets a base point for comparison between creatures which is what CR is.
I'm not talking about the battle. I'm talking about the assumptions made when calculating a monster's challenge rating. Specifically, when calculating the average amount of damage a monster would deal in one round, what kind of AOE would be ASSUMED to hit two creatures?
Any size AOE hits two creatures, both of whom fail the save...this is the standard calculation rule. This doesn’t mean this always occurs but it sets a base point for comparison between creatures which is what CR is.
No, that doesn't make sense. I looked at the young white dragon, the young red dragon, the adult red dragon, and the mind flayer. If you assume their AOEs to hit 2 creatures, their calculated challenge ratings are above their stated challenge ratings. But if you assume them to hit 1 creature instead, calculating their challenge ratings does yield their stated challenge ratings.
I'm not talking about the battle. I'm talking about the assumptions made when calculating a monster's challenge rating. Specifically, when calculating the average amount of damage a monster would deal in one round, what kind of AOE would be ASSUMED to hit two creatures?
Any size AOE hits two creatures, both of whom fail the save...this is the standard calculation rule. This doesn’t mean this always occurs but it sets a base point for comparison between creatures which is what CR is.
No, that doesn't make sense. I looked at the young white dragon, the young red dragon, the adult red dragon, and the mind flayer. If you assume their AOEs to hit 2 creatures, their calculated challenge ratings are above their stated challenge ratings. But if you assume them to hit 1 creature instead, calculating their challenge ratings does yield their stated challenge ratings.
I'm not saying that that method works for all officially created monsters...I'm saying that is what the DMG says to use. Also, CR calculation is a lot more complicated for larger and more powerful creatures, as many have special traits that impact their CR, or offensive and defensive CRs that don't match (but average out).
CR calculation is not an exact science and shouldn't be taken as such. The DMG gives us rules and methods for calculating it for homebrew creatures, and thats what we have to use.
Also, regarding your sample set, you have picked out mostly "classic" or "signature" monsters in D&D (dragons and mindflayers)...this is not the only time that the creators of the game boosted the stats of a signature pieces of the game (compare the damage output of an iconic spell like fireball or [spell]lightning bolt[/spell) (8d6, or 28 avg damage) to the DMG recommendation for 3rd level AoE spells (6d6, or 21 avg damage) to see a similar strategy at play).
I'm not talking about the battle. I'm talking about the assumptions made when calculating a monster's challenge rating. Specifically, when calculating the average amount of damage a monster would deal in one round, what kind of AOE would be ASSUMED to hit two creatures?
Any size AOE hits two creatures, both of whom fail the save...this is the standard calculation rule. This doesn’t mean this always occurs but it sets a base point for comparison between creatures which is what CR is.
No, that doesn't make sense. I looked at the young white dragon, the young red dragon, the adult red dragon, and the mind flayer. If you assume their AOEs to hit 2 creatures, their calculated challenge ratings are above their stated challenge ratings. But if you assume them to hit 1 creature instead, calculating their challenge ratings does yield their stated challenge ratings.
I'm not saying that that method works for all officially created monsters...I'm saying that is what the DMG says to use. Also, CR calculation is a lot more complicated for larger and more powerful creatures, as many have special traits that impact their CR, or offensive and defensive CRs that don't match (but average out).
CR calculation is not an exact science and shouldn't be taken as such. The DMG gives us rules and methods for calculating it for homebrew creatures, and thats what we have to use.
Also, regarding your sample set, you have picked out mostly "classic" or "signature" monsters in D&D (dragons and mindflayers)...this is not the only time that the creators of the game boosted the stats of a signature pieces of the game (compare the damage output of an iconic spell like fireball or [spell]lightning bolt[/spell) (8d6, or 28 avg damage) to the DMG recommendation for 3rd level AoE spells (6d6, or 21 avg damage) to see a similar strategy at play).
I'm taking all these features into account when looking at these challenge ratings. Even the effective AC granted by an excess of proficiency bonuses and access to ranged damage while flying. And I am also making sure to average the offensive and defensive challenge ratings. The problem is that when I take all this into account and assume that an AOE hits two creatures, I get an absurdly high challenge rating, and then when I assume that the same AOE hits just one creature, the challenge rating makes perfect sense. If the signature monsters are being buffed just for being signature monsters, why is this happening?
I'll admit, though. I did look at the Mage stat block when you pointed out that my problems were only with signature monsters. And sure enough, the Mage's challenge rating of 6 makes sense if Fireball is assumed to hit two creatures. Furthermore, the Tarrasque, an signature monster with no AOEs at all, seems to be a bit too beefy for its challenge rating. However, I don't understand the need to have signature monsters be too strong for their listed challenge rating. Is tricking a DM into accidentally wiping the party supposed to make the monster cool somehow? Or does the monster just need to be a little stronger to make up for a lack of crazy effects that WOTC expect someone homebrewing a monster from scratch to add?
I'll admit, though. I did look at the Mage stat block when you pointed out that my problems were only with signature monsters. And sure enough, the Mage's challenge rating of 6 makes sense if Fireball is assumed to hit two creatures. Furthermore, the Tarrasque, an signature monster with no AOEs at all, seems to be a bit too beefy for its challenge rating.
It's actually significantly underpowered for its challenge rating; there are a number of stupid ways a tier 2 party could kill it, as could a surprisingly small number of low CR critters. The first is because it lacks ranged options, the second is because it lacks any area options (just need a way to get around its immunities; about 70 acolytes will do the job).
The short answer is that it doesn’t make sense because:
CR sucks as a way to gauge the actual degree of challenge in combat encounters.
Because WotC was very inconsistent with how they calculated their official monster CRs.
Because the chart for how a DM should calculate monster CR has very little to do with how WotC did it. This may be where they started, but then I guarantee that they adjusted things after playtesting.
Where does it say that you consider the AOE to sucessfully hit 2 targets for the purposes of calculating CR?
As far as I'm aware, that rule is never specified. However, in the young white dragon example provided in DMG chapter 9, the breath is explicitly assumed to hit two creatures successfully, and the example calculates damage based on that. But that amount of damage is too high for the dragon's challenge rating, almost as if the writer who wrote the example didn't check with the writer of the young white dragon stat block.
Where does it say that you consider the AOE to sucessfully hit 2 targets for the purposes of calculating CR?
In Monster Features under Breath Weapon it says "For the purpose of determining effective damage output, assume the breath weapon hits two targets, and that each target fails its saving throw." There doesn't seem to be a more generic rule for all area effects.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
According to the Dungeon Master's Guide Chapter 9, when making a monster and determining its damage output per round:
"If a monster’s damage output varies from round to round, calculate its damage output each round for the first three rounds of combat, and take the average. For example, a young white dragon has a multiattack routine (one bite attack and two claw attacks) that deals an average of 37 damage each round, as well as a breath weapon that deals 45 damage, or 90 if it hits two targets (and it probably will). In the first three rounds of combat, the dragon will probably get to use its breath weapon once and its multiattack routine twice, so its average damage output for the first three rounds would be (90 + 37 + 37) ÷ 3, or 54 damage (rounded down)."
This has me very confused. First off, the assumption that the Young White Dragon will use its breath weapon once and its multiattack routine twice is very misleading. Since the breath weapon is already charged at the start of the fight, the dragon only needs to roll for turns 2 and 3. This means the dragon has a 4/9 chance of using the breath weapon once (supposedly for an average of 54 damage), a 4/9 chance of using it twice (for an average of 72 damage), and a 1/9 chance of using it thrice (for an average of 90 damage). These are huge changes in damage tantamount to changing the dragon's effective challenge rating, but even the lenient scenario (54 average damage) the DMG describes sees the dragon punch above its challenge rating.
On the other hand, if we consider the 30 foot cone to hit just one creature, the calculated damage output according to the DMG's formula drops to a much more reasonable 39 (rounded down) damage, bringing the dragon's challenge rating down to 6, which is the listed challenge rating. The same goes for the Mind Flayer and the Adult Red Dragon, where the challenge rating only makes sense if we assume that the 60 foot cone only hits one person. But other AOEs, such as the Demilich's Howl, HAVE to hit multiple creatures to satisfy the challenge rating. What's going on here? How big does an AOE need to be to be assumed to hit two creatures?
This is a case of the actual monster manual not matching the formulas given in the DMG.
If my players are in an aoe of any kind they all take the full damage unless they make the saving throw. There is no mitigating the damage if one person takes the brunt of the s attack. But each DM should do what they feels right for their story.
I'm not talking about the battle. I'm talking about the assumptions made when calculating a monster's challenge rating. Specifically, when calculating the average amount of damage a monster would deal in one round, what kind of AOE would be ASSUMED to hit two creatures?
Any size AOE hits two creatures, both of whom fail the save...this is the standard calculation rule. This doesn’t mean this always occurs but it sets a base point for comparison between creatures which is what CR is.
No, that doesn't make sense. I looked at the young white dragon, the young red dragon, the adult red dragon, and the mind flayer. If you assume their AOEs to hit 2 creatures, their calculated challenge ratings are above their stated challenge ratings. But if you assume them to hit 1 creature instead, calculating their challenge ratings does yield their stated challenge ratings.
I'm not saying that that method works for all officially created monsters...I'm saying that is what the DMG says to use. Also, CR calculation is a lot more complicated for larger and more powerful creatures, as many have special traits that impact their CR, or offensive and defensive CRs that don't match (but average out).
CR calculation is not an exact science and shouldn't be taken as such. The DMG gives us rules and methods for calculating it for homebrew creatures, and thats what we have to use.
Also, regarding your sample set, you have picked out mostly "classic" or "signature" monsters in D&D (dragons and mindflayers)...this is not the only time that the creators of the game boosted the stats of a signature pieces of the game (compare the damage output of an iconic spell like fireball or [spell]lightning bolt[/spell) (8d6, or 28 avg damage) to the DMG recommendation for 3rd level AoE spells (6d6, or 21 avg damage) to see a similar strategy at play).
I'm taking all these features into account when looking at these challenge ratings. Even the effective AC granted by an excess of proficiency bonuses and access to ranged damage while flying. And I am also making sure to average the offensive and defensive challenge ratings. The problem is that when I take all this into account and assume that an AOE hits two creatures, I get an absurdly high challenge rating, and then when I assume that the same AOE hits just one creature, the challenge rating makes perfect sense. If the signature monsters are being buffed just for being signature monsters, why is this happening?
I'll admit, though. I did look at the Mage stat block when you pointed out that my problems were only with signature monsters. And sure enough, the Mage's challenge rating of 6 makes sense if Fireball is assumed to hit two creatures. Furthermore, the Tarrasque, an signature monster with no AOEs at all, seems to be a bit too beefy for its challenge rating. However, I don't understand the need to have signature monsters be too strong for their listed challenge rating. Is tricking a DM into accidentally wiping the party supposed to make the monster cool somehow? Or does the monster just need to be a little stronger to make up for a lack of crazy effects that WOTC expect someone homebrewing a monster from scratch to add?
It's actually significantly underpowered for its challenge rating; there are a number of stupid ways a tier 2 party could kill it, as could a surprisingly small number of low CR critters. The first is because it lacks ranged options, the second is because it lacks any area options (just need a way to get around its immunities; about 70 acolytes will do the job).
The short answer is that it doesn’t make sense because:
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Where does it say that you consider the AOE to sucessfully hit 2 targets for the purposes of calculating CR?
As far as I'm aware, that rule is never specified. However, in the young white dragon example provided in DMG chapter 9, the breath is explicitly assumed to hit two creatures successfully, and the example calculates damage based on that. But that amount of damage is too high for the dragon's challenge rating, almost as if the writer who wrote the example didn't check with the writer of the young white dragon stat block.
In Monster Features under Breath Weapon it says "For the purpose of determining effective damage output, assume the breath weapon hits two targets, and that each target fails its saving throw." There doesn't seem to be a more generic rule for all area effects.