I would like to go back and expand my original answer.

The encounter building rules are pretty bad. They are based upon the Challenge ratings being balanced, but they are pretty rough themselves. This means that encounter design can either use the formulas or just wing it, and you'll probably end up shifting from the former to the latter in any event once you're experienced with the game. For new DMs, this is a real problem.

Quote from: HappyDaze;1110712I would like to go back and expand my original answer.

The encounter building rules are pretty bad. They are based upon the Challenge ratings being balanced, but they are pretty rough themselves. This means that encounter design can either use the formulas or just wing it, and you'll probably end up shifting from the former to the latter in any event once you're experienced with the game. For new DMs, this is a real problem.

Yes, the CR system is quite borked, but it works well enough for levels 1 and 2, and mostly for 3 (just avoid that CR 2 level 5 wizard with the pair of fireballs).

By the time the party hits level 4 and the CR system is basicallly useless, however, the DM isn't exactly "new."

Quote from: Antiquation!;1110576On a whim, I just went to look at some examples of the 5e art. It seems largely decent, if somewhat "sanitized" and uninspired (although the style and quality seem pretty unified?). Not as cartoony and silly as the 4e art.

What are your opinions of the 5e art in general?

Some of the most hideous halflings ever rendered. Otherwise mostly good. I really like the bard pic among others. I think they stumbled on one or two monsters. But not the botches of 3e.
The art is not consistent at all though and some of the styles clash a little are can be potentially jarring to go from soft style to hard edge style and everything in between.

Quote from: Doom;1110726(just avoid that CR 2 level 5 wizard with the pair of fireballs)

Where does this CR2 level 5 wizard come from? The Priest NPC is 5th level, but a cleric and maybe not the best spell list. Princes of the Apocalypse had level 5 wizards who were CR3, not CR2.

Quote from: rawma;1110754Where does this CR2 level 5 wizard come from? The Priest NPC is 5th level, but a cleric and maybe not the best spell list. Princes of the Apocalypse had level 5 wizards who were CR3, not CR2.

Hrm, mea culpa. Could have sworn that came up before. That said, with the Priest, Lizardman Shaman, and Sahuagin priestess all being basically level 5 spellcasters of CR2, I can see how someone might think a level 5 wizard would also be CR2.

Well, there is a CR 2 pyromancer with 2 fireballs, so I wasn't that far off.

Quote from: Doom;1110759Well, there is a CR 2 pyromancer with 2 fireballs, so I wasn't that far off.

A homebrew mage? Using a CR calculator at https://5e.tools/crcalculator.html and treating its AC as 18 (using shield for at least 3 rounds) and its average DPR as 43 (two FBs hitting 2 characters failing their saves for 28 , and one 2nd level burning hands for 14 on 2 targets), I got a CR of 4, or 3 by checking "vulnerabilities", although vulnerability to cold might not be "vulnerability to common damage" as most characters can't inflict it, and to water seems even harder to use if there isn't any immediately available. Without the CON bonus and with no vulnerabilities, it comes out to CR3. which would probably describe a typical 5th level fireball mage. (I don't know if this is a correct implementation of the 5e guidelines for CR, but it seems reasonable.)

A homebrew CR calculator? But if you change all the assumptions you made around, you get a different number. Avoiding such irrelevancies and typical idiocies, we still see that CR really doesn't work well once you get past CR 2.

My impression was that it implemented the 5e DMG system, although there are a lot of special cases. Mages have a terrible defensive CR (few hit points, middling AC even with shield) but high offensive CR (based on average damage per round over 3 rounds, assuming for area of effect that they hit two targets who do not save; 2 fireballs plus their next best spell); these two are averaged. There's fiddling for various special traits and I don't know if those are official, but I think the main computation is what the DMG puts forth - I'll check when I have the DMG at hand. I run hardcovers and modules and so rarely create a new monster, only NPCs and I eyeball their difficulty based on existing NPCs.

CR is like an after the fact computation of the point cost for a system that might resemble spending points in Gurps Supers or Champions, and there are ways to manipulate any such system; NPC mages would be one such way. Fireball is overpowered for its level.

Agreed, CR doesn't really work past the lowest levels and mages are overpowered. I bet someone could show the CR 3 Mummy is far more powerful than the CR 3 Bugbear Chief, and there are no fireballs there.

I think it breaks down as you note for two big reasons:
1. It may be reasonably accurate for boring monsters (big sack of HP with a fixed AC and a single fixed attack routine, where all of these are in line with each other) but those are, happily, relatively rare and rarer for tough monsters. Once you get odd specials or a mismatch between offense and defense, things vary widely - a vulnerability or an immunity are irrelevant if they don't come up, but pretty important if they do.
2. PCs vary more and more as they go up levels; choice of spells, choice of feats, clever multiclass combinations, magic items, but also just hard to value class features. Just inflation of HPs (and healing to keep them up) will give more scope for things that seem less important to influence outcomes.

Mages are a major example from the first, and maybe a little the second since spell choice can vary a lot with NPC casters. I'm not sure I agree that mages are overpowered overall; as NPCs, they are because the limited number of spell slots has little effect for balancing - I don't think I've seen a hostile NPC caster last long enough to run out of slots.

Quote from: rawma;1110805I'm not sure I agree that mages are overpowered overall; as NPCs, they are because the limited number of spell slots has little effect for balancing - I don't think I've seen a hostile NPC caster last long enough to run out of slots.

Mages tend to be force multipliers to their allies, and deadly in ambush, trivial when ambushed. The MM Mage (Wiz-9, CR 6) is deadly when protected by low CR mooks, pre-buffed and using AoE on the PCs, whereas with 40 hp he can go down in a single blow from an Assassin Rogue or other high-DPR PC.

I found the fireballing CR 3 priests in PoTA are definitely overpowered for their CR.

The lowly bullywog with its double attack can be a serious threat for its CR rating. There are a couple like that which can pose a larger threat than their CR suggests.

Wolf packs. Very much wolf packs. Groups of kobolds and a few other creatures with group advantages have the potential too.

Back on the subject of saves in 5e.

I did some calculations and comparisons and some general thoughts here.

In AD&D PCs saved at level 10 anywhere from an average of 9.5 for a cleric and 9.4 for a fighter or most monsters. To a sucky 11.2 for a thief and magic user. (these two have the worst saves overall)

In 5e at level 10 the base save DC is 12 before any stat bonuses. Adding in stat bonus, then the save DC can range at level 10 from the base 12 all the way up to 17 as it is possible for a PC to have capped their primary stat by now using stat array, or a good roll. Subtracted from this is the targets stat mod, which for a PC is going to range also from a 0 to a +5 potentially. Assuming the same level as the caster then a +4 on the save if they have the appropriate save prof. So at this point the save DC can effectively range from a 3 up to a 17.
Monsters though get no roll bonus unless they specifically have a save bonus stat. And very few monsters have save bonuses. Couple of demons do for example. One I found at cr 10 had around a +6 on several save types. So it would save on a 6 to 11 if the spell happened to be one of the several its got skill on. Depending on the casters stats.

So in 5e spells are usually harder to resist than in older editions. But there is huge amount of variance due to player choices. A player that focused on non primary stats or feats that grant no stat points in their casting stat is going to be probably easier to resist than one who has hit the books and improved themselves instead with a focus on their primary.

All this assuming my math is right. Im pretty sure it is. Which means I probably goofed it.

Make of that what you will. Boon or Flaw. But to me seems monsters overall get shafted in 5e. I'd at least give them their stat mod to the save just like PCs. Its what I have been doing as I keep forgetting that "gets no bonus unless has a save listing" bit.

Quote from: Omega;1110896I'd at least give them their stat mod to the save just like PCs.

Pretty sure that is the RAW.

Yes, all monsters just use their stat bonuses for saves. When a specific save is called out, it's because the monster is PROFICIENT in the save, just like a PC with their proficient saves.

It's still pretty easy for monsters to fail certain saves, but, you have an infinite supply of monsters, so it's fine. If it's a monster that needs to be especially resilient, give it Legendary Resistance (auto succeeds 3 saves/day) or boost it up.