When building an encounter, do you find the monster difficulty chart to be an accurate way to determine a good difficulty?
Thanks
Yes and no. Keep in mind the encounter guidelines assume 6-8 encounters per day. If you are getting that many encounters in then it's a decent way to determine difficulty. If not I isn't .
Player options. If you are using multiclassing it can drastically change power levels as well as magical items. Monsters with resistances become increasingly easier with magic items.
No, not really. Then again my players are kinda OP, so ya know
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
In the words of the great philosopher, Unicorse, "Aaaannnnd why should I care??"
Best quote from a book ever: "If you love with your eyes, death is forever. If you love with your heart, there is no such thing as parting."- Jonah Cook, Ascendant, Songs of Chaos by Michael R. Miller. Highly recommend
When building an encounter, do you find the monster difficulty chart to be an accurate way to determine a good difficulty?
That's easy. No. In tier 1 any fight that's less than Deadly is trivial, and it gets worse as level increases, by tier 4 an entirely daily budget in a single encounter is quite reasonable.
When building an encounter, do you find the monster difficulty chart to be an accurate way to determine a good difficulty?
Thanks
Monster CR is useful for determining combat difficulty but the absolute level of the XP budget vs difficulty is designed for new players making basic characters (no optional rules, no feats) with no magic items. Most tables don't play like that so it wildly overestimates the danger level.
But a combat with 3x CR 4 is going to be easier than one with 3x CR 6 creatures. If you want a rule of thumb calibration, a Deadly encounter for a party of N players with full resources is N-1 monsters of CR equal to the party level.
When building an encounter, do you find the monster difficulty chart to be an accurate way to determine a good difficulty?
That's easy. No. In tier 1 any fight that's less than Deadly is trivial, and it gets worse as level increases, by tier 4 an entirely daily budget in a single encounter is quite reasonable.
That is largely because it only works if you have 6-8 encounters. The fewer encounters you have the more difficult each individual encounter needs to be.
That is largely because it only works if you have 6-8 encounters. The fewer encounters you have the more difficult each individual encounter needs to be.
No, it's not just that. Yes, in tier 1 filling your daily budget will in fact drain the party of resources enough to challenge them, but even then for any given encounter to feel like a challenge it needs to be deadly+. In tier 2 and higher, PC power increases faster than monster power and you need to significantly blow your budgets. My rule of thumb for tier 2 is "total monster CR = half total PC levels" will be a reasonable challenge that the PCs will almost certainly beat (you can throw a couple encounters like that per day).
5E encounter building is an inexact science to say the least. XP value for monsters in amount of encounters in a given adventuring day is more there to help make rough estimate.
It is a good guideline, and you need to then work out if it is tougher or easier with your particular group.
Let's take an iron golem as a baseline. It's big, hard, and has a bunch of hitpoints. However, it's CR includes "immune to nonmagical bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage". If your party has magical weapons on all of the martials, then this trait is worthless to the iron golem, so the fight will be a little easier. Then, it has the whole "Regenerates if you hit it with fire damage" thing. If the party has a pyromancer themed for fire damage in all things, then this will make the fight tougher.
Same principle with flight. If the party has a monk who can step-of-the-wind-wings-unfurled to fly up and punch 'em, and the barbarian has flying shoes, and so forth, the flight will not be so bad. If you have a party of paladins with hammers, then the fight will ignore 80% of their damage output as they make ranged improvised attacks with rocks, so will be harder.
I use the Dwrmun method which I invented. I add a Dwarf called Dwrmun to my party, who is invisible, intangible, and does nothing every round, and nobody knows he is there. However, he is level 8 at the moment, in a party of 5 level 13's. His job is to work as a handicap - representing their mounts, magical items, and power-combos like sentinel/polearm master, and makes the encounters a little harder to compensate for all of the party's shenanigans which make them more powerful. Then, when I put them into an encounter calculator (I use Kastark, it's simple and it works) the encounters are closer to the right difficulty for the party. I adjust Dwrmun as I see how the party are performing, but he's always there, balancing the encounter calculator!
It is a good guideline, and you need to then work out if it is tougher or easier with your particular group.
Let's take an iron golem as a baseline. It's big, hard, and has a bunch of hitpoints. However, it's CR includes "immune to nonmagical bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage". If your party has magical weapons on all of the martials, then this trait is worthless to the iron golem, so the fight will be a little easier. Then, it has the whole "Regenerates if you hit it with fire damage" thing. If the party has a pyromancer themed for fire damage in all things, then this will make the fight tougher.
Same principle with flight. If the party has a monk who can step-of-the-wind-wings-unfurled to fly up and punch 'em, and the barbarian has flying shoes, and so forth, the flight will not be so bad. If you have a party of paladins with hammers, then the fight will ignore 80% of their damage output as they make ranged improvised attacks with rocks, so will be harder.
I use the Dwrmun method which I invented. I add a Dwarf called Dwrmun to my party, who is invisible, intangible, and does nothing every round, and nobody knows he is there. However, he is level 8 at the moment, in a party of 5 level 13's. His job is to work as a handicap - representing their mounts, magical items, and power-combos like sentinel/polearm master, and makes the encounters a little harder to compensate for all of the party's shenanigans which make them more powerful. Then, when I put them into an encounter calculator (I use Kastark, it's simple and it works) the encounters are closer to the right difficulty for the party. I adjust Dwrmun as I see how the party are performing, but he's always there, balancing the encounter calculator!
I feel sorry for Dwrmun. Being used this way and doesn't even get a share of the treasure!
It is a good guideline, and you need to then work out if it is tougher or easier with your particular group.
Let's take an iron golem as a baseline. It's big, hard, and has a bunch of hitpoints. However, it's CR includes "immune to nonmagical bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage". If your party has magical weapons on all of the martials, then this trait is worthless to the iron golem, so the fight will be a little easier. Then, it has the whole "Regenerates if you hit it with fire damage" thing. If the party has a pyromancer themed for fire damage in all things, then this will make the fight tougher.
Same principle with flight. If the party has a monk who can step-of-the-wind-wings-unfurled to fly up and punch 'em, and the barbarian has flying shoes, and so forth, the flight will not be so bad. If you have a party of paladins with hammers, then the fight will ignore 80% of their damage output as they make ranged improvised attacks with rocks, so will be harder.
I use the Dwrmun method which I invented. I add a Dwarf called Dwrmun to my party, who is invisible, intangible, and does nothing every round, and nobody knows he is there. However, he is level 8 at the moment, in a party of 5 level 13's. His job is to work as a handicap - representing their mounts, magical items, and power-combos like sentinel/polearm master, and makes the encounters a little harder to compensate for all of the party's shenanigans which make them more powerful. Then, when I put them into an encounter calculator (I use Kastark, it's simple and it works) the encounters are closer to the right difficulty for the party. I adjust Dwrmun as I see how the party are performing, but he's always there, balancing the encounter calculator!
I feel sorry for Dwrmun. Being used this way and doesn't even get a share of the treasure!
Maybe Dwrmun likes being used that way and it’s the only reward needed?😄
When building an encounter, do you find the monster difficulty chart to be an accurate way to determine a good difficulty?
Thanks
How many encounters are you running per in game day? If the answer is less than 6, then throw the Monster CRs and such out of the window. They don't apply to you.
How many magic items do you tend to let your player characters get their hands on? If your players have more than one magic item each, throw the CRs and encounter building section of the DMG out of the window. It doesn't apply.
Do you allow multi-classing at your table? If you do, then your characters are far more powerful than the underlying assumptions for the damage and difficulties of monsters. Throw out the Monster CRs and encounter building info in DMG.
I know this all seems quite bleak, but it is sadly the truth. These three issues often cut to the core of why the CR and Encounter Building 'advice' such as it is in the DMG is so woefully useless. What most DMs don't understand is that there are underlying design choices behind any TTRPG. Now in 5e, one of the base assumptions is still that players will be crawling through immense dungeons that will mean encounter after encounter after encounter. Basically, take a look at Wave Echo Cave from Lost Mine of Phandelver. That is a grueling slog through a dungeon that wicks away resources from the party until they finally arrive at the end boss. In game it will take less than a day to explore, but the encounters get more and more difficult as the party run into more and more encounters. Spell slots eventually fizzle away, superiority die disappear, sorcery die diminish. Wave Echo Cave is the best example that exists of how an adventuring day is 'supposed' to work. In fact the assumptions made during that dungeon are what the creators behind the game used when designing it's balance and difficulties.
So let's look at an in game day according to how the DMG and the system is built would work.
- Player Characters wake up - Party travel to the location of the dungeon [Let's say 2 hours for a single 6 mile hex] - Encounter 1, a random encounter en route to dungeon - 5Giant Rat (250xp) - Party take a short rest after the encounter before getting back on the road [We're at 3.5 hours of day total] - Party arrive at the entrance to the dungeon - Encounter 2, the party search for and find a trap at the entrance - Party begin to explore the dungeon - Encounter 3, the party find a group of 6 kobold scavenging the room (600xp) - Party recommence exploring [Let's say another 30 minutes here for 4 in game hours] - Encounter 4, the party fall victim to a rock fall trap that deals bludgeoning damage - Party take another short rest - Encounter 5, the short rest is interrupted as 4 allies of the previous kobold surprise the party. (200xp) - Party restart their short rest [Game day so far approx 5.5 hours] - Party search more rooms of the dungeon - Encounter 6, the party come across the 3 skeleton of long dead adventurers who now rise to fight the party (300xp) - Party continue until they find one final room from which strange arcane light is being shed. - Party secure a side room of the dungeon and take one more short rest [Let's assume here 7 hours of in game day so far] - Encounter 7, the party push through into the final room and meet a Noble, 2 Guard and a Scout (350xp) - The party somehow manage to get through this encounter, but they realise that this dungeon isn't a safe place to recover so the leave to head home. - Encounter 8, the party encounter a pack of very territorial 4 Mastiff en route home. (200xp) - Party finally arrive back at their village, exhausted after 10 in game hours. - After some socialising and the like the party finally Long Rest
That's a single in game adventuring day for a Level 2 party of four characters. It would actually be a fairly easy adventuring day too with no creature at a CR above 1. They would gain just 475 of the 900xp needed to take them up to level 3. Note here too that there are more than two short rests (nothing in DMG states that there is a limit on short rests, it just uses two as the 'typical' number per day).
A lot of this of course is down to the woeful design of the DMG. DMs are all too often just ignored by the team at WotC. There's so few of us out there compared with the number of players that to be clear, they don't see us as a big enough or vocal enough market to sell to. Either way, trying to read through the DMG will tell you a lot about how the game is designed.
Summary The take away here is that D&D 5e is designed for a lot of encounters per in game day. If you're letting player characters have just one encounter per day, it's going to be very, very easy for them to simply walk over encounters. If however you're packing those days and locations full of stuff, then the balance of encounters skews more towards the game as designed. I will caveat here that I have read through the 2024 Player's Handbook and sadly the options there require us to fall back on those encounters per day in order to achieve anything even slightly approaching balance within the game. Fact is though that leaving so long before the new DMG is a massive mis-step by WotC especially if they have altered the assumptions for encounters per in game day and short rests per in game day.
I would note that lots of published adventures do not include anything resembling an adventuring day. Consider Curse of Strahd, a generally well regarded adventure. While Castle Ravenloft itself is potentially a long chain of annoyances (I say potentially because there's no specific path through it, it's technically possible to skip 90% of the castle) many areas (e.g. Old Bonegrinder, Krezk, Berez, the Wizard of Wines, Yester Hill, and the Werewolf Den) basically only include one encounter of any note.
I would note that lots of published adventures do not include anything resembling an adventuring day. Consider Curse of Strahd, a generally well regarded adventure. While Castle Ravenloft itself is potentially a long chain of annoyances (I say potentially because there's no specific path through it, it's technically possible to skip 90% of the castle) many areas (e.g. Old Bonegrinder, Krezk, Berez, the Wizard of Wines, Yester Hill, and the Werewolf Den) basically only include one encounter of any note.
Curse of Strahd is not an adventure that should be run by any but those DMs who understand the underlying game design and balance factors. Sapping fog, endless social encounters, random combat encounters, changes to magics and the fact that the recommended level up system is milestone, not XP. All of these more advanced features combine to make CoS a particularly tricky adventure to run for the newer and less experienced DM. CoS really is a Campaign 2 type of adventure. You run LMoP as a starter campaign following on to another adventure. Once you've learnt the game, run adventurers, then you start a new set of adventures with new characters and some of the more advanced modules.
That's why CoS doesn't mirror the basics of the adventuring day. However, it also provides a very good reason that DMs should learn and develop and understanding of the adventuring day. If Lost Mine of Phandelver's Wave Echo Cave shows us a model of how to create a dungeon for the adventuring day, Curse of Strahd shows us a model of how to develop an adventure and make alterations (like the fog) to create a different type of adventure.
Basically here, you're comparing apples to oranges.
I would note that lots of published adventures do not include anything resembling an adventuring day. Consider Curse of Strahd, a generally well regarded adventure. While Castle Ravenloft itself is potentially a long chain of annoyances (I say potentially because there's no specific path through it, it's technically possible to skip 90% of the castle) many areas (e.g. Old Bonegrinder, Krezk, Berez, the Wizard of Wines, Yester Hill, and the Werewolf Den) basically only include one encounter of any note.
Why do you assume a party should visit only one location per adventuring day? Borovia isn't that big, they could easily visit multiple locations in a single day.
It's pretty hard to make any intrigue or political game have the "standard adventuring day" without heavy railroading. Most intrigue games fall prey to "we can do that tomorrow".
Adventuring day of encounters is meant to be for dungeon crawls or overtly hostile places, like crossing the wilds. And if they choose to go slower, they will have more resource - but take much longer to get there. In a dungeon, it might be 5 encounters between safe rooms, so they literally cannot stop halfway for a sleep!
Why do you assume a party should visit only one location per adventuring day? Borovia isn't that big, they could easily visit multiple locations in a single day.
The locations are definitely not balanced on the assumption that people will do that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
When building an encounter, do you find the monster difficulty chart to be an accurate way to determine a good difficulty?
Thanks
Yes and no. Keep in mind the encounter guidelines assume 6-8 encounters per day. If you are getting that many encounters in then it's a decent way to determine difficulty. If not I isn't .
Player options. If you are using multiclassing it can drastically change power levels as well as magical items. Monsters with resistances become increasingly easier with magic items.
No, not really. Then again my players are kinda OP, so ya know
In the words of the great philosopher, Unicorse, "Aaaannnnd why should I care??"
Best quote from a book ever: "If you love with your eyes, death is forever. If you love with your heart, there is no such thing as parting."- Jonah Cook, Ascendant, Songs of Chaos by Michael R. Miller. Highly recommend
That's easy. No. In tier 1 any fight that's less than Deadly is trivial, and it gets worse as level increases, by tier 4 an entirely daily budget in a single encounter is quite reasonable.
Monster CR is useful for determining combat difficulty but the absolute level of the XP budget vs difficulty is designed for new players making basic characters (no optional rules, no feats) with no magic items. Most tables don't play like that so it wildly overestimates the danger level.
But a combat with 3x CR 4 is going to be easier than one with 3x CR 6 creatures. If you want a rule of thumb calibration, a Deadly encounter for a party of N players with full resources is N-1 monsters of CR equal to the party level.
That is largely because it only works if you have 6-8 encounters. The fewer encounters you have the more difficult each individual encounter needs to be.
No, it's not just that. Yes, in tier 1 filling your daily budget will in fact drain the party of resources enough to challenge them, but even then for any given encounter to feel like a challenge it needs to be deadly+. In tier 2 and higher, PC power increases faster than monster power and you need to significantly blow your budgets. My rule of thumb for tier 2 is "total monster CR = half total PC levels" will be a reasonable challenge that the PCs will almost certainly beat (you can throw a couple encounters like that per day).
5E encounter building is an inexact science to say the least. XP value for monsters in amount of encounters in a given adventuring day is more there to help make rough estimate.
It is a good guideline, and you need to then work out if it is tougher or easier with your particular group.
Let's take an iron golem as a baseline. It's big, hard, and has a bunch of hitpoints. However, it's CR includes "immune to nonmagical bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage". If your party has magical weapons on all of the martials, then this trait is worthless to the iron golem, so the fight will be a little easier. Then, it has the whole "Regenerates if you hit it with fire damage" thing. If the party has a pyromancer themed for fire damage in all things, then this will make the fight tougher.
Same principle with flight. If the party has a monk who can step-of-the-wind-wings-unfurled to fly up and punch 'em, and the barbarian has flying shoes, and so forth, the flight will not be so bad. If you have a party of paladins with hammers, then the fight will ignore 80% of their damage output as they make ranged improvised attacks with rocks, so will be harder.
I use the Dwrmun method which I invented. I add a Dwarf called Dwrmun to my party, who is invisible, intangible, and does nothing every round, and nobody knows he is there. However, he is level 8 at the moment, in a party of 5 level 13's. His job is to work as a handicap - representing their mounts, magical items, and power-combos like sentinel/polearm master, and makes the encounters a little harder to compensate for all of the party's shenanigans which make them more powerful. Then, when I put them into an encounter calculator (I use Kastark, it's simple and it works) the encounters are closer to the right difficulty for the party. I adjust Dwrmun as I see how the party are performing, but he's always there, balancing the encounter calculator!
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
I feel sorry for Dwrmun. Being used this way and doesn't even get a share of the treasure!
Maybe Dwrmun likes being used that way and it’s the only reward needed?😄
How many encounters are you running per in game day?
If the answer is less than 6, then throw the Monster CRs and such out of the window. They don't apply to you.
How many magic items do you tend to let your player characters get their hands on?
If your players have more than one magic item each, throw the CRs and encounter building section of the DMG out of the window. It doesn't apply.
Do you allow multi-classing at your table?
If you do, then your characters are far more powerful than the underlying assumptions for the damage and difficulties of monsters. Throw out the Monster CRs and encounter building info in DMG.
I know this all seems quite bleak, but it is sadly the truth. These three issues often cut to the core of why the CR and Encounter Building 'advice' such as it is in the DMG is so woefully useless. What most DMs don't understand is that there are underlying design choices behind any TTRPG. Now in 5e, one of the base assumptions is still that players will be crawling through immense dungeons that will mean encounter after encounter after encounter. Basically, take a look at Wave Echo Cave from Lost Mine of Phandelver. That is a grueling slog through a dungeon that wicks away resources from the party until they finally arrive at the end boss. In game it will take less than a day to explore, but the encounters get more and more difficult as the party run into more and more encounters. Spell slots eventually fizzle away, superiority die disappear, sorcery die diminish. Wave Echo Cave is the best example that exists of how an adventuring day is 'supposed' to work. In fact the assumptions made during that dungeon are what the creators behind the game used when designing it's balance and difficulties.
The other two assumptions are that a typical party will take just two short rests per in game day and one long rest per in game day. Creating Adventures - Dungeon Master’s Guide (2014) - Dungeons & Dragons - Sources - D&D Beyond (dndbeyond.com)
So let's look at an in game day according to how the DMG and the system is built would work.
- Player Characters wake up
- Party travel to the location of the dungeon [Let's say 2 hours for a single 6 mile hex]
- Encounter 1, a random encounter en route to dungeon - 5 Giant Rat (250xp)
- Party take a short rest after the encounter before getting back on the road [We're at 3.5 hours of day total]
- Party arrive at the entrance to the dungeon
- Encounter 2, the party search for and find a trap at the entrance
- Party begin to explore the dungeon
- Encounter 3, the party find a group of 6 kobold scavenging the room (600xp)
- Party recommence exploring [Let's say another 30 minutes here for 4 in game hours]
- Encounter 4, the party fall victim to a rock fall trap that deals bludgeoning damage
- Party take another short rest
- Encounter 5, the short rest is interrupted as 4 allies of the previous kobold surprise the party. (200xp)
- Party restart their short rest [Game day so far approx 5.5 hours]
- Party search more rooms of the dungeon
- Encounter 6, the party come across the 3 skeleton of long dead adventurers who now rise to fight the party (300xp)
- Party continue until they find one final room from which strange arcane light is being shed.
- Party secure a side room of the dungeon and take one more short rest [Let's assume here 7 hours of in game day so far]
- Encounter 7, the party push through into the final room and meet a Noble, 2 Guard and a Scout (350xp)
- The party somehow manage to get through this encounter, but they realise that this dungeon isn't a safe place to recover so the leave to head home.
- Encounter 8, the party encounter a pack of very territorial 4 Mastiff en route home. (200xp)
- Party finally arrive back at their village, exhausted after 10 in game hours.
- After some socialising and the like the party finally Long Rest
That's a single in game adventuring day for a Level 2 party of four characters. It would actually be a fairly easy adventuring day too with no creature at a CR above 1. They would gain just 475 of the 900xp needed to take them up to level 3. Note here too that there are more than two short rests (nothing in DMG states that there is a limit on short rests, it just uses two as the 'typical' number per day).
A lot of this of course is down to the woeful design of the DMG. DMs are all too often just ignored by the team at WotC. There's so few of us out there compared with the number of players that to be clear, they don't see us as a big enough or vocal enough market to sell to. Either way, trying to read through the DMG will tell you a lot about how the game is designed.
Summary
The take away here is that D&D 5e is designed for a lot of encounters per in game day. If you're letting player characters have just one encounter per day, it's going to be very, very easy for them to simply walk over encounters. If however you're packing those days and locations full of stuff, then the balance of encounters skews more towards the game as designed. I will caveat here that I have read through the 2024 Player's Handbook and sadly the options there require us to fall back on those encounters per day in order to achieve anything even slightly approaching balance within the game. Fact is though that leaving so long before the new DMG is a massive mis-step by WotC especially if they have altered the assumptions for encounters per in game day and short rests per in game day.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
Thank you
I would note that lots of published adventures do not include anything resembling an adventuring day. Consider Curse of Strahd, a generally well regarded adventure. While Castle Ravenloft itself is potentially a long chain of annoyances (I say potentially because there's no specific path through it, it's technically possible to skip 90% of the castle) many areas (e.g. Old Bonegrinder, Krezk, Berez, the Wizard of Wines, Yester Hill, and the Werewolf Den) basically only include one encounter of any note.
Curse of Strahd is not an adventure that should be run by any but those DMs who understand the underlying game design and balance factors. Sapping fog, endless social encounters, random combat encounters, changes to magics and the fact that the recommended level up system is milestone, not XP. All of these more advanced features combine to make CoS a particularly tricky adventure to run for the newer and less experienced DM. CoS really is a Campaign 2 type of adventure. You run LMoP as a starter campaign following on to another adventure. Once you've learnt the game, run adventurers, then you start a new set of adventures with new characters and some of the more advanced modules.
That's why CoS doesn't mirror the basics of the adventuring day. However, it also provides a very good reason that DMs should learn and develop and understanding of the adventuring day. If Lost Mine of Phandelver's Wave Echo Cave shows us a model of how to create a dungeon for the adventuring day, Curse of Strahd shows us a model of how to develop an adventure and make alterations (like the fog) to create a different type of adventure.
Basically here, you're comparing apples to oranges.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
Why do you assume a party should visit only one location per adventuring day? Borovia isn't that big, they could easily visit multiple locations in a single day.
It's pretty hard to make any intrigue or political game have the "standard adventuring day" without heavy railroading. Most intrigue games fall prey to "we can do that tomorrow".
Adventuring day of encounters is meant to be for dungeon crawls or overtly hostile places, like crossing the wilds. And if they choose to go slower, they will have more resource - but take much longer to get there. In a dungeon, it might be 5 encounters between safe rooms, so they literally cannot stop halfway for a sleep!
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
The locations are definitely not balanced on the assumption that people will do that.