D&D 5E Legendary Resistance shouldn't be optional

[deadman1204]

What game is this?

Where can I buy it?

It sounds amazing and nothing like D&D's attitude toward martial and magic.

Oh, I didnt say they succeded at it, but dnd clearly tries to make melee stronger than it reasonable should be compared to someone who can throw comets and fireballs.

Its this wierd videogame logic that all characters should be equal, even though someone with a knife shouldn't be able to do as much damage as a dragon stepping on you or a wizard calling down a lightning bolt.

 

[MarkB]

I don't want the decision of when a DM should use a LR to be taken away, but I would not be against there being some cost or knock-on effect for using it. Something perhaps more tangible for the group beyond "you're one step closer to where it can't just shrug your attack off."

For example, noting on things like Stun* - perhaps using the LR to evade the effect uses up one of the creature's Legendary Actions (LA) - the player gets the satisfaction that they slowed the enemy a little bit, but they haven't completely taken it out of the fight. In fact, moving LR to a LA ability may be a more tactical approach for advanced DMs allowing for more interplay between the players and the DM and creating more uncertainty in the will it/won't it get through of the fight.

*Assuming stuns and other effects are a once-per-PC-per-round action, not the unfixed Stunning Fist of the pre-24 Monk.

It's an option I've considered, but it seems likely to result in the DM hoarding legendary actions and not using the more costly ones, to have at least one in reserve for resistance.

 

[tetrasodium]

SR, MR (1E and 2E), as well as the basic-classic 'immune to spells of level X or lower' all helped keep BBEGs alive in the face of PC spells (back when it was save-or-dies as well as save-or-sucks). They each had their own limitations*, nuances, and incentivization structures, though -- and I'm really not sure that these were strictly better so much as a different set of problems.*on top of, well, only working on magic

Notably multiple posts in the thread have spoken about the specific benefits that come in how those older options influence play & player actions in desirable ways lacking from legendary resistance. Ironically I'm pretty sure that just as many (if not more) posts have made similar claims about legendary resistance creating an identical influence despite the mechanic doing nothing to facilitate those results. The question of if one is better than the other on a net level is secondary to what benefits the mechanics themselves carry on their own & what benefits are the result of phase2

Spoiler: phase2

The benefits of Legendary Resistance are largely found in phase2 while its already discussed negatives are trivial to see in actual play.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Oh, I didnt say they succeded at it, but dnd clearly tries to make melee stronger than it reasonable should be compared to someone who can throw comets and fireballs.

Its this wierd videogame logic that all characters should be equal, even though someone with a knife shouldn't be able to do as much damage as a dragon stepping on you or a wizard calling down a lightning bolt.

I couldn't agree more. It's the Tyranny of Balance Over All. In a logical universe, some options are just stronger.

 

[dave2008]

I couldn't agree more. It's the Tyranny of Balance Over All. In a logical universe, some options are just stronger.

As we have discussed previously. I am fine with balancing martial PCs with caster PCs, I just want to be clear those martials are performing feats beyond what is humanly possible. They are legendary martials, not RL martials.

 

[dave2008]

Oh, I didnt say they succeded at it, but dnd clearly tries to make melee stronger than it reasonable should be compared to someone who can throw comets and fireballs.

Its this wierd videogame logic that all characters should be equal, even though someone with a knife shouldn't be able to do as much damage as a dragon stepping on you or a wizard calling down a lightning bolt.

Yes and no. You logic only makes sense if you assume the PCs are people from earth. They are not. I mean we have magic and dragons and stuff. Innately powerful (aka magical) martial characters can be equally as powerful as casters. Think Herakles not Robin.

 

[Micah Sweet]

As we have discussed previously. I am fine with balancing martial PCs with caster PCs, I just want to be clear those martials are performing feats beyond what is humanly possible. They are legendary martials, not RL martials.

Sure, but apparently there's a strong lobby (on this site anyway) that approves of WotC's stance on not making that clear. They seem to want both or neither, but never one or the other.

I miss the magical martial threads. Those were fun.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yes and no. You logic only makes sense if you assume the PCs are people from earth. They are not. I mean we have magic and dragons and stuff. Innately powerful (aka magical) martial characters can be equally as powerful as casters. Think Herakles not Robin.

Provided it's clear that they are supernaturally/magically-powered characters. Otherwise, I have no reason to believe a being without obvious, visible special abilities is any more capable than a human from Earth (which remains the only actual example we have).

 

[MichaelSomething]

The solution is to give solo monsters powerful abilities that scale based on the number of LRs they have.

Like the monster has an extra attack for every LR they have.

That way, spellcasters will feel useful when forcing LRs.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Oh, I didnt say they succeded at it, but dnd clearly tries to make melee stronger than it reasonable should be compared to someone who can throw comets and fireballs.

Its this wierd videogame logic that all characters should be equal, even though someone with a knife shouldn't be able to do as much damage as a dragon stepping on you or a wizard calling down a lightning bolt.

So there's no game with actual good design where you can play what you want without being purposefully depowered then?

Just a weird, unproven assertion that the guys making everything spells tried to make martials strong? And a random anti-videogame nonsequitor that was obnoxious in 2004?

I am disappoint.