D&D 5E Level = Challenge Rating

[mamba]

This is not overloading the term "level." It is using the same term in the same way.

no it is not, a monster does not have levels. There is no level 3 Orc who after gaining some XP is now a level 4 Orc

 

[mamba]

It worked in 4e, and it worked in 13A. Given the encounter-balancing rules for those games are well-oiled machines, as opposed to the flaming dumpster fire that CR has been in both 3e and 5e, I should think the benefits are obvious:

a system that actually works as advertised.

I don’t think renaming CR to level has anything to do with that, you will need a different game from the ground up…

 

[mamba]

sure, but 4e and pf2e's encounter building systems working as well as they do suggests that using level can give you much better estimates then CR can.

no, it suggest that having a much steeper curve makes it easier to tell you what monster is appropriate. You will need a very different game for this, not a search and replace

 

[Cadence]

This is not overloading the term "level." It is using the same term in the same way. Level 12 characters will get approximately the intended, baseline combat experience from a healthy mix of roughly as many level 12 opponents as there are characters.

But an NPC made with the PC rules as being 12th level would not be a 12th level monster, they would be like a 14 or 15th level monster? Similarly a 12th level Thief PC would be viewed as much more skilled than a 12th level ("monster made thief") member of the thieves guild?

(Most of the time I wouldn't full stat out a random enemy caster/fighter/rogue/etc .. but would for a boss villain or maybe some other major NPC. Otherwise I like what 4e and 5e have done in bypassing that as opposed to 3e).

 

[Yaarel]

There are already too many disparate uses of the word "level" in the system.
Not only is it for characters, but also spells which are on a separate 0-9 track no less.
Adding monsters into the mix can only make it more confusing, doubly so because that would imply that a monster is equal to a PC at some point.

To refer to spells, I now always use the term "slot" instead of "level". It is natural, immediately clear to D&D players, and has avoided much confusion when discussing what caster class level gains a spell. Even when using short rest spell points, a slot 3 spell costs 3 points.

I strongly recommend 5e 2024 switches to saying "a slot 3 spell" instead of "a 3rd-level spell".


Otherwise, the "level" of a player character and the "level" of a monster statblock mean exactly the same thing. For example, if a player wants to write up a statblock for ones own player character, to abbreviate the favorite and frequently used features of a character sheet, the level is the same whether on a character sheet or a statblock.

 

[MarkB]

To refer to spells, I now always use the term "slot" instead of "level". It is natural, immediately clear to D&D players, and has avoided much confusion when discussing what caster class level gains a spell. Even when using short rest spell points, a slot 3 spell costs 3 points.

I strongly recommend 5e 2024 switches to saying "a slot 3 spell" instead of "a 3rd-level spell".


Otherwise, the "level" of a player character and the "level" of a monster statblock mean exactly the same thing. For example, if a player wants to write up a statblock for ones own player character, to abbreviate the favorite and frequently used features of a character sheet, the level is the same whether on a character sheet or a statblock.

They feel like two different things - i.e. I have two level 3 spell slots left. I'm not sure how I'd parse that if slot also means level.

 

[Yaarel]

But an NPC made with the PC rules as being 12th level would not be a 12th level monster, they would be like a 14 or 15th level monster? Similarly a 12th level Thief PC would be viewed as much more skilled than a 12th level ("monster made thief") member of the thieves guild?

Usually, it is the other way around. For example, in the 2014 Monster Manual, a level 18 Wizard is listed as Challenge 12.

But in Mordenkainen, the gap between level and challenge narrows considerably, and is sometimes the same.

Encounter balance is always going to be a matter of judgement. Whether you use challenge rating or level, it can't account for all the variables of how well or badly groups of monsters synergise with each other or the environment, or how particular monster capabilities may stack up against different PC group compositions. At best, it's a tool to get you into vaguely the right ballpark.

Yeah. As DM, I intentionally vary the threats of challenges for the sake of verisimilitude. I put in challenges that are cakewalks that the players will easily overcome, and be able to show off, and remember how these challenges used to be so difficult at a lower level. And I put in challenges that are too powerful, that players need to avoid or flee from.

For this reason, the unreliability of Challenge ratings hasnt interfered too much. But still, I would rather 5e 2024 offer a system that makes meaningful, intuitive sense, and that predicts an encounter with some reasonable amount of accuracy, especially at high tiers.

A level 12 creature is appropriate for a level 12 character to fight. That's precisely why you do it.

Ideally, pitting a level 12 player character versus a level 12 monster, will be equally powerful and have 50-50 odds on who wins, on average. This is a highly lethal encounter with a 50% of death.

But this too is an important, meaningful, measure of a threat, that is useful for the DM to know!

 

[Yaarel]

They feel like two different things - i.e. I have two level 3 spell slots left. I'm not sure how I'd parse that if slot also means level.

When referring to the slots, I say,

I have two slot 3s left that I can use for the next encounter.

(Sometimes I say two 3rd slots.)


When referring to spells,

I say, "I have two slot 3 spells left".

A level 5 Wizard has two slot 3 spells.

A level 13 Paladin gains the ability to cast a slot 4 spell.

Etcetera.

Even reading what I just said, I am sure what I mean is instantly crystal clear to you.

 

[LordEntrails]

So I don't see anything useful, yet, in this "level" nomenclature. Is a level 8 NPC equal to a Level 8 PC? or 4 Level 8 PC's? And what does equal mean? 50% change of killing a PC? How many Level 8 NPCs can a party of 4 level 8 PCs fight before they need a short rest? A long rest? How challenging are these encounters?

 

[W'rkncacnter]

no, it suggest that having a much steeper curve makes it easier to tell you what monster is appropriate.

i have no idea how you reached this conclusion.

You will need a very different game for this, not a search and replace

well i mean yeah, obviously you'd need to change how the monster math works. 4e and pf2e did that.