Let me state clearly now: CR sucks ass.

They should call it "avoid any challenge ever, rating".

Its nothing other than a way to secure a mediocre game. Along with poison that doesn't actually hurt you and level draining that doesn't actually drain your levels, its another wussy way that the modern D&D game has been emasculated for the sake of sissified-players who would have a tantrum if their character died "Unfairly".

Its based on a whole bunch of faulty ideas:
-that players should never end up randomly encountering anything too powerful for them to handle
-that players should never have to run away from combat
-that players should never have to think of creative ways to avoid/resolve combat because they should always be able to defeat their opponents with nothing more than their "leet powers".
-that player characters should never have to die permanently
and most of all, the biggest fucking LIE of all:
-That the game should be "fair" or "balanced"

Its an example of all that's wrong with the mollycoddled ninnies who play D&D these days. Spoiled powergaming brats, every man-jack of them.

To suggest that it was actually an "innovation" that improved the D&D game is abominable to me.

This rant courtesy of the "innovation in roleplaying games" thread.

RPGPundit

Swine.

That's pretty much crap.  There is some of that attitude in 3e.  But CR is just a rough gauge of how tough something is - it doesn't tell you not to use higher ones at times.

CR is unreliable because it is a fudge and doesn't take into account a great deal of context (and how could it?) - but it's reasonable when taken as a measure of challenge in a generic situation.

I suppose this is a deliberate troll, or have you joined with the anti-civilizatory bunch lately?

Of course having a measurement for the danger of an encounter is a good thing.

There´s a difference between having a decent scale and how you put it to use.

Also: Your beloved RC has the precursor of challenge ratings, too.
Your own game has them, too!

Example for use of CRs:

Wilderlands:
Each terrain has it´s own general CR.
Each hex has a CR.
That makes judgement calls easier. And this is a good thing.

What you do with that judgement is something totally different.

Again Pundit, that is the stupidmost thing you ever said.

That day of the month again?

Challenge ratings are a tool, nothing more. They help the DM judge then danger level of certain monsters and give a decent ad hoc method of estimating larger groups. That's all there is to it.

First of all, what you think about is the ECL, not the CR. And specifically, never giving the players encounters above their average party level. That's coddlng the players, the existance of CRs has nothing to do with that particular annyoing habit per se.

And news flash: What's the difference between CR and XP total?

Wow. That's about the last thing i would expect to see posted by you, Pundit.

I think you're riffing on two different levels here though. The CR need not lead to anything like your dislike of 'safe games' and never running away from a fight. If you want that, send enemies with CRs much higher than the PC's.

Your points on poison, level drain and permanent death are another matter entirely. One that i pretty much agree with. That said, one campaign i played in sucked ass simply because every fucking time we went up a level or two, in the next couple of sessions, we were nearly guaranteed of loosing them again. That makes for a pretty frustrating campaign.

Many years ago, my 14th level wizard died via poison in ad&d 1st because the stupid cleric hadn't got neutralise poison prayed for (our GM normally gave us a couple of rounds to administer this even in save or die situations). What's more, in being raised, the cleric aged and i lost 4 stat points (2 from Intelligence!, 1 from Con and 1 from Dex). Our GM made us make a saving throw for each stat on being raised or have that stat lowered by 1 or 2 points. I had no problem with this and the very easy raises in v3 or v3.5 is my only main bugbear, (edit. i didn't finish the sentence!) which can lead to rather strange roleplaying where players are 'safe' in that they need not fear death and thus don't come up with interesting ways to circumvent dangers. (end of edit)

Wow, that was inane.

You're confusing what CR itself means with how some DMs misuse it.

It's a tool to help a DM make 'appropriate' challenges and assign XP.  As Sett mentioned, often this is "appropriate for this location" rather than "appropriate for the PCs."

Personally, I think it's a remarkable concept that's greatly helped both my prep work and my random encounter tables.

-O

Quote from: RPGPunditIts based on a whole bunch of faulty ideas:
-that players should never end up randomly encountering anything too powerful for them to handle
-that players should never have to run away from combat
-that players should never have to think of creative ways to avoid/resolve combat because they should always be able to defeat their opponents with nothing more than their "leet powers".
-that player characters should never have to die permanently
and most of all, the biggest fucking LIE of all:
-That the game should be "fair" or "balanced"

Got a page reference for those? I don't recall seeing them in my DMG.

So each hex has its own CR... what then? What if your fucking players want to go to that hex, and its 10 levels higher in challenge than they are? Conventional wisdom says "change it".  The implications behind CRs and ELs is that the GM should never ever send the PCs up against something more than they can actually defeat easily. Its asinine. Its asinine also that they should somehow go into dungeons that are only full of CR1 creatures when they're level 1, and not face anything CR5 until they're level 5, and then suddenly the world is full of CR20 creatures when they're level 20.

If I want that, I'll go play a video game.

If my players are stupid enough to go where they're told not to, if they hurry down to lower levels of the dungeon or enter the Forest Of Doom, then they're very likely to face creatures much more dangerous than they're able to safely handle. And then they'll have to do that one thing that seems like a mortal sin these days: run away.  I know.. crazy, huh? How DARE I make my players have to Run Away from an opponent?! I must be the devil!

RPGPundit

i had a huge problem with CRs until i just thought of them as guidelines.  remember the fact that they assume a fresh party of 4 iconic classes.  with or without certain elements (spellcasters, rogue abilities, fighting prowess) and the numbers quickly go up or down a bit.

i think somebody else got to pundit's login.  or he put the wrong thing in his pipe :what: :emot-350: :madcow:

This is a pretty silly set of complaints that just shows unfamiliarity with D&D or how it's actually played.

Quote from: James McMurrayGot a page reference for those? I don't recall seeing them in my DMG.

Its built into the fucking rules. Encounters have to be at your level, poison won't ever kill you anymore (just temporarily reduce some of your attributes a tiny bit), and even the poor old wraiths won't actually take away your levels anymore.

RPGPundit

Pundit, you are saying embarassingly wrong and stupid shit right now.

Quote from: RPGPunditIts built into the fucking rules. Encounters have to be at your level

Page reference?

Quote, poison won't ever kill you anymore (just temporarily reduce some of your attributes a tiny bit),

Blatantly false

Quoteand even the poor old wraiths won't actually take away your levels anymore.

True, wraiths permanently drain your constitution instead. For permanent level loss you have to look at Specters and similar level draining undead.

Encounters don't have to be at your level. In fact, it doesn't make any sense to include precalculated experience awards for eight CRs higher and lower than the party's level if that's the case.