But the thing I am more interested in,
Is this nugget. Its a blog from 2018 (so definitely not new information), but the idea it posits is interesting. It is essentially a list of observations comparing the DMG monster guidelines and Monster Manuel statblocks and noting some weird stuff, in short:
- Monsters tend to have lower HP and expected damage across the board than the DMG would have us believe
- Monsters tend to have higher attack values then what the DMG would have us believe
- Monster HP, AC, Damage and Attack bonuses have mild correlation. The DMG would have us believe high attack bonuses would be balanced by lower damage and vice versa. but in practice there is little to suggest that in the MM. High AC monsters have comparable HP to low AC monsters and High Attack bonus monsters have comparable damage to Low Attack Bonus monsters.
- Of particular personal validation, Resistances and Immunity have no correlation to a monsters HP to a given CR, which makes sense as vulnerability does not according to the DMG, despite being the same thing from a game perspective presented differently
Does this match up with what people have observed using these systems? What are your opinions on any of this?