
![]() |

In my DMing experience, I can find parties can handle some pretty tough encounters. But I am finding throwing enemies that are CR equal to their level too easy in a fight. So how many extra CR can a party handle without the fight ending in a TPK. The math is mind boggling. Now take things into consideration:
1. Most CR's are built for 4 a typical 4 person party. For every additional player character, would it be reasonable to up the CR of an encounter by 1 or 2 points or character beyond the 4th?
2. When you give NPC class levels, it tends to calculate their CR as their class level -1. But how much value does a class level provide? A few extra HP and one or two extra class abilities or spell levels? And what about animal companions and the like? Do you calculate those as separate creatures or include their CR as part of the class you're facing?
So what is the guidelines of challenge rating that will help you judge the right balance of CR related to the threat? Is an encounter say +4 greater than the PC level too tough to put into play?

Arachnofiend |

This can vary wildly depending on how good your players are. A highly optimized and tactical team of adventurers can essentially throw the CR system out the window, while the group where a Fighter with 18 strength and power attack is the pinnacle of optimization can struggle with even basic CR=level encounters.

Orfamay Quest |

In my DMing experience, I can find parties can handle some pretty tough encounters. But I am finding throwing enemies that are CR equal to their level too easy in a fight. So how many extra CR can a party handle without the fight ending in a TPK.
A CR = APL is supposed to be fairly easy; remember, though, that you'll typically face a lot of these encounters over the course of a dungeon crawl. The primary thing that a CR = APL does is burns resources.
My general rule of thumb:
If CR < APL, you'll burn time but not much else.
If CR = APL, you'll burn daily resources (e.g. rage rounds, spells, panache points)
If CR = APL+1, you'll burn small consumables (e.g. potions, scrolls, wand charges)
if CR = APL+2, you'll burn expensive consumables (e.g., high-level scrolls, one use moderate wondrous items) and still be hurt
If CR = APL+3, someone might die For Reals, but not everyone
if CR = APL +4, a TPK is likely
The way the math works out, an X-th level PC is CR X. So four X-th level PCs are CR X+4. So a CR X+4 encounter is literally a tossup; you're as likely to see all the bad guys die as all the good guys.

thejeff |
I assume you've seen this
Table: Encounter Design
Difficulty Challenge Rating Equals…
Easy APL –1
Average APL
Challenging APL +1
Hard APL +2
Epic APL +3
That's assuming a 4 person party.
In theory animal companions and the like are counted as part of the class. Both for enemies and the party.Consider that 1 PC (with PC wealth) is a CR=APL encounter for the party. 4 PCs is a CR=APL+4 encounter. That's a fair fight. Fighting your own party is beyond an epic encounter. The PCs are supposed to win. :)
But you should be able to reverse engineer the strength of a larger than normal party from the tables for monster CR. 4 creatures of a given CR are CR+4. 6 creatures are CR+5. So I'd assume that 2 PCs would add 1 to the APL.
CR=APL probably should be easy for a larger party.
General adventure design theory does suggest a bunch of easy and average encounter along with only a few Challenging or Hard ones, reserving Epic for major events. The more rest time they have, the fewer, but harder fights are needed.
If I was going to beef up encounters because of party size, I'd suggest doing it by adding more enemies, rather than changing to tougher ones most of the time. That gives both the party and their enemies more actions, balancing the action economy while not risking introducing enemies with abilities the PCs can't counter yet.
And I'd also keep in mind that all of it is guidelines. Optimization, tactics and just decent character choices can lead to parties that are much tougher than they appear on paper. Nor are all CR equivalent enemies really created equal and some may be more vulnerable or deadly to some groups than others.

Nargemn |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

This guide has really helped me with designing encounters for my groups I DM for.
Also, Animal Companions are calculated as part of the challenge rating for a class, so you don't try to figure out what threat they represent and calculate them separately.

Kobold Catgirl |

I assume you've seen this
Quote:
Table: Encounter Design
Difficulty Challenge Rating Equals…
Easy APL –1
Average APL
Challenging APL +1
Hard APL +2
Epic APL +3That's assuming a 4 person party.
In theory animal companions and the like are counted as part of the class. Both for enemies and the party.Consider that 1 PC (with PC wealth) is a CR=APL encounter for the party. 4 PCs is a CR=APL+4 encounter. That's a fair fight. Fighting your own party is beyond an epic encounter. The PCs are supposed to win. :)
Minor correction: The PCs are supposed to get somewhere. If they make it to the BBEG and lose, it's a Bad End, but not a bad ending.

![]() |

CR is a good guideline. I recommend getting well familiar with it. Make sure you can calculate it on the spot. Why? Because it's a good guideline :) With all respect to CR however, it tends to fall away from it's curve at higher levels and once you GM for longer periods, you will quickly realize that some encounters are tougher even though their CR remains the same.
1. There was a good guide that I saw somewhere about this. It goes something like this: "In order to properly challenge party of 4x lv1 PCs, you need to make 4x lv1 NPCs. 4x lv1 NPCs in this case would equal to CR 3 encounter or APL +2 (hard) encounter." Although this isn't exactly how guidelines in PF Gamemastery Guide would probably suggest, I think it provides much better reference.
2. NPC class levels are -1 CR lower when calculating CR. NPC classes are good tool to use at lower and mid levels because due to CR -1 challenge, you can slightly increase the CR without actually modifying it. Animal companions are usually treated as class abilities and wouldn't receive any CR, but if they are a standalone encounter, you could compare their statistics with some other animal statistics.
I think that guidelines in general are such a large topic. There is much to be said, but you can probably learn most through gameplay itself. A CR +4 encounter might be considered epic, but if encountered on lv15, it might prove to be insufficient and weak. What truly makes CR dance wild is the spellcasting available to PCs at higher levels. Access to every item they desire might also have significant influence.
Adam

![]() |

It depends on the group. I typically throw CR+3 encounters at my groups as a regular fight, but I also don't use maps and typically only have 1-2 encounters per in-game day, so that tends to work out well. I will occassionally do a CR+5 as a boss, but that's about it. Recently I've taken to using monsters that break the CR system, like Shadow Demons, Medusas, etc. They're a lot more interesting, and are always threatening, regardless of party level.

Black_Lantern |

Calculating challenge rating based upon a linear incrementation of the party's CR is stupid. There's a big difference between a CR 1 party taking on a CR 5 and a CR 15 party taking on a CR 19; this is because of how higher level spells and class features grant more actions to perform that handle different situations. Once players have access to the haste spell is an initial jump in their ability to artificially increase their CR, especially if there are a lot of martial characters. I've seen many times where a CR 13 party takes on a CR 20+ encounter and comes out with only 0-1 casualties; however, I've also seen cases where a CR 1 party struggles against a CR 3 encounter. To give you an idea of an appropriate upper bound on the CR a party can handle you should be more conservative with increasing the CR at lower levels and be more liberal at higher levels, depending on the optimization done by the party.

thejeff |
thejeff wrote:Minor correction: The PCs are supposed to get somewhere. If they make it to the BBEG and lose, it's a Bad End, but not a bad ending.I assume you've seen this
Quote:
Table: Encounter Design
Difficulty Challenge Rating Equals…
Easy APL –1
Average APL
Challenging APL +1
Hard APL +2
Epic APL +3That's assuming a 4 person party.
In theory animal companions and the like are counted as part of the class. Both for enemies and the party.Consider that 1 PC (with PC wealth) is a CR=APL encounter for the party. 4 PCs is a CR=APL+4 encounter. That's a fair fight. Fighting your own party is beyond an epic encounter. The PCs are supposed to win. :)
No. They're really supposed to win. That's the design. That's why Epic is still weaker than the group. Though the group likely has used up resources by the time they reach the BBEG, so it's closer.
BBEG that ends a campaign, maybe. BBEG that ends a session or a module or something similar, they're still supposed to win. If you put them up against enough actual fair fights in a campaign, they'll always lose and it probably won't take many.
The trick of course is making it seem like they could easily lose any of those major fights.

thejeff |
2. NPC class levels are -1 CR lower when calculating CR. NPC classes are good tool to use at lower and mid levels because due to CR -1 challenge, you can slightly increase the CR without actually modifying it.
A minor detail:
A creature that possesses class levels, but does not have any racial Hit Dice, is factored in as a creature with a CR equal to its class levels –1. A creature that only possesses non-player class levels (such as a warrior or adept) is factored in as a creature with a CR equal to its class levels –2.
NPC levels are actually -2. I believe that's explained by:
a classed NPC that instead has gear equivalent to that of a PC (as listed on Table: Character Wealth by Level) has a CR of 1 higher than his actual CR.
So a NPC class with NPC gear is -2
A PC class with NPC gear is -1A PC class with PC gear is at level.

![]() |

Malag wrote:2. NPC class levels are -1 CR lower when calculating CR. NPC classes are good tool to use at lower and mid levels because due to CR -1 challenge, you can slightly increase the CR without actually modifying it.A minor detail:
Quote:A creature that possesses class levels, but does not have any racial Hit Dice, is factored in as a creature with a CR equal to its class levels –1. A creature that only possesses non-player class levels (such as a warrior or adept) is factored in as a creature with a CR equal to its class levels –2.NPC levels are actually -2. I believe that's explained by:
Quote:a classed NPC that instead has gear equivalent to that of a PC (as listed on Table: Character Wealth by Level) has a CR of 1 higher than his actual CR.So a NPC class with NPC gear is -2
A PC class with NPC gear is -1
A PC class with PC gear is at level.
I meant in retrospect to regularly classed NPC but thank you for clearing it up.

thorin001 |

It also depends on the length of your adventuring day. A CR=APL encounter is much more dangerous when the party has expended most of its resources than when they are fresh. And a fresh party that goes nova can handle encounters much higher than APL+4.
Never forget that encounters stack up differently against different parties. A party of demon hunters will have a much easier time against demons than most other groups. Conversely they may have a harder time against dragons with so many of their resources being demon specific.
And never forget terrain, weather , and similar conditions. Lots of close terrain can shut down your Spirited Charging Cavalier. Depriving you big damage dealer of his big damage will make the encounter much more difficult than the CR would suggest. Rain/fog granting concealment to everyone over a certain distance will shut down ranged characters. This will impact a party of ray slingers, Zen Archers, and Gunslingers far more than it will a melee party. Underwater encounters screw up anyone without Freedom of Movement and a swim speed, so monsters will be more effective than their CR indicates because the PCs will be less effective.