D&D 5E June 17 Legend & Lore - Playtesting Dragons

[GX.Sigma]

does WotC really expect monsters to flee? Because this dragon would be pretty much unstoppable when flying away.

I suppose that's why there's an emphasis on fighting it in its lair.

 

[Derren]

I suppose that's why there's an emphasis on fighting it in its lair.

Even better. Darkness lair power and underwater tunnels. Swimming is usually an adventurers weak point.

 

[Rhenny]

I always found trigger actions difficult to use, I always kept forgetting it when the trigger came up and than remember it only after the player turn ended, I much prefer the current mechanic.

Warder

Me too. I'd rather be unlimited by triggers.

 

[MarkB]

I really like the little touches like the way the creature shapes the territory around it. Even if the characters have no idea there's such a beast around, they'll start seeing the land becoming more twisted and inhospitable, and know that there's something nasty lurking at its centre. There's a very Tolkienesque feel to that, the land itself being shaped by powerful beings that dwell within it.

The Legendary Actions concept is good, and like others I prefer it to triggered actions. It's not hard to manage when you're controlling just one creature.

Legendary Resistance works on a black dragon, representing its ability to overcome magical effects, but I'd definitely like to see it changed up on other monsters. Maybe a more physically-oriented opponent would trade out fewer resistance point for more Legendary Action points.

On that subject, one way of making that Legendary Resistance feel less like a 'gotcha' would be for it to cost a Legendary Action - maybe even two - to spend one of its Legendary Resistance points. So yes, it can do it, but that costs it other out-of-turn options that round.

 

[I'm A Banana]

The Legendary Actions concept is good, and like others I prefer it to triggered actions. It's not hard to manage when you're controlling just one creature.

I think it comes down to preferences, really, and I don't see the two concepts as really incompatible. I like triggers better because it's easier to rememberize and limits ability spam (no loading up on one trait) and keeps the fight strategic (if you learn that IF X, then Y, and Y is getting wailed on, you might try a different X). A list of actions just hits me as a wall of boring.

But that's just me, and it's easy enough to add triggers to each of the actions, or to take away the triggers and treat them like a big pool. Ah, dials.

 

[Nymrohd]

I really wonder how WotC expects monsters to behave. Do they fight to the death like good "mobs"? Sure, the personality entry says that they do not (duh), but does WotC really expect monsters to flee? Because this dragon would be pretty much unstoppable when flying away.
Yet from all I see about 5Es design it doesn't look like WotC intends monsters to behave that way.

Would it be easy to stop a dragon to flee within the context of the game world (system aside) or was it easy to stop them in any past editions? We cannot really pin a dragon, never had the kind of rules that would let us shred its wings, at best we could hope for a magic effect to grapple them and actually be able to hold them (and I guess we can do that in DDN as well). Beyond that, it's rule 0 (for instance I've let a fighter pin a dragon for 1 round by impaling one of its feet to the ground with an adamantine greatsword).
I have to agree with you though; if the dragon decides to escape it can be very hard to stop it.

 

[GSHamster]

A thought about the action economy. We are okay with a creature getting multiple actions during its turn. For example, no one objects to the fact that the dragon can claw, claw, bite on it's turn.

However, we don't really have a mechanism (other than readying actions) to spread actions across the round. For example, let's say that even though there's a single dragon, there are three dragon-Initiatives (DI). Each DI rolls initiative separately, so the dragon rolls 8, 17, 19. On each initiative, the dragon can take one action. On 8, claw. On 17, a bite. On 19, the last claw.

From a perspective of the entire round, the two situations are pretty similar. In both situations, the dragon goes claw,claw,bite. But interleaving the dragon's actions with the PCs makes for a better and more dynamic fight.

 

[Nymrohd]

A thought about the action economy. We are okay with a creature getting multiple actions during its turn. For example, no one objects to the fact that the dragon can claw, claw, bite on it's turn.

However, we don't really have a mechanism (other than readying actions) to spread actions across the round. For example, let's say that even though there's a single dragon, there are three dragon-Initiatives (DI). Each DI rolls initiative separately, so the dragon rolls 8, 17, 19. On each initiative, the dragon can take one action. On 8, claw. On 17, a bite. On 19, the last claw.

From a perspective of the entire round, the two situations are pretty similar. In both situations, the dragon goes claw,claw,bite. But interleaving the dragon's actions with the PCs makes for a better and more dynamic fight.

It also robs the dragon of the strategic power of responsiveness. It's entirely different to be able to use a tail swipe right after that mage hit me with a spell to get rid of him with using a tail swipe when it's my turn again.
Indeed the initiative order of combat resolution is one of the necessary but completely unrealistic abstractions of the 6 second per round combat system. Letting the dragon get out of it actually makes him more realistic in combat. It does rob the players from the strategy of perhaps readying actions after the dragon has his turns so he cannot react to them but isn't that the point of this entire legendary system?

 

[MarkB]

However, we don't really have a mechanism (other than readying actions) to spread actions across the round. For example, let's say that even though there's a single dragon, there are three dragon-Initiatives (DI). Each DI rolls initiative separately, so the dragon rolls 8, 17, 19. On each initiative, the dragon can take one action. On 8, claw. On 17, a bite. On 19, the last claw.

4e had a couple of similar mechanisms. For instance, many dragons have the option to use their breath weapon on their initiative +10, and Ettins get to go twice per round, once for each head.

The problem with giving the creature multiple initiative rolls is that it's never guaranteed to result in that multiple interleaving. Maybe the dragon rolls better (or worse) than the entire party each time, or maybe all its rolls happen to be in the middle area and all the PCs roll either very high or very low.

And ultimately, such systems don't actually make the creature any more special. The net result is effectively little different than fighting three different opponents who all happen to be standing in the same place.

 

[Derren]

Would it be easy to stop a dragon to flee within the context of the game world (system aside) or was it easy to stop them in any past editions?

In past editions dragons were a lot slower. With its 4 legendary actions it can move an additional 300ft (flight) or 120ft (water/ground) per round. Plus it automatically succeeds at a save if it wants and still has points left.
How long are bow ranges in 5E?

Personally I have no problem with that as I believe the players should work for their kills and that includes preventing the enemy from fleeing. But I do not believe that WotC suddenly sees it that way, too. So rather I wonder if WotC considers fleeing monsters a "valid" event in the game or if they just assume that everyone (excluding PCs) fights to the death.