D&D 5E 5e EPIC MONSTER UPDATES

[Werebat]

Having actually run a free-for-all combat between several demon lords that used these epic stats, I can say that the legendary actions do indeed add to the complexity (and length) of the combat - but I thought that they were fun. I just gave each player running a demon lord three tokens at the start of each round, which they spent as they used legendary actions, putting them all into a kitty in the center of the table to be redistributed at the start of the next round.

I would consider that just giving the epic monsters "extra rounds" will probably not make such combats run much FASTER. But it might make them less dynamic.

 

[dave2008]

[MENTION=83242]dave2008[/MENTION] , I forsee, IMO, an inconsistency you may want to take into account during this design phase.

(UNLESS, epic games and standard games are totally divorced from each other)


16th level group of adventurers combat the infamous Ursine'Twain, Demon Double Drop Bear, Lord of the Infinite Wasteland Prison of Stralia, in the Abyss.

The demon has legendary actions, as they should for this grand semi-solo combat extravaganza. Players survive, but did not kill Ursine'Twain on its home plane.

Adventurers become "epic", they go back to the prison wasteland to finish the job. Demon no longer has legendary actions?

Not quite, UT would still have his legendary abilities. What I am proposing is that Epic Monsters have Legendary (or Epic) Turns instead of legendary actions, so:

At 16th level the party fights UT and the Demon Lord has 2 turns of actions (action, bonus, reaction, move - the whole set).

Later, when the group is now demigods they challenge UT again. However, now they too can perform 2 turns of actions in 6 seconds. So to simply the equation you just have everyone use one turn of actions (essentially a half round - hmm, how does that effect spell duration). So UT still has his legendary turn, it is just the PCs do too. You could play out a full round and give everyone 2 turns per round.

To be clear creatures of higher rank get more turns. For example, Demogorgon will have an epic rank of 3, that means he would have 4 turns (3 legendary turns) if he faced the 16th level group and he would still get 3 turns (2 legendary turns as one is cancelled out by the PCs) when facing them again as demigods.

Does that make sense?

 

[SkidAce]

Yes. I can see it.

 

[Quartz]

I am thinking that for the second drafts of these epic monsters I may get rid of legendary actions. My thought is to move the abilities to be standard, bonus, and reactions actions and give epic monsters multiple turns (if needed) to compensate.

Multiple Turns could get rather complex, what with Actions, Reactions, and Bonus Actions, so how about simplifying it by adapting the Fighter's Action Surge and giving Epic Creatures extra Actions or Reactions or both?

 

[dave2008]

Multiple Turns could get rather complex, what with Actions, Reactions, and Bonus Actions, so how about simplifying it by adapting the Fighter's Action Surge and giving Epic Creatures extra Actions or Reactions or both?

I will think about it, but at first glance this doesn't seem to solve the problem I foresee with legendary actions. Refer to my post #1182 in response to SkidAce. I am heading out, but will think about it some more when I get back. Thank you for the comment!

 

[dave2008]

Having actually run a free-for-all combat between several demon lords that used these epic stats, I can say that the legendary actions do indeed add to the complexity (and length) of the combat - but I thought that they were fun. I just gave each player running a demon lord three tokens at the start of each round, which they spent as they used legendary actions, putting them all into a kitty in the center of the table to be redistributed at the start of the next round.

That sounds like a good method to handle the actions.

I would consider that just giving the epic monsters "extra rounds" will probably not make such combats run much FASTER. But it might make them less dynamic.

That is a possibility, but I think if I design them correctly (moving the legendary actions into a combination of bonus actions and reactions) the additional turns can be equally dynamic, possible more as they would get 2x the movement, along with another full set of actions.

So Legendary monster gets: move, action, bonus action (maybe), reaction (maybe), & legendary actions (3); or 6 possible actions and one movement

So my revised Epic monster gets: move, action, bonus action (likely), reaction (likely) + move, action, bonus action (likely), reaction (likely); or 8 possible actions and 2x movement.

 

[dave2008]

Multiple Turns could get rather complex, what with Actions, Reactions, and Bonus Actions, so how about simplifying it by adapting the Fighter's Action Surge and giving Epic Creatures extra Actions or Reactions or both?

Those are good ideas, and I do plan on using them. That is how I would revise an ancient dragon for example. The extra turns would only come up with creatures that have epic ranks, and then only really when you have combatants of different epic ranks. For creatures of the same rank, it would fall back on revised actions, reactions, & bonus actions.

 

[Ebonynightcloudstorm]

Charisma and intelligence modifiers haven't been added to the arch-devils spell bonus for spell damage attacks like empowered evocation and elemental affinity
For example Mephistophelese innate spell casting is charisma based(DC 32) while his learned spell casting is intelligence based(DC 30)If his innate spell casting is charisma based, which is that of a sorcerer should he not get elemental affinity for cold? And for his wizard(intelligence)based spells should he not get empowered evocation bonus for one spell damage?

 

[Ebonynightcloudstorm]

And would Asmodeus get elemental affinity bonus damage for his spell attacks either with his rod and innately?

 

[Ebonynightcloudstorm]

Or would you add on these bonus's only on their home respective layer's where they are more powerful?