Is the CR system actually useful?

[KOLE]

Hey guys- I've been DMing my first full campaign for a few months now. All my players save one are very new to TTRPGs- this being one of my players first time playing any sort of tabletop.

We've all been learning together as I certainly had to pick up a few lessons DMing along the way. But one thing is sort of bugging me.

I've avoided the pitfalls of the five minute adventure day- and I generally throw a lot of encounters over the course of the day at the party. One of the players is a Warlock so I consider it especially important to balance short rests and long rests so they don't feel useless. However... They have been STEAMROLLING every encounter I throw at them.

I started with encounters on the low end of medium at first, since they are new, to get their bearings. Everyone but the newest player hit the ground running as far as using their abilities to their fullest. The newest player, who is also the Warlock, is having trouble knowing when to use her resources as she's afraid of running out. I've been coaching her personally and she's been getting better and better- even picked really strong Invocations without me having to walk her through it.

With everyone doing well, I've been silently dialing up the CR rating- they are still MURDERING the opposition. I wanted to make the fight before level 3 significant- so I did some homebrewing on their first big boss encounter. I started with a CR2 enemy and added spellcasting and minions on top. I also boosted stats. I was a little afraid it was going to be too much.

...I was wrong. I was very, very impressed with my players. They managed the session with extreme competence and DEVASTATED the opposition. Three round knock out. I was a little stunned.

I'm not upset in any manner- I'm not one of those DM's cackling maniacally at a TPK- but I don't feel like my players are being challenged properly! I pushed the CR to the limit- and homebrewed on top of it- and they're still wading through encounters. I'm sort of scratching my head here.

There's only one thing I think I could do differently here: I had the players roll for stats. I'm a big believer in Point Buy, but since the players were new, I decided to implement a lenient roll. (Roll 7 4d6- drop lowest, assign as you like- one free reroll on a score less than 8). That being said, they didn't get crazy stats- just a good spread. Most of them ended up with some variant of 14,14,14,13,13,12. One player did roll crazy well and ended up with a 19 in his primary stat at level 1.

But even considering that, I don't feel like this should push the CR challenge THAT hard. What should I do here? I don't want to start tossing double Deadly encounters at them left and right and TPK by accident. But I also don't want them to feel like they're not being challenged. What do, GITP?

[MaxWilson]

With everyone doing well, I've been silently dialing up the CR rating- they are still MURDERING the opposition. I wanted to make the fight before level 3 significant- so I did some homebrewing on their first big boss encounter. I started with a CR2 enemy and added spellcasting and minions on top. I also boosted stats. I was a little afraid it was going to be too much.

...I was wrong. I was very, very impressed with my players. They managed the session with extreme competence and DEVASTATED the opposition. Three round knock out. I was a little stunned.

I'm not upset in any manner- I'm not one of those DM's cackling maniacally at a TPK- but I don't feel like my players are being challenged properly! I pushed the CR to the limit- and homebrewed on top of it- and they're still wading through encounters. I'm sort of scratching my head here.

...But even considering that, I don't feel like this should push the CR challenge THAT hard. What should I do here? I don't want to start tossing double Deadly encounters at them left and right and TPK by accident. But I also don't want them to feel like they're not being challenged. What do, GITP?

You've discovered that 5E's difficulty settings are dialed way down.

In my experience, Deadly x3-4 is about the breakeven point where victory for either the monsters or the players is equally plausible, if the players don't fight smart. Even at Deadly x5-6, the players still can win with some luck. If the players do fight smart and have some time to prepare, Deadly x10 is also doable, but is hard enough that I wouldn't want to use it on a regular basis, just as a sort of climax.

Don't be afraid to go Deadly if your players like a challenge. Curbstomping weak monsters can get old very quickly. But I would advise you to lean more on large numbers of monster than high CR monsters, in order to keep the game fun--I sometimes feel like players are more willing to engage with a dozen CR 3s than with a single CR 13, even if the dozen CR 3s are technically harder from a raw power perspective. E.g. if you include a CR 17 Adult Red Dragon in your game for level 8 players to interact with, make sure the players have the opportunity to run away, and be prepared for them to take it. But also be prepared for them to ram and board the neogi deathspider filled with dozens CR 5 Umber Hulks, because they may do that too, even though the Umber Hulks collectively have an order of magnitude more killing power than the lone Red Dragon.

[Dudewithknives]

Yes but not the way they balanced things.

Most of the time all they did was just throw on a mountain of hp and let it swing harder.

Back in the day Scarred Lands has an amazing monster manual, things had great abilities that made players tho m.

5e is more just pound the bag of hp till one side dies.

[Unoriginal]

It's useful, but not the way you've been using it, from what you tell us.

A CR 2 monster is a Medium encounter for 4 level 2 PCs. It's an *Easy* encounter for 5 PCs. That the PCs destroyed then in 3 round is expected, even with minions (given how the PCs got pretty high stats)

If you want to give you players a challenge, you have to go into the Hard-Deadly range, 3-4 encounters between Long Rests.

So to reiterate: yes, CR is useful, but you have to use it for what it's intended for.

[Man_Over_Game]

Few good rules of thumb, for making your own modifications:

Enemies should have higher hit rates than players, they should deal less damage than players, and they should have more life than players.

You want your badguys to be scary and big. But it's also a game, and a game like DnD isn't much fun if you cannot change the outcome. Increasing the accuracy of your enemies while scaling down their damage will make them much more consistent and allow your players time to change the circumstances.

Personally, I cheat. If I want an accurate enemy, I just take the highest to-hit of my players, and use that +1 for my monster's to-hit. If I want a tanky enemy, I give them roughly 10+ (8xLevel) in health. Damage should range somewhere about 3+ (3xLevel) per turn. A good rule of thumb is that a monster should not be able to kill the squishiest player in a single turn (unless it's a crit). Even if your monster deals max damage, they should do about as much damage as to leave the squishy near dying.

This is a good estimation as to how to make your monsters terrifying without game breaking, while still allowing random chance to play a part. For players to feel like they have some control, there needs to be obvious threats, with the means of removing those threats that's within their power.

[PhoenixPhyre]

CR is just fine for what it claims to be. A first pass at setting boundaries on an encounter. It's not the only or even the most important part of encounter balance.

What does CR tell you:
1. How likely it is for a creature to one-round-knock-out (reduce from full to 0 HP in one round's actions) a player character). Specifically, a creature of offensive CR X can, if everything hits and deals at least average damage, 1RKO a wizard (with +2 CON) of level X-1.
2. The chances of that creature surviving 3 rounds against a baseline1 party of four (as part of a group). A creature of defensive CR X will (usually) survive 3 rounds against a party of level X-1.
3. It contributes to a 1st-pass estimate of the number of encounters that a party can handle between long rests.
4. A rough tier of capabilities necessary to overcome its abilities (which is why Rakshassa, for example, are as high CR as they are--it takes a level 11+ spellcaster to affect them with spells).

Note 1: Baseline here means the following:
1. No multiclassing or feats (those are optional rules)
2. No magic items that improve numerical damage output.
3. A straight-up fight with appropriate tactics.

What CR doesn't tell you
1. How hard a specific encounter will be for a specific party.
2. The effects of non-damaging abilities (although those can be estimated2).
3. The synergy with other monsters or terrain.

Note 2: if you consider them spells and replace them with a damaging effect of that same level, it gives a very rough estimate of the CR-effect of those abilities.

Other things that matter quite a lot:
* Terrain. A white-room punchfest is easy. Give them places to duck behind or flank from.
* How the creature's abilities and the party's saving throw profile line up. A set of mindflayers/intellect devourers against a "dumb brute" party will punch well above their weight. Against an INT-heavy party, they'll suffer quite a lot.
* Tactics. Tactics make a huge difference. Remember monsters can take actions that aren't on their sheet--dodge, disengage, dash among them.

Side note: the PCs are supposed to win.
Second side note: the DMG guidelines are cautious (since the default mode is 0% chance of TPK). You're generally safe running top-of-medium/hard encounters.
Third side note: giving magic items skews things. Figure every +1 ATK or AC item is worth about +1 level. It's a rough rule of thumb, but it's not too bad.
Fourth side note: I write too many side notes.
Fifth side note: The name of the game is action economy. A decent rule of thumb is 1.5-2 monsters of CR X/2 per character of CR X. Not perfect, but decent. Solos (and even duos) are dead meat, even with legendary actions unless you're pushing into the "can 1RKO" range.

[Louro]

The CR is fine. Just 2 thing I consider when planning encounters.

1) Suggested CRs are a bit easier than suggested.
2) Make sure the enemies have a plan.

2nd point is what makes encounters interesting. Give the foes some sort of advantage they can exploit in combat: cover, surprise, favorable terrain, traps, reinforcements, skill combos...

[Trustypeaches]

CR is simply a tool for determining a creatures threat level at a glance.

You can make any monster more or less dangerous depending on how intelligently you play them and their tactics.

[Gastronomie]

First I suggest you read AngryDM's guides to designing encounters. They do really help.

That aside, I agree with above that it is okay to push the limits on the table and create encounters that are more difficult than "deadly" - that is, in the case where your players seem to want tougher opponents.

Otherwise, I believe, it's more or less fine. Simply put, at least in my experience, the PCs wiping the floor with the enemies is normal of D&D. What do you expect? They're the main characters, the heroes, and the encounter table is designed so they can survive 6 or 7 encounters no problem. No way the enemies can win unless they have great tactics, synergy and luck.

[Knaight]

CR is a secondary system here - the XP balance is the primary tool for assessing encounter strength, where CR works mostly to prevent certain types of fights. Spending the entire XP balance on one high CR monster usually goes pretty much one of two ways. They win initiative, wipe out a single PC, then get shredded by the party because action economy advantage is a powerful tool, or they lose initiative and just get shredded. More lower CR monsters generally reduces how swingy a fight is, such that they generally distribute some damage around a bunch of PCs without taking any out, unless the PCs started the fight injured.

[MaxWilson]

CR is a secondary system here - the XP balance is the primary tool for assessing encounter strength, where CR works mostly to prevent certain types of fights. Spending the entire XP balance on one high CR monster usually goes pretty much one of two ways. They win initiative, wipe out a single PC, then get shredded by the party because action economy advantage is a powerful tool, or they lose initiative and just get shredded. More lower CR monsters generally reduces how swingy a fight is, such that they generally distribute some damage around a bunch of PCs without taking any out, unless the PCs started the fight injured.

The third possibility is that they win surprise and/or initiative, fight smart, and then shred the party. (This is not necessarily a good thing or a bad thing per se.) Snail groups have tactical options that aren't generally open to larger groups, for example a dragon exploiting superior stealth and mobility.

There is an enormous difference between the threat level of a T Rex that charges the party and starts rolling attacks against the nearest PC, vs. a genius-level T Rex who appears from around a corner just long enough to scoop up a squishy-looking PC in its jaws before retreating 50' or so behind cover to gnaw on its meal in isolation. Same CR, completely different encounter.

Be careful about using smart monsters. They are not always fun for all players.

[Willie the Duck]

Snail groups have tactical options that aren't generally open to larger groups

This is clearly attack of the smartphone, but the mental image is just too good! :-D

[PhoenixPhyre]

This is clearly attack of the smartphone, but the mental image is just too good! :-D

Agreed.

On the main topic, one thing that's worked for me is waves.

I did one with two "main" enemies and 6 spawn points for 2.5 (ish) PC party of level 6 with good items--2 full PCs, a PC on autopilot (healer) and an NPC giant lizard/barbarian...thing.

Each spawn point either summoned a swarm of spiders or a giant wolf spider, but only only sometimes. Basically I rolled a die (and sort of occasionally cheated to keep the pressure up/down/sideways) to see which ones would spawn a creature that would then go and attack. They were fragile though--any decent fire damage or any direct melee hit would disable them. There weren't more than about 4-5 total creatures on the board at any point in time though, so the turn time was decently short.

The main enemies were two homebrew creatures estimated at CR 5 and CR 3--turns out the CR 3 was more of a threat because it was super mobile.

The presence of the little things forced the party to react and spend actions not focus-firing the bigger guys. Knocked both of the main PCs and the lizard down to 0 a couple times each for the only fight of the day, which is more than usual.

[Cealocanth]

Yes, CR is useful. No, it's not useful for what it says it's for. It's useful for answering questions like "will I completely vaporize the party wizard if I add a black pudding to this fight with an ogre zombie?"

If your players want to, and it very much hinges on if they want to, the CR system is significantly easier compared to what actually makes for a difficult encounter. As any war gamer will tell you, the game has nothing to do with what the players can do, but everything to do with the battlefield and what the players actually do. An encounter that registers as Medium in the CR system can be made into quite a difficult encounter if the party is facing a unit with viable tactics and cover, artillery fire or archers, battlefield controllers, or disadvantageous terrain. Four goblins and a wizard is surprisingly deadly when the goblins prevent the players from moving through a hallway, and the wizard drops a fireball on them. A dragon of their tier will usually make a party work up a sweat, and may even kill some of the weaker players, but the party will succeed. That is, unless you're fighting a Black Dragon in a room that is mostly water in pure darkness, where the dragon can strike like a great white shark on a hapless party of players swimming about like arctic seals. Environment changes the game. Tactics take advantage of the environment. Traps and terrain let you change the environment.

But, that's for games where the players are struggling to survive, like a horror game or a survival game. It's for players who like the taste of blood and the feeling that they clawed their way to victory by the skin of their teeth. For a party who wants to be an unstoppable force tearing through bad guys left and right, fighting endlessly until they confront the dragon's layer and feed the poor beast its own genitals, the CR system works fine enough.

[Gilrad]

I would argue that the only time an encounter is "failed" on the side of too easy is if the players emerge victorious with zero relevant resources spent.

Exceptions of course being when the players sit down and come up with a brilliant plan to bypass or dominate the encounter with almost no resource expenditure, but even then I would low-key add another encounter to the day so in the end their reward is "more xp" rather than "not having to be put at risk".

[Tanarii]

Depends.

Do you allow feats? Multiclassing? Both of those tend to more powerful characters.

Do players do a good job of picking their fights, and setting them up for a turkey shoot? If the enemy is surprised, and the party isn't, or if the enemy don't have cover and the party does, that's a level of difficulty decrease each. See DMG 85. I'd also count it if the party has easy ability to kite, or take advantage of other terrain or environmental effects.

I've found in a no-feats, no multiclassing campaign, most parties can push on to 1-1/3 of an adventuring day if they get a 3rd short rest, taking into account adjustments for situational benefits/drawbacks per fight. They start to feel risk if they try to push on past a 4th short rest towards 1-2/3 an adventuring day.

I also tend towards many lower CR creatures (so x2 to x2.5 XP difficulty modifier). I generally feel that solos or pairs are a bit weak for their supposed difficulty.

[Asensur]

I have the following adjustments for a party of 4.

Lvl1-4 -> CR
Lvl5-8 -> CR+1
Lvl9-12 -> CR+2
Lvl13-16 -> CR+3
Lvl17-19 -> CR+4
Lvl20 & epic -> CR+5

So, for a lvl 10 party I use CR12 encounters.

[Finback]

This is clearly attack of the smartphone, but the mental image is just too good! :-D

Teenage Mutant Wizard Flail Snails.

[Theodoric]

It's about as useful as it gets for a game as relatively open as D&D 5e. It can't account for everything, so it doesn't. It's always going to be more art than science, especially considering how different parties can be.

For example, take a Shadow Demon. It's only a CR 4 creature, but it's got a huge set of vulnerabilities, resistances and immunities, and is reliant on stealth to do most of it's damage (so it depends on how the DM plays it and the environment it's put in, too). A party of just fighters, rogues and wizards without magical weapons is going to have a different challenge than one with a cleric and a paladin.

[Willie the Duck]

It's about as useful as it gets for a game as relatively open as D&D 5e.

That's a good point. Useful compared to what? oD&D (and kinda through the end of the TSR era) used hit dice as a very rough approximation of monster power, and the best thing I can say about it is that no one treated it as anything more than a very rough approximation. 3e/PF have a CR system where the numbers mean something different than 5e (which is where a whole bunch of the confusion comes from, I feel), but the 3e/PF fans rant about it just as much. I'm sure plenty of other ttrpgs have something akin to a CR system (GURPS and HERO System using points, just like the PCs, being an example), and I've never really heard of any that are routinely lauded. While I think there should have been a boatload more playtesting of monsters (such that the CR system at least was a better internally-relative ranking system for the monsters), I am suspicious of something that purports to do it better (while still using something approaching the simplicity of a numeric scale).

[MaxWilson]

That's a good point. Useful compared to what? oD&D (and kinda through the end of the TSR era) used hit dice as a very rough approximation of monster power, and the best thing I can say about it is that no one treated it as anything more than a very rough approximation. 3e/PF have a CR system where the numbers mean something different than 5e (which is where a whole bunch of the confusion comes from, I feel), but the 3e/PF fans rant about it just as much. I'm sure plenty of other ttrpgs have something akin to a CR system (GURPS and HERO System using points, just like the PCs, being an example), and I've never really heard of any that are routinely lauded. While I think there should have been a boatload more playtesting of monsters (such that the CR system at least was a better internally-relative ranking system for the monsters), I am suspicious of something that purports to do it better (while still using something approaching the simplicity of a numeric scale).

It would be useful and interesting to have empirical measurements, such as e.g. the Champion scale: what is the smallest value of N for which N/2 Nth level Champions[1] have a 50% chance of winning the fight with at least one PC left alive? What is the smallest value which gives them a 99% chance of success with no casualties?

Then you could talk in meaningful terms of e.g. 1 Beholder and 6 Githyanki being a "Champion 7-15" fight.

[1] Odd Champions are melee-specialized, even Champions are range-specialized.

[darknite]

CR is a pretty basic guideline in my book, especially as numbers of combatants on any/both sides start to increase. I prefer to use my experience as a DM to guide encounter building.

[jdolch]

CR can never be the be-all-and-end-all.

Just take the same group of undead monsters against a group having a cleric and a paladin and then against a group that doesn't. Same Enemies, wildly different outcome. Just one example of how PC groups can differ WILDLY both tactically as well as mechanically. So yeah, use CR with a boatload of salt.

[Demonslayer666]

It's useful, but just realize that deadly is not deadly, unless you are playing with very incompetent players.


I think you are handling it correctly. Keep ramping it up slowly (I like to increase AC slightly and add a generous amount of HP). Be very familiar with your party's abilities.

[GlenSmash!]

CR (in truth xp budget) needs to target the lowest common denominator: newbie players and DMs.

We can't expect newbie DMs to scale encounters down for players with poor tactical judgement, low system mastery, lack of feats etc, etc, etc nearly as well as we can expect experienced DMs to ramp up difficulty for a more experienced group of players.

As such I think it fulfills its role quite fine.