It seems like using generic NPCs as adversaries is much more dangerous than using the traditional monsters. A Guard, due to better defenses and hp, is about 3x as durable as a Kobold and, due to lower attack bonus and lack of pack tactics, does about 2/3 the damage, so overall about twice the threat. Similarly, a Thug is nearly twice as durable as a Orc, has marginally higher basic damage, and has pack tactics, so overall easily twice as dangerous.
Some of that could be resolution issues, but it's not like they couldn't just change stats around; set them both to 3 HD, instead of 2HD for the orc and 5HD for the thug, and it would be pretty even. So I'm curious: is the problem that the humanoids are too weak, or that the NPCs are too strong?
It seems like using generic NPCs as adversaries is much more dangerous than using the traditional monsters. A Guard, due to better defenses and hp, is about 3x as durable as a Kobold and, due to lower attack bonus and lack of pack tactics, does about 2/3 the damage, so overall about twice the threat. Similarly, a Thug is nearly twice as durable as a Orc, has marginally higher basic damage, and has pack tactics, so overall easily twice as dangerous.
Some of that could be resolution issues, but it's not like they couldn't just change stats around; set them both to 3 HD, instead of 2HD for the orc and 5HD for the thug, and it would be pretty even. So I'm curious: is the problem that the humanoids are too weak, or that the NPCs are too strong?
The trick is how you play them. No kobold should EVER be more than 5 feet away from another kobold ally, and no kobold should enter melee unless the have to. They should always fight the PCs in the dark to make the best of their darkvision. Using the environment and the kobold's abilities as you would a PC makes combat intense and fun.
Similar to the kobold's pack tactics, the orc has a few tricks up its sleeve. Orcs have a higher AC, higher attack bonus, and therefore a slightly higher DPR. Orcs also have the aggressive trait, which allows them to dominate the battlefield. A wave orcs go in to attack while the rest stay back and use the following tactic: 30 ft. towards the PCs (Aggressive), throw a javelin, 30 ft. back (movement). The melee orcs can easily swap out for new forces by taking the disengage action, then using their movement to move away from the PCs while a ranged orc closes the 60 foot distance with aggressive.
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Homebrew (Mostly Outdated):Magic Items,Monsters,Spells,Subclasses ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
Your poll needs a 5th option: the CR system itself is arbitrary and flawed
I was just about to say almost the same thing.
IMHO, CR is primarily most useful for two general types of DMs.
It is useful to new DMs who need something to get them started so they can hopefully form their own opinions on how best to balance things for their own campaigns.
The other demographic which I see most often jump to defend the virtues of the system are those who insist that everything a DM does must be objectively “fair and balanced” to the players, and that the only objective metrics by which such thangs can be measured must be those found within the official sources. They are the folks who see such a concept as bounded accuracy as an absolute truth rather than as simply another tool for the DM’s toolbox that they can use when appropriate.
Maybe some of then think that everything WotC publishes must be inherently balanced or else they wouldn’t halve published it? Maybe some of them don’t trust their own judgement on what is or isn’t balanced for their campaign unless they have the official metric to use for comparison?
Maybe some of them just don’t want to figure out a different way and just want such things to be provided by the Publisher.
Maybe some of them are just that gosh darned Lawful in alignment that if the see rules for something they gotta follow them?
There are a million other different answers, I’m sure.
I dunno, maybe they’re correct. But for my games, about half the time I don’t even notice it until it’s time to calculate XP. The other half of the time I kinda sorta go by CR to help me more quickly get things into the right general neighborhood in which the ballpark of what I want exists, and then I adjust things as I see fit based on my instinct and experience. In other words, I don’t always use CR, but when I do I use It to help get me close more quickly, and then I go with my gut for accuracy.
Your poll needs a 5th option: the CR system itself is arbitrary and flawed
It's flawed, but for simple monsters evaluating on expected damage and toughness is perfectly reasonable, and few of the monsters I'm talking about have abilities that are terribly hard to evaluate. It doesn't take advanced math to go "monsters X and Y hit about the same, but monster X has twice as many hp, so monster X is substantially more powerful'.
The other half of the time I kinda sorta go by CR to help me more quickly get things into the right general neighborhood in which the ballpark of what I want exists
That's pretty much what I do. I've recognized by now that CR is not super helpful if you want to use it specifically and exactly... but although I'm not exactly new to D&D, I am relatively new to 5e, and sometimes even now, 17 sessions and 6 months into our game, it is still not super easy for me to judge exactly how challenging something will be, especially when the players have hit a new level and added all these abilities that I'm not very familiar with. It's one thing to read the ability in text; it's quite another when a smart player who has had the entire rest of the round waiting his turn to think about it comes up with a creative use for it you never counted on. Once they've been at a level for a while I kind of know what to expect but even so -- I'm often a level or two ahead of them working on things I am developing for the next adventure, so my knowledge of their characters lags behind my planning.
So at least the CR tells me, "WOTC thinks this is somewhere in the ballpark of my party level" and then I can take it from there.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
although I'm not exactly new to D&D, I am relatively new to 5e, and sometimes even now, 17 sessions and 6 months into our game, it is still not super easy for me to judge exactly how challenging something will be, especially when the players have hit a new level and added all these abilities that I'm not very familiar with.
That’s what hot fixing is for IMO.
However, there are some folks out ther including those who insist that CR must be strictly followed and meticulously calculated that are of the opinion that any DM like myself who would stoop to such a low-down, filthy technique such as that is a dirty cheater and we should either voluntarily turn in our DMGs, or at the very least that we should voluntarily wash the stain of our crimes and dishonor from the surface of the earth with blood through honorable seppuku. You know, on accounta how inherently, abysmally subhuman we must be as individuals to even consider such an action, let alone to actually do it.
although I'm not exactly new to D&D, I am relatively new to 5e, and sometimes even now, 17 sessions and 6 months into our game, it is still not super easy for me to judge exactly how challenging something will be, especially when the players have hit a new level and added all these abilities that I'm not very familiar with.
That’s what hot fixing is for IMO.
However, there are some folks out there including those who insist that CR must be strictly followed and meticulously calculated that are of the opinion that any DM like myself who would stoop to such a low-down, filthy technique such as that is a dirty cheater and we should either voluntarily turn in our DMGs, or at the very least that we should voluntarily wash the stain of our crimes and dishonor from the surface of the earth with blood through honorable seppuku. You know, on account of how inherently, abysmally subhuman we must be as individuals to even consider such an action, let alone to actually do it.
CR is helpful, but not precise. Mostly I use it to help determine how generally difficult an encounter will be, so that I make sure that I'm not making it way too hard. But for the more precise difficulty, I just go with my instincts. Also, not following the CR scale is fine as long as you and your players have a good time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Homebrew (Mostly Outdated):Magic Items,Monsters,Spells,Subclasses ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
I'm not necessarily great at "hotfixing" abilities. Again as someone who knows older D&D versions better than 5e even still, months into it... there is a high chance my attempted hot fix is what I think the ability used to do, rather than what it actually does now, and I will not get the result I want.
CR helps me get into the ballpark. Then I look at and potentially modify actual abilities from there.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I think the entire CR system needs to be overhauled, but there is one key issue is one that needs to be addressed, and I believe it is actually two issues intertwined: Initiative and Action Economy. I have had a pair of CR3's really hammer my group of 7th level chars, because the CR 3 Assassin Vines had a Surprise Round. Conversely, the same group totally trashed a CR8 because of the way the turns went down, and the CR8 went last in the attacks.
The only way to address this is that each and every monster, whether NPC Humanoid, or otherwise, must have Legendary Actions, in order to balance out when each side can do damage. I would happy to see a CR5 do half the damage per attack it does now, but have twice as many attacks interspersed with the player's attacks.
I think the entire CR system needs to be overhauled, but there is one key issue is one that needs to be addressed, and I believe it is actually two issues intertwined: Initiative and Action Economy. I have had a pair of CR3's really hammer my group of 7th level chars, because the CR 3 Assassin Vines had a Surprise Round. Conversely, the same group totally trashed a CR8 because of the way the turns went down, and the CR8 went last in the attacks.
The only way to address this is that each and every monster, whether NPC Humanoid, or otherwise, must have Legendary Actions, in order to balance out when each side can do damage. I would happy to see a CR5 do half the damage per attack it does now, but have twice as many attacks interspersed with the player's attacks.
You could accomplish the same effect by just reducing damage across the board and increasing hit points. If you design for three round fights, an extra round makes a big difference, as does initiative order; if you design for five round fights it makes much less difference. However, D&D combat being fairly swingy doesn't strongly correlate to problems with CR.
Your poll needs a 5th option: the CR system itself is arbitrary and flawed
It's flawed, but for simple monsters evaluating on expected damage and toughness is perfectly reasonable, and few of the monsters I'm talking about have abilities that are terribly hard to evaluate. It doesn't take advanced math to go "monsters X and Y hit about the same, but monster X has twice as many hp, so monster X is substantially more powerful'.
See that's the problem with CR though. It gives the illusion that you can call two things equivalent when part of the math involves an extremely situational ability, or something that requires specific tactics. It works fine when you have things that just walk around and attack, but even something as simple as Pack Tactics dramatically affects the challenge of a creature depending on how it is played.
But you are correct that the NPCs you list should be relatively simple to calculate, so either their abilities are factored into CR in a very inconsistent manner, or there is more going on here. I would guess that intended NPCs have been overridden a bit to be more durable because they are intended to be interacted with beyond just reducing to 0 hit points, at least to a greater degree than kobolds. For that to work, they might need to survive an initial volley. I don't know, my point was that CR calculation is damage + toughness + magical mystery number, and these seem to be just another example of the magical mystery number serving some intended purpose that the devs didn't think we needed to know about.
I'm not necessarily great at "hotfixing" abilities. Again as someone who knows older D&D versions better than 5e even still, months into it... there is a high chance my attempted hot fix is what I think the ability used to do, rather than what it actually does now, and I will not get the result I want.
CR helps me get into the ballpark. Then I look at and potentially modify actual abilities from there.
The players have no idea how many HP a monster had when it started the battle, only how much damage it took by the end of it. If a monster has an ability that can be used N times between rests, they have no idea what N was, or if that particular monster started that specific encounter on that exact day with N uses remaining, or N-1. They only know how many times the monster used that ability during that encounter. A DM can hotfix pretty much anything, the trick is being subtle and maintaining a poker face.
I'm not necessarily great at "hotfixing" abilities. Again as someone who knows older D&D versions better than 5e even still, months into it... there is a high chance my attempted hot fix is what I think the ability used to do, rather than what it actually does now, and I will not get the result I want.
CR helps me get into the ballpark. Then I look at and potentially modify actual abilities from there.
The players have no idea how many HP a monster had when it started the battle, only how much damage it took by the end of it. If a monster has an ability that can be used N times between rests, they have no idea what N was, or if that particular monster started that specific encounter on that exact day with N uses remaining, or N-1. They only know how many times the monster used that ability during that encounter. A DM can hotfix pretty much anything, the trick is being subtle and maintaining a poker face.
Very true. See my post above. Many a time if the players get the majority of first attacks, then can down or really change the complexion of a fight before the monster even attacks. Adding HP on the fly is something I do a lot. That being said, I would prefer not having to do that, hence my notion of all monsters having LA's to mitigate the need to Hot Fix.
I'm not necessarily great at "hotfixing" abilities. Again as someone who knows older D&D versions better than 5e even still, months into it... there is a high chance my attempted hot fix is what I think the ability used to do, rather than what it actually does now, and I will not get the result I want.
CR helps me get into the ballpark. Then I look at and potentially modify actual abilities from there.
The players have no idea how many HP a monster had when it started the battle, only how much damage it took by the end of it. If a monster has an ability that can be used N times between rests, they have no idea what N was, or if that particular monster started that specific encounter on that exact day with N uses remaining, or N-1. They only know how many times the monster used that ability during that encounter. A DM can hotfix pretty much anything, the trick is being subtle and maintaining a poker face.
Very true. See my post above. Many a time if the players get the majority of first attacks, then can down or really change the complexion of a fight before the monster even attacks. Adding HP on the fly is something I do a lot. That being said, I would prefer not having to do that, hence my notion of all monsters having LA's to mitigate the need to Hot Fix.
Oh yeah, I think they keep stuff like that over in the same isle with the world peace, right in between the shelf with the end of world hunger and the floorstand display for the upcoming Beatles reunion world tour with all four original members. You know, that isle that’s just labeled with the picture of the guy just pointing and laughing at you because your request was so hil-arious.
Considering the sheer variability of combinations between Race, Class, and Subclass alone it becomes obvious how.... improbable that would be to achieve. I mean, when two players can use the exact same rules and one player could create a character like this:
Then add to that all of the optional rules that are available and trying to compensate for all of those with absolutely no way of knowing which optional rules and how many may or may jot be used at any given table. The system just became even more far fetched. Add the swingines of a 1d20 system and it moves right on into that “nigh-ludicrous” level. Then consider that this system would have to be managed by human DMs with
levels of experience potentially ranging from “50+ years” to “less than a day”
some may be Math geniuses able to calculate pi out to the 37 decimal place... in Roman Numerals, and others might struggle to figure a 20% tip at a restaurant without an app on their phone
and that some may able to rattle off the full definition and etymology of any word in any version of the English language spoken on every continent from memory, and another might not even be able to pronounce the words definition or etymology
Do you honestly figure it at all possible for anyone to create a system that meets all of the following criteria:
As absolute, and objectively balanced as you would like.
Robust and detailed enough to stand up against all of the potential degrees of variation in party composition from “optimized” to “beer and pretzels.”
Streamlined enough to fit in with “The Design Philosophy of 5e.”
Simple and easy enough yo use that the DM who just started today, sucks at math, and don’t read too gud will be able to use it.
And not dumbed down to the point that the person who DMed for the group that purchased the very first three book set ever sold, can rattle off any math the game requires, and has mastered every iteration of the language in which the game is written won’t feel condescended to.
Especially since the same game company that wrote a system capable of creating both of those characters I posted above is the same company we have to relying on to design the type of system that would have to fulfill all of those criteria.
I honestly think they tried really, really hard to nail something right along the lines of what you describe and meeting all of those criteria that I listed, and what came out was CR. In the face of all that is stacked against the possibility of WotC creating a system for encounter balance, I think the “kinda-sorta in the general vicinity... ish” of CR was probably about the best we could expect from them on the subject.
Considering the sheer variability of combinations between Race, Class, and Subclass alone it becomes obvious how.... improbable that would be to achieve. I mean, when two players can use the exact same rules and one player could create a character like this:
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Homebrew (Mostly Outdated):Magic Items,Monsters,Spells,Subclasses ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
Considering the sheer variability of combinations between Race, Class, and Subclass alone it becomes obvious how.... improbable that would be to achieve.
I'm not sure I agree with this. Lots of other games have achieved the ability to balance things to that a power level of X from the PCs corresponds roughly equivalently to a power level of Y for their opponents. There is way more variability in how Champions characters are created, for example, but you can be fairly sure, due to how the game is balanced, that one 250 point character is roughly equivalent to another 250 point character. I never had any trouble balancing villain vs hero fights in that game.
Furthermore, in 3e, the guys at Bioware were able to balance CR somehow in NWN that you could generate random encounters using trigger points in that game and as long as you gave the engine enough variable CR combos to choose from, it could generate an encounter that worked well for any party of any size and level. You had to give the computer enough options (if it's only option was 1-8 creatures and "kobolds" clearly it could only do so much), but if you did, there was an algorithm that worked well pretty much every time.
If Bioware could figure this out with 3e (or maybe, if the guys who wrote 3e could figure it out so Bioware could use it? Not sure which one, as I never played 3e tabletop), why can't the guys who run 5e figure it out?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Bioware may have need able to do it, and whoever published Champions may have been able to do it....
Now compare the games made by those other companies with D&D 3e-5e. Does it honestly seem to you like WotC has its shit anywhere even remotely together enough to do it? 'Cause I sure do not, since Bioware had to fix WotC shit in 3/3.5; then there was 4e (‘nuff said); and now in 5e we have a CR that, IMO, is less useful than what it was in 3e.
Does it honestly seem to you like WotC has its shit anywhere even remotely together enough to do it?
No, they do not.
I guess my point was, D&D 5e is not so much more complex than these other games that somehow they just can't get CR to work because the game is too complex.
If Champions can do it, then WOTC could, if they had competent people working for them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It seems like using generic NPCs as adversaries is much more dangerous than using the traditional monsters. A Guard, due to better defenses and hp, is about 3x as durable as a Kobold and, due to lower attack bonus and lack of pack tactics, does about 2/3 the damage, so overall about twice the threat. Similarly, a Thug is nearly twice as durable as a Orc, has marginally higher basic damage, and has pack tactics, so overall easily twice as dangerous.
Some of that could be resolution issues, but it's not like they couldn't just change stats around; set them both to 3 HD, instead of 2HD for the orc and 5HD for the thug, and it would be pretty even. So I'm curious: is the problem that the humanoids are too weak, or that the NPCs are too strong?
The trick is how you play them. No kobold should EVER be more than 5 feet away from another kobold ally, and no kobold should enter melee unless the have to. They should always fight the PCs in the dark to make the best of their darkvision. Using the environment and the kobold's abilities as you would a PC makes combat intense and fun.
Similar to the kobold's pack tactics, the orc has a few tricks up its sleeve. Orcs have a higher AC, higher attack bonus, and therefore a slightly higher DPR. Orcs also have the aggressive trait, which allows them to dominate the battlefield. A wave orcs go in to attack while the rest stay back and use the following tactic: 30 ft. towards the PCs (Aggressive), throw a javelin, 30 ft. back (movement). The melee orcs can easily swap out for new forces by taking the disengage action, then using their movement to move away from the PCs while a ranged orc closes the 60 foot distance with aggressive.
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homebrew (Mostly Outdated): Magic Items, Monsters, Spells, Subclasses
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
Your poll needs a 5th option: the CR system itself is arbitrary and flawed
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I was just about to say almost the same thing.
IMHO, CR is primarily most useful for two general types of DMs.
It is useful to new DMs who need something to get them started so they can hopefully form their own opinions on how best to balance things for their own campaigns.
The other demographic which I see most often jump to defend the virtues of the system are those who insist that everything a DM does must be objectively “fair and balanced” to the players, and that the only objective metrics by which such thangs can be measured must be those found within the official sources. They are the folks who see such a concept as bounded accuracy as an absolute truth rather than as simply another tool for the DM’s toolbox that they can use when appropriate.
Maybe some of then think that everything WotC publishes must be inherently balanced or else they wouldn’t halve published it? Maybe some of them don’t trust their own judgement on what is or isn’t balanced for their campaign unless they have the official metric to use for comparison?
Maybe some of them just don’t want to figure out a different way and just want such things to be provided by the Publisher.
Maybe some of them are just that gosh darned Lawful in alignment that if the see rules for something they gotta follow them?
There are a million other different answers, I’m sure.
I dunno, maybe they’re correct. But for my games, about half the time I don’t even notice it until it’s time to calculate XP. The other half of the time I kinda sorta go by CR to help me more quickly get things into the right general neighborhood in which the ballpark of what I want exists, and then I adjust things as I see fit based on my instinct and experience. In other words, I don’t always use CR, but when I do I use It to help get me close more quickly, and then I go with my gut for accuracy.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
It's flawed, but for simple monsters evaluating on expected damage and toughness is perfectly reasonable, and few of the monsters I'm talking about have abilities that are terribly hard to evaluate. It doesn't take advanced math to go "monsters X and Y hit about the same, but monster X has twice as many hp, so monster X is substantially more powerful'.
That's pretty much what I do. I've recognized by now that CR is not super helpful if you want to use it specifically and exactly... but although I'm not exactly new to D&D, I am relatively new to 5e, and sometimes even now, 17 sessions and 6 months into our game, it is still not super easy for me to judge exactly how challenging something will be, especially when the players have hit a new level and added all these abilities that I'm not very familiar with. It's one thing to read the ability in text; it's quite another when a smart player who has had the entire rest of the round waiting his turn to think about it comes up with a creative use for it you never counted on. Once they've been at a level for a while I kind of know what to expect but even so -- I'm often a level or two ahead of them working on things I am developing for the next adventure, so my knowledge of their characters lags behind my planning.
So at least the CR tells me, "WOTC thinks this is somewhere in the ballpark of my party level" and then I can take it from there.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
That’s what hot fixing is for IMO.
However, there are some folks out ther including those who insist that CR must be strictly followed and meticulously calculated that are of the opinion that any DM like myself who would stoop to such a low-down, filthy technique such as that is a dirty cheater and we should either voluntarily turn in our DMGs, or at the very least that we should voluntarily wash the stain of our crimes and dishonor from the surface of the earth with blood through honorable seppuku. You know, on accounta how inherently, abysmally subhuman we must be as individuals to even consider such an action, let alone to actually do it.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
CR is helpful, but not precise. Mostly I use it to help determine how generally difficult an encounter will be, so that I make sure that I'm not making it way too hard. But for the more precise difficulty, I just go with my instincts. Also, not following the CR scale is fine as long as you and your players have a good time.
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homebrew (Mostly Outdated): Magic Items, Monsters, Spells, Subclasses
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
I'm not necessarily great at "hotfixing" abilities. Again as someone who knows older D&D versions better than 5e even still, months into it... there is a high chance my attempted hot fix is what I think the ability used to do, rather than what it actually does now, and I will not get the result I want.
CR helps me get into the ballpark. Then I look at and potentially modify actual abilities from there.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I think the entire CR system needs to be overhauled, but there is one key issue is one that needs to be addressed, and I believe it is actually two issues intertwined: Initiative and Action Economy. I have had a pair of CR3's really hammer my group of 7th level chars, because the CR 3 Assassin Vines had a Surprise Round. Conversely, the same group totally trashed a CR8 because of the way the turns went down, and the CR8 went last in the attacks.
The only way to address this is that each and every monster, whether NPC Humanoid, or otherwise, must have Legendary Actions, in order to balance out when each side can do damage. I would happy to see a CR5 do half the damage per attack it does now, but have twice as many attacks interspersed with the player's attacks.
You could accomplish the same effect by just reducing damage across the board and increasing hit points. If you design for three round fights, an extra round makes a big difference, as does initiative order; if you design for five round fights it makes much less difference. However, D&D combat being fairly swingy doesn't strongly correlate to problems with CR.
See that's the problem with CR though. It gives the illusion that you can call two things equivalent when part of the math involves an extremely situational ability, or something that requires specific tactics. It works fine when you have things that just walk around and attack, but even something as simple as Pack Tactics dramatically affects the challenge of a creature depending on how it is played.
But you are correct that the NPCs you list should be relatively simple to calculate, so either their abilities are factored into CR in a very inconsistent manner, or there is more going on here. I would guess that intended NPCs have been overridden a bit to be more durable because they are intended to be interacted with beyond just reducing to 0 hit points, at least to a greater degree than kobolds. For that to work, they might need to survive an initial volley. I don't know, my point was that CR calculation is damage + toughness + magical mystery number, and these seem to be just another example of the magical mystery number serving some intended purpose that the devs didn't think we needed to know about.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
The players have no idea how many HP a monster had when it started the battle, only how much damage it took by the end of it. If a monster has an ability that can be used N times between rests, they have no idea what N was, or if that particular monster started that specific encounter on that exact day with N uses remaining, or N-1. They only know how many times the monster used that ability during that encounter. A DM can hotfix pretty much anything, the trick is being subtle and maintaining a poker face.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Very true. See my post above. Many a time if the players get the majority of first attacks, then can down or really change the complexion of a fight before the monster even attacks. Adding HP on the fly is something I do a lot. That being said, I would prefer not having to do that, hence my notion of all monsters having LA's to mitigate the need to Hot Fix.
Oh yeah, I think they keep stuff like that over in the same isle with the world peace, right in between the shelf with the end of world hunger and the floorstand display for the upcoming Beatles reunion world tour with all four original members. You know, that isle that’s just labeled with the picture of the guy just pointing and laughing at you because your request was so hil-arious.
Considering the sheer variability of combinations between Race, Class, and Subclass alone it becomes obvious how.... improbable that would be to achieve. I mean, when two players can use the exact same rules and one player could create a character like this:
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/tips-tactics/83398-5e-throwdowns-d-d-beyond-edition-4-powergamers?comment=6
And the other player could make this:
https://ddb.ac/characters/38631350/JycDWL
Then add to that all of the optional rules that are available and trying to compensate for all of those with absolutely no way of knowing which optional rules and how many may or may jot be used at any given table. The system just became even more far fetched. Add the swingines of a 1d20 system and it moves right on into that “nigh-ludicrous” level. Then consider that this system would have to be managed by human DMs with
Do you honestly figure it at all possible for anyone to create a system that meets all of the following criteria:
Especially since the same game company that wrote a system capable of creating both of those characters I posted above is the same company we have to relying on to design the type of system that would have to fulfill all of those criteria.
I honestly think they tried really, really hard to nail something right along the lines of what you describe and meeting all of those criteria that I listed, and what came out was CR. In the face of all that is stacked against the possibility of WotC creating a system for encounter balance, I think the “kinda-sorta in the general vicinity... ish” of CR was probably about the best we could expect from them on the subject.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
The two links are exactly the same...
All stars fade. Some stars forever fall.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homebrew (Mostly Outdated): Magic Items, Monsters, Spells, Subclasses
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If there was no light, people wouldn't fear the dark.
Thanks, fixed it.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I'm not sure I agree with this. Lots of other games have achieved the ability to balance things to that a power level of X from the PCs corresponds roughly equivalently to a power level of Y for their opponents. There is way more variability in how Champions characters are created, for example, but you can be fairly sure, due to how the game is balanced, that one 250 point character is roughly equivalent to another 250 point character. I never had any trouble balancing villain vs hero fights in that game.
Furthermore, in 3e, the guys at Bioware were able to balance CR somehow in NWN that you could generate random encounters using trigger points in that game and as long as you gave the engine enough variable CR combos to choose from, it could generate an encounter that worked well for any party of any size and level. You had to give the computer enough options (if it's only option was 1-8 creatures and "kobolds" clearly it could only do so much), but if you did, there was an algorithm that worked well pretty much every time.
If Bioware could figure this out with 3e (or maybe, if the guys who wrote 3e could figure it out so Bioware could use it? Not sure which one, as I never played 3e tabletop), why can't the guys who run 5e figure it out?
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Bioware may have need able to do it, and whoever published Champions may have been able to do it....
Now compare the games made by those other companies with D&D 3e-5e. Does it honestly seem to you like WotC has its shit anywhere even remotely together enough to do it? 'Cause I sure do not, since Bioware had to fix WotC shit in 3/3.5; then there was 4e (‘nuff said); and now in 5e we have a CR that, IMO, is less useful than what it was in 3e.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
No, they do not.
I guess my point was, D&D 5e is not so much more complex than these other games that somehow they just can't get CR to work because the game is too complex.
If Champions can do it, then WOTC could, if they had competent people working for them.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.