I realize they are in place to make a monster "epic", but much like your parents saying "because I said so!", it's a lazy way to parent... or in this case run an epic fight.
What's more... it's a rule/ability I'd wager was barely tested, but was thought of as a necessary evil for high-level play. Since many games don't go to super high level, it might not have been encountered by some or the DM is good at hiding it--doesn't let on that they failed their save and proclaims the Boss-Monster made their save. This revelation came to me during a game night; normally I'm a GM. I Pro-GM for RPGclub actually and before that Startplayinggames, and have been playing DnD for 39 years now. Due to the influx of VTT most rolls are public, so the GM doesn't roll behind a screen and thereby a chance to flub or alter rolls for dramatic purpose. This also means the players "see how the sauce is made", and as a result the monsters powers are quickly evaluated by most parties.
We were fighting a dragon and were holding our own even after taking a breath weapon. I then had a stroke of luck and it failed a save. Watching the GM roll a fail against my spell and then decide to just succeed is an annoying feeling. It's like arguing with the IRS that you shouldn't have to pay so much in tax... they don't care and more over won't respond to you.
It's also a lazy way to make a villain feel superior!
In this instance I was casting a 4th level Confusion spell which would have give us a pretty good chance to rally a downed companion and catch a breath, But I'll explain in more detail why (hopefully in annoyingly excruciating detail as to warrant a change).
The idea of monsters or players having resistances or powers that allow them to save for no damage is amazing, but there is still a roll and that level of chance is what makes the game feel exciting. When you know the monster has Legendary Resistances, then what transpires is a war of attrition. Spell casters knowing what they are up against will sand-bag their less powerful spells to draw out the L.R.s which forces players to play their character a certain way strategically (in every instance). Casters already have to deal with the annoyance of Concentration which can be disrupted, as well as the dilution of spell-power that most status effects give the victim a saving throw at the end of every round anyway. So a monster failing a saving throw may only be a short-lived victory... all of which are good ways to ruin the fun for a player.
But here's the Solution. Replace Legendary Resistances with...
Legendary Recovery: If effected by a status effect, Tiamat may use one of its Legendary Actions to end all spell/status effects.
It may seem like a minor change, but within the bounds of play it keeps a little more thematic 'realism' and also rewards player's tactics. It essentially allows for a monster to be legendary without hampering play with a wet blanket. Most monsters at this level already have resistance to magic and save with advantage, so when they fail it's amazing. Let the effect take place. No matter the resulting status... Polymorph (formally baleful polymorph), Banishment, Power Word Stun, Imprisonment, etc... the creature can use it's Legendary Actions out of turn to nullify the effect. This sets up a whole host of possibilities. Legendary Actions are now a resource for defense and depending on the GM's play style may approach running the monsters differently. Players may try and exhaust their L.A.s in order to get a spell effect to take place on that turn. Also, a small victory of stunning, confusing, charming or in some way effecting a Legendary creature allows the party to nullify spell-like effects/auras that need concentration. Maybe gives the party a moment to escape?
This also bolsters player agency and doesn't waste their turn in the homogenized mechanic of making a monster appear tougher.
Happy to hear other opinions on the matter, but as it stand the current Legendary Resistance power is an annoying mechanic.
-Nate (Hollywood DM)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
-Nate the Knife
"You are neither beer nor gems." -dismissive Dwarven saying.
This mechanic has been in existence for more than 10 years now. It’s been as tested as tested can be at countless tables. It works like it’s supposed to. The idea is to make it so the PCs can’t 1-shot these sort of creatures and make what’s meant to be a major fight anticlimactic. And while it might encourage PCs to think tactically about their spells, that’s a good thing. It makes the game more interesting.
Additionally, the DM is playing, too. And LR allows them to think tactically as well. They’ve got 3 or 4 LRs to use and X number of PCs forcing saving throws. When they should use one is an important decision that helps keep the encounter more interesting for the DM.
As far as your personal experience, did anyone die? Did you defeat the dragon?
The purpose of legendary resistance is to prevent the use of these save or suck spells at the beginning of combat. The simple solution for a player is to use damage spells, almost all of which do half damage on a save. Then, at the end of the fight when the monster is weakened, the spellcaster is more capable of incapacitating/severely nerfing the monster. Here's an analogy: say you have a martial who some way or another has insanely powerful crits. However, to get that they need to only make one attack per round with disadvantage. If the player goes the whole boss fight without getting a crit, it's boring for them. But, if they do get a crit, the boss fight is already over and it's boring for everybody else. A good DM might realize this and give the boss adamantite armor, forcing the martial to use a different strategy. The player might be annoyed, but it is better for everybody. Legendary resistance is like the adamantite armor. Another analogy: asking to be able to practically end a boss fight the moment the boss fails a save is like asking the IRS to not pay any taxes. Of course they aren't going to allow that.
Well, IMHO when a DM says they roll open, you basically give up any agency DM or Player simply because you leave the outcome to random probability.
When a DM hides the result, they can adjust the combat to suit the fun and experience of the group. The problem isn’t the Legendary Resistance, it’s that player power creep forces more resistances or the use of a resistance to be available just enough to give everyone a chance.
Most players don’t normally test for resistances, and that’s how we learn. DMs that play “fair( open rolls )” has like their players to understand the dice will run the game not the DM and that means be prepared for the dice to turn on one side or the other hard, and it might not be very pretty.
Maybe have a group chat about if the combat is too long or too one sided, try letting the DM hide rolls and working the game that makes the encounter feel more interesting.
And nothing says a legendary resistance has to be used at all, but usually a creature will sandbag that use until it really needs it, so it kinda works both ways.
It’s been that way for decades, and it’s really nothing new. Welcome to D&D.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
We did defeat the dragon actually, but it was fairly harrowing. I don't know of a party that can one-shot a creature like that, unless of course it's some monte hall campaign, but then it wouldn't really matter what you threw at them. Once again at this point, if they can 1-shot a creature, we are belaboring the inevitable and forcing a war of attrition for the pretend idea that this creature is challenging.
I'm rather shocked that the rule has been around for 10 years and no one else has thought it was a lazy way to adjudicate "elite power". I've read the responses and see the host of analogies mounting, but I'll put one here. It's like going to Vegas and hitting the jackpot, but the House says, "Hey nice spin on the roulette wheel! But that one didn't count. Next round place your bets!"
That's how ridiculous it is as a built in strat for end bosses. It makes more thematic sense to have an end creature absorb the hit if it can and then recover. If you want a movie reference think about the scene in Willow (if you are from an older time), when Willow throws the magic acorn at Bavmorda and she starts to turn into stone, but she wills herself to resist the power (spoiler alert).
----kind of replying to everyone in one post I think---
Are there Save or Suck spells any more? They used to exist but 5e pretty much nerfed the crap out of casters. Don't think those are a thing like they were in 1e. With this minor rule change I propose, a creature could NO MATTER the CONDITION they are afflicted with, use a LA point to then Recover. So if they were Power Word Stunned, next LA they get, they recover. Paralyzed... not any more, Banishment... they come back early as opposed to the 10 rounds the party normally has to prep and heal. Blindness, Unconsciousness, the Legendary Recover has the same result, but implementing it takes a little more strategy from the DM.
Finally, using open rolls isn't turning over DMing to randomness. While the game does have combat as a main aspect, it's not the story. Just because you roll openly doesn't remove your ability to let a creature die early; if winning is a foregone conclusion and a couple more rounds would just be boring. You as the DM can still alter those. Creature has more hit points but a player does an amazing critical hit and it just feels thematic for that one moment, let the crit kill that monster. Situational effects or party members teaming up with spells... adjust the DC or give a bonus for them conjoining efforts. The die hits the table and it's a number that would normally just save, but you're ruling the effect is more difficult to save against because of their actions; the party get surprised by a victorious moment. Open rolling does not run a game.
Legendary resistance really isn't that broken. I know it can feel bad but that is more of a DM-not-flavoring-it-well issue and a player-expecting-to-steam-roll-a-country-or-world-level-threat issue. Legendary resistances start to come into play often in tier 3 and 4 where your characters are supposed to deal with country and world level threats respectively. If a supposedly catastrophic monster could just be paralyzed by one attempt of one spell caster it wouldn't be much of a threat to a country let alone the world.
Forcing the creature to use a legendary action to remove a condition destroys the action economy legendary monsters. Legendary actions are essential because they prevent monsters from being so outclassed in action economy that they aren't a threat. In 2024 rules a combat following the encounter builder would normally lasts 2-6 rounds. With single monsters like you normally get with legendary monsters it tends to be on the shorter side. So you're looking at the big bad dragon potentially taking only 2 actions in a fight if you force them to use legendary actions to remove conditions. With a party of 4 or 5 you can easily make a monster burn 3 recoveries a round. A dragon that only does its breath weapon and 3 attacks is kinda a pushover fight.
If you still don't like it flavor is free. Reskin it as a monster version of indomitable, have your spell casters enemies break some sort of crystal or talisman, or maybe even have a minion or someone else suffer the effects instead as the boss transfers the effects. It'd be sort of amusing for the boss to seem like it failed, do something weird and a random NPC off screen screams and dies. Think Basil Hawkins using his straw men in One Piece.
It's not a good idea to mess with abilities specifically designed to balance the game because you will have to compensate somewhere else if you don't want your players to be over powered.
It makes more thematic sense to have an end creature absorb the hit if it can and then recover. If you want a movie reference think about the scene in Willow (if you are from an older time), when Willow throws the magic acorn at Bavmorda and she starts to turn into stone, but she wills herself to resist the power (spoiler alert).
You literally just provided an example of a legendary resistance, my dude. She failed the saving throw, then "willed herself" to resist the effect
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Well, IMHO when a DM says they roll open, you basically give up any agency DM or Player simply because you leave the outcome to random probability.
When a DM hides the result, they can adjust the combat to suit the fun and experience of the group. The problem isn’t the Legendary Resistance, it’s that player power creep forces more resistances or the use of a resistance to be available just enough to give everyone a chance.
Most players don’t normally test for resistances, and that’s how we learn. DMs that play “fair( open rolls )” has like their players to understand the dice will run the game not the DM and that means be prepared for the dice to turn on one side or the other hard, and it might not be very pretty.
Open rolls and playing fair is not the same thing.
If the DM is determined to win they can just use an enemy that is far more powerful than the party. D&D is not DM v party it is the DM and the party working together to create an epic story and relying on random dice rolls does not negate that.
A DM hiding rolls helps prevent meta gaming by the party. If the playeers know the boss has used all three of its legendary resistances it is very tempting to then start casting the big save or such spells and it is hard to remove that meta knowledge when deciding PC actions. In most of my games the DM rolls hidden, at least in boss fights, not so they can fudge the rolls (I trust them not no) but so when the bbeg makes a save I do not know whether they used a legendary resistance to do so.
In a similar vain, death saves are whispered to the DM so the rest of the party do not know how risky it is to try and kill the bad guy before healing the felled PC.
Well, IMHO when a DM says they roll open, you basically give up any agency DM or Player simply because you leave the outcome to random probability.
When a DM hides the result, they can adjust the combat to suit the fun and experience of the group. The problem isn’t the Legendary Resistance, it’s that player power creep forces more resistances or the use of a resistance to be available just enough to give everyone a chance.
Most players don’t normally test for resistances, and that’s how we learn. DMs that play “fair( open rolls )” has like their players to understand the dice will run the game not the DM and that means be prepared for the dice to turn on one side or the other hard, and it might not be very pretty.
Open rolls and playing fair is not the same thing.
If the DM is determined to win they can just use an enemy that is far more powerful than the party. D&D is not DM v party it is the DM and the party working together to create an epic story and relying on random dice rolls does not negate that.
A DM hiding rolls helps prevent meta gaming by the party. If the playeers know the boss has used all three of its legendary resistances it is very tempting to then start casting the big save or such spells and it is hard to remove that meta knowledge when deciding PC actions. In most of my games the DM rolls hidden, at least in boss fights, not so they can fudge the rolls (I trust them not no) but so when the bbeg makes a save I do not know whether they used a legendary resistance to do so.
In a similar vain, death saves are whispered to the DM so the rest of the party do not know how risky it is to try and kill the bad guy before healing the felled PC.
The point of open rolling is to show your being fair in what is occurring and to some that is considered playing fair.
It ‘s not about the DM wanting to win, it’s about what happens if the DM gets on a hot streak and the players are getting hammered by just straight pure luck. Dice have no memory, and at times it can kill an entire group of players for no reason at all. Meta gaming by players is expected if you always open roll every encounter, but when the dice turn a near victory into a TPK, kinda hard to continue to build an epic story and experience when the dice are dictating the outcome and players and Dm’s are forced to just live( or die) with it.
Not every roll should be hidden, and in critical moments the roll should be open, but if as a DM the dice are determined to end a party sooner than expected then being able to redirect and reduce the “luck” and appearance of the DM vs Player mentality should help smooth out and enhance the togetherness of gameplay.
BBEG fights are meant to be played with the mentality that it’s not going to be easy for the group to win, but should never be impossible. Sometimes it best if that BBEG doesn’t get that Legendary ability reset, and if the players don’t realize that it would have done so, then it’s not really a DM vs Players mentality is it.
When you play by always open rolling, you take what you get even if what you get is luck trying to run you over. It swings both ways, and as a DM if luck wants player deaths and you roll openly, then you give up any chance of preventing that outcome, and where’s the fun for anyone?
As a DM I’d rather fudge a little here and there and make the close calls memorable rather than just trust the dice wont run a group over like a freight train.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
We did defeat the dragon actually, but it was fairly harrowing. I don't know of a party that can one-shot a creature like that, unless of course it's some monte hall campaign, but then it wouldn't really matter what you threw at them. Once again at this point, if they can 1-shot a creature, we are belaboring the inevitable and forcing a war of attrition for the pretend idea that this creature is challenging.
I'm rather shocked that the rule has been around for 10 years and no one else has thought it was a lazy way to adjudicate "elite power". I've read the responses and see the host of analogies mounting, but I'll put one here. It's like going to Vegas and hitting the jackpot, but the House says, "Hey nice spin on the roulette wheel! But that one didn't count. Next round place your bets!"
That's how ridiculous it is as a built in strat for end bosses. It makes more thematic sense to have an end creature absorb the hit if it can and then recover. If you want a movie reference think about the scene in Willow (if you are from an older time), when Willow throws the magic acorn at Bavmorda and she starts to turn into stone, but she wills herself to resist the power (spoiler alert).
----kind of replying to everyone in one post I think---
Are there Save or Suck spells any more? They used to exist but 5e pretty much nerfed the crap out of casters. Don't think those are a thing like they were in 1e. With this minor rule change I propose, a creature could NO MATTER the CONDITION they are afflicted with, use a LA point to then Recover. So if they were Power Word Stunned, next LA they get, they recover. Paralyzed... not any more, Banishment... they come back early as opposed to the 10 rounds the party normally has to prep and heal. Blindness, Unconsciousness, the Legendary Recover has the same result, but implementing it takes a little more strategy from the DM.
Finally, using open rolls isn't turning over DMing to randomness. While the game does have combat as a main aspect, it's not the story. Just because you roll openly doesn't remove your ability to let a creature die early; if winning is a foregone conclusion and a couple more rounds would just be boring. You as the DM can still alter those. Creature has more hit points but a player does an amazing critical hit and it just feels thematic for that one moment, let the crit kill that monster. Situational effects or party members teaming up with spells... adjust the DC or give a bonus for them conjoining efforts. The die hits the table and it's a number that would normally just save, but you're ruling the effect is more difficult to save against because of their actions; the party get surprised by a victorious moment. Open rolling does not run a game.
So, you had an exciting fight, which you won, and that’s a problem? Seems like everything worked just right.
As for 1-shots, how about hold monster. All the melee characters with advantage and auto-critting? I suppose that’s technically not a 1-shot, my mistake, but it does make the fight trivially easy, which is how I should have phrased it at first. Damage spells may not kill an enemy, but denying them actions is really the way to win in this edition. So things like hold monster, hypnotic pattern, stunning strike can just about end the fight on one bad roll.
I'm rather shocked that the rule has been around for 10 years and no one else has thought it was a lazy way to adjudicate "elite power". I've read the responses and see the host of analogies mounting, but I'll put one here. It's like going to Vegas and hitting the jackpot, but the House says, "Hey nice spin on the roulette wheel! But that one didn't count. Next round place your bets!"
Maybe that tells you something, like maybe... you're wrong? Personally, I think that's a great analogy. Don't go to Vegas if you don't want to lose money.
That's how ridiculous it is as a built in strat for end bosses. It makes more thematic sense to have an end creature absorb the hit if it can and then recover. If you want a movie reference think about the scene in Willow (if you are from an older time), when Willow throws the magic acorn at Bavmorda and she starts to turn into stone, but she wills herself to resist the power (spoiler alert).
----kind of replying to everyone in one post I think---
Are there Save or Suck spells any more? They used to exist but 5e pretty much nerfed the crap out of casters. Don't think those are a thing like they were in 1e. With this minor rule change I propose, a creature could NO MATTER the CONDITION they are afflicted with, use a LA point to then Recover. So if they were Power Word Stunned, next LA they get, they recover. Paralyzed... not any more, Banishment... they come back early as opposed to the 10 rounds the party normally has to prep and heal. Blindness, Unconsciousness, the Legendary Recover has the same result, but implementing it takes a little more strategy from the DM.
For a start, there are the spell you listed: "Polymorph (formally baleful polymorph), Banishment, Power Word Stun, Imprisonment, etc..." Even at relatively low levels, slow, phantasmal killer, polymorph and banishment are very powerful. At higher levels, there are flesh to stone, hold monster, and dominate monster, and these are only ones I found on the wizard spell list.
Also, your suggestion doesn't really work, as some spells, like banishment do not depend on the target having a condition.
(why in the world did you put a spoiler alert after the spoiler?)
Replacing legendary resistance with legendary recovery is an option, but it has its own drawbacks -- for example, it doesn't work on
IME the best boss fight experience is probably
Using your save or suck spell early in the encounter does something -- but that something makes the monster weaker, rather than entirely disabling it.
Using your save or suck late in the encounter can be a finisher.
Legendary resistance fails at the first of those (the monster is in no way weaker for using legendary resistance, it just has fewer of them left), and doesn't consistently accomplish the second (a monster might run out of legendary resistances at a similar rate to running out of hit points, but that's by no means guaranteed). Having it cost a legendary action is probably too small, and also forces the DM to camp on legendary actions in case they're needed later in the round. There are various alternatives, but none I particularly love.
I think pathfinder handled it right from how I understand it, never played it really so I am not sure. But it sounds to me from what I heard about it is the bosses will just make their saves at least well enough no shut down occurs. like maybe on a one it can happen but even then it wont be a critical fail. But even succeeding on a save does something to the boss so its not a total loss for the caster.
I'm not a fan of legendary resistances, and there are plenty of people who agree. In the confines of 5e though there aren't any easy fixes. I'm personally of the opinion the entire save system needs to be changed. 6 saves is too many as it allows the player too many ways to target a easy save, and its rarely hard to figure out so this doesn't really add to the tactics of the game. Most saves not increasing at all whether its the enemy or the player just doubles down on that as the DCs do increase as you level. If its not one of your core saves you are worse at saving as you level due to that, even your core saves if its not paired with your primary attribute will suffer the same fate though less as pronounced. And enemies have similar issues with how they are designed, that 14 wisdom gave them a shot at level 1, but a CR 10 enemy with a 14 wisdom but no save proficiency is just toast. Without them diving in and overhauling the entire save system you kind of need patches like legendary resistance.
Multiple Initiative. Tiamat does not roll initiative. Instead she acts five times per turn (on each turn, she may use an action, a bonus action, movement, and a reaction).
Initiative 30: Red Action; elemental damage type Fire.
Initiative 26: Blue Action; elemental damage type Lightning.
Initiative 22: Green Action; elemental damage type Poison.
Initiative 18: Black Action; elemental damage type Acid.
Initiative 14: White Action; elemental damage type White
Damage Threshold. Tiamat has a damage threshold of 20. If a single creature does damage multiple times in a single turn, combine the damage to determine whether the threshold is exceeded.
Dominant Head. At the start of every round, roll 1d20+10. The non-disabled head with the lowest initiative score greater than or equal to the roll is dominant for the round. Some actions may only be take by the dominant head.
Head Disabling. For every 100 damage Tiamat takes (at 400, 300, 200, and 100 hp) one head (the head that most recently acted) becomes disabled. If a head is disabled, Tiamat is treated as incapacitated on that head's initiative.
Head Sacrifice. If Tiamat fails a save, she may choose to succeed. If she does so, she is stunned until she uses Legendary Recovery to remove that condition.
Legendary Recovery. If Tiamat takes no action on one of her turns, she may either heal 50 hit points, or remove any number of conditions affecting her, other than the effects of Head Disabling.
Bite. Melee Weapon Attack:+19 to hit, reach 20 ft., one target. Hit: 23 (2d12 + 10) piercing damage plus 19 (3d12) elemental damage.
Breath Weapon (Dominant Head Only). Tiamat uses a breath weapon corresponding to her currently active and dominant head. Creatures in the area must make a DC 27 save (type varies) or take 10d12 (65) elemental damage, or half damage on success.
Red Dragon Breath, 150' cone, save Dexterity.
Blue Dragon Breath, 300' x 10' line, save Dexterity.
Green Dragon Breath, 150' cone, save Constitution.
Black Dragon Breath, 300' x 10' line, save Dexterity.
White Dragon Breath, 150' cone, save Constitution.
Spellcasting. Tiamat casts one of the following spells, requiring no Material components and using Charisma as the spellcasting ability (spell save DC 25, +17 to hit with spell attacks). Each head may concentrate separately.
Dominant Head, 3x/day: Wish. If used for a purpose other than duplicating a spell of 8th level or lower, Tiamat is immediately banished to Avernus but suffers no other effects.
Spellcasting. Tiamat casts Misty Step, using Charisma as the spellcasting ability.
This is far less generalizable than legendary resistance, as it would need to be customized per NPC, but it feels like it would be a better experience. Thoughts?
I wasn’t looking for this to get contentious. I’m not sure why many of you are feeling personally offended about the proposed rule. If you don’t like it and find that it fails in comparison to the rule as written then, great. So far all arguments are one of the following:
It works as intended.
You need to protect against making end bosses easy to kill from moments of luck.
I’m wrong and don’t go to Vegas
You aren’t using them the correct way (smoothly lie to cover the auto-save)
LR’s aren’t THAT broken.
So, for a moment, stop trying to sound pithy and “beat” me with a quip and just compare the game mechanics.
Legendary Resistances: creature may choose to succeed on a save if it fails.
Mechanics:
It nullifies a caster round at worst or just their offense at best (assuming the spell caster also did some healing or buffing on the side somehow).
Nullifies any status effect that the monster is normally susceptible to.
IF used in an overt way, takes player agency in forcing character’s play style.
IF used as intended (secretively), it makes the boss feel unbeatable and very tough.
Used at any time.
Legendary Recovery: Creature may use a Legendary Action to remove ALL status/spell effects currently plaguing it.
Mechanics:
Allows for casters to still cast spells and perhaps effect combat for a small period of time.
Nullifies any status effect that the monster is normally susceptible to, but offers up a small window of vulnerability.
Does not cause player annoyance or discomfort whether used overtly or covertly.
Celebrates player agency allowing them to attack a BBEG how they want as opposed to a ‘war of attrition’.
Used at any time.
There were some comments on worrying about taking down large BBEG’s too quickly if LRs aren’t in the game. I don’t know that I believe in this, but let’s run through some numbers and see what happens. (also: I’m usually not a fan of players vs a BBEG solo. I know most modules will set that up and that’s the reason for LRs; action economy. The easy fix is just not to have them ganged up on by the party).
3 LAs (Cantrip, Paralyzing Touch 2 [stick around], Frightening Gaze 2 [runway], Disrupt life 3 [deal minor necrotic damage])
Lair Actions: d8 spell level return, share damage with player/victim DC18 con save, Summon spirits to do some necrotic damage.
What’s interesting about the Lich is despite being a master of magic, isn’t resistant to it, doesn’t get Advantage to saving throws vs magic spells which normal large BBEGs have. If you want to add this feature as a DM it’s only a magic item away and viola.
Firstly, I’m not a fan of just running a simple statblock vs statblock fight, which I find most DMs usually do, but let’s assume it’s just a standoff at high-noon in town square.
Secondly, I think you usually fight liches around 10 to 12 level, but let’s really give our party an extra fighting chance and say they are all 14 level (CR 21 alone, CR 22 in Lair)
Lair action, Lich gets a 20 on Initiative. You can beat the lich if you have a good roll and let’s assume your rogue does, but you have a party member that can switch around initiative scores and you push the caster forward to beat the lich and hopefully land a fabled Save or Suck.
Options: Disintegrate (dex save), Eyebite (wis save), Finger of Death (con save), Flesh to Stone (Con save), Forcecage (I guess), Harm (Con save), Otto’s Irresistible Dance, Prismatic Spray, Banishment (Cha save), Confusion (wis save), Resilient Sphere (dex save),
Saves: Con +10, Int +12, Wis +9, Dex +3, Cha +3
Target DC at 14 level I think it would be safe to assume it’s DC21+, but we can just say 21.
Now that we’ve done all of that…
With a Legendary Resistance, you just nope the spell, and you’ve wasted the Initiative changed class feature + the spell casters turn and burned one spell off the list, let’s assume you do this “secretly” so the players don’t feel irritated.
With a Legendary Recovery, you might make your save and it wouldn’t matter anyway, yet your best bet is Dex or Cha saves so that narrows the list to: Banishment, Disintegrate, Resilient Sphere, Prismatic Spray… I would say Otto’s Dance, but in this instance it doesn’t matter. Let’s say you fail your save, you go next in the initiative and escape (not dead from Disintegrate or Prismatic Spray); heal up and come back to lead off when best suits you, PWK for a nice opener. OR effected by a status effect or Banishment, in either case, 1 LA removes the status effect (in Banishment it’s Incapacitated) and then spend your round casting spells as normal… perhaps PWK the mage for the insolence of casting a spell at you in the first place.
However, if you use your spells near the end of a round when the LA’s are used up for the round, then you can plan a strategy that can help bring down a large foe or deadly opponent.
----------pew pew---------
I suppose it all comes down to what you value in your games. If you want to just be able to take luck out of that fight and proclaim the BBEG invulnerable until you do some damage to the players, then I guess that’s your bag. I personally feel that is heavy handed, lacks finesse and is a myopic view of combat; it defends statblock vs statblock combat.
If however, you want to reward a party for tactics or don’t mind some random luck favoring either side but just want to see how it all turns out. Routing for your players to win, but not shying away from “dice-fate” then I think Recovery is a good alternate rule to allow that.
The goal was to keep the BBEG tough, without being a complete FU to casters, because that’s what it is currently.
They could equal it out for melee-classes and come up with a Legendary Defense: when a player hits the Tarrasque it can choose to ignore that attack. Essentially the same thing and would feel just as annoying.
Nate (Hollywood DM)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
-Nate the Knife
"You are neither beer nor gems." -dismissive Dwarven saying.
So, for a moment, stop trying to sound pithy and “beat” me with a quip and just compare the game mechanics.
Legendary Resistances: creature may choose to succeed on a save if it fails.
Mechanics:
It nullifies a caster round at worst or just their offense at best (assuming the spell caster also did some healing or buffing on the side somehow).
Nullifies any status effect that the monster is normally susceptible to.
IF used in an overt way, takes player agency in forcing character’s play style.
IF used as intended (secretively), it makes the boss feel unbeatable and very tough.
Used at any time.
Legendary Recovery: Creature may use a Legendary Action to remove ALL status/spell effects currently plaguing it.
Mechanics:
Allows for casters to still cast spells and perhaps effect combat for a small period of time.
Nullifies any status effect that the monster is normally susceptible to, but offers up a small window of vulnerability.
Does not cause player annoyance or discomfort whether used overtly or covertly.
Celebrates player agency allowing them to attack a BBEG how they want as opposed to a ‘war of attrition’.
Used at any time.
You left out the two most important differences:
1) Legendary Resistances are a finite resource. Once they're used up, that's it. Legendary Actions are not, and replenish every turn 2) Legendary Actions can't be used at all if the creature is incapacitated or can't take actions
Also, you are incorrect about when Legendary Actions can be taken. They can't be used "at any time"
If the monster has Legendary Action options, those are listed in this section. A Legendary Action is an action that a monster can take immediately after another creature’s turn. Only one of these actions can be taken at a time and only after another creature’s turn ends.
Your idea just doesn't work, sorry. It either prolongs combat, because the BBEG can just keep erasing conditions immediately after they're imposed and before any PC can take advantage of them, or it results in dropping the BBEG in one round if something gets through that Incapacitates them -- like, say, one Stunning Strike from a monk
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I wasn’t looking for this to get contentious. I’m not sure why many of you are feeling personally offended about the proposed rule. If you don’t like it and find that it fails in comparison to the rule as written then, great. So far all arguments are one of the following:
It works as intended.
You need to protect against making end bosses easy to kill from moments of luck.
I’m wrong and don’t go to Vegas
You aren’t using them the correct way (smoothly lie to cover the auto-save)
LR’s aren’t THAT broken.
So, for a moment, stop trying to sound pithy and “beat” me with a quip and just compare the game mechanics.
Legendary Resistances: creature may choose to succeed on a save if it fails.
Mechanics:
It nullifies a caster round at worst or just their offense at best (assuming the spell caster also did some healing or buffing on the side somehow).
Nullifies any status effect that the monster is normally susceptible to.
IF used in an overt way, takes player agency in forcing character’s play style.
IF used as intended (secretively), it makes the boss feel unbeatable and very tough.
Used at any time.
Legendary Recovery: Creature may use a Legendary Action to remove ALL status/spell effects currently plaguing it.
Mechanics:
Allows for casters to still cast spells and perhaps effect combat for a small period of time.
Nullifies any status effect that the monster is normally susceptible to, but offers up a small window of vulnerability.
Does not cause player annoyance or discomfort whether used overtly or covertly.
Celebrates player agency allowing them to attack a BBEG how they want as opposed to a ‘war of attrition’.
Used at any time.
There were some comments on worrying about taking down large BBEG’s too quickly if LRs aren’t in the game. I don’t know that I believe in this, but let’s run through some numbers and see what happens. (also: I’m usually not a fan of players vs a BBEG solo. I know most modules will set that up and that’s the reason for LRs; action economy. The easy fix is just not to have them ganged up on by the party).
3 LAs (Cantrip, Paralyzing Touch 2 [stick around], Frightening Gaze 2 [runway], Disrupt life 3 [deal minor necrotic damage])
Lair Actions: d8 spell level return, share damage with player/victim DC18 con save, Summon spirits to do some necrotic damage.
What’s interesting about the Lich is despite being a master of magic, isn’t resistant to it, doesn’t get Advantage to saving throws vs magic spells which normal large BBEGs have. If you want to add this feature as a DM it’s only a magic item away and viola.
Firstly, I’m not a fan of just running a simple statblock vs statblock fight, which I find most DMs usually do, but let’s assume it’s just a standoff at high-noon in town square.
Secondly, I think you usually fight liches around 10 to 12 level, but let’s really give our party an extra fighting chance and say they are all 14 level (CR 21 alone, CR 22 in Lair)
Lair action, Lich gets a 20 on Initiative. You can beat the lich if you have a good roll and let’s assume your rogue does, but you have a party member that can switch around initiative scores and you push the caster forward to beat the lich and hopefully land a fabled Save or Suck.
Options: Disintegrate (dex save), Eyebite (wis save), Finger of Death (con save), Flesh to Stone (Con save), Forcecage (I guess), Harm (Con save), Otto’s Irresistible Dance, Prismatic Spray, Banishment (Cha save), Confusion (wis save), Resilient Sphere (dex save),
Saves: Con +10, Int +12, Wis +9, Dex +3, Cha +3
Target DC at 14 level I think it would be safe to assume it’s DC21+, but we can just say 21.
Now that we’ve done all of that…
With a Legendary Resistance, you just nope the spell, and you’ve wasted the Initiative changed class feature + the spell casters turn and burned one spell off the list, let’s assume you do this “secretly” so the players don’t feel irritated.
With a Legendary Recovery, you might make your save and it wouldn’t matter anyway, yet your best bet is Dex or Cha saves so that narrows the list to: Banishment, Disintegrate, Resilient Sphere, Prismatic Spray… I would say Otto’s Dance, but in this instance it doesn’t matter. Let’s say you fail your save, you go next in the initiative and escape (not dead from Disintegrate or Prismatic Spray); heal up and come back to lead off when best suits you, PWK for a nice opener. OR effected by a status effect or Banishment, in either case, 1 LA removes the status effect (in Banishment it’s Incapacitated) and then spend your round casting spells as normal… perhaps PWK the mage for the insolence of casting a spell at you in the first place.
However, if you use your spells near the end of a round when the LA’s are used up for the round, then you can plan a strategy that can help bring down a large foe or deadly opponent.
----------pew pew---------
I suppose it all comes down to what you value in your games. If you want to just be able to take luck out of that fight and proclaim the BBEG invulnerable until you do some damage to the players, then I guess that’s your bag. I personally feel that is heavy handed, lacks finesse and is a myopic view of combat; it defends statblock vs statblock combat.
If however, you want to reward a party for tactics or don’t mind some random luck favoring either side but just want to see how it all turns out. Routing for your players to win, but not shying away from “dice-fate” then I think Recovery is a good alternate rule to allow that.
The goal was to keep the BBEG tough, without being a complete FU to casters, because that’s what it is currently.
They could equal it out for melee-classes and come up with a Legendary Defense: when a player hits the Tarrasque it can choose to ignore that attack. Essentially the same thing and would feel just as annoying.
Nate (Hollywood DM)
Banishment gives the incapacitated condition, but it does not end when that condition ends.
In general legendary resistance can only completely nullify save or suck spells. It can only halve the damage on damage spells, using up a resource in the process.
Wait, you think the appropriate level for fighting liches is around 10-12????? Round 1: power word kill. Round 2: chain lightning. Round 3: fireball. Round x: kill the few remaining martials with high hp. Congratulations you just TPKed the party.
As I've said, don't cast save or suck spells if you don't want your spells to be wasted.
Finally, as I said before, this is more akin to adamantite armor against a very low-chance critfishing build (that can also play normally).
Where does it end though? Take out Legendary Resistance because a BBEG deciding to just save is no fun. Ok, then take out regular resistances and immunities too? It’s not fun when I hit something or a spell lands but it doesn’t do as much as it should. Take out saving throws altogether? If I cast a spell, it should do something otherwise I’ve just wasted my turn and that’s no fun. So on and so forth. But sometimes the players do just waste a turn because of dice rolls or monster abilities. That’s part of the game since its inception.
It seems like you want it so the players don’t waste an action casting an unsuccessful spell and you also want the mob to use up a lair action removing the spell effect or condition rather than for some other, useful option currently available to them. The players already enjoy a significant advantage in terms of action economy though. And, since creatures have only a small number of times they can use Legendary Resistance, the mechanic is not that consequential over the course of a longer fight—the type you’d have against a tougher creature with LR.
When the players realize the BBEG will nullify three, four or maybe five of the party’s spells outright, it doesn’t take anything away from the casters, it simply shifts their part into a battle of wits where they provoke those uses of LR while preserving meaningful offense to bear after they’re expended. Then it’s back to business as usual. A party of adventurers should have more than a handful of scary spells that warrant a use of LR to chuck at a powerful enemy. If they don’t, their primary MO is stabbing things anyway. As such, I’m just not sure why you feel so egregiously short changed by this mechanic as is. Nor do I think your suggestion is an improvement. It is a common refrain that 5e is too easy and this change would only stack the deck further in favour of the players.
Jumondur, the being incapacitated is what keeps said Lich in the "harmless demi-plane". The Legendary Recovery would remove that status and It can leave of it's own accord via a Plane Shift from that point. Thereby either escaping or posting up in an advantages position.
"In general legendary resistance can only completely nullify save or suck spells. It can only halve the damage on damage spells, using up a resource in the process".
You keep trying to explain how LRs work, like I'm not understanding. I completely understand. I think it's a bad game mechanic.
Lich's are extremely deadly, especially if run in a nefarious way. They do only have 135 hp, so I think a stand-up fight is not in their best interest. (to indulge your TPK assertion) Assuming you have a competent group, that shift in Initiative at the beginning, my group would have done this to place the wizard in a position to counterspell the PWK (he's a Diviner and most likely would have succeeded by using a portent on the roll). So PWK is now used up and worthless. Chain Lighting hurts the group but doesn't kill us. Fighter rushes up and grapples. Lich with an LA = paralyzing touch, if the fighter fails, (heroic inspiration or perhaps another Diviner Portent or lucky), then rogue + Barbarian for attacks with advantage and if the DM doesn't teleport away... I just realized I was looking at the legacy version vs the newest version, they are much more potent in 2024. Yet it still stands. When grappled (for some crazy reason), the grappled person (incapacitated) can't speak, no V, S, M. Older Lich didn't have misty step, but they now have a Deathly Teleport as a L.A. So I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility for a group of 10-12 to take on a lich. Now that we went down that rabbit hole.
Born_of_Fire74: you are going overboard. Changing Legendary Resistances to Legendary Recovery isn't removing all of the intrinsic defenses or epic toughness they have. It's just changing that one element to not be so heavy handed. You all are still arguing for the monster. This game isn't about Dm's and Monsters. It's about the heroes at your table. I realize that we are "playing" too as DMs, but your goal isn't to corn-hole your table. The goal is to play NPCs and Monsters to their motivations (eg:Thanos).
"It seems like you want it so the players don’t waste an action casting an unsuccessful spell and you also want the mob to use up a lair action removing the spell effect or condition rather than for some other, useful option currently available to them. The players already enjoy a significant advantage in terms of action economy though. And, since creatures have only a small number of times they can use Legendary Resistance, the mechanic is not that consequential over the course of a longer fight—the type you’d have against a tougher creature with LR.",
Of course I don't want players to waste their actions. But if they don't play smart it will happen. There are ways to use your skills to find out resistances and defenses of creatures you fight. It takes turns to pull off so feels harrowing, since you aren't doing damage, but can save you from wasting resources as a group. As far as Action Economy goes. I'm not advocating removing Legendary Actions. Just changing the mechanic of Legendary Resistances. It would still effectively function the same except you don't out right deny the caster's initial spot of luck.
It doesn't DRASTICALLY change the field of battle, but it does add some "realism' to the potency of spells. Casters already have many things that nerf their in-game abilities anyway. Almost ever spell can be saved for again on the end of every turn and concentration limits protection magics to be used. An LR on top of this is as I stated earlier a big FU to casters.
So, for a moment, stop trying to sound pithy and “beat” me with a quip and just compare the game mechanics.
Legendary Resistances: creature may choose to succeed on a save if it fails.
Mechanics:
It nullifies a caster round at worst or just their offense at best (assuming the spell caster also did some healing or buffing on the side somehow).
Nullifies any status effect that the monster is normally susceptible to.
IF used in an overt way, takes player agency in forcing character’s play style.
IF used as intended (secretively), it makes the boss feel unbeatable and very tough.
Used at any time.
Legendary Recovery: Creature may use a Legendary Action to remove ALL status/spell effects currently plaguing it.
Mechanics:
Allows for casters to still cast spells and perhaps effect combat for a small period of time.
Nullifies any status effect that the monster is normally susceptible to, but offers up a small window of vulnerability.
Does not cause player annoyance or discomfort whether used overtly or covertly.
Celebrates player agency allowing them to attack a BBEG how they want as opposed to a ‘war of attrition’.
Used at any time.
You left out the two most important differences:
1) Legendary Resistances are a finite resource. Once they're used up, that's it. Legendary Actions are not, and replenish every turn 2) Legendary Actions can't be used at all if the creature is incapacitated or can't take actions
Also, you are incorrect about when Legendary Actions can be taken. They can't be used "at any time"
If the monster has Legendary Action options, those are listed in this section. A Legendary Action is an action that a monster can take immediately after another creature’s turn. Only one of these actions can be taken at a time and only after another creature’s turn ends.
Your idea just doesn't work, sorry. It either prolongs combat, because the BBEG can just keep erasing conditions immediately after they're imposed and before any PC can take advantage of them, or it results in dropping the BBEG in one round if something gets through that Incapacitates them -- like, say, one Stunning Strike from a monk
It works exactly the same (albeit with a small moment of success for the caster). Your notion of Incapacitated hamstringing the Monster when it's out of Legenary Resistances vs Legendary Recoveries (proposed change) is exactly the same. The number of them (finite) and when they are gone, they are gone. So your statement is moot. I didn't mention it because they are synonymous.
I never compared Resistances to Actions. That's not what this thread is about.
And... aren't thematically realistic.
I realize they are in place to make a monster "epic", but much like your parents saying "because I said so!", it's a lazy way to parent... or in this case run an epic fight.
What's more... it's a rule/ability I'd wager was barely tested, but was thought of as a necessary evil for high-level play. Since many games don't go to super high level, it might not have been encountered by some or the DM is good at hiding it--doesn't let on that they failed their save and proclaims the Boss-Monster made their save. This revelation came to me during a game night; normally I'm a GM. I Pro-GM for RPGclub actually and before that Startplayinggames, and have been playing DnD for 39 years now. Due to the influx of VTT most rolls are public, so the GM doesn't roll behind a screen and thereby a chance to flub or alter rolls for dramatic purpose. This also means the players "see how the sauce is made", and as a result the monsters powers are quickly evaluated by most parties.
We were fighting a dragon and were holding our own even after taking a breath weapon. I then had a stroke of luck and it failed a save. Watching the GM roll a fail against my spell and then decide to just succeed is an annoying feeling. It's like arguing with the IRS that you shouldn't have to pay so much in tax... they don't care and more over won't respond to you.
-Nate the Knife
"You are neither beer nor gems." -dismissive Dwarven saying.
This mechanic has been in existence for more than 10 years now. It’s been as tested as tested can be at countless tables. It works like it’s supposed to.
The idea is to make it so the PCs can’t 1-shot these sort of creatures and make what’s meant to be a major fight anticlimactic.
And while it might encourage PCs to think tactically about their spells, that’s a good thing. It makes the game more interesting.
Additionally, the DM is playing, too. And LR allows them to think tactically as well. They’ve got 3 or 4 LRs to use and X number of PCs forcing saving throws. When they should use one is an important decision that helps keep the encounter more interesting for the DM.
As far as your personal experience, did anyone die? Did you defeat the dragon?
The purpose of legendary resistance is to prevent the use of these save or suck spells at the beginning of combat. The simple solution for a player is to use damage spells, almost all of which do half damage on a save. Then, at the end of the fight when the monster is weakened, the spellcaster is more capable of incapacitating/severely nerfing the monster. Here's an analogy: say you have a martial who some way or another has insanely powerful crits. However, to get that they need to only make one attack per round with disadvantage. If the player goes the whole boss fight without getting a crit, it's boring for them. But, if they do get a crit, the boss fight is already over and it's boring for everybody else. A good DM might realize this and give the boss adamantite armor, forcing the martial to use a different strategy. The player might be annoyed, but it is better for everybody. Legendary resistance is like the adamantite armor. Another analogy: asking to be able to practically end a boss fight the moment the boss fails a save is like asking the IRS to not pay any taxes. Of course they aren't going to allow that.
Well, IMHO when a DM says they roll open, you basically give up any agency DM or Player simply because you leave the outcome to random probability.
When a DM hides the result, they can adjust the combat to suit the fun and experience of the group. The problem isn’t the Legendary Resistance, it’s that player power creep forces more resistances or the use of a resistance to be available just enough to give everyone a chance.
Most players don’t normally test for resistances, and that’s how we learn. DMs that play “fair( open rolls )” has like their players to understand the dice will run the game not the DM and that means be prepared for the dice to turn on one side or the other hard, and it might not be very pretty.
Maybe have a group chat about if the combat is too long or too one sided, try letting the DM hide rolls and working the game that makes the encounter feel more interesting.
And nothing says a legendary resistance has to be used at all, but usually a creature will sandbag that use until it really needs it, so it kinda works both ways.
It’s been that way for decades, and it’s really nothing new. Welcome to D&D.
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
We did defeat the dragon actually, but it was fairly harrowing. I don't know of a party that can one-shot a creature like that, unless of course it's some monte hall campaign, but then it wouldn't really matter what you threw at them. Once again at this point, if they can 1-shot a creature, we are belaboring the inevitable and forcing a war of attrition for the pretend idea that this creature is challenging.
I'm rather shocked that the rule has been around for 10 years and no one else has thought it was a lazy way to adjudicate "elite power". I've read the responses and see the host of analogies mounting, but I'll put one here. It's like going to Vegas and hitting the jackpot, but the House says, "Hey nice spin on the roulette wheel! But that one didn't count. Next round place your bets!"
That's how ridiculous it is as a built in strat for end bosses. It makes more thematic sense to have an end creature absorb the hit if it can and then recover. If you want a movie reference think about the scene in Willow (if you are from an older time), when Willow throws the magic acorn at Bavmorda and she starts to turn into stone, but she wills herself to resist the power (spoiler alert).
----kind of replying to everyone in one post I think---
Are there Save or Suck spells any more? They used to exist but 5e pretty much nerfed the crap out of casters. Don't think those are a thing like they were in 1e. With this minor rule change I propose, a creature could NO MATTER the CONDITION they are afflicted with, use a LA point to then Recover. So if they were Power Word Stunned, next LA they get, they recover. Paralyzed... not any more, Banishment... they come back early as opposed to the 10 rounds the party normally has to prep and heal. Blindness, Unconsciousness, the Legendary Recover has the same result, but implementing it takes a little more strategy from the DM.
Finally, using open rolls isn't turning over DMing to randomness. While the game does have combat as a main aspect, it's not the story. Just because you roll openly doesn't remove your ability to let a creature die early; if winning is a foregone conclusion and a couple more rounds would just be boring. You as the DM can still alter those. Creature has more hit points but a player does an amazing critical hit and it just feels thematic for that one moment, let the crit kill that monster. Situational effects or party members teaming up with spells... adjust the DC or give a bonus for them conjoining efforts. The die hits the table and it's a number that would normally just save, but you're ruling the effect is more difficult to save against because of their actions; the party get surprised by a victorious moment. Open rolling does not run a game.
-Nate the Knife
"You are neither beer nor gems." -dismissive Dwarven saying.
Legendary resistance really isn't that broken. I know it can feel bad but that is more of a DM-not-flavoring-it-well issue and a player-expecting-to-steam-roll-a-country-or-world-level-threat issue. Legendary resistances start to come into play often in tier 3 and 4 where your characters are supposed to deal with country and world level threats respectively. If a supposedly catastrophic monster could just be paralyzed by one attempt of one spell caster it wouldn't be much of a threat to a country let alone the world.
Forcing the creature to use a legendary action to remove a condition destroys the action economy legendary monsters. Legendary actions are essential because they prevent monsters from being so outclassed in action economy that they aren't a threat. In 2024 rules a combat following the encounter builder would normally lasts 2-6 rounds. With single monsters like you normally get with legendary monsters it tends to be on the shorter side. So you're looking at the big bad dragon potentially taking only 2 actions in a fight if you force them to use legendary actions to remove conditions. With a party of 4 or 5 you can easily make a monster burn 3 recoveries a round. A dragon that only does its breath weapon and 3 attacks is kinda a pushover fight.
If you still don't like it flavor is free. Reskin it as a monster version of indomitable, have your spell casters enemies break some sort of crystal or talisman, or maybe even have a minion or someone else suffer the effects instead as the boss transfers the effects. It'd be sort of amusing for the boss to seem like it failed, do something weird and a random NPC off screen screams and dies. Think Basil Hawkins using his straw men in One Piece.
It's not a good idea to mess with abilities specifically designed to balance the game because you will have to compensate somewhere else if you don't want your players to be over powered.
You literally just provided an example of a legendary resistance, my dude. She failed the saving throw, then "willed herself" to resist the effect
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Open rolls and playing fair is not the same thing.
If the DM is determined to win they can just use an enemy that is far more powerful than the party. D&D is not DM v party it is the DM and the party working together to create an epic story and relying on random dice rolls does not negate that.
A DM hiding rolls helps prevent meta gaming by the party. If the playeers know the boss has used all three of its legendary resistances it is very tempting to then start casting the big save or such spells and it is hard to remove that meta knowledge when deciding PC actions. In most of my games the DM rolls hidden, at least in boss fights, not so they can fudge the rolls (I trust them not no) but so when the bbeg makes a save I do not know whether they used a legendary resistance to do so.
In a similar vain, death saves are whispered to the DM so the rest of the party do not know how risky it is to try and kill the bad guy before healing the felled PC.
The point of open rolling is to show your being fair in what is occurring and to some that is considered playing fair.
It ‘s not about the DM wanting to win, it’s about what happens if the DM gets on a hot streak and the players are getting hammered by just straight pure luck. Dice have no memory, and at times it can kill an entire group of players for no reason at all.
Meta gaming by players is expected if you always open roll every encounter, but when the dice turn a near victory into a TPK, kinda hard to continue to build an epic story and experience when the dice are dictating the outcome and players and Dm’s are forced to just live( or die) with it.
Not every roll should be hidden, and in critical moments the roll should be open, but if as a DM the dice are determined to end a party sooner than expected then being able to redirect and reduce the “luck” and appearance of the DM vs Player mentality should help smooth out and enhance the togetherness of gameplay.
BBEG fights are meant to be played with the mentality that it’s not going to be easy for the group to win, but should never be impossible. Sometimes it best if that BBEG doesn’t get that Legendary ability reset, and if the players don’t realize that it would have done so, then it’s not really a DM vs Players mentality is it.
When you play by always open rolling, you take what you get even if what you get is luck trying to run you over. It swings both ways, and as a DM if luck wants player deaths and you roll openly, then you give up any chance of preventing that outcome, and where’s the fun for anyone?
As a DM I’d rather fudge a little here and there and make the close calls memorable rather than just trust the dice wont run a group over like a freight train.
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
So, you had an exciting fight, which you won, and that’s a problem? Seems like everything worked just right.
As for 1-shots, how about hold monster. All the melee characters with advantage and auto-critting? I suppose that’s technically not a 1-shot, my mistake, but it does make the fight trivially easy, which is how I should have phrased it at first. Damage spells may not kill an enemy, but denying them actions is really the way to win in this edition.
So things like hold monster, hypnotic pattern, stunning strike can just about end the fight on one bad roll.
Maybe that tells you something, like maybe... you're wrong? Personally, I think that's a great analogy. Don't go to Vegas if you don't want to lose money.
For a start, there are the spell you listed: "Polymorph (formally baleful polymorph), Banishment, Power Word Stun, Imprisonment, etc..." Even at relatively low levels, slow, phantasmal killer, polymorph and banishment are very powerful. At higher levels, there are flesh to stone, hold monster, and dominate monster, and these are only ones I found on the wizard spell list.
Also, your suggestion doesn't really work, as some spells, like banishment do not depend on the target having a condition.
(why in the world did you put a spoiler alert after the spoiler?)
Replacing legendary resistance with legendary recovery is an option, but it has its own drawbacks -- for example, it doesn't work on
IME the best boss fight experience is probably
Legendary resistance fails at the first of those (the monster is in no way weaker for using legendary resistance, it just has fewer of them left), and doesn't consistently accomplish the second (a monster might run out of legendary resistances at a similar rate to running out of hit points, but that's by no means guaranteed). Having it cost a legendary action is probably too small, and also forces the DM to camp on legendary actions in case they're needed later in the round. There are various alternatives, but none I particularly love.
I think pathfinder handled it right from how I understand it, never played it really so I am not sure. But it sounds to me from what I heard about it is the bosses will just make their saves at least well enough no shut down occurs. like maybe on a one it can happen but even then it wont be a critical fail. But even succeeding on a save does something to the boss so its not a total loss for the caster.
I'm not a fan of legendary resistances, and there are plenty of people who agree. In the confines of 5e though there aren't any easy fixes. I'm personally of the opinion the entire save system needs to be changed. 6 saves is too many as it allows the player too many ways to target a easy save, and its rarely hard to figure out so this doesn't really add to the tactics of the game. Most saves not increasing at all whether its the enemy or the player just doubles down on that as the DCs do increase as you level. If its not one of your core saves you are worse at saving as you level due to that, even your core saves if its not paired with your primary attribute will suffer the same fate though less as pronounced. And enemies have similar issues with how they are designed, that 14 wisdom gave them a shot at level 1, but a CR 10 enemy with a 14 wisdom but no save proficiency is just toast. Without them diving in and overhauling the entire save system you kind of need patches like legendary resistance.
So, I decided to try my hand at a 'better' version of Tiamat (I think the CR math is... more or less correct):
Multiple Initiative. Tiamat does not roll initiative. Instead she acts five times per turn (on each turn, she may use an action, a bonus action, movement, and a reaction).
Damage Threshold. Tiamat has a damage threshold of 20. If a single creature does damage multiple times in a single turn, combine the damage to determine whether the threshold is exceeded.
Dominant Head. At the start of every round, roll 1d20+10. The non-disabled head with the lowest initiative score greater than or equal to the roll is dominant for the round. Some actions may only be take by the dominant head.
Head Disabling. For every 100 damage Tiamat takes (at 400, 300, 200, and 100 hp) one head (the head that most recently acted) becomes disabled. If a head is disabled, Tiamat is treated as incapacitated on that head's initiative.
Head Sacrifice. If Tiamat fails a save, she may choose to succeed. If she does so, she is stunned until she uses Legendary Recovery to remove that condition.
Legendary Recovery. If Tiamat takes no action on one of her turns, she may either heal 50 hit points, or remove any number of conditions affecting her, other than the effects of Head Disabling.
Chromatic Separation. If Tiamat is reduced to zero hit points, she breaks apart; remove her from the map and spawn an Adult Black Dragon, [monster]Adult Blue Dragon[/monsters], Adult Green Dragon, Adult Red Dragon, and Adult White Dragon. They are worth their normal XP value.
Bite. Melee Weapon Attack: +19 to hit, reach 20 ft., one target. Hit: 23 (2d12 + 10) piercing damage plus 19 (3d12) elemental damage.
Breath Weapon (Dominant Head Only). Tiamat uses a breath weapon corresponding to her currently active and dominant head. Creatures in the area must make a DC 27 save (type varies) or take 10d12 (65) elemental damage, or half damage on success.
Spellcasting. Tiamat casts one of the following spells, requiring no Material components and using Charisma as the spellcasting ability (spell save DC 25, +17 to hit with spell attacks). Each head may concentrate separately.
Spellcasting. Tiamat casts Misty Step, using Charisma as the spellcasting ability.
This is far less generalizable than legendary resistance, as it would need to be customized per NPC, but it feels like it would be a better experience. Thoughts?
I wasn’t looking for this to get contentious. I’m not sure why many of you are feeling personally offended about the proposed rule. If you don’t like it and find that it fails in comparison to the rule as written then, great. So far all arguments are one of the following:
So, for a moment, stop trying to sound pithy and “beat” me with a quip and just compare the game mechanics.
Legendary Resistances: creature may choose to succeed on a save if it fails.
Mechanics:
Legendary Recovery: Creature may use a Legendary Action to remove ALL status/spell effects currently plaguing it.
Mechanics:
There were some comments on worrying about taking down large BBEG’s too quickly if LRs aren’t in the game. I don’t know that I believe in this, but let’s run through some numbers and see what happens. (also: I’m usually not a fan of players vs a BBEG solo. I know most modules will set that up and that’s the reason for LRs; action economy. The easy fix is just not to have them ganged up on by the party).
LICH
Conditioned Immunities: Charmed, Exhaustion, Frightened, Paralyzed, Poisoned.
Turn Resistances: Advantage on Saving Throw.
3 LRs (I win)
3 LAs (Cantrip, Paralyzing Touch 2 [stick around], Frightening Gaze 2 [runway], Disrupt life 3 [deal minor necrotic damage])
Lair Actions: d8 spell level return, share damage with player/victim DC18 con save, Summon spirits to do some necrotic damage.
What’s interesting about the Lich is despite being a master of magic, isn’t resistant to it, doesn’t get Advantage to saving throws vs magic spells which normal large BBEGs have. If you want to add this feature as a DM it’s only a magic item away and viola.
Firstly, I’m not a fan of just running a simple statblock vs statblock fight, which I find most DMs usually do, but let’s assume it’s just a standoff at high-noon in town square.
Secondly, I think you usually fight liches around 10 to 12 level, but let’s really give our party an extra fighting chance and say they are all 14 level (CR 21 alone, CR 22 in Lair)
Lair action, Lich gets a 20 on Initiative. You can beat the lich if you have a good roll and let’s assume your rogue does, but you have a party member that can switch around initiative scores and you push the caster forward to beat the lich and hopefully land a fabled Save or Suck.
Options: Disintegrate (dex save), Eyebite (wis save), Finger of Death (con save), Flesh to Stone (Con save), Forcecage (I guess), Harm (Con save), Otto’s Irresistible Dance, Prismatic Spray, Banishment (Cha save), Confusion (wis save), Resilient Sphere (dex save),
Saves: Con +10, Int +12, Wis +9, Dex +3, Cha +3
Target DC at 14 level I think it would be safe to assume it’s DC21+, but we can just say 21.
Now that we’ve done all of that…
With a Legendary Resistance, you just nope the spell, and you’ve wasted the Initiative changed class feature + the spell casters turn and burned one spell off the list, let’s assume you do this “secretly” so the players don’t feel irritated.
With a Legendary Recovery, you might make your save and it wouldn’t matter anyway, yet your best bet is Dex or Cha saves so that narrows the list to: Banishment, Disintegrate, Resilient Sphere, Prismatic Spray… I would say Otto’s Dance, but in this instance it doesn’t matter. Let’s say you fail your save, you go next in the initiative and escape (not dead from Disintegrate or Prismatic Spray); heal up and come back to lead off when best suits you, PWK for a nice opener. OR effected by a status effect or Banishment, in either case, 1 LA removes the status effect (in Banishment it’s Incapacitated) and then spend your round casting spells as normal… perhaps PWK the mage for the insolence of casting a spell at you in the first place.
However, if you use your spells near the end of a round when the LA’s are used up for the round, then you can plan a strategy that can help bring down a large foe or deadly opponent.
----------pew pew---------
I suppose it all comes down to what you value in your games. If you want to just be able to take luck out of that fight and proclaim the BBEG invulnerable until you do some damage to the players, then I guess that’s your bag. I personally feel that is heavy handed, lacks finesse and is a myopic view of combat; it defends statblock vs statblock combat.
If however, you want to reward a party for tactics or don’t mind some random luck favoring either side but just want to see how it all turns out. Routing for your players to win, but not shying away from “dice-fate” then I think Recovery is a good alternate rule to allow that.
The goal was to keep the BBEG tough, without being a complete FU to casters, because that’s what it is currently.
They could equal it out for melee-classes and come up with a Legendary Defense: when a player hits the Tarrasque it can choose to ignore that attack. Essentially the same thing and would feel just as annoying.
Nate (Hollywood DM)
-Nate the Knife
"You are neither beer nor gems." -dismissive Dwarven saying.
You left out the two most important differences:
1) Legendary Resistances are a finite resource. Once they're used up, that's it. Legendary Actions are not, and replenish every turn
2) Legendary Actions can't be used at all if the creature is incapacitated or can't take actions
Also, you are incorrect about when Legendary Actions can be taken. They can't be used "at any time"
Your idea just doesn't work, sorry. It either prolongs combat, because the BBEG can just keep erasing conditions immediately after they're imposed and before any PC can take advantage of them, or it results in dropping the BBEG in one round if something gets through that Incapacitates them -- like, say, one Stunning Strike from a monk
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Banishment gives the incapacitated condition, but it does not end when that condition ends.
In general legendary resistance can only completely nullify save or suck spells. It can only halve the damage on damage spells, using up a resource in the process.
Wait, you think the appropriate level for fighting liches is around 10-12????? Round 1: power word kill. Round 2: chain lightning. Round 3: fireball. Round x: kill the few remaining martials with high hp. Congratulations you just TPKed the party.
As I've said, don't cast save or suck spells if you don't want your spells to be wasted.
Finally, as I said before, this is more akin to adamantite armor against a very low-chance critfishing build (that can also play normally).
Where does it end though? Take out Legendary Resistance because a BBEG deciding to just save is no fun. Ok, then take out regular resistances and immunities too? It’s not fun when I hit something or a spell lands but it doesn’t do as much as it should. Take out saving throws altogether? If I cast a spell, it should do something otherwise I’ve just wasted my turn and that’s no fun. So on and so forth. But sometimes the players do just waste a turn because of dice rolls or monster abilities. That’s part of the game since its inception.
It seems like you want it so the players don’t waste an action casting an unsuccessful spell and you also want the mob to use up a lair action removing the spell effect or condition rather than for some other, useful option currently available to them. The players already enjoy a significant advantage in terms of action economy though. And, since creatures have only a small number of times they can use Legendary Resistance, the mechanic is not that consequential over the course of a longer fight—the type you’d have against a tougher creature with LR.
When the players realize the BBEG will nullify three, four or maybe five of the party’s spells outright, it doesn’t take anything away from the casters, it simply shifts their part into a battle of wits where they provoke those uses of LR while preserving meaningful offense to bear after they’re expended. Then it’s back to business as usual. A party of adventurers should have more than a handful of scary spells that warrant a use of LR to chuck at a powerful enemy. If they don’t, their primary MO is stabbing things anyway. As such, I’m just not sure why you feel so egregiously short changed by this mechanic as is. Nor do I think your suggestion is an improvement. It is a common refrain that 5e is too easy and this change would only stack the deck further in favour of the players.
Jumondur, the being incapacitated is what keeps said Lich in the "harmless demi-plane". The Legendary Recovery would remove that status and It can leave of it's own accord via a Plane Shift from that point. Thereby either escaping or posting up in an advantages position.
"In general legendary resistance can only completely nullify save or suck spells. It can only halve the damage on damage spells, using up a resource in the process".
You keep trying to explain how LRs work, like I'm not understanding. I completely understand. I think it's a bad game mechanic.
Lich's are extremely deadly, especially if run in a nefarious way. They do only have 135 hp, so I think a stand-up fight is not in their best interest. (to indulge your TPK assertion) Assuming you have a competent group, that shift in Initiative at the beginning, my group would have done this to place the wizard in a position to counterspell the PWK (he's a Diviner and most likely would have succeeded by using a portent on the roll). So PWK is now used up and worthless. Chain Lighting hurts the group but doesn't kill us. Fighter rushes up and grapples. Lich with an LA = paralyzing touch, if the fighter fails, (heroic inspiration or perhaps another Diviner Portent or lucky), then rogue + Barbarian for attacks with advantage and if the DM doesn't teleport away... I just realized I was looking at the legacy version vs the newest version, they are much more potent in 2024. Yet it still stands. When grappled (for some crazy reason), the grappled person (incapacitated) can't speak, no V, S, M. Older Lich didn't have misty step, but they now have a Deathly Teleport as a L.A. So I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility for a group of 10-12 to take on a lich. Now that we went down that rabbit hole.
Born_of_Fire74: you are going overboard. Changing Legendary Resistances to Legendary Recovery isn't removing all of the intrinsic defenses or epic toughness they have. It's just changing that one element to not be so heavy handed. You all are still arguing for the monster. This game isn't about Dm's and Monsters. It's about the heroes at your table. I realize that we are "playing" too as DMs, but your goal isn't to corn-hole your table. The goal is to play NPCs and Monsters to their motivations (eg:Thanos).
"It seems like you want it so the players don’t waste an action casting an unsuccessful spell and you also want the mob to use up a lair action removing the spell effect or condition rather than for some other, useful option currently available to them. The players already enjoy a significant advantage in terms of action economy though. And, since creatures have only a small number of times they can use Legendary Resistance, the mechanic is not that consequential over the course of a longer fight—the type you’d have against a tougher creature with LR.",
Of course I don't want players to waste their actions. But if they don't play smart it will happen. There are ways to use your skills to find out resistances and defenses of creatures you fight. It takes turns to pull off so feels harrowing, since you aren't doing damage, but can save you from wasting resources as a group. As far as Action Economy goes. I'm not advocating removing Legendary Actions. Just changing the mechanic of Legendary Resistances. It would still effectively function the same except you don't out right deny the caster's initial spot of luck.
It doesn't DRASTICALLY change the field of battle, but it does add some "realism' to the potency of spells. Casters already have many things that nerf their in-game abilities anyway. Almost ever spell can be saved for again on the end of every turn and concentration limits protection magics to be used. An LR on top of this is as I stated earlier a big FU to casters.
-Nate the Knife
"You are neither beer nor gems." -dismissive Dwarven saying.
It works exactly the same (albeit with a small moment of success for the caster). Your notion of Incapacitated hamstringing the Monster when it's out of Legenary Resistances vs Legendary Recoveries (proposed change) is exactly the same. The number of them (finite) and when they are gone, they are gone. So your statement is moot. I didn't mention it because they are synonymous.
I never compared Resistances to Actions. That's not what this thread is about.
-Nate the Knife
"You are neither beer nor gems." -dismissive Dwarven saying.