D&D 5E June 17 Legend & Lore - Playtesting Dragons

[Weather Report]

I want to say i much prefer legendary actions to triggers myself. since its only one monster, i'm not worried about bookkeeping. And it gives me the flexibility to run the fight my way.

The connection between the creature and its lair is wonderful. Keep it up!

Yes, the Lair Actions and Enemies and Allies bit is my favourite.

Spontaneous Shambling Mounds is very cool.

 

[Neonchameleon]

As you say, it's "known" what he's responible for...so again, why is it necessary for you to have an attribution from him? Especially when you require no such attributions from anyone else, nor concerning any other edition...

You haven't answered the question; only talked around it.

In the past week you've been both orange texted for mindreading and getting personal and red texted for threadcrapping against me. You've also had a mod suggest you put me on your IL. And you're accusing me of harassment? Get thee to a mirror. Half the responses you quote from me are in reply to an actual ENWorld Moderator who didn't ask me to back off. But despite not being a moderator and facing two personal mod-warnings about harassing me you have decided to continue to harass me and try to take on the role of a moderator.

Why is it desirable to have a personal attribution from the person who was directly responsible for the appearance of a specific problem he singles out in 4e (a medium sized solo in the very first WotC 4e module, of which he was the lead writer) when he is using that specific issue that he himself was responsible for the appearance of as a problem with 4e? Is that the question?

If James Wyatt were to say bad things about major sections of the 4e DMG 1 without pointing out that he himself was responsible for the 4e DMG 1 I would have exactly the same problem. He has not, as far as I am aware, done this.

If, on the other hand, Mearls were to have had the grace of Monte Cook and say "Yes, I was responsible for doing this" (e.g. Ivory Tower Game Design) "And no it wasn't a good idea. I'll do better next time and ensure we don't make this mistake in the future." then I would be praising rather than criticising him for this. And I'm talking about his actions as a game designer and lead developer. I believe these are directly relevant to the subject of D&D Next.

That's 5 mentions in as many days, and none of them were a question or issue for clarification.

Every single one of which was, so far as I am aware (a) justified, (b) relevant, and (c) using his own words in the spirit with which I believe they were intended. Mike Mearls words mocking the warlord were relevant to likelihood of Warlords appearing in D&D Next and his personal words are a big part of why I considered Kamikaze Midget's approach to be nothing like the D&D Next I see being created. Are you telling me that they were irrelevant, or that I was wrong to attribute his words to him, or simply that using [MENTION=697]mearls[/MENTION] was the wrong way to do it?

That's harrasment.

Says the person with two personal mod rulings telling you to lay off me in the past week. Good day to you.

 

[Blackwarder]

I want to say i much prefer legendary actions to triggers myself. since its only one monster, i'm not worried about bookkeeping. And it gives me the flexibility to run the fight my way.

The connection between the creature and its lair is wonderful. Keep it up!

I always found trigger actions difficult to use, I always kept forgetting it when the trigger came up and than remember it only after the player turn ended, I much prefer the current mechanic.

Warder

 

[El Mahdi]

deleted

 

[Weather Report]

Just please stop designer bashing, it's cheap, and transparent.

 

[Umbran]

ENOUGH!

Neonchameleon, El Madhi, at this point I must request that you both cease and desist. If I see either of you responding to each other, expect a week off. if I still had a threadban tool, I'd have used it on both of you now.

We'll be reviewing this thread, and decide whether either of you has broken the rules enough to merit other action.

 

[Ratskinner]

Having had to deal with that playing Torg, where I think the problem is even worse, I agree.

Some other games that I'm familiar with have incorporated some kind of "villain point" as well. But in the latest couple of editions of Mutants and Masterminds, I believe they've hit on a good formula for it. Every time the villain uses a GM fiat to have an improbable escape or save his bacon from a lucky shot, the PCs should gain a hero point. The PCs gain a benefit for suffering what is basically a plot complication.

FATE and MHRP have similar mechanisms, and Old-School Hack has it specifically as part of the way monsters work. IME, such things lead to pure awesomeness in play. Of course, there will be many who argue that such things are "not D&D" or are "metagame"...::sigh::.

By contrast, Torg and this legendary pool for the dragon end up just having yet another sort of hit point to ablate before you can finally resolve the encounter.

The dragon's legendary actions replenish each round, according to the pdf.

 

[billd91]

FATE and MHRP have similar mechanisms, and Old-School Hack has it specifically as part of the way monsters work. IME, such things lead to pure awesomeness in play. Of course, there will be many who argue that such things are "not D&D" or are "metagame"...::sigh::.

It's not pure awesomeness when the combats drag and drag because your successful attacks are being negated or substantially blunted too often. And what do you have to show for it? Pretty much nothing except a spent action, a lucky die roll that amounted to nothing, and a mounting sense of frustration. Resources like this in the hands of the GM's characters/monsters need to be sparing.

The dragon's legendary actions replenish each round, according to the pdf.

In this case, I'm referring to the 4 saving throw immunities, not the special actions.

 

[Ratskinner]

It's not pure awesomeness when the combats drag and drag because your successful attacks are being negated or substantially blunted too often. And what do you have to show for it? Pretty much nothing except a spent action, a lucky die roll that amounted to nothing, and a mounting sense of frustration. Resources like this in the hands of the GM's characters/monsters need to be sparing.

The rest of the game has to account for it, certainly. When it does, it can become a large part of the flow of combat.

 

[Derren]

I really wonder how WotC expects monsters to behave. Do they fight to the death like good "mobs"? Sure, the personality entry says that they do not (duh), but does WotC really expect monsters to flee? Because this dragon would be pretty much unstoppable when flying away.
Yet from all I see about 5Es design it doesn't look like WotC intends monsters to behave that way.