D&D 5E How to defeat creatures with legendary actions?

[Coroc]

It doesn't matter. If you followed my posts in this thread, you'll see I was just asking for a few official options to make the game more like it was before so I don't have to resort to homebrew rules or OSR retro clones.

Everyone insisting 5e doesn't go out of it's way to prevent PC's death either aren't being completely honest or aren't really getting my point.

That's all.

It might be that the intention of 5e's creators to offer a PC are quasi-immortal style is to target younger players (or in general players) who might not take it so well, if their character succumbs. But that is just a guess.

I admit you can play 5e that way , that you do not like and criticize, it is also not my kind of prefered style. But 5e offers the toolset for both you just have to use it. So imho it comes up to what playstyle you prefer and what parts of the toolset you use and how.

See, i can find no statement anywhere in the RAW, that a dragon is not allowed to down the poor party wizard for good within one round, i can find no RAW that ghouls cannot start chewing up sub zero hp characters and thereby killing them for good, if a healing spell or anything similar is not immediately applied, but the cleric or whoever capable to do so, might be occupied fighting for his own life in this situation.

 

[tetrasodium]

It might be that the intention of 5e's creators to offer a PC are quasi-immortal style is to target younger players (or in general players) who might not take it so well, if their character succumbs. But that is just a guess.

I admit you can play 5e that way , that you do not like and criticize, it is also not my kind of prefered style. But 5e offers the toolset for both you just have to use it. So imho it comes up to what playstyle you prefer and what parts of the toolset you use and how.

See, i can find no statement anywhere in the RAW, that a dragon is not allowed to down the poor party wizard for good within one round, i can find no RAW that ghouls cannot start chewing up sub zero hp characters and thereby killing them for good, if a healing spell or anything similar is not immediately applied, but the cleric or whoever capable to do so, might be occupied fighting for his own life in this situation.

It is not however "just a guess" that one of 5e's core tenants was to simplify things with the intent of making it easier for the GM to modify the system to fit the type of game they want to run. Wotc went around shouting that from the tallest towers right out of the gate. That's all well & good except they cranked every possible dial towards that "quasi-immortal style" and even the modular tools they provided in things like the dmg in many cases are either a deliberate miss for any other style or intentionally created to crank that quasi-immoral dial up to 11.

In the case of making the game more deadly that simplicity fights against making changes because they are so many differing low level system elements that hinge on or enforce that style of quasi-immortal play. Without any real depth where crunch & subjectivity once existed there aren't really any wide ranging tweaks a gm could make that might crank the dials back down from 11 without needing to individually address each & every subsystem & one off ability fighting to bring back quasi-immortality one by one.

 

[CleverNickName]

I admit you can play 5e that way , that you do not like and criticize, it is also not my kind of prefered style. But 5e offers the toolset for both you just have to use it. So imho it comes up to what playstyle you prefer and what parts of the toolset you use and how.

See, i can find no statement anywhere in the RAW, that a dragon is not allowed to down the poor party wizard for good within one round, i can find no RAW that ghouls cannot start chewing up sub zero hp characters and thereby killing them for good, if a healing spell or anything similar is not immediately applied, but the cleric or whoever capable to do so, might be occupied fighting for his own life in this situation.

This is my take as well. The 5th Edition rules are already flexible enough to make the game fit any tone, setting, or style that I could imagine. And if it didn't, there are lots of optional rules (and guidelines for writing my own rules) already in the DMG. I understand that some people don't want to use these optional rules, or write their own house-rules. And that's fine...but that doesn't mean the options don't exist, nor that the game doesn't support the style you wanted.

 

[tetrasodium]

This is my take as well. The 5th Edition rules are already flexible enough to make the game fit any tone, setting, or style that I could imagine. And if it didn't, there are lots of optional rules (and guidelines for writing my own rules) already in the DMG. I understand that some people don't want to use these optional rules, or write their own house-rules. And that's fine...but that doesn't mean the options don't exist, nor that the game doesn't support the style you wanted.

If I'm reading your post right you discount the frustrations annoyances and needs faced by people aiming for a more deadly style as meaningless in your support of @Coroc 's statement that 5e offers the needed "toolset" required to support a playstyle not his preferred one?


If that's not the case can you elaborate on what specifically your "take" is?

 

[CleverNickName]

If I'm reading your post right you discount the frustrations annoyances and needs faced by people aiming for a more deadly style as meaningless in your support of @Coroc 's statement that 5e offers the needed "toolset" required to support a playstyle not his preferred one?


If that's not the case can you elaborate on what specifically your "take" is?

I don't think you're reading my post right. @Coroc stated that 5E has the toolset you need to play the game a number of ways, and I agreed with them. Then I mentioned the optional rules in the DMG that can be used as-is, or as starting points for customization. That's all. That was my "take."

All the other stuff you wrote about discounting frustrations and meaninglessness is just, well, stuff you wrote.

 

[ECMO3]

So, you have been at it since 79 and you really dont feel like 5e is easy mode?

I have been at it since 81 I started on D&D basic and moved to AD&D 1E rather quickly. I find 5E more deadly than basic or 1E AD&E, especially at low levels.

That said, 5e requires a lot more prep by the DM to fight enemies correctly. The bonus actions and reactions and conditions (if an ally is adjacent you can .....). To do it right, you have to know all the enemies like they are a PC, what routines are going to work best, how do I fight them as a group etc. If the DM puts a lot of thought into this they are very deadly. What I find as a DM is unless I have really studied the monsters and think through every single fight ahead of time I miss things (...... oh crap I could have had that Goblin hide as a bonus action but I forgot ....) so I end up playing the monsters like a noob would play his 2nd level Rogue, just forgetting that I can do things, and that makes it a lot easier for the PCs.

1E did not have this problem because the monsters were simpler and there were fewer choices.

 

[tetrasodium]

I don't think you're reading my post right. @Coroc stated that 5E has the toolset you need to play the game a number of ways, and I agreed with them. Then I mentioned the optional rules in the DMG that can be used as-is, or as starting points for customization. That's all. That was my "take."

All the other stuff you wrote about discounting frustrations and meaninglessness is just, well, stuff you wrote.

In that case it should be easy for you to list off all of the the optional rules in the dmg that increase lethality since that's been the area getting called out as lacking right?

 

[CleverNickName]

In that case it should be easy for you to list off all of the the optional rules in the dmg that increase lethality since that's been the area getting called out as lacking right?

And that's where you're wrong. It's not easy to tell someone which rules to use and/or customize to make the game play the way they want it to play. I'm not interested in arguing.

The 5th Edition rules are already flexible enough to make the game fit any tone, setting, or style that I could imagine. And if it didn't, there are lots of optional rules (and guidelines for writing my own rules) already in the DMG. I understand that some people don't want to use these optional rules, or write their own house-rules. And that's fine...but that doesn't mean the options don't exist, nor that the game doesn't support the style you wanted.

Anyway, I said what I said. I hope you find what you're looking for.

 

[Nefermandias]

We have come to a point where people are arguing that 5e is deadlier than AD&D 1E.
C'mon, people... There is only so much that can be left to subjectivity and personal opinion. You cannot possibly be arguing in good faith anymore.
I'm out.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I have been at it since 81 I started on D&D basic and moved to AD&D 1E rather quickly. I find 5E more deadly than basic or 1E AD&E, especially at low levels.

This is an interesting view point from a Grognard, and not one that I find common on these boards.