D&D 5E 5e Monster Stats by Level (not CR)

S

Stalker0

Legend
when considering 20th level, I honestly don't think you can overdo it, because there are so many factors you won't have in your whiteroom analytics. Does 323 hp seems like a lot for the fighter? On paper it might, but then you factor in:

1) How often will the fighter have an energy resistance against an attack from numerous areas.
2) how many attacks will be flat out stopped by party shenanigans? (rerolls, blocking attacks with things like walls of force, just being flat out immune to an attack through a wish, preventing the monster from getting close enough to even attack, etc)

20th level parties have so many freakin tricks at their disposal, that even without a lot of optimization I would expect them to take on way stronger threats than their on paper stats would often indicate, so no I would not tone down the numbers. 323 hp isn't the fighter having 323, its trying to model the innumerable ways the fighter will be able to tank things that you don't have written on the paper.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

dave2008

dave2008

Legend
OK, here is an updated monster by level chart v5 based on the 20th lvl PCs I made (cleric, fighter, rogue, wizard). I then averaged those into one "average PC" here: Average 20th lvl PC. Finally, I revised the HP and DPR from that chart down by 10% as they feel a bit over optimized for my goals. However, I may reverse course on that based on feedback.

1719600184171.png
 
Last edited:

dave2008

dave2008

Legend
Stalker0 said:
when considering 20th level, I honestly don't think you can overdo it, because there are so many factors you won't have in your whiteroom analytics. Does 323 hp seems like a lot for the fighter? On paper it might, but then you factor in:

1) How often will the fighter have an energy resistance against an attack from numerous areas.
2) how many attacks will be flat out stopped by party shenanigans? (rerolls, blocking attacks with things like walls of force, just being flat out immune to an attack through a wish, preventing the monster from getting close enough to even attack, etc)

20th level parties have so many freakin tricks at their disposal, that even without a lot of optimization I would expect them to take on way stronger threats than their on paper stats would often indicate, so no I would not tone down the numbers. 323 hp isn't the fighter having 323, its trying to model the innumerable ways the fighter will be able to tank things that you don't have written on the paper.
Click to expand...
As always I appreciate your input and I am inclined to agree (I want to hear what others think). That being said, this is not just for 20th lvl PCs. I just started there and worked back to get my Monsters Stats by Level tables. This current table does include a 10% reduction, but I may reverse course on that.

That issue I have is that, though epic tier (17+) PCs can do crazy amazing things, not all PCs or players or groups are built to take advantage of all those options. My players, for example, are not nearly as effective combatants as you describe your players. I am trying to model PCs better than my players, but I am not sure your players are the target (but they could be). Does that make sense?
 

S

Stalker0

Legend
dave2008 said:
OK, here is an updated monster by level chart v4 (ignore the XP budgets for now) based on the 20th lvl PCs I made (cleric, fighter, rogue, wizard). I then averaged those into one "average PC" here: Average 20th lvl PC. Finally, I revised the HP and DPR from that chart down by 10% as they feel a bit over optimized for my goals. However, I may reverse course on that based on feedback.

View attachment 369793
Click to expand...
for context with your chart, what would be a standard number of Cr 20 threats for an "average" encounter against a group of 4 level 20 pcs?
 

S

Stalker0

Legend
dave2008 said:
That issue I have is that, though epic tier (17+) PCs can do crazy amazing things, not all PCs or players or groups are built to take advantage of all those options. My players, for example, are not nearly as effective combatants as you describe your players. I am trying to model PCs better than my players, but I am not sure your players are the target (but they could be). Does that make sense?
Click to expand...
do casual players really play at 17+ level? I mean even my hardcore players normally stop around 12-13, I figure you have to be pretty hardcore to run a game up that high a level and still find it fun.
 

S

Stalker0

Legend
here's another curveball that wotc stats do not take into account (but really need to).

Number of attacks is considered challenge agnostic, its only DPR that matters. This frankly is 100% incorrect at high levels, because of the way death saves work. If a monster's DPR is not strong enough to actually kill a PC with an attack (and almost no monsters are at that CR), than you only can really kill a PC through death save failures. And more attacks = more death save failures.

ergo a monster with 3 attacks can:
1) Drop a PC with the first attack
2) Crit on the 2nd (2 failures)
3) Crit on the 3rd (4 failures = death)

a monster with 1 strong attack only drops the PCs....and PCs at that level have tosn of ways to come back from 0. So monsters with only a single instance of damage (unless the damage is high enough to actually kill the PC straight up), are MUCH weaker at high CRs than ones with lots of attacks.
 

dave2008

dave2008

Legend
Stalker0 said:
for context with your chart, what would be a standard number of Cr 20 threats for an "average" encounter against a group of 4 level 20 pcs?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you're asking. This doesn't use CR. The monster are meant to be level equal to a PC 1v1. So if you have 4 PCs vs 4 monsters of the same level the fight should be roughly 50/50. That is what I am working to get to at least. Any time you fight a level equivalent monster you risk defeat.
 

dave2008

dave2008

Legend
Stalker0 said:
do casual players really play at 17+ level? I mean even my hardcore players normally stop around 12-13, I figure you have to be pretty hardcore to run a game up that high a level and still find it fun.
Click to expand...
Yes, IME. My group is casual and we have done several (5 I think) epic tier (17 plus) adventures (not whole campaigns though). Also, many people on these forums have run casual or semi-casual games up to 20.
 

S

Stalker0

Legend
dave2008 said:
I'm not sure what you're asking. This doesn't use CR. The monster are meant to be level equal to a PC 1v1. So if you have 4 PCs vs 4 monsters of the same level the fight should be roughly 50/50. That is what I am working to get to at least. Any time you fight a level equivalent monster you risk defeat.
Click to expand...
I was asking exactly this. so your saying that 4 PCs vs 4 CRs 20 monsters, the PCs have a 50% chance of getting wiped out (or at least forced to retreat)
 

S

Stalker0

Legend
I also consider a 5th level aid pretty par for the course at this level. +20 Hp to 3 creatures, no concentration, 8 hour duration....this is an automatic for any cleric I've seen run.

AID is a fairly weak spell at low levels but it scales remarkably well.
 

Similar Threads

Quickleaf
D&D 5E Monster damage realization - DPR per CR diminishes across the game
2 3 4 5
Replies
41
Views
6K
NotAYakk
N
el-remmen
D&D 5E Do you ever roll for monster HPs in 5E?
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
76
Views
6K
CleverNickName
CleverNickName
el-remmen
D&D 5E How I prep monsters in 5E D&D.
2 3
Replies
21
Views
3K
Whizbang Dustyboots
Whizbang Dustyboots
SkidAce
D&D 5E Question on Mass Combat Comparison
2 3
Replies
29
Views
3K
overgeeked
overgeeked
Libertad
D&D General [Eberron Homebrew] Cooking With Gaze Attacks: Droaam's Monstrous Industry
2
Replies
19
Views
1K
Libertad
Libertad

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top