CR Is Borken; I Will Prove

[Neurosis]

THESIS: CR is arbitrary as fuck.

CHALLENGE RATING CHALLENGE

Name any six Challenge Ratings (like, give me six different CR numbers) between lets say 2 and 12.

For at least four of the six numbers you named, I will find at least two monsters within the same CR that represent a ludicrously different level of threat/challenge to an average, not-super-optimized party. Possibly as dramatically different as "speedbump" and "TPK waiting to happen".

For invisible bonus points, I will find my examples of "CR X != CR X" solely within the core 3.5 Monster Manual 1 whenever possible.

This gauntlet is specifically thrown in Kaelik's general direction (although let's keep it civil, Kaelik, or at least whatever the den equivalent OF CIVIL IS) but this an all-skate, and all who want may play the challenge rating challenge.

If you don't disagree with me in the first place, just say that.

[virgil]

You seem to be ignoring the part where Kaelik acknowledged there are monsters whose CR is wrong, but added the important caveat that they are a minority. This challenge of yours doesn't actually disprove his claim. There are over two dozen CR 6 monsters in the core rules. If there are two bad eggs, you don't declare that CR 6 is an arbitrary load of hot garbage.

[Username17]

Yeah, I can't see "I will name at least one bad example!" as being a counter argument to Kaelik's claim that the bad examples were a profound minority. Kaelik made a claim about trends, your threat to recite an anecdote isn't compelling.

-Username17

[Neurosis]

I'm not talking about "reciting an anecdote", I'm talking about actual on-paper stats we can easily extrapolate from.

And

Name any six Challenge Ratings (like, give me six different CR numbers) between lets say 2 and 12.

For at least four of the six numbers you named, I will find at least two monsters within the same CR that represent a ludicrously different level of threat/challenge to an average, not-super-optimized party. Possibly as dramatically different as "speedbump" and "TPK waiting to happen".

I'm saying that for every four out of six CR levels, I can find at least two monsters that aren't even in the same ballpark as far as the challenge they represent to an average party.

I have to assert that if I can prove that there are at least two wildly different-powered monsters for every given CR level from 2 to 12, it DOES prove that CR in general is not even close to working as intended.

It AT LEAST proves that it's not just "a few bad apples" like Kaelik said, it's somethin' like 20-30% of the monsters in the goddamn book have Challenge Ratings that were literally just pulled out of Skip William's asshole.

Here, why don't we just start with: EVERY SINGLE DRAGON. The Den admitted years ago that dragons have the [awesome] subtype. Pretty much every adult and older dragon should have a CR at least 2 or 3 points higher than its actual CR.

Also Frank: Have you ever in the last five years, even just as an intellectual exercise, tried to say anything in a way that wasn't at least somewhat dickish and/or assholish? You might be surprised at the results you'd get.

[fbmf]

Also Frank: Have you ever in the last five years, even just as an intellectual exercise, tried to say anything in a way that wasn't at least somewhat dickish and/or assholish? You might be surprised at the results you'd get.

One of the reasons we can say insightful things about stuff is that we don't have to pretend to be nice to people. By embracing active aggression, we eliminate much of the passive aggression that so paralyzes things on other gaming forums.

Schwarzkopf, you just broke my irony meter.

Game On,
fbmf

[erik]

I would've cited the response in this thread as an example of not assholish or dickish. Maybe I need calibrated.

[Username17]

I'm saying that for every four out of six CR levels, I can find at least two monsters that aren't even in the same ballpark as far as the challenge they represent to an average party.

And that's a trivial claim. Here's the thing you're responding to:

Ugh, this again. CR is a really fucking good metric of monster power and challenge. It's really really really really really good. If it wasn't really good, people wouldn't point to like 12 specific monsters as being just toooooo powerful. And always those 12, and not any of the 100s of other in all the books.

So just to begin with, he concedes that there are 12 monsters whose power is out of proportion for their listed CR out of 20 levels. Your claim that you can find a monster that is out of proportion for 4 levels in 6 would be... 13 creatures.

So just to begin with, Kaelik gave you 12 creatures that had bad CR numbers. You're claiming that the number is at least thirteen! Twelve versus Thirteen is a difference so trivial that it is not worth making a new thread over. Hell, it's not worth making a new post over.

But it's actually worse than that. And it's worse than that in several ways. The first and most obvious way is that Kaelik doesn't give a flying rat's ass what monster statlines look like at level 17. The game is essentially unplayable at that point and he probably doesn't count those levels. He probably doesn't count any levels over 12 as making much difference edgewise or longform. And the second important distinction is that Kaelik mentioned over powered monsters, while you are talking about power differences, which would be demonstrable with both an overpowered monster and an underpowered monster.

So at the end of the day, Kaelik said that there were 12 overpowered monsters in the first 12 levels and that nevertheless the CR system had considerable value. Your "counterargument" was that in the first 12 levels you could name at least 8 monsters that were overpowered or underpowered. Which isn't a refutation of Kaelik's point at all. Your claim is actually much more modest than the concessions Kaelik offered you at the beginning of the discussion. If you throw down this gauntlet and fail, then you lose. But even if you succeed at meeting the challenge you've set yourself you haven't actually dented his rhetorical position at all. If that's all you got, you lose the argument before it starts. The only question would be how hard you lose the argument. Point: Kaelik.

Have you ever in the last five years, even just as an intellectual exercise, tried to say anything in a way that wasn't at least somewhat dickish and/or assholish? You might be surprised at the results you'd get.

Don't take it personal that you're arguing your position extremely poorly. I haven't even been insulting you in this thread, you just happen to have staked out a rhetorical position that you cannot win.

-Username17

[virgil]

What would better support your argument would be to show the percentage of monsters that are out-of-whack for their CR (in your declared range). If it's more than some value, we can at minimum declare that CR in practice is flawed. The problem is your rubric for testing can run into a hurdle; the Den largely feels that the martial classes start turning soggy after level 7 or so unless it's a rogue (which stays steady) or a monk (which starts crap). If you don't accept that premise, you can very easily conclude that most monsters past CR 6 are OP, because at least half the classes can't handle them.

[Leress]

What constitutes an "average party", Schwarz?

[Kaelik]

I am mostly not required at all in this thread (yet) because people, especially Frank, have pointed out how your promise to find one overpowered or underpowered monster Per CR, is tremendously unimpressive.

Now you say you will use the MM 1, "whenever possible" but that just means that if I list CRs, and you can't find them in the MM 1, you will name something else. That's basically a loss condition. There are 30 CR 6 Outsiders. That's just Outsiders. Not Undead, Oozes, Constructs, Dragons, Humanoids, Monstrous Humanoids, Aberrations, Magical Beasts, Plants, Vermin, Giants, Fey, Elementals, or Animals.

So I want to be clear, if you can find a single CR 6 monster that is out of whack with all the others, that is literally worthless information.

The only way to present good analysis of this question at all is by using percentage of monsters who deviate from their CR versus those that don't.

I mean, for god sakes, you said 4/6 of 2-12 you would find a monster that was different from another monster. Even if we are exceptionally generous and assume you said that because you planned out all your monsters in advance, and you have one for all but two CR numbers, that's still only 9 monsters you found.

[Mechalich]

Even if CR values tended to be wildly inaccurate, so what? It is absolutely necessary for a game like D&D to provide a GM with some estimate of how powerful monsters are. Whether you use CR or XP value you're essentially doing the same thing - trying to gauge overall monster potency.

CR works just fine for most 'standard' type monsters - meaning the kind you're expected to line up and fight thunderdome style and have some mix of capabilities. It tends to fail when dealing with monsters built around a specific gimmick - something like a basilisk - because so much of the monster's capability is tied up in something that is either utterly destructive or totally useless depending on circumstances. Really though, a simply guideline of 'probably don't use these for random encounters' can take care of that issue.

[deaddmwalking]

Regarding Dragons specifically, it wouldn't prove anything if you used them as your example for 'overpowered' since the Designers claim to have done it on purpose to make those 'extra special'.

I think you could probably apply a CR adjustment based on creature type if you compared enough of them; the process by which a fixed number of HD are supposed to correspond to an increase in CR would necessarily create more deviant results as you apply the process repeatedly even if the variance were small. For example, if a particular creature was given 1 HD= 1 CR, but the actual result was 1 HD = .8 CR, you'd be within 1 CR for 5 levels, but by level 10, you'd be off by 2; by 20 by 4.

I definitely think that CR has huge value. Now, I think the notion that 'equal CR equates to 25% of the party resources' is bunk. A mirror match between any one member of the party where the other side gets 3 allies turns into a curb-stomp pretty quick. If CR is a measure of difficult for a PARTY, reducing the CR of class-levels by 1 or 2 would probably be appropriate (ie, a Level 4 Fighter would be CR 3 or 4). Considering a 4th level fighter roughly equivalent to an Ogre is probably fair.

[nockermensch]

What are these 12 overpowered monsters?

There are the dragons, mind-flayers, that damn crab, and ... ?

As for the CR system, the only bizarre thing about it is the "non-associated levels" method for advancing monsters. An ogre is CR 3. But an ogre cleric 4 is "CR 5", which is kind of wonky, because we're talking about a 8HD dude that will enter combat with Str 30. See also: Nymph sorceresses.

[Pixels]

I'm sure the low-CR incorporeals are on the overpowered list. Looking at you, Allip and Shadow.

[OgreBattle]

allip, shadow, and swarm of bees

[Mask_De_H]

Also Frank: Have you ever in the last five years, even just as an intellectual exercise, tried to say anything in a way that wasn't at least somewhat dickish and/or assholish? You might be surprised at the results you'd get.

One of the reasons we can say insightful things about stuff is that we don't have to pretend to be nice to people. By embracing active aggression, we eliminate much of the passive aggression that so paralyzes things on other gaming forums.

Schwarzkopf, you just broke my irony meter.

Game On,
fbmf

Those fuckers are expensive, too.

Swartz, chill on the thread making man. You're starting to look like silva.

[virgil]

Meh, I'd hardly call them silva. They're making sense, actually willing to read the rules discussed, and aren't constantly shilling *World or whatever.

[Blicero]

What are these 12 overpowered monsters?

There are the dragons, mind-flayers, that damn crab, and ... ?

As for the CR system, the only bizarre thing about it is the "non-associated levels" method for advancing monsters. An ogre is CR 3. But an ogre cleric 4 is "CR 5", which is kind of wonky, because we're talking about a 8HD dude that will enter combat with Str 30. See also: Nymph sorceresses.

MM2 has the automata capable of casting mordenkainen's game disjunction.

[SlyJohnny]

Chain devils are pretty nasty. Manticores can be pretty bad, but they're circumstantial; it might be in the air and KOing the wizard in round 1, but it's got AC 17 and will die if it gets in melee range to a level 5 fighting type.

[angelfromanotherpin]

The Den's been pretty quiet lately, it's nice to get some energy in here.

[Rawbeard]

I feel like this topic is a blast from at least a decade ago. so, now that we are talking about CR, is a Troll CR 5 with the party having fire damage available to actually harm and kill it?

[maglag]

Regeneration won't stop you from beating a Troll unconscious (even a vanilla fighter can pull it off without consumables in melee, although it's tight). Then just light up a torch for the coup de grace.

What are these 12 overpowered monsters?

There are the dragons, mind-flayers, that damn crab, and ... ?

As for the CR system, the only bizarre thing about it is the "non-associated levels" method for advancing monsters. An ogre is CR 3. But an ogre cleric 4 is "CR 5", which is kind of wonky, because we're talking about a 8HD dude that will enter combat with Str 30. See also: Nymph sorceresses.

MM2 has the automata capable of casting mordenkainen's game disjunction.

MM II is pretty wonky overall, but later published monsters had a lot more consistent CR.

[Kaelik]

What are these 12 overpowered monsters?

There are the dragons, mind-flayers, that damn crab, and ... ?

That Damn Crab is a web enhancement that was nerfed once it was printed, Mind Flayers are not one of the OP monsters at all, Dragons are arguably OP, but only to the extent that they were intentionally done that way, and even then, not as OP as people make them sound (if you are smart, dumb people can just be bombing runned by a monster with better defenses then they are usually prepared to deal with).

I'm thinking of pretty standard pull outs like Allip/Shadow (not because they aren't actually CR 3 for a party with the right tools, but because it is too easy for the party to not have the right tools), Aboleths, Disjunction/Implosion at will CR 9 Construct (that is supposed to be balance for CR 9 because there is only one in the world.... even though that has no effect on CR), Some monster in MM2 that shoots a stoning lazer that people can't just look away from, some wonky swarm also in MM2 or maybe Fiend Folio that has regular swarm immunities plus some extra immunities, and too much HP. Ekolids. Those things.

The problem is that no one ever says "If I pull a book out at random, and point to a monster there is an X% chance that it will be too strong and a Y% chance that it will be too weak." They instead always say "But remember the AlamoAboleth/Adamntium Horror"

As for the CR system, the only bizarre thing about it is the "non-associated levels" method for advancing monsters. An ogre is CR 3. But an ogre cleric 4 is "CR 5", which is kind of wonky, because we're talking about a 8HD dude that will enter combat with Str 30. See also: Nymph sorceresses.

Any system that starts by having to lie about how your Cleric levels that let you cast Divine Power are totally non-associate with your 3/4BAB Giant levels is not even a system problem. (Not that you specifically gave that example, although you did just give Cleric casting to a Giant who punches people, and clerics have spells that make them punch people harder, more accurately, ect. But the point is that most people wip out some variation of a giant for the high HD to CR ratio and then claim to non-associate level appropriate casting, that is then used to protect against the Giants primary weaknesses and increase the effectiveness of their damage methods.)

That said, plenty of the CR advancement rules are bad, which doesn't have any bearing on the brokenness of CR as a concept or the actual CRing of monsters that are written.

I feel like this topic is a blast from at least a decade ago. so, now that we are talking about CR, is a Troll CR 5 with the party having fire damage available to actually harm and kill it?

If you knock a troll unconscious, you can coup de grace it over and over and over if you need to until it fails the death save and/or burn it to death with a torch.

If your entire party has no weapons and can't light a touch, I'm going to say that it's your fault.

[erik]

Incorporeals aren't so bad if you're allowed to buy magic items at low level. I mean like cheap items. A potion/oil of magic weapon will git er done, and only costs 50 gp. Acid and Alchemist's fire aren't prohibitively expensive either for swarms.

When I played living greyhawk I'd always make sure that my starting characters had some way to get magic weapon cast (preferably 2 castings of it in case needed twice in an adventure), either scrolls or potions. This paid off in one intro module, wherein an Allip was featured. Intros are for level 1 characters only, and we curbstomped the Allip easily (I had a halfling ranger with PBS, not exactly power gaming it there). Would have gone the same for a Shadow.

I'd rate those monsters as puzzle monsters checking to see if you made intelligent purchases with starting money.

[maglag]

Mind Flayers are not one of the OP monsters at all

I believe he was mentioning Mind Flayers from the expanded psionic Handbook which are ML 9 manifesters at CR 8, meaning they're throwing 5th level spells powers when the party usually only has 4th level ones. And it's psionics so any anti-magic tricks don't work at all, it will ignore half the game's usual disables, and that's before factoring in its racial bits.