D&D 5E Lair and Legendary actions for high-level humanoid "Boss" encounters.

[The Crimson Binome]

The problem occurs when an NPC fighter can do something much, much cooler than a PC fighter. Especially when it's something the PC wants to be good at as well.

Sure, let's stick with that for now. New sub-classes and new spells are invented all the time, so those aren't out of line for an NPC or future PC. Let's ignore all of the stuff that NPCs do slightly differently, and focus on the abilities that would allow them to challenge an entire party, which is the topic of this thread.

And we are talking about NPCs... of legend. By definition they're not normal NPCs.

High-level PCs aren't usually normal characters, either. High-level PCs can conquer worlds and kill gods. They do it all the time. Nothing your NPC guildmaster does is going to top that by any significant margin.

They're the equivalent of epic characters. And what are epic level characters capable of? Well, we don't have rules for that. So why should the boss monsters be hindered and limited because the game doesn't support level 21+ characters?

If it was possible to become more powerful than a level 20 character, then that avenue would necessarily be open to PCs as well. There is no distinction between PCs and NPCs within the game world, after all. Fortunately, it's not, so we don't have to worry about it.

Now, at the same level, the abilities of the boss also shouldn't be beyond the realm of possibility or that too breaks the narrative.

For example, if you have a special NPC who can somehow match the combined prowess of several high-level PCs, then that's going to break the narrative.

Um, no.
Part of your job as a DM is also to provide combat encounters of a narratively appropriate challenge.

If you're adhering to the sort of Gamist-first priorities which made 4E the laughing stock of the entire industry, then maybe it's useful to contrive all enemies relative to the power of PCs. Otherwise, the only use of CR in 5E is in calculating experience.

So, tell me, is a level 13 halfling rogue assassin an appropriate as an enemy for a level 6 party? How much of a challenge is that fight? Is it a deadly encounter? Hard? Easy?

I don't really care. It's not my job to contrive encounters of a particular CR. If you don't want to fight this level 13 halfling rogue assassin, then that's your choice; whatever you do, I'm going to role-play the NPC, and adjudicate uncertainty in action resolution.

The rules are guidelines. To be customized. What "is" in the game is what I "want". If I want new monsters, then there's new monsters. If I want lava trolls that are immune to fire and set people ablaze with a bear hug then they exist. I'm not bound by the printed word of the gamebooks.

To an extent, yes. None of the individual monsters are rules, but the way that monsters work is a rule. Likewise, none of the class or races or backgrounds are rules, but the way that classes and races and backgrounds interact to create a character is a rule.

If you want lava trolls in your world, then go wild, but anyone who's fluent in 5E should be able to look at that stat block and figure out what's going on. If you give them Strength 32, then you're not playing 5E anymore.

For example, I don't have any elemental monks or dragon sorcerers at my table. That information is irrelevant. Memorising it is literally a waste of my brainpower and time I could spend actually prepping things that will make a difference at my table.

Likewise, but I take the further step of not adding them to my world. If they aren't important enough for me to learn, then they aren't important enough to show up in the world.

As such, if I did need to make a draconic sorcerer NPC, it would take time. A lot of time. And running it would be slow. It's much easier to just have a simplified version that has half the powers. The key ones that would identify it as a sorcerer.

Sure, but if there's a functional difference at the table, then a player who knows how it should work may be unhappy when that difference manifests. If the sorcerer player has every reason to expect that the NPC is using a short-rest power, then they have every reason to be upset if it turns out to be a recharge power.

Right, but we're not tweaking the system. Monsters already aren't identical to PCs. Limiting monster abilities to match PCs would be tweaking the system.

Humanoid NPCs can't currently challenge entire parties of high-level characters, which is the topic of this thread. If you want them to, then you need to change 5E away from what it is.

 

[CubicsRube]

The idea of providing level/cr appropriate encounters is really born out of 3e. It's a play style, but not the only play style.

Personally I like the idea of levelled areas. It gives great forewarning potential and make s a workd feel more alive. If Sir Francis Of Bacon, the heroic Paladin Of Bizzarre Proportions whi battled the Angry Dragon Of Deadly Halitosis was decimated in the Forest of Many Evil Things, then it signals that the players maybe should wait until they can defeat a dragon before venturing there.

 

[Jester David]

Sure, let's stick with that for now. New sub-classes and new spells are invented all the time, so those aren't out of line for an NPC or future PC. Let's ignore all of the stuff that NPCs do slightly differently, and focus on the abilities that would allow them to challenge an entire party, which is the topic of this thread.

No... the topic of the thread was how before it became a giant thread of crapping on the OP's ideas because players might be unable to handle an NPC that does things slightly different from them.

If you're adhering to the sort of Gamist-first priorities which made 4E the laughing stock of the entire industry, then maybe it's useful to contrive all enemies relative to the power of PCs. Otherwise, the only use of CR in 5E is in calculating experience.
I don't really care. It's not my job to contrive encounters of a particular CR. If you don't want to fight this level 13 halfling rogue assassin, then that's your choice; whatever you do, I'm going to role-play the NPC, and adjudicate uncertainty in action resolution.

Balanced encounters originated in 3e. The question of "what CR is an # level NPC?" is something you ask in 3e, 4e, or 5e.

Sure, but if there's a functional difference at the table, then a player who knows how it should work may be unhappy when that difference manifests. If the sorcerer player has every reason to expect that the NPC is using a short-rest power, then they have every reason to be upset if it turns out to be a recharge power.

Right. Which is exactly what I meant when I said they needed to strike a balance. It can be different, but the differences should largely be invisible to the players and fall in line with their expectations unless necessary for the design.
Monsters not needing many exploration powers or as many resources to track is one example. A sorcerer NPC does NOT need sorcerery points, they just need the ability to apply a metamagic X times per short rest. A similar effect but identical in narrative to what the players expect.

Legendary Monsters are all but necessary for good one-on-four+ boss fights. They can't be stunlocked by the wizard and because their damage is spread out over a full round they don't just obliterate the fighter without the cleric being able to respond. And because they have more HD than a classed NPC, the rogue won't reduce them to a fine mist in one hit. After all, a level 20 fighter could have 200+ hit points, which is a CR 10 monster. That fighter would be lucky to last a single round against a level 9 party. That's going to be one disappointing boss.

"Behold, Veriakas! The greatest fighter in the land! The most powerful warrior in the continent! The warlord that rules an army! Oh, a rag-tag group of heroes. You will face your doo-" Hold person Sneak attack. Action surge. Dead.

Humanoid NPCs can't currently challenge entire parties of high-level characters, which is the topic of this thread. If you want them to, then you need to change 5E away from what it is.

No. Again, NPCs in the Basic Rules DO NOT follow the exact rules of PCs. NPCs in the Basic Rules CAN do things that PC do not. That is 5e. I am changing nothing. Especially as THERE ALREADY ARE humanoid NPCs with Legendary Actions.
None of this is a change. This is all perfectly in line with 5e.

 

[epithet]

First of all, no. The ability to make three Legendary Actions every round is significantly more powerful than any ability gained from any other martial archetype. For comparison, look at the level 17 Thief ability, which is the closest thing we have to this.

Alternatively, it's much simpler because it allows you to stat-up the NPC as any other character rather than relying on esoteric monster math.

I don't know about you, but I can stat out a level 15 rogue in under a minute, in either 3E or 5E. It's really easy, because I've done it so many times. Building a level 15 monster with Legendary Actions is going to take a lot longer than that.

For me it's not about statting out the npc as I'm relaxed in my bathrobe drinking scotch, I'm much more concerned about playing the npc with a combat tracker full of mayhem and a handful of ungrateful players trying their best to break everything I've so artfully crafted for their enjoyment. That's why, for example, if I have an npc bard, their inspiration ability is an instant-use reaction and not a "here's a die that lasts 10 minutes" bonus thing.

In terms of legendary actions, hell... just add a couple of epic boons to the list in the DMG and say "Ok, when you get above level 20 or earn the favor of an archfey, goddess, etc. you can earn it. Now, roll initiative."

 

[Gadget]

Having played both 3e, 4e, & 5e, I faaaaaaaaarr prefer 4e's way of building Monsters/NPCs, though 5e leaves the door open for that as well. There's no way I want to return to the meticulous, detail oriented tracking of class abilities/skills/spells of 3e npc/monster tweaking. The PHB is just that: The Players Handbook. I don't treat it as a physics bible for the fantasy universe, but rather a way for players to interact with said fantasy in an enjoyable and reasonably efficient manner, and a general measuring stick to compare against. What really matters, IMHO, is the degree to which there is a disconnect in the abstract rules and how they are presented and implemented. 4e went a too far in some areas and really had problems with some people's games, but I don't think that invalidates the general approach and efficacy of the method.

 

[VikingLegion]

Wow, this got feisty. Some good points by both sides, but in an effort to bring this back to the OP's point:

All I know is if I play it straight up in NPC design, my players - good strategists all - will utterly melt the big boss in 1 round and make for a terribly disappointing session. One way I've found to make these major encounters more exciting is to give the boss some kind of damage mitigating factor that needs to be "solved" by the players before they can really pour on the pain. Sure they can injure the NPC, but they will be able to tell (based on my verbal descriptions as damage is being rolled) that they aren't inflicting the full amount that they feel they should be doing. Often there will be some kind of environmental clue to help them figure out after a round or two. Is that a bit video-gamey? Sure. Is it preferable over the terribly anti-climactic fight with Veriakas that @Jester David described a few posts above? I feel it is. Here's an example:

My players were on the Negative Energy plane trying to recover an item of pivotal importance from an undead master-bard. He was a unique NPC in the storyline, something like the bardish equivalent of a lich. I gave him several offensive-based powers based on the infusion of Death magic into Song. But I knew they would be all for nothing if he was dispatched within a round. So to beef up his defense I encased him in a suit of bone armour that absorbed 80% of all incoming damage. When the PCs first entered his chamber, a sinister pipe organ (made of skulls and femur-pipes and the requisite gothy effects) started blaring out a cacophonous dirge. This caused some debuffing effects on the players, but they since they all made their saves they figured the best route would be to burn down the bardlich as fast as possible and then worry about the organ. The bone armour on the bard had its own pool of hitpoints and was almost treated as a separate entity, but it wasn't until round 2 or 3 that the players realized that the musical dirge in the background had another effect - it was completely reconstituting the bone armour at the top of each round. So unless they wanted to continue smashing their heads against a wall and only getting 20% damage on the maestro, they had to switch up tactics and take out the organ.

They started to beat on that, which freed up my boss to do some boss stuff, which really pushed the cleric to the limits of his healing ability. But the organ's hardness rating and damage resistance made it fairly hard to smash. It's not all that easy to do structural type damage, I mean, who really prepares for that? One of my houserules has always been that wizards can cast an unprepared spell directly out of their spellbook as though it were a scroll, but that destroys the page (exactly as a scroll would be consumed). The party wizard, who hoards spells like a miser, heroically cast a Shatter spell from his book, permanently losing the spell. I thought it was a great team-oriented move, so I made sure the bards loot had a spellbook with 2 or 3 new spells the mage had never scribed before. Once the organ was reduced to a pile of bone shards, they turned on the maestro with a vengeance. He still had what was left of his bone armour, so that prolonged him another round. But without the song to keep replenishing it, they were able to smash through his protection and then his body in turn.

Again, maybe it played a bit like a raid-script from an MMO boss? All I know is that it turned a major villain from a 1 round smash-n-grab, into a 5 or 6 round white-knuckle bout that they barely got out of, and with the mage having to sacrifice one of his learned spells. You can bet he reminded everyone at the table for several weeks afterwards. But as I said, I made sure he was compensated for it, and it made for an encounter we still remember vividly some 8 years later.

This type of tactic can take a few forms - an impenetrable suit of armour, maybe a collection of gemstones that orbit the NPC like ioun stones, each absorbing a full hit before shattering and falling to the ground - really anything that can take a massive attack and negate or lessen it, at least for a round or two before the puzzle is solved. You can't go to this well too often, else it will become a gimmick that makes your players groan. But when used once or twice in a full campaign, especially on fights that need to last a few rounds and be memorable, I think it's a viable option. And if any of my players wanted to roll up a bard and ask how do I get such cool special abilities, I would simply reply, "Spend 500 years in the Negative Energy Plane and you too may learn how to construct a similar pipe organ! Oh yeah, and also, since you will have to give yourself whole-heartedly over to the darkness, you will have to voluntarily hand over your character sheet and become an NPC. Sounds fair?"

EDIT: I can't be the only DM to have ever used a bard as a major villain, can I?

 

[Dualazi]

At that level, the boss has survived numerous dangerous activities including assassination attempts and has contingency plans for his/her minions to ambush the PC's when they think they will ambush the boss.

Ah yes, the old "just play the NPC as omniscient" answer. A classic, but as wrong then as it is wrong now. There are any number of reasons why this might not work, including being unaware the PCs are coming for them, being dependent on outside factors (need to travel, perform a risky ritual, maintain public appearance etc.), and really the only way the "plans within plans" thing works is if your antagonists just hang around in their doom forts until the players kick in the door.

Also, nothing about the enemy (or the players for that matter) level is related to the assumption of experience with assassinations. You could easily become high level in a campaign against giants and ogres that never involves any subterfuge, so assuming that the big bad is always hyper-aware is just incredibly gamey.

Plus, when in the history of fantasy has "we are going to hang around for two weeks waiting for the boss to be alone and no one sells us out or spots us and none of our archrivals shows up" ever occurred?

See above, unless your big bad is 100% certain that the PCs are coming and he needs to be on the defensive, chances are he's going to be progressing with whatever plan or goal that currently sets him up to be an antagonist. That can mean leading armies, meeting allies, forging armaments, you name it. Point is, all of those things can leave them potentially vulnerable, but that's simply an unavoidable fact of life unless they're veritable throne-room hermits.


Legendary action ideas

Warrior-types: Stunning shout (con save or stunned until end of boss' next turn), an attack that adds knockback and prone effects, granting forms of damage resistance, second wind, charge attacks, ripostes (probably give your players a head up that attacking him while he has this active is a bad idea), pinning arrow shots, and of course simple things like off-turn grapple checks to help secure them if need be.

Rogue-types: crippling strike (damage+disadvantage for a set duration), AoO-free movement, shadow step (mentioned by other posters), speedily applying poison to a weapon, releasing poisonous mist in the surrounding area, blinding attacks, off-turn grapple escapes, off-turn saving throws (for when legendary resistance is gone), and attacks that make the target vulnerable to incoming damage for a set duration are all options I can think of off the top of my head.

Mage-types: Really the sky is the limit here, simply being able to cast additional low-level spells is hugely influential on combat. Other than that I would strongly advise making these effects more about control rather than raw damage, so spontaneous terrain like wall spells, hazards like Stinking Cloud and Cloudkill, and charm effects are all great.

Lair actions I feel like have less to do with archetype and more to do with where the foe resides, so you'd have to give more information about where you want him to be found, since a portal to the abyss will have different lair actions than a temple in the heart of a volcano.

 

[Coroc]

As many others wrote in this and other Posts, put minions.

If you do not for plot / style reasons: Use insane amounts of hitpoints, legendary saves (so no oneshotting / disabling), high AC (full plate +1, ring of protection, buff spells, stoneskin potions/ displacement /invisibility whatever), or get the Party into disadvantage somehow. Everything is possible it is not that hard if you put a bit of thinking into the specific Situation.

I had a AC21 fighter with 20 Str and 150 HP with + 9 to hit vs. the 4 man Level 5 Party lately and it occupied them well, especially since they could not go all out in the Situation at Hand.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

Ah yes, the old "just play the NPC as omniscient" answer. A classic, but as wrong then as it is wrong now. There are any number of reasons why this might not work, including being unaware the PCs are coming for them, being dependent on outside factors (need to travel, perform a risky ritual, maintain public appearance etc.), and really the only way the "plans within plans" thing works is if your antagonists just hang around in their doom forts until the players kick in the door.

Also, nothing about the enemy (or the players for that matter) level is related to the assumption of experience with assassinations. You could easily become high level in a campaign against giants and ogres that never involves any subterfuge, so assuming that the big bad is always hyper-aware is just incredibly gamey.



See above, unless your big bad is 100% certain that the PCs are coming and he needs to be on the defensive, chances are he's going to be progressing with whatever plan or goal that currently sets him up to be an antagonist. That can mean leading armies, meeting allies, forging armaments, you name it. Point is, all of those things can leave them potentially vulnerable, but that's simply an unavoidable fact of life unless they're veritable throne-room hermits.


Legendary action ideas

Warrior-types: Stunning shout (con save or stunned until end of boss' next turn), an attack that adds knockback and prone effects, granting forms of damage resistance, second wind, charge attacks, ripostes (probably give your players a head up that attacking him while he has this active is a bad idea), pinning arrow shots, and of course simple things like off-turn grapple checks to help secure them if need be.

Rogue-types: crippling strike (damage+disadvantage for a set duration), AoO-free movement, shadow step (mentioned by other posters), speedily applying poison to a weapon, releasing poisonous mist in the surrounding area, blinding attacks, off-turn grapple escapes, off-turn saving throws (for when legendary resistance is gone), and attacks that make the target vulnerable to incoming damage for a set duration are all options I can think of off the top of my head.

Mage-types: Really the sky is the limit here, simply being able to cast additional low-level spells is hugely influential on combat. Other than that I would strongly advise making these effects more about control rather than raw damage, so spontaneous terrain like wall spells, hazards like Stinking Cloud and Cloudkill, and charm effects are all great.

Lair actions I feel like have less to do with archetype and more to do with where the foe resides, so you'd have to give more information about where you want him to be found, since a portal to the abyss will have different lair actions than a temple in the heart of a volcano.

Ah yes, the old "just play the NPC as a complete moron" answer. A classic, but ten times more wrong then the "just play the NPC as omniscient" answer. I am sorry, did I say ten? I meant 100 times. A sure sign of a DM who doesn't respect his/her players. Why bother even giving the NPC an attack option? Just have the NPC come out, throw up his/her hands, and say "kill me in the most spectacular fashion you can."

If you are going to go there, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised you think every other NPC should be either a complete moron or totally on the PC's side, because the warlord who has managed to gather an army is really hated by the entire army (why do we need the PC's again?). No wait I have it, there is so much prosperity in the warlord's wake that turning the PC's in for a reward occurs to no one (if everything is so good, why do we need the PC's?). No, no I got it, all the other NPC's are blind, deaf, and dumb. I am totally convinced....

 

[Dualazi]

Ah yes, the old "just play the NPC as a complete moron" answer. A classic, but ten times more wrong then the "just play the NPC as omniscient" answer. I am sorry, did I say ten? I meant 100 times. A sure sign of a DM who doesn't respect his/her players. Why bother even giving the NPC an attack option? Just have the NPC come out, throw up his/her hands, and say "kill me in the most spectacular fashion you can."

If you are going to go there, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised you think every other NPC should be either a complete moron or totally on the PC's side, because the warlord who has managed to gather an army is really hated by the entire army (why do we need the PC's again?). No wait I have it, there is so much prosperity in the warlord's wake that turning the PC's in for a reward occurs to no one (if everything is so good, why do we need the PC's?). No, no I got it, all the other NPC's are blind, deaf, and dumb. I am totally convinced....

Man, do you run a steakhouse? Because I'm liking the salt.

Also, I must have missed a few of your logical leaps between "the villain should be an actor in the world's events with both strengths and weaknesses" to your obvious hyperbolic bait of suggesting that he should just surrender on whim. Even more ridiculous is your assertion that it's "disrespectful to the players". You know what's really disrespectful? Stomping on good ideas/tactics to exploit the villain's vulnerability just so you can have your oh-so-epic showdown. Based on your stance in your original post:

Plus, when in the history of fantasy has "we are going to hang around for two weeks waiting for the boss to be alone and no one sells us out or spots us and none of our archrivals shows up" ever occurred?

I can only assume your poor players are firmly anchored to that railroad you're laying down, since you seem to hold the opinion that no player-lead assassination attempt ever succeeds. If I were to channel my inner MechaTarrasque and spew some pointless hyperbole, I'd ask why you even inquire what your players want to do, since they might as well just skip to whatever confrontation you have planned in lieu of other tactics that are destined to fail.