I was told a trick by a friend of mine that really seems to work well! It’s for calculating CR for a combat. They add 1 level to a PC for each of the following: The PC… has a combat related feat (SS, GWM, etc.), is multiclassed at all, has a feature that adds a massive amount hit points or temp hp (moon druid, barbarian, that cleric subclass from Tasha’s, etc.), has a reliable AoE AND the enemy side has many smaller enemies, has a reliable nova ability AND are fighting a single creature, and/or has any combat related magic item(s).
Honestly, I just use an encounter difficulty calculator, below. Was a bit skeptical at first but over time I’ve come to trust it, and 95% of the time it’s pretty damn accurate.
Honestly, I just use an encounter difficulty calculator, below. Was a bit skeptical at first but over time I’ve come to trust it, and 95% of the time it’s pretty damn accurate.
I find the DND Beyond builder to be clunky as hell. You also have to select specific creatures. The linked one above is fast, easy to use, and gives you the information you need with as little moving parts a possible.
I find the DND Beyond builder to be clunky as hell. You also have to select specific creatures. The linked one above is fast, easy to use, and gives you the information you need with as little moving parts a possible.
Well when I am building an encounter it is with specific creatures in mind from looking at the tool shared I would need to be going through my monster manual finding the right monster to then enter its XP anyway, I also the use the encounter builder to manage my combat so it has that benefit, I more wondered if it was more accurate/used a different CR calculation. We all know CR is broken anyway so I hoped this tool was a different way of calculating that
I find the DND Beyond builder to be clunky as hell. You also have to select specific creatures. The linked one above is fast, easy to use, and gives you the information you need with as little moving parts a possible.
Well when I am building an encounter it is with specific creatures in mind from looking at the tool shared I would need to be going through my monster manual finding the right monster to then enter its XP anyway, I also the use the encounter builder to manage my combat so it has that benefit, I more wondered if it was more accurate/used a different CR calculation. We all know CR is broken anyway so I hoped this tool was a different way of calculating that
1. It sounds like a wonderful tool for you! Awesome!
2. I would bet that the math each of these use is the same math. All from the DMG.
3. I don't think it's broken at all. It is based on standards that don't seem to be the norm for most folks. Multiclassing, feats, magic items, number of players, available resources, etc. If you use the straight up CR math for a party of 4-5 handbook only with no feats, multiclassing, and maybe only one magic item, the math is solid.
This trick seems rather finicky and prone to misfire by unintentional omission. If one were to use this to set up random encounters on the fly, I could see something being missed in the algorithm and the output be skewed. I'm not doubting that this works for your friend, I'm just not sure the juice is worth the squeeze.
If I'm certain that my party will be headed into a combat encounter, I'll use the encounter builder here on DDB. Primarily because I can use the combat tracker to consolidate things at the table so as to not have books and pages and cards strewn about. I will judge how lethal to make the combat encounters based on the Adventuring Day XP Budget for the party. If I'm only running two or maybe three encounters, as long as the total of those encounters doesn't exceed the daily budget, there shouldn't be a TPK. (Leaning heavily on *shouldn't*) All creatures statblocks, quantities and initiative order is bundled up and ready. YMMV.
If I have to put together a random encounter on the road or during a wilderness exploration, I'll lean towards the random encounter tables in XGtE and then polish them with The Lazy Encounter Benchmark. Less math, gets things close enough without being too swingy, and if things get too bad, in either direction, I'll sprinkle in some Dials of Monster Difficulty. Again, YMMV.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
This trick seems rather finicky and prone to misfire by unintentional omission. If one were to use this to set up random encounters on the fly, I could see something being missed in the algorithm and the output be skewed. I'm not doubting that this works for your friend, I'm just not sure the juice is worth the squeeze.
If I'm certain that my party will be headed into a combat encounter, I'll use the encounter builder here on DDB. Primarily because I can use the combat tracker to consolidate things at the table so as to not have books and pages and cards strewn about. I will judge how lethal to make the combat encounters based on the Adventuring Day XP Budget for the party. If I'm only running two or maybe three encounters, as long as the total of those encounters doesn't exceed the daily budget, there shouldn't be a TPK. (Leaning heavily on *shouldn't*) All creatures statblocks, quantities and initiative order is bundled up and ready. YMMV.
If I have to put together a random encounter on the road or during a wilderness exploration, I'll lean towards the random encounter tables in XGtE and then polish them with The Lazy Encounter Benchmark. Less math, gets things close enough without being too swingy, and if things get too bad, in either direction, I'll sprinkle in some Dials of Monster Difficulty. Again, YMMV.
I find the DND Beyond builder to be clunky as hell. You also have to select specific creatures. The linked one above is fast, easy to use, and gives you the information you need with as little moving parts a possible.
Well when I am building an encounter it is with specific creatures in mind from looking at the tool shared I would need to be going through my monster manual finding the right monster to then enter its XP anyway, I also the use the encounter builder to manage my combat so it has that benefit, I more wondered if it was more accurate/used a different CR calculation. We all know CR is broken anyway so I hoped this tool was a different way of calculating that
1. It sounds like a wonderful tool for you! Awesome!
2. I would bet that the math each of these use is the same math. All from the DMG.
3. I don't think it's broken at all. It is based on standards that don't seem to be the norm for most folks. Multiclassing, feats, magic items, number of players, available resources, etc. If you use the straight up CR math for a party of 4-5 handbook only with no feats, multiclassing, and maybe only one magic item, the math is solid.
You say that but with a level 3 party anything other then deadly encounters are walked over with no issue and offer no real threat. I am finding that even with a standard build you need deadly+ to offer a challenge,
I find the DND Beyond builder to be clunky as hell. You also have to select specific creatures. The linked one above is fast, easy to use, and gives you the information you need with as little moving parts a possible.
Well when I am building an encounter it is with specific creatures in mind from looking at the tool shared I would need to be going through my monster manual finding the right monster to then enter its XP anyway, I also the use the encounter builder to manage my combat so it has that benefit, I more wondered if it was more accurate/used a different CR calculation. We all know CR is broken anyway so I hoped this tool was a different way of calculating that
1. It sounds like a wonderful tool for you! Awesome!
2. I would bet that the math each of these use is the same math. All from the DMG.
3. I don't think it's broken at all. It is based on standards that don't seem to be the norm for most folks. Multiclassing, feats, magic items, number of players, available resources, etc. If you use the straight up CR math for a party of 4-5 handbook only with no feats, multiclassing, and maybe only one magic item, the math is solid.
You say that but with a level 3 party anything other then deadly encounters are walked over with no issue and offer no real threat. I am finding that even with a standard build you need deadly+ to offer a challenge,
But that more or less meets the definition of what those levels of combat encounter difficulty are. Even the definition of a deadly encounter says "...could be lethal for one or more player characters..."
I find the DND Beyond builder to be clunky as hell. You also have to select specific creatures. The linked one above is fast, easy to use, and gives you the information you need with as little moving parts a possible.
Well when I am building an encounter it is with specific creatures in mind from looking at the tool shared I would need to be going through my monster manual finding the right monster to then enter its XP anyway, I also the use the encounter builder to manage my combat so it has that benefit, I more wondered if it was more accurate/used a different CR calculation. We all know CR is broken anyway so I hoped this tool was a different way of calculating that
1. It sounds like a wonderful tool for you! Awesome!
2. I would bet that the math each of these use is the same math. All from the DMG.
3. I don't think it's broken at all. It is based on standards that don't seem to be the norm for most folks. Multiclassing, feats, magic items, number of players, available resources, etc. If you use the straight up CR math for a party of 4-5 handbook only with no feats, multiclassing, and maybe only one magic item, the math is solid.
You say that but with a level 3 party anything other then deadly encounters are walked over with no issue and offer no real threat. I am finding that even with a standard build you need deadly+ to offer a challenge,
But that more or less meets the definition of what those levels of combat encounter difficulty are. Even the definition of a deadly encounter says "...could be lethal for one or more player characters..."
My experience is deadly is no where near lethal, for instance I put my party into an encounter that was meant to be highly deadly and they came through with barely a scratch. This is a common statement about the CR system, it is predicated on the idea that the party face 5-8 combat encounters in an adventuring day.
So if you are trying to kill a party with only one or two combats per long rest, it won't work as well. The rules account for this in the daily budget and maximum CR for a single combat.
If you are allowing feats and multiclassing and have given ample magic items WITHOUT making adjustments to the enemy side CR, it won't work well. The system is not designed with this as a standard.
If the party has more than 4.5 player, it won't work as well.
We can't add 2+2 and complain that it doesn't add up to 5.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I was told a trick by a friend of mine that really seems to work well! It’s for calculating CR for a combat. They add 1 level to a PC for each of the following: The PC… has a combat related feat (SS, GWM, etc.), is multiclassed at all, has a feature that adds a massive amount hit points or temp hp (moon druid, barbarian, that cleric subclass from Tasha’s, etc.), has a reliable AoE AND the enemy side has many smaller enemies, has a reliable nova ability AND are fighting a single creature, and/or has any combat related magic item(s).
Honestly, I just use an encounter difficulty calculator, below. Was a bit skeptical at first but over time I’ve come to trust it, and 95% of the time it’s pretty damn accurate.
Give it a go, if you like:
https://kastark.co.uk/rpgs/encounter-calculator-5th/
I love this! I’ve used it for a year or so now.
how is this different to the encounter calculator here on DnD beyond?
I find the DND Beyond builder to be clunky as hell. You also have to select specific creatures. The linked one above is fast, easy to use, and gives you the information you need with as little moving parts a possible.
Well when I am building an encounter it is with specific creatures in mind from looking at the tool shared I would need to be going through my monster manual finding the right monster to then enter its XP anyway, I also the use the encounter builder to manage my combat so it has that benefit, I more wondered if it was more accurate/used a different CR calculation. We all know CR is broken anyway so I hoped this tool was a different way of calculating that
1. It sounds like a wonderful tool for you! Awesome!
2. I would bet that the math each of these use is the same math. All from the DMG.
3. I don't think it's broken at all. It is based on standards that don't seem to be the norm for most folks. Multiclassing, feats, magic items, number of players, available resources, etc. If you use the straight up CR math for a party of 4-5 handbook only with no feats, multiclassing, and maybe only one magic item, the math is solid.
This trick seems rather finicky and prone to misfire by unintentional omission. If one were to use this to set up random encounters on the fly, I could see something being missed in the algorithm and the output be skewed. I'm not doubting that this works for your friend, I'm just not sure the juice is worth the squeeze.
If I'm certain that my party will be headed into a combat encounter, I'll use the encounter builder here on DDB. Primarily because I can use the combat tracker to consolidate things at the table so as to not have books and pages and cards strewn about. I will judge how lethal to make the combat encounters based on the Adventuring Day XP Budget for the party. If I'm only running two or maybe three encounters, as long as the total of those encounters doesn't exceed the daily budget, there shouldn't be a TPK. (Leaning heavily on *shouldn't*) All creatures statblocks, quantities and initiative order is bundled up and ready. YMMV.
If I have to put together a random encounter on the road or during a wilderness exploration, I'll lean towards the random encounter tables in XGtE and then polish them with The Lazy Encounter Benchmark. Less math, gets things close enough without being too swingy, and if things get too bad, in either direction, I'll sprinkle in some Dials of Monster Difficulty. Again, YMMV.
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
I LOVE the Lazy DM! His stuff is great!
You say that but with a level 3 party anything other then deadly encounters are walked over with no issue and offer no real threat. I am finding that even with a standard build you need deadly+ to offer a challenge,
But that more or less meets the definition of what those levels of combat encounter difficulty are. Even the definition of a deadly encounter says "...could be lethal for one or more player characters..."
My experience is deadly is no where near lethal, for instance I put my party into an encounter that was meant to be highly deadly and they came through with barely a scratch. This is a common statement about the CR system, it is predicated on the idea that the party face 5-8 combat encounters in an adventuring day.
Right.
So if you are trying to kill a party with only one or two combats per long rest, it won't work as well. The rules account for this in the daily budget and maximum CR for a single combat.
If you are allowing feats and multiclassing and have given ample magic items WITHOUT making adjustments to the enemy side CR, it won't work well. The system is not designed with this as a standard.
If the party has more than 4.5 player, it won't work as well.
We can't add 2+2 and complain that it doesn't add up to 5.