D&D 5E To Be or Not to Be: Legendary

[dave2008]

I have been thinking about a comment @Blue mentioned in another thread. They suggested that non-legendary monsters are not / could not be a threat as solo monsters. I didn't agree with that (after all CR is independent of legendary status) and I have been souring a bit on legendary monster design be the one stop shop for solo monsters in 5e. So I decided to take a look at the Ancient Red Dragon. The Ancient Red Dragon is a CR 24 and supposed to be a solo threat for 4 level 18 PCs.

First up, the official 2024 Ancient Red Dragon

It has Legendary Resistance (LR) and Legendary Actions (LA). These allow it to escape some harm and spread the damage. This is fairly good for keep the monster around (LR) and keeping the party engaged by is actions across the round (LA). However, except for the fire breath, it sacrifices a lot of damage. Individual attack damage is low because there are so many (6/round w/ LA) and overall damage suffers because 120 Hit Points of CR are eaten up by LR (30 per use). Not including its fire breath, the dragon is doing 87 DPR on its turn and 87 DPR with LA for a total of 174 DPR. You can see all of my CR calculations at the end.

So what if we removed LR & LA and redistributed that HP & # of attacks to become fewer more powerful attacks. Here is a look at a non-legendary Ancient Red Dragon (no LR or LA). I used the same HP and AC and just revised its attacks.

This dragon hits much harder, particularly on its turn. It has a DPR of 167 on its turn and an off turn (1 reaction) DPR of 62 for a total DPR of 229 (257 with FIre Breath). That is almost a 32% increase in damage over the Legendary dragon. To compensate for some of the protection and tactical interest of LR and LA, without robbing the dragons CR, I gave it various tactical riders to its attacks and some options for its reaction. The Draconic Resilience works similar to LR, but without completely nerfing the triggering effect and it costs the dragon 62 in potential damage (this might be to large of a cost). Wing escape gives it some mobility and various other effects or moving the PCs around or keeping them locked down.

IDK, this seems like a more interesting fight to me, or at least as interesting. What are your thoughts. Do solo monsters have to Legendary? Which version feels more threatening for a party of 4 level 18 PCs?

Here are the CR calculations for above. FYI a 2024 CR 24 dragon is equivalent to a CR 27 in 2014.

Spoiler: Ancient Red Dragon CR Calculations

Legendary

Non Legendary

OK, because I think dragons should be something special, and I couldn't resist. I give you what, or close to what, I would do if I wrote the MM. I have used the Mythic template from Theros, Fizban's, etc. to make this Ancient Red a real terror! So here is my quick look at a Mythic Ancient Red Dragon. With this option I have upped its AC, reduced its HP, and increased its damage even more and it still comes out to CR 24! Now the on turn DPR is 196 and 75 off turn for a total of 271 DPR (296 w/ Fire Breath). I am happy to sacrifice the HP to get this increases damage because I know I have Spawn of Tiamat to the rescue. Yes, it is gaming the system a bit, but it works for me! Let me know what you think!

Spoiler: Mythic CR calulation

 

[Reynard]

On a quick glance, it seems to me the biggest thing you lose is the ability to engage the PCs outside of the dragon's turn. I think that is what makes solos so weak against parties, even outside of simple action economy math. Since the state of the battle cannot change between the solo's turns, the PCs are free to make only the most optimal choices and the creature's lifespan is almost certainly decreased. Even if LA don't increate solo's overall damage output, forced movement, applying conditions, sudden injections of damage, etc, can and likely will cause the PCs to have to adjust their attack plan.

 

[dave2008]

On a quick glance, it seems to me the biggest thing you lose is the ability to engage the PCs outside of the dragon's turn. I think that is what makes solos so weak against parties, even outside of simple action economy math. Since the state of the battle cannot change between the solo's turns, the PCs are free to make only the most optimal choices and the creature's lifespan is almost certainly decreased. Even if LA don't increate solo's overall damage output, forced movement, applying conditions, sudden injections of damage, etc, can and likely will cause the PCs to have to adjust their attack plan.

Perhaps you missed were I added all of those to the non-legendary dragon? My non-legendary has more forced movement and applied conditions than the WotC Legendary version (which only has Command). Now, you could add those things to the Legendary version, but they are not there by default. Of course my non-legendary version still gets a reaction (choosing from 3 options), which can be fairly impactful.

I don't mind if you think Legendary monsters are better, I personally don't plan to stop using them, but to me your statement doesn't make sense based on what I presented. Maybe you are think about hypotheticals?

My only point in this exploration is to see if we can have interesting solos without the legendary status (something WotC toyed with too). I plan to use both myself, based on what fits for the particular monster IMO.

 

[AlViking]

A few things. First, where did you find the CR calculator?

I think the effectiveness of the non-legendary dragons is limited because they only have 1 reaction per turn. If it's a small group it won't make a big difference but with a larger group? It's going to be hurting, you may want to increase the number of reactions the dragon has but then you're just in legendary territory. Not having enough legendary actions can still be an issue with larger groups so I increase the number of legendary actions for bigger groups.

It's an interesting take on it, but not having legendary resistance (I increase that number as well for bigger groups) is likely to be it's Achille's Heel. That and how many times can the Spawn of Tiamat be used? Kind of hard to kill a monster that always comes back. Is there any way of shutting it down?

Anyway those are my thoughts at the moment. If I get a chance I'll look back at an old campaign and review what those 20th level PCs had at their disposal. But I will say that solo monster can go from slog-fest to virtually unbeatable based on how they are used which is difficult to encapsulate in a CR calculation or on paper.

 

[Mistwell]

I agree non-legendary creatures can absolutely be a solo threat to a party. It's more difficult to pull off but it can be done and your example is a good one.

I'd say flight, or some other meaningful distance or barrier between the party and the foe, is pretty important to pull this off. The more rounds the party wastes trying to get into position to attack or get spells or other magic effects on them to be able to effectively attack, the more the foe is a threat regardless of legendary actions.

A single goblin with Greater Invisibility, Cover and Evasion, attacking with a ranged weapon and then hiding on the other side of a cavern from the party, can be a meaningful threat sometimes.

 

[dave2008]

Thank you for your thoughts @AlViking they are much appreciated.

A few things. First, where did you find the CR calculator?

2014 Monster CR Calculator
Just be aware this is specifically from the 2014 DMG monster creation guidelines. Also, if you are making a monster below CR 1 there are issue with the calculations.

I think the effectiveness of the non-legendary dragons is limited because they only have 1 reaction per turn. If it's a small group it won't make a big difference but with a larger group? It's going to be hurting, you may want to increase the number of reactions the dragon has but then you're just in legendary territory. Not having enough legendary actions can still be an issue with larger groups so I increase the number of legendary actions for bigger groups.

As I noted in the OP, this is specifically for a group of 4 PCs at lvl 18. If you have more PCs and you want the same challenge, then you need to up the CR. Any easy to do that is give it more reactions (or legendary actions) as you noted. However, that is not what I am investigating. This is specifically for the baseline assumption of 4 v 1.

For reference, per the 2024 DMG a CR 24 dragon is a threat for the following # and level of PCs:

• 3 PCs @ level 20
• 4 PCs @ level 18-19
• 5 PCs @ level 17-18
• 6 PCs @ level 16-17
• 8 PCs@ level 14-15

I wouldn't use this dragon on groups lower than level 14 probably. If I want a solo monster to be a serious 50/50 fight for my PCs (5-6 @ level 17 ) I make its CR their level + 10. So slightly tougher than the DMG calculator.

It's an interesting take on it, but not having legendary resistance (I increase that number as well for bigger groups) is likely to be it's Achille's Heel. That and how many times can the Spawn of Tiamat be used? Kind of hard to kill a monster that always comes back. Is there any way of shutting it down?

A Spawn of Tiamat is a mythic trait it is supposed to be 1/rest per normal (see below). I just forgot to put it in there. I will get that added.

Legendary Resistance is important, I just don't think it is worth 120 hit points. The dragon has good saves, so it is going to make a lot to begin with. Those it doesn't save against it has Draconic Resilience to keep it going. I am honestly not sure which is more effective for most groups. My PCs do not have a lot of conditions they can apply (only one magic user in the group), so I don't come across them a lot.

I do think it is relevant that the legendary dragon only has 4 uses of LR, while the non-legendary version has unlimited uses of Draconic Resilience.

Anyway those are my thoughts at the moment. If I get a chance I'll look back at an old campaign and review what those 20th level PCs had at their disposal. But I will say that solo monster can go from slog-fest to virtually unbeatable based on how they are used which is difficult to encapsulate in a CR calculation or on paper.

Thank you taking the time and your thoughts. That is the whole point of putting this out. Also, just wanted to remind you that this is intended to be a threat for lvl 20 PCs.

 

[Distracted DM]

I like the heavier hits a lot more ... 20-something damage from an ancient dragon hit seems so minor, even if there are many of them... that thing should hit like a truck, not death-by-a-thousand-cuts. PCs at that level have, what, ~150hp?

But I guess that could be a simulationist mentality, whereas the game has definitely gone further towards gameist design.

 

[Stormonu]

Monsters don't have to be statted out as Solos to work, but it makes them a bit more tactical and everyone has to pay closer attention when it has access to legendary actions. Without the solo abilities, as you've shown it acts less often but can hit with devastating attacks when it does. With legendary actions it's always in motion, but each hit tends to be nickel-and-dime.

Against a well-tuned party, I'd lean towards Legendary actions as it will at least get some punches in before going down. Against more casual players I'd be more inclined to use standard creatures as when they hit, they'll make the players stand up and take notice.

 

[Distracted DM]

Against a well-tuned party, I'd lean towards Legendary actions as it will at least get some punches in before going down.

The bolded bothers me.. I guess it's just part of the "there's no real risk involved in this fight" mentality. Not your fault, it's nothing new... I think it's why I like higher damage. That's one thing Mearls mentioned about increasing damage/lowering HP.. it definitely made his players more on-edge in confrontations.

 

[Stalker0]

To start I think we have to look at this question at high levels (as the OP kicks this off with a high level dragon conversation).

I do think high level monster design is still flawed even in 2024. The game ramped up the math but it still doesn't respect how fundamentally different high level dnd is.

To that end, I do think legendary struggles to do its job. As noted, damage values are not high enough to deliver proper threat to a high level party. The issue here is that high damage can lead to swings where players take extra damage and die.... but at high levels thats really not a concern (tons of ways to avoid death or just resurrect).

Another example, the game assumes that one high level damage attack is equivalent to 2 or 3 attacks if they all do the same DPR. This is absolutely not true at higher levels, if you are doing an alpha strike, it has to do a RIDICULOUS amount of damage to deliver credible death threat, as compared to a 3 attack combo that can blow through a players death saving throws and deliver damage. While LAs in theory let a monster deliver damage in response to a player, because these single buckets of damage or often relatively low they don't deliver the same threat as a focused hit with multiple attacks.

A rethink of high level monster design I do think is useful. For example the recent discussion about "hitboxes".... which invokes the classic Final Fantasy idea that boss monsters often go through "phases". You beat phase 1 and then the boss moves to phase 2, with all conditions removed and at full health (no matter how much nova the phase 1 monster takes). Such a design bypasses a lot of fundamental powers of high levels PCs and is a very effective design that is underutilized in 5e imo.