CapnZapp
Legend
Put simply: I'm sceptical to these two 5th Edition mechanisms:
Legendary resistance puts me, the DM, into a situation I don't want to be in - gaming the PCs abilities. In a split second, when I see the dice failing my monster, I need to judge if a given spell is survivable, or if I need to use one of these autosuccesses.
Also, I'm not confident in how the players will take it. Getting your big shiny new spell neutered automatically doesn't sound like fun, especially with how few big spells you get.
Finally, while I can see some game value in using lower-levelled spell to try to "draw out" the legendary resistance before I use up my big guns (that is, I see a value in any game mechanism that can explain why a spellcaster would want to not cast his biggest spells right away; since a combat against a BBEG is better off when not short-circuited in the very first round anyway).
Have you experienced high level play? What did your players think of it?
Myself, I can appreciate the simplicity of the rule, but I can't shake the feeling it would be possible to create a general framework that allowed BBEGs to absorb "save or suck" spells gradually. I'm thinking "three strikes and you're out", and specifically, how, at two strikes, you're down, but not out.
I'm prepared for some complexity when it comes to BBEG solo monsters. I would have loved if, say, Hold Monster, took "chunks" out of a BBEG one third at a time; meaning a single Hold Monster would slow down or irritate a solo monster but would not take it straight out. Two Hold Monsters would cripple it, but still not render it harmless.
---
When it comes to Magic Resistance, I realize this is the simplified Spell Resistance.
But it still feel like a blanket "cheat code". Advantage means a demon, say, with 50% chance of making a save now has a 75% chance.
It basically means spellcasters are screwed. Go do something indirect instead, like raise a wall, or buff a party member. Or stay in the background pew-pewing your cantrips.
This is connected to the sharp limitation on spell slots in the edition. You simply can't afford to chance a spell when you need to cast four on average to get it in; especially since so many spells allow a save each round.
If you have a 75% chance of nailing a spell, this means there's a 42% chance the spell will hold for a decisive three rounds.
But with only a 25% chance, that probability drops to less than 2%!
That's an overwhelmingly huge difference, that simply weren't there in previous editions. You simply don't cast spells at monsters with magic resistance.
In previous editions, a 25% chance was just that: a 25% chance of nailing a monster for "plenty enough time" (one minute, one round per level, etc). You might think a 25% chance is still one in four in 5E, but as shown above, it's much much worse than that.
Should Magic Resistance be limited to the initial save only?
What do you think?
Legendary Resistance (3/Day). If the monster fails a saving throw, it can choose to succeed instead.
Magic Resistance. The monster has advantage on saving throws against spells and other magical effects.
Magic Resistance. The monster has advantage on saving throws against spells and other magical effects.
Legendary resistance puts me, the DM, into a situation I don't want to be in - gaming the PCs abilities. In a split second, when I see the dice failing my monster, I need to judge if a given spell is survivable, or if I need to use one of these autosuccesses.
Also, I'm not confident in how the players will take it. Getting your big shiny new spell neutered automatically doesn't sound like fun, especially with how few big spells you get.
Finally, while I can see some game value in using lower-levelled spell to try to "draw out" the legendary resistance before I use up my big guns (that is, I see a value in any game mechanism that can explain why a spellcaster would want to not cast his biggest spells right away; since a combat against a BBEG is better off when not short-circuited in the very first round anyway).
Have you experienced high level play? What did your players think of it?
Myself, I can appreciate the simplicity of the rule, but I can't shake the feeling it would be possible to create a general framework that allowed BBEGs to absorb "save or suck" spells gradually. I'm thinking "three strikes and you're out", and specifically, how, at two strikes, you're down, but not out.
I'm prepared for some complexity when it comes to BBEG solo monsters. I would have loved if, say, Hold Monster, took "chunks" out of a BBEG one third at a time; meaning a single Hold Monster would slow down or irritate a solo monster but would not take it straight out. Two Hold Monsters would cripple it, but still not render it harmless.
---
When it comes to Magic Resistance, I realize this is the simplified Spell Resistance.
But it still feel like a blanket "cheat code". Advantage means a demon, say, with 50% chance of making a save now has a 75% chance.
It basically means spellcasters are screwed. Go do something indirect instead, like raise a wall, or buff a party member. Or stay in the background pew-pewing your cantrips.
This is connected to the sharp limitation on spell slots in the edition. You simply can't afford to chance a spell when you need to cast four on average to get it in; especially since so many spells allow a save each round.
If you have a 75% chance of nailing a spell, this means there's a 42% chance the spell will hold for a decisive three rounds.
But with only a 25% chance, that probability drops to less than 2%!
That's an overwhelmingly huge difference, that simply weren't there in previous editions. You simply don't cast spells at monsters with magic resistance.
In previous editions, a 25% chance was just that: a 25% chance of nailing a monster for "plenty enough time" (one minute, one round per level, etc). You might think a 25% chance is still one in four in 5E, but as shown above, it's much much worse than that.
Should Magic Resistance be limited to the initial save only?
What do you think?
