Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 6911701" data-attributes="member: 12731">A blanket failed-save to damage would perhaps come across as simple or even crude, but in the framework of D&D combat, where (in later editions) hp is the first and foremost indicator of level, it would work very well. At least conceptually: I still think it should be embellished by the consequence retaining at least some semblance to the actual incoming spell effect. I realize I probably need to explain that - so, example: a banishment spell described as opening up the "usual" vortex but the legendary monster being to awesome to be simply sucked in, instead taking some temporary debilitating condition as well as losing 40 hp (or whatever amount).As for the other idea - I should probably clarify that it is me as a DM that doesn't like being given the responsibility to decide when and where my monster should cheat. I definitely understand it can only be my responsibility - after all I am the monster. Not being able to choose significantly nerfs the ability, and I never objected it was too strong. So I would say that no, that proposal doesn't really solve the issues (even if it lightens my load).The real problem isn't, after all, that I'm cheating. The real problem is that the rules empower the DM to handwave away the players hard-earned abilities. I would much rather meet them half-way: "okay congrats on sticking your very first spell to the monster. Now, the normal effects would mean an autowin, and that's not fun or dramatic or appropriate for a legendary monster. So how about coming up with an effect that's half as impactful as Banishment or Maze or Feeblemind?"The real problem is the way spell effects and conditions can't be halved the way damage can. In my ideal world, D&D finally gets rid of its atomic save or die model (where it's either "save" or "die" but never anything in the middle).Until that happy time, I wonder if Olrox idea (basically allowing a legendary monster to "bribe" its way out of a spell by paying hit points) isn't the most workable...</blockquote>

Verification