Legendary Actions were a bad idea in 5e. They're a bad idea now.

[claiminglight]

They were one of my major reasons for staying away from 5e as a tabletop game, and they remain so now.

The conceit of D&D is that, even if you have magic and monster with wonderous and terrible abilities, they're bound by the same rules of internal logic and physics. If an enemy wizard can cast a spell, you can learn that spell. If an enemy who can't fly falls, they take X amount of damage when they land. And so on.

Legendary actions are a straight up violation of the central logic of the game- that being "We're all moving at the same time, the turns are just there to keep track of it all". But if my fighter hits the Boss on his turn, then the Boss uses a legendary action and teleports next to my paladin, and my paladin his the boss on his turn, then the Boss was literally in two places at the same time.

While we're at it, if a creature can take turns out of order when they feel like it, why not just change other parts of the central ruleset the players and the game agreed to? Why not have monsters sometimes not have hit points as a concept, or sometimes have no ability scores at all, or have 9 of them with names chosen at random from a dictionary?

Ugh. I hate legendary actions. I'm convinced somebody thought they were a "rule of cool" idea, they pooped it out in a design meeting and nobody thought too hard about since.

[Kasa]

So then, what do you mean? Explain it like I'm 5.

[THAC0]

Escrito originalmente por Kasa:

Yes because a Tarrasque in 3.5 was playing by the same rules as the players.

yeah players tend to completely be biased and ignore alot of things that excisted in previoius games
example i lolzz all the time when i hear ppl complain about the dialogue in FO3/FONV/FO4 but praise the dialog tree in ME when they both make the same mistake that was being complained out (That being that the voice actor sometimes changes what he says slightly vs what was typed in the thing)

[claiminglight]

@Zero: https://5thsrd.org/gamemaster_rules/legendary_creatures/
That actually isn't the case. A creature cannot gain legendary actions through poly

[zero]

Escrito originalmente por claiminglight:

@Zero: https://5thsrd.org/gamemaster_rules/legendary_creatures/
That actually isn't the case. A creature cannot gain legendary actions through poly

i literally just said they cant use poly to get it? please read what i said again.

what i stated is nothing stops a sorak from having legendary actions, and also able to use poly, they do not contradict.

[claiminglight]

Which is a pretty sound argument for what I'm trying to explain. Bosshood isn't an in-game thing. It's an out of game thing.

If you had a PC put on a, say, helmet that made them go crazy and become an enemy of the party, that former PC could then have legendary actions. Not because of anything special, or for any othe reason. Because rule-of-cool, and that's it.

[claiminglight]

? This is what you said:
"nothing is stopping a sorak from being a creature with legendary actions"

But at any rate, we're on the same page, so we can move past that.

[zero]

Escrito originalmente por claiminglight:

Which is a pretty sound argument for what I'm trying to explain. Bosshood isn't an in-game thing. It's an out of game thing.

If you had a PC put on a, say, helmet that made them go crazy and become an enemy of the party, that former PC could then have legendary actions. Not because of anything special, or for any othe reason. Because rule-of-cool, and that's it.

bosshoss isn't an out of game thing, its always been a thing, the dragon is dungeons and dragons, have always been the age old boss types.

here, lets use an example of the adult black dragon from 2e, CR11, an excellent choice for a lvl 10 final boss, a creature that'd have legendary actions.

Escrito originalmente por the breath weapon of the dragon:

Breath Weapon Two Actions (acid, arcane, evocation) The dragon breathes a spray of acid that deals 12d6 acid damage in an 80-foot line (DC 30 basic Reflex save). It can't use Breath Weapon again for 1d4 rounds.

hmm, recharges every 1d4 rounds? a mechanic that refreshes to be used to make the encounter more dangerous? so a legendary action of the black dragon.

this isn't "rule of cool" as you call it, this is simply the new name for something that has existed for decades.

[zero]

Escrito originalmente por claiminglight:

? This is what you said:
"nothing is stopping a sorak from being a creature with legendary actions"

But at any rate, we're on the same page, so we can move past that.

how does that state that they'd get it through poly? as YOU state:

Escrito originalmente por claiminglight:

@Zero: https://5thsrd.org/gamemaster_rules/legendary_creatures/
That actually isn't the case. A creature cannot gain legendary actions through poly

[claiminglight]

Escrito originalmente por Aldain:

Escrito originalmente por claiminglight:

@Aldain: Sure, maybe. Case-by-case, I imagine I'd agree. But that sort of thing sounds to me like a special ability. Which nobody ever has trouble with. The specific issue for me is the violation of the fundamental rules of the game I'm playing. I'm not allowed to reroll/fubb my dice rolls, and the "DM" isn't allowed to say that we're suddenly not playing a turn-based game.

I'm a bit more used to seeing things like that in other RPGs, not so much in actual tabletop (where I imagine a bad DM can abuse Legendary actions to table-flipping levels), but overall I think in Solasta in particular it more is an issue of implementation than theoretical concept.

I could see something like a Defiler using Dark Veil if you try to use Daylight to exploit its weakness as a good example of a boss being aware of it's own weaknesses.

The problem is that the Legendary Actions it can take in Solasta proper don't react to anything and are just bonus actions thrown out for the sake of trying to balance the action economy out.

To put it simply, as currently implemented it is a counterbalancing method that doesn't quite pan out as well as it could have because it is too general, but if it were more specific to circumstances and served as a response to the flow of battle it would have been a fair system that also still shows the cunning/powerful nature of Legendary enemies.

...I'm mostly just typing out my opinion on the topic now, feel free to disregard me if I'm just talking in circles.

Happy to have you ramble! :)

My issue isn't really the power level of the thing, though balance is always a concern, of course. My issue is that life itself isn't turn-based. Turn-based is a nonsense thing we use to have a strategy game we can play. But if you really start to try and make sense of turn-basedness, things break down fast.

For instance: why can a rogue disengage with me, then shoot me, and I have to sit there and look at them until I'm allowed to go run after them? Only in turn-based games.

But if I going to sit down with that understand of how the game is played, and I agree to forgo that measure of sanity, the game can't spit in my face when it chooses to by deciding that doesn't apply to THIS guy, because HE'S special.

[Kasa]

still waiting on the explanation, you shifted your argument with zero to saying that legendary status is arbitrary and thus out of game.

That's incorrect, it's a tool the DM applies. You can't gain it just like you can't gain the 3.5 Tarrasque ability to revive even through the use of any form of polymorph short of the DM fiat of wish or miracle, which to reiterate is a tool used by the DM if they so choose.

[zero]

Escrito originalmente por Kasa:

still waiting on the explanation, you shifted your argument with zero to saying that legendary status is arbitrary and thus out of game.

That's incorrect, it's a tool the DM applies. You can't gain it just like you can't gain the 3.5 Tarrasque ability to revive even through the use of any form of polymorph short of the DM fiat of wish or miracle, which to reiterate is a tool used by the DM if they so choose.

its called goalposting shifting and hes been doing a lot of it.

[claiminglight]

Escrito originalmente por zero:

Escrito originalmente por Kasa:

still waiting on the explanation, you shifted your argument with zero to saying that legendary status is arbitrary and thus out of game.

That's incorrect, it's a tool the DM applies. You can't gain it just like you can't gain the 3.5 Tarrasque ability to revive even through the use of any form of polymorph short of the DM fiat of wish or miracle, which to reiterate is a tool used by the DM if they so choose.

its called goalposting shifting and hes been doing a lot of it.

I'm talking to a lot of people at once here, dood. You're all in different places.

[Kasa]

Escrito originalmente por zero:

Escrito originalmente por Kasa:

still waiting on the explanation, you shifted your argument with zero to saying that legendary status is arbitrary and thus out of game.

That's incorrect, it's a tool the DM applies. You can't gain it just like you can't gain the 3.5 Tarrasque ability to revive even through the use of any form of polymorph short of the DM fiat of wish or miracle, which to reiterate is a tool used by the DM if they so choose.

its called goalposting shifting and hes been doing a lot of it.

There last statement of "The Special" is also weird... That's precisely what you agree to when playing D&D. The DM can point to something and say "this is unique", hell there are guides in the books to do just that.

[claiminglight]

Escrito originalmente por Kasa:

still waiting on the explanation, you shifted your argument with zero to saying that legendary status is arbitrary and thus out of game.

That's incorrect, it's a tool the DM applies. You can't gain it just like you can't gain the 3.5 Tarrasque ability to revive even through the use of any form of polymorph short of the DM fiat of wish or miracle, which to reiterate is a tool used by the DM if they so choose.

Now, it's one thing if dragons breath fire. We accept that various in-game elements can do various in-game things. But when it comes to the very fabric of the game itself, those things are sacred to the structure. See the last comment I wrote to Aldain for instance.

The trouble, I think, is that you're not fielding the arguments. You're just making new ones. To everyone, consider this idea in good faith: do you not see a difference between a fire-breathing move and an ability that lets you move onto the grid-lines between spaces?

Also, I was specifically talking to Aldain with that, because we're on the same page and he understands that by "special", I don't mean a different creature in the game. He knows that I mean "special" in the sense that they aren't a part of the game universe at all. Boss is an out-of-game designator.

[Kasa]

Escrito originalmente por claiminglight:

Escrito originalmente por Kasa:

still waiting on the explanation, you shifted your argument with zero to saying that legendary status is arbitrary and thus out of game.

That's incorrect, it's a tool the DM applies. You can't gain it just like you can't gain the 3.5 Tarrasque ability to revive even through the use of any form of polymorph short of the DM fiat of wish or miracle, which to reiterate is a tool used by the DM if they so choose.

Now, it's one thing if dragons breath fire. We accept that various in-game elements can do various in-game things. But when it comes to the very fabric of the game itself, those things are sacred to the structure. See the last comment I wrote to Aldain for instance.

The trouble, I think, is that you're not fielding the arguments. You're just making new ones. To everyone, consider this idea in good faith: do you not see a difference between a fire-breathing move and an ability that lets you move onto the grid-lines between spaces?

No?