D&D (2024) Testing against the Gold Dragon

[AnotherGuy]

Cool thread @MonsterEnvy
I'm on team dragon, kill them pesky heroes

 

[Barolo]

Not sure if it is not intended. Against smaller (less than 4 characters) parties, the Dragon can´t use their bonus lair action and would still get extra XP for being in their lair. I think the idea of legendary action is not balancing it against smaller parties but spreading the damage over several instances so the legendary creature does not always do all damage at once. So the characters have always have a chance to do something in between. Heal a bit and so on.
I even think 3 legendary actions against a 4 person party is perfect, as it goes LC(normal turn), C, LA, C, LA ,C , LA, C and then it is the legendary creature´s normal turn again. The extra lair legendary action will cause the legendary creature to more or less make a double turn. The reposition legendary action will be very helpful.

Against a smaller party I would actually allow the legendary to spend their remaining lair actions at some point in the middle of the initiative list.

So lets see how this is explained in the MM explanation section.

For the dragon I´d say, I wish they had kept legendary reactions and increased the use to account for the normal reaction. And then I had made banishment as a reaction to being attacked.

I agree with that. If a creature ends up with a different action economy depending on party size, it's potential DPR would change, which would effectively affect its CR calculation.

Just picture a legendary creature being able to use all its 3 legendary actions against a 4-hero party, and then the same creature on its lair, which would award it an extra legendary action, but being able to use a single legendary action because it is fighting against a solo hero, and for some reason being worth more XP. Does not feel right to me.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I agree with that. If a creature ends up with a different action economy depending on party size, it's potential DPR would change, which would effectively affect its CR calculation.

CR is based around a four person party. Any more or fewer and it doesn't work anyway.

 

[Reynard]

I really am stunned by the number of people that think banishing the wizard (polymorph, hold monster, forcecage, wish, ect ect) or the cleric (all the healing abilities, all the buffs, ect ect) or the Rogue (critical sneak attack) would somehow mean the dragon is throwing the fight instead of banishing the fighter again and again and again and again. Heck, your "drop them into nearby lava" plan would actually make MORE sense to cycle them, because the characters might not immediately be able to rush back into melee with the dragon.

I think you are applying a preference to me that I did not indicate: whether to banish the same guy over and over depends entirely on the threat level to the dragon. If the fighter can't fly, i can't imagine the dragon being terrible concerned about them after dropping him down a chasm.

 

[dave2008]

I think it is intended, to weaken the creature against smaller parties, but the text actually reads thus:


Which means if the monster has allies, it can use it's LAs at the end of their turn.

I am aware, but the fight in question was 1v1, so that didn't apply either.

The issue with removing LA actions because of the RAW text is that it reduced the CR (by about 2), which is not good for anyone.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Loonas gets blasted with another LA Guiding Bolt. But now it's his turn he runs up using his last second wind to heal and get closer to the Dragon.

It's a very successful round with Action Surge as he gets two crits and max damage on several attacks only missing 1 of his 8 attacks.

The Dragon Recharges it's Breath weapon again and sends a fire breath before flying away. Loonas only surviving cause of Indomitable (The rest of the unconscious people are not as lucky). Loonas gets one more hit on the Dragon as it flies away.

The Battle ends at the end of round 7 as an LA Guiding Bolt crits the Fighter and brings him down.

This was a low end High Difficulty Fight. Which the DMG states as this

High Difficulty. A high-difficulty encounter could be lethal for one or more characters. To survive it, the characters will need smart tactics, quick thinking, and maybe even a little luck.

If the PC's were luckier I would have seen them winning, but luck sided with the Dragon, and prevented the PC's from capitalizing on several things. Belamur was going to use Mass Heal but got banished and then dropped right before he could for example, which no doubt would have resulted in a victory in that case. A victory that would have still involved Luca's death and for sure would have fit into the High Difficulty scenario.

 

[Lidgar]

This was great, thanks for doing this. It reminded me of the thread from a few weeks ago regarding who/what you blame when your character dies. I voted The Dice, which was certainly the case for this unfortunate party - too little too late, but still a very close and exciting battle!

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I'm not expecting anyone to do this, but I'd be interested in knowing how well would the dragon do without the banishment. It is the most powerful weapon its arsenal by far, but it also is something that is very unfun in play.

 

[Reynard]

unfun in play.

I'm getting flashbacks...

 

[Lidgar]

I'm not expecting anyone to do this, but I'd be interested in knowing how well would the dragon do without the banishment. It is the most powerful weapon its arsenal by far, but it also is something that is very unfun in play.

As a player, I wouldn’t mind. It allows a save (albeit it’s a dc24 charisma save). I enjoy battles that require a combination of sound tactics and luck.

Obviously they would have won if they only had a bard (or monk)!