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

[DrJawaPhD]

Do you mind if a monster succeeds at its saving throws? If not, what is the difference with LR in your mind? If so, why have monsters make saves at all?

Failing due to a dice roll is nothing like failing due to DM fiat. Basically every single thing you can do in DnD (besides magic missile?) requires rolling some clickety clacks and depending on the mercy of the fickle dice gods. The difference is that with dice rolls you have a percent chance to succeed, which you can boost by your character design choices, versus with legendary resistance you automatically fail and have zero control over it.

I like the idea of legendary resistance causing some monster-specific debuff to happen, which solves one of the major problems without having to get a specific list of permissions. It means your entire turn doesn't feel negated (you can't paralyze the dragon, but it did something more than decrease an invisible counter by 1).

Yes! I have seen some third party monsters designed this way and I love this approach. I would rather implement this type of solution, but innovative new monster designs stretches well beyond my homebrewing skills. Maybe if enough 3pp monsters and/or the 2025 MM monsters start using this approach, there will be some templates to follow.

 

[dave2008]

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.

That is a great game mechanic, but it doesn't always work for me from a world building / simulation stance. Now should that matter for a game, probably not, but I enjoy what I enjoy

 

[MGibster]

Failing due to a dice roll is nothing like failing due to DM fiat. Basically every single thing you can do in DnD (besides magic missile?) requires rolling some clickety clacks and depending on the mercy of the fickle dice gods.

Since when is following the rules a form of DM fiat? The rules describe when legendary saves work and limits the number a monster might have.

 

[dave2008]

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.

I will admit, I am generally a fan of things not being clear, whether they are rules or lore.

I know some, maybe most, people like precise definitions and RAI to clearly be RAW. However, I like things to be a bit vague and let to interpretation. It gives me room to stretch and explore and make things my own without having to fight so much. I'm weird though, so there is that!

 

[dave2008]

Failing due to a dice roll is nothing like failing due to DM fiat. Basically every single thing you can do in DnD (besides magic missile?) requires rolling some clickety clacks and depending on the mercy of the fickle dice gods. The difference is that with dice rolls you have a percent chance to succeed, which you can boost by your character design choices, versus with legendary resistance you automatically fail and have zero control over it.

I guess, but from the player prospective it should look no different. When I used LR my players had no idea when it was or was not being implemented. From their persepctive there is no mechanical difference, so it is the same to them as failing due to dice roll.

 

[Weiley31]

Flee,Mortals has Legendary Resistances that when triggered, makes the solo monster take a little bit of damage with some other effect.

 

[DrJawaPhD]

Since when is following the rules a form of DM fiat?

Does the term "fiat" imply that the DM decree is not following the rules? I don't believe it does but I could be mistaken.

I guess, but from the player prospective it should look no different. When I used LR my players had no idea when it was or was not being implemented. From their persepctive there is no mechanical difference, so it is the same to them as failing due to dice roll.

So you would use LR but then tell the players that the monster succeeded on their roll? That feels icky to me personally, but I'm not judging anyone who uses that style. We roll in the open so that isn't an option either way - you can't exactly roll a 2 and pass it off as the monster passing their saving throw

 

[MGibster]

Does the term "fiat" imply that the DM decree is not following the rules? I don't believe it does but I could be mistaken.

Fiat implies the following: That the DM is making an arbitrary decision. Arbitrary in the sense that they are abusing their authority as a DM or that their decision is made on a whim without rhyme or reason. If we're worried about DM fiat, let's just assign a formula to each creature dictating its actions. If PCs do X then Y happens this round. If they do A then B happens. That way the DM isn't in any position to make a decision.

There are plenty of good arguments against legendary saves here, but DM fiat isn't one of them. A basic function of the DM is to decide what the bad guys do, when they do it, and how they do it. And if they're following the rules then it isn't an abuse of their authority or done at their whim without rhyme or reason.

 

[dave2008]

So you would use LR but then tell the players that the monster succeeded on their roll? That feels icky to me personally, but I'm not judging anyone who uses that style. We roll in the open so that isn't an option either way - you can't exactly roll a 2 and pass it off as the monster passing their saving throw

No.

I don't tell them if a creature succeeds or fails on a roll (save or otherwise). I just describe / narrate the results / action. From there it is generally pretty easy to for them to determine. However, LR looks exactly the same as a successful roll when done this way.

 

[dave2008]

So you would use LR but then tell the players that the monster succeeded on their roll? That feels icky to me personally, but I'm not judging anyone who uses that style. We roll in the open so that isn't an option either way - you can't exactly roll a 2 and pass it off as the monster passing their saving throw

No, I don't roll in the open. To much meta game issues with that IMO.