A few noobie questions

[zlefin]

I finally got to read some of the 5th ed stuff as it was available at my library (they had player's handbook and monster manual, the DMG was out, so if the answer is there just say that and i'll see it when it's available), so I have a few questions:
1) how's the balance on the various sub-class options? my impression was that some of them had much better boosts than others. like the champion version of fighters seemed alot weaker than battlemasters; and some of the wizard schools seemed much nicer than others, like divination seemed great.

2) it looks like you can only move twice your speed in a turn at max (using your standard move plus your action to move); I couldn't find any option for dedicated running; is there one that I missed? it'd seem odd if you could only move 60'

3) are there any sources for what the CR would be of someone made with the rules for building PCs?

4) how accurate is the CR system in general?

5) I noticed a number of monsters have access to spells of a higher level than PCs would if they were fighting CR=level monsters. does that cause any problems?

6) do PCs get into trouble from focus fire by lots of smaller monsters? I saw lots of monsters with <1 CR and pretty good mobility that looked like they could pose a serious threat to softer chars.

7) Am I correct that touch range spells that target an enemy don't require an attack roll in general? (i.e. unless they specifically state they do)

[Rukelnikov]

I finally got to read some of the 5th ed stuff as it was available at my library (they had player's handbook and monster manual, the DMG was out, so if the answer is there just say that and i'll see it when it's available), so I have a few questions:
1) how's the balance on the various sub-class options? my impression was that some of them had much better boosts than others. like the champion version of fighters seemed alot weaker than battlemasters; and some of the wizard schools seemed much nicer than others, like divination seemed great.

Heya, well, some subs are better than others for the general case, but most if not all subs can be useful in some kind of builds, for instance 3 or 4 lvls of Champion work pretty well for crit fishing.


2) it looks like you can only move twice your speed in a turn at max (using your standard move plus your action to move); I couldn't find any option for dedicated running; is there one that I missed? it'd seem odd if you could only move 60'

There are many ways to move more than that, from lvl 2 onwards Rogue and Monk can use a bonus action to take the dash action, so they could already be moving 3x speed. Theres also the spell Expeditious Retreat which allows for the same, and Haste, which doubles your speed and gives an extra action a round that can be used for dash


3) are there any sources for what the CR would be of someone made with the rules for building PCs?

No matter how you come by for the enemies stats, once you have them, theres a section in the DMG that tells you how to calculate CR


4) how accurate is the CR system in general?

With just those manuals its accurate enough if you follow all of the game stipulations, the farther you stray from them, the less powerful most enemies will be.


5) I noticed a number of monsters have access to spells of a higher level than PCs would if they were fighting CR=level monsters. does that cause any problems?

For the PCs? I sure hope so!


6) do PCs get into trouble from focus fire by lots of smaller monsters? I saw lots of monsters with <1 CR and pretty good mobility that looked like they could pose a serious threat to softer chars.

In good numbers they can pose a lot of trouble to tanks too. AC doesn't scale that much (thats what the game assumes at least), so enemies will almost always retain some level of relevancy.


7) Am I correct that touch range spells that target an enemy don't require an attack roll in general? (i.e. unless they specifically state they do)

Yup

[MilkmanDanimal]

Well, you have a good eye in terms of subclasses; Champion is typically considered weaker than Battlemaster, but, all things considered, it's fine. It's not flashy or exciting, but being able to crit twice as often is very useful, and can be perfectly fun if all you want to do is hit things with a stick. Divination is indeed great in all sorts of ways.

Sub-class wise in the PHB, I'd say it's generally accepted that the Beastmaster Ranger and Four Elements Monk are both pretty lousy, but, even with those, they're fully playable. There are no super-gimped subclasses, and you could have perfect fun with any of them. Some subclasses (Tempest Cleric, Lore Bard, Arcane Trickster, some others) have some pretty distinct advantages, but 5e is really balanced well enough that nobody completely outshines another subclass to ludicrous levels.

[Rusvul]

To add to Rukelnikov's excellent answers on a few points:

1) A few subclasses (namely Four Elements Monk and Beastmaster Ranger) are considered pretty subpar, but by and large the balance is pretty good. The gap between a well-optimized character and a poorly-optimized one is much smaller in 5e, so unless you make really bad choices ("I'm going to play a Ranger with low Dex and Con!") you'll almost certainly have a functional character who can contribute reasonably well. Subclasses like Battlemaster and Diviner do generally outperform Champions and Enchanters, but even poor subclasses usually have niches where they shine. Because all the base classes (with the arguable exception of ranger) have solid chassis, at the end of the day you still have all the useful class features of a monk/fighter/wizard (etc), even if you're playing the worst subclass available to you.

2) You are correct, move speed is limited to 60' per round (assuming you have a base speed of 30'). While there are a number of class features, racial features, spells, and even a feat to increase your movement speed through various means (bonus action Dash, increased speed, etc), there is no "Run" option available to all characters like in 3.5.

5) This is entirely normal. The Archmage is an 18th-level spellcaster with 9th level spells, but is only a CR 12 creature. It's worth noting that exactly what spells the creature uses are relevant: because CR is calculated primarily with four factors (damage per round, attack bonus or save DC, armor class, and hit points), not all spells are equal as far as CR is concerned. The Archmage has no damage spells above 5th level in its statblock; if it had meteor swarm instead of time stop, its CR would probably be higher.

[Chronos]

1: This is of course subject to debate, but some subclasses are generally considered to be stronger than others. Most notably, berserker barbarians pay too high a cost for their frenzy, and so are considered to be weaker than totem warriors, and chaos sorcerers have drawbacks as class features instead of advantages, and so are weaker than draconic sorcerers. I would also argue that eldritch knight fighters, thief rogues, and elements monks are weaker than their other subclass options, but others might disagree. The champion fighter, though, isn't so much weaker as simpler: A skilled player probably will do a bit better with a battlemaster, but less skill is needed to play the champion effectively. Beastmaster rangers get a lot of flack, too, but they're not actually weak; they just feel like they don't make sense.

2: 60' of movement a turn (for an ordinary human) is running. Some classes can also use Dash as a bonus action, so they could move 90' (30' base move, another 30' from dash as an action, another 30' from dash as a bonus action).

3: It'd depend on class. Spellcasters have higher CR for their level than non-spellcasters, because for adventurers, it's assumed that spells are a resource that you have to ration out over the course of the entire day, and so in any given encounter you're only using a fraction of what you could. But monsters fighting the PCs have no reason not to throw everything they've got.

6: They can be, which means that it's good to clear out the large mobs of weak monsters quickly. Area-effect spells are good for this.

7: Most touch spells either do say they require an attack roll, or are things you wouldn't be casting on an enemy anyway. Do you have a specific spell in mind?

[OverLordOcelot]

Some sub classes are better than others, and some are situational - Wizrd - illusionist, for example, depends a lot on how the DM handles illusion magic. Class balance is vastly better than it was in 3/3.5, even the 'bad' class/subclass choices are reasonably effective. If you take a single-class of any subclass and follow the basic guidelines (good main stat, use equipment and spells that make sense for it) you're not going to be dead weight, even though you might not be as amazing at specialty as someone else.

Note for the specifics: Champions are actually quite a solid choice, they just don't have a lot of decisions to make. They're great for someone who basically wants to show up and swing/shoot a bunch of times (occasionally twice as many times in a round) and not do a lot of fiddly stuff, or for multiclassing to take advantage of the expanded crit range. The fact that their abilities are 'always on' also makes them the energizer bunny of fighters, they don't run out of maneuvers like battlemasters or spell slots like EKs, they just keep swinging until they're dead.

A regular person can move 60' per turn with regular movement. Classes, spells, and abilities change this - 2nd level rogues can use their bonus action to move an additional 30', Monks get an extra 10-30' movement, Longstrider (1st level spell) adds 10' to your movement for an hour, Misty Step (a common 2nd level spell) lets you teleport 30' on a bonus action, and so on. Dedicated running is usually going to be abstracted using the chase rules in the DMG, where instead of comparing movement rates you make ability checks to get closer or dodge obstacles.

PCs make for weird monsters, if you build them they tend to strong offensively, with a higher AC and less HP than a monster. You can stat up a PC and use the chart in the DMG to figure out what their CR would be as a monster, but PCs have a lot of abilities so it probably requires abjudication.

CR is vastly different from 3e, you need to read and use the whole system from the DMG to make use of it. Generally a monster of CR= Average Party Level will be a speed bump encounter; quite easy, probably uses some resources, but not that risky of a fight. Single monsters also tend to be very easy for a party (especially a larger party) to beat because of the action economy, the game really expects there to be 1-2 enemies per PC. The system works reasonably well, but does require some abjudication, and (AGAIN) isn't like the 3/3.5 system - it's based around 6-8 encounters per day, with PCs gradually using up resources over the course of multiple fights.

Because of bounded accuracy (armor class and hit bonuses do not increase drastically the way they did in 3/3.5), lower level monsters remain relevant to higher level characters for on a much wider range than they used to. The difference between 'squishy' and 'front line' is not as stark as it is in some games or versions, most characters can have a decent pool of HP and decent defense or escape abilities.

Spells state how they work, 'touch' range only affects the range, it doesn't mean that you have to make an attack roll. Most offensive spells require either an attack roll or a saving throw. A few spells have odd characteristics, for example Thorn Whip requires a melee attack roll but has a range of 30'.

[Vogie]

1) how's the balance on the various sub-class options? my impression was that some of them had much better boosts than others. like the champion version of fighters seemed alot weaker than battlemasters; and some of the wizard schools seemed much nicer than others, like divination seemed great.
There are certain classes that are considered underpowered - The 4 elements Monk, the Beastmaster ranger, the storm herald barbarian - but they're largely even across the board. The difference between the others is largely a form of nuance - Both Champions and Battlemasters can have critical attacks and can shove a target creature, but the Champ crits more often, while the Battlemaster can use a Pushing maneuver while dealing damage (instead of giving up an attack to shove). Which is better? It really depends on what you want to do. All wizards can use divination and evocation spells, but Divination wizards don't use up their spell slots as fast on divination spells ,and a Evocation wizard can happy fireball the face of their targets, knowing that their teammates will be safe due to sculpting the spells.


2) it looks like you can only move twice your speed in a turn at max (using your standard move plus your action to move); I couldn't find any option for dedicated running; is there one that I missed? it'd seem odd if you could only move 60'
There are long-distance chase rules in the DMG. But being able to run 60ft in 6 seconds (1 round) is pretty fast. Also some classes and subclasses will be faster than their counterparts. All rogues can dash as a bonus action, but scout rogues can also move half their speed as a reaction. All monks are fast, but Shadow monks are fast and can also teleport between shadows.


3) are there any sources for what the CR would be of someone made with the rules for building PCs?
All of that is covered in the DMG


4) how accurate is the CR system in general?
It's as accurate as you let it be. Whenever you start adjusting the monsters


5) I noticed a number of monsters have access to spells of a higher level than PCs would if they were fighting CR=level monsters. does that cause any problems?
Not usually. The players will always have a higher action economy than any single monster.


6) do PCs get into trouble from focus fire by lots of smaller monsters? I saw lots of monsters with <1 CR and pretty good mobility that looked like they could pose a serious threat to softer chars.
Yes. That's a leftover from 4th edition "minion revelation"... 100 duck-sized horses are more deadly than one horse-sized duck, because that's 99 more potential hits doing any amount of damage.


7) Am I correct that touch range spells that target an enemy don't require an attack roll in general? (i.e. unless they specifically state they do)
If it's an offensive spell, they should all say "Make a melee spell attack", requiring a roll, or potentially giving the target a save. Beneficial spells, like Cure Wounds or Dragon's breath, just require you to be in range.

[Brotherbock]

6) do PCs get into trouble from focus fire by lots of smaller monsters? I saw lots of monsters with <1 CR and pretty good mobility that looked like they could pose a serious threat to softer chars.



One of the best adventures I came across years ago (can't recall where it was published) was filled entirely with kobolds, but they were behind fake walls and arrow slits and all sorts of remarkable and devious places to hide. The way a cave filled of nothing but kobolds could carve through a party of 7-10th levels was amazing. As it should be. You may be great, kobolds may suck, but if there are 50 of them and 1 of you...

[ad_hoc]

I see lots of 3e stuff in your signature.

The best advice anyone can give you is to throw out what you know of 3e when learning 5e.

It is a new game. It uses a lot of the same terminology but meanings are not carried over. For example, CR means something entirely different.

5e is not 3e part 2.

[zlefin]

thanks all for the answers :)

[Willie the Duck]

Others have answered the meat of the question, but I'll put a point on a few of them.


1) how's the balance on the various sub-class options? my impression was that some of them had much better boosts than others. like the champion version of fighters seemed alot weaker than battlemasters; and some of the wizard schools seemed much nicer than others, like divination seemed great.

There are a few poorly made classes (4e and Berserker, and maybe wild magic sorcerer). Champion Fighter and Evoker wizards are more what I would call Simplified -- They are for the beginning gamer who doesn't want an overabundance of choices to have to pick through every combat round or the TSR-era gamer that wants the game to look most like Advanced or Basic/Classic edition D&Ds. A champion's 19-20 crit ability (note: not the only thing it gets, just the first) is kind of boring and often feels underwhelming, but it is much better than playing the battlemaster and wasting a bunch of superiority dice (either blowing them on an encounter where they aren't needed, or heading into the next rest with them unspent).

Other archetypes are fairly niche to certain gamers. With wizards, Diviners and Abjurers have clear and obvious perks whose avenue-towards-capitalizing-upon-them is obvious. Enchanters and Necromancers can probably outperform them in spades... but only if played by a certain type of player who is laser focused on their advantages. The entire sorcerer class is like that-- It is pretty much a wizard with constrained spells (who occasionally can cast a good spell, plus a cantrip, if you spam quickened spell), except for the player who looks at the metamagic list and thinks, "ooooh, I know exactly what I'll be doing with that..."


2) it looks like you can only move twice your speed in a turn at max (using your standard move plus your action to move); I couldn't find any option for dedicated running; is there one that I missed? it'd seem odd if you could only move 60'

Getting real life out of the way: 10'/second is slow for sprinting on a racetrack, so that clearly isn't what this is (perhaps the chase rules are better for this scenario). It is more dedicated running through a chaotic situation where you still have to be on the lookout for dodging danger.

Now to gamist issues: why is it odd that you could only move [twice your normal move-per-round]*? I am guessing perhaps the edition you are used to had some other rules on this? The thing to remember about 5e is that it is not that other edition. I'm guessing we're talking 3e/PF, as it has 4x (3x if encumbered or heavily armored) running. 3e/PF is the outlier, not 5e.
*barring the many ways others have listed of circumventing this constaint


6) do PCs get into trouble from focus fire by lots of smaller monsters? I saw lots of monsters with <1 CR and pretty good mobility that looked like they could pose a serious threat to softer chars.

That is a primary downstream consequence of the dominant unique-and-defining change that the edition implemented (bounded accuracy): low level creatures are still a threat at higher levels because the DM can just throw a larger squad of them at you.

As to the softer chars: the game has some problems with actually keeping the enemies from rushing past the front line and attacking the softer PCs in the rear. If you (or the DM, if you are a player) play that straight, and have the enemies know that it is tactically sound to have one of them eat an OA so that they can all gang up on the mage or the like and take them down, then the players will be incentivized to play one of the options where there are no squishy characters (play mountain dwarf abjurers instead of variant human diviners, valor bard instead of lore bard, etc.).


7) Am I correct that touch range spells that target an enemy don't require an attack roll in general? (i.e. unless they specifically state they do)

Each spell lists the resolution mechanic required (almost exclusively either enemy makes a save or caster makes a spell-attack roll: proficiency+casting stat for both long-range and touch-range).

[Unoriginal]

Specifically, it's estimated that a CR X monster means "is a Medium Encounter against 4 PCs of level X, and an Easy Encounter against 5 PCs of level X".

[Willie the Duck]

Specifically, it's estimated that a CR X monster means "is a Medium Encounter against 4 PCs of level X, and an Easy Encounter against 5 PCs of level X".

While we're on that subject, it should be pointed out that a lot of people have taken issue with the challenge terminology. A "Deadly" encounter, for instance, still isn't an encounter were a party with a reasonable amount of resources remaining should expect to have a character death (or even a TPK), it's just more challenging than a "Hard" encounter.

[tchntm43]

3) are there any sources for what the CR would be of someone made with the rules for building PCs?

This is discouraged, but I've been doing this and I'm also still pretty new to the game. I've been multiplying the hit points by some value around 1.3 - 1.5, and the damage dealt by .75 or so (usually I only bother doing this on high rolls for damage). This helps to keep it more in line with the other fights. The thing you have to be careful about is that an enemy PC has the ability to burn through things like Action Surge and generate a very large amount of damage on its first couple turns.

Unfortunately, gauging the CR for an enemy created this way isn't easy. Rather, it would be, but the problem is that what you really want is to know the CR first and then know what level to make the enemy character based on that, and unfortunately the instructions in the DMG work in reverse: you look up things like HP and damage and from that you calculate the CR. For example, our most recent play session was finishing up the 3rd adventure, and the party is at level 2. There are 5 characters in the party. So for a difficult boss fight, I wanted something around CR 3-4 or so. But there isn't really a convenient to go from there. I can look up how many hit points and damage he should deal, but that doesn't tell me what level he should be. I ended up just winging it, went with a Fighter (Eldritch Knight) 3 / Rogue 2, and boosted his hit points as I mentioned earlier up to 79. I then decided that 5-to-1 was still grossly in favor of the player group, so I added a Gargoyle in the fight. It actually ended up being pretty much exactly what I wanted.

Some day, after I feel more comfortable with the system, I might put together a random enemy PC generator, where you would put in what CR rating you want for the encounter, and how many enemies you want, and it would generate results using PC stats for the enemies, with appropriately adjusted hit points and damage output. I think this would help give more variety in hostile NPCs than using the default ones at the back of the MM.

[PhoenixPhyre]

As for PC-classed NPCs, the issue is that it varies. A lot. And not smoothly.

For example, a mountain dwarf GW-style champion fighter clocks in at the following CRs per level:

Level | CR
1 | 2
5 | 4
11 | 7
17 | 10
20 | 12

Whereas the stock Archmage NPC (technically a level 18 wizard) could range from CR 7 (doesn't upcast blasting spells) to CR OMG (using high level damaging spells instead of defensive ones). He's CR 12 because his defensive suite makes it a pain for the party to deal with him earlier, not because he's an offensive powerhouse as written. His defensive CR (adjusted for traits) is only 4.5.

Monsters and PCs are complementary, not symmetric. They need to be designed differently because the role they play is different. Plus, PCs have lots of extra cruft that NPCs don't need.

Half the time I don't even assign spell slots/spell lists fully to casting NPCs--I just figure out what they'll cast (at what levels) based on a decision tree. They won't run out of slots in an average combat, so it all works out the same. If he survives, then I'll track exactly which slots he still has later.

[Brotherbock]

Getting real life out of the way: 10'/second is slow for sprinting on a racetrack, so that clearly isn't what this is (perhaps the chase rules are better for this scenario). It is more dedicated running through a chaotic situation where you still have to be on the lookout for dodging danger.


Good call here. Average IRL human top running speed is going to be around 22'/sec (15mph). (Usain Bolt hit 40.7'/sec, just short of 29mph). Now throw in broken ground, trees to dodge, a battle around you, wearing a 40lb pack, in boots, carrying a 3lb sharp sword, and you're pretty far away from running shorts/Nikes/track/head down full out sprint :)