Boss Immunities

[Red_Death01]

Recently I was talking with my DM about his campaign we're playing in. I'm playing a "Reaping Mauler" (though not the best class I enjoy the grapple mechanic and such). He told me however that his bosses are immune to all forms of grappling simply because "anything you grapple effectively ends combat."

Is this fair to do in a normal boss creating process?

[Big Fau]

No, it isn't. There are effects that can counter grappling, but it is not fair for the DM to neutralize your entire concept because he thinks the concept is ruining boss encounters.


There are so many ways for him to deal with your concept without completely removing your ability to contribute (most importantly, multiple enemies instead of one big one).

[Mystify]

No, that would be like making the bosses randomly immune to sneak attack because the rouge kills things too fast, and immune to spells so the spellcaster can't combat, etc. There are plenty of ways to deal with grappling that flat-out negating a persons build is not necessary, and even if there weren't, negating a player's tactic is simply bad DMing.

[HunterOfJello]

Fair to do in general? Not really. The DM probably just had a series of bad experiences with grappling in the past.

Is it fair of him to tell you this at the beginning of the campaign so that you can be aware of it before meeting the first boss? Yes, that's quite fair of him.

You now know that going with your previous build will be highly ineffective in many situations. Find another build that you enjoy and that he won't be so sensitive about in the future.

[DementedFellow]

Short answer: Yes.

A DM's job is to 1) tell a good story and 2) make the ending to a campaign as memorable as possible. For the very same reason it wouldn't make a good ending if the BBEG is done away with by a game mechanic instead of through collaborative effort.

I don't know the villain, but several classes have access to Freedom of Movement. It's not that crazy to assume a BBEG would use it.

Is it unfair that most villains are immune to diplomacy?

Long answer: Maybe.

Unless the battle is one on one, this notion that a simple grapple check finishes everything is simply not true. Bosses tend of have henchmen or at least the ability to summon up critters to fight along side him.

However, if your DM is trying to nerf a convoluted check by ignoring it completely, then you may have a bigger issue on your hands. If you are dead set on being a one-trick-grapple-pony, then your best bet is to work with your DM on how one can beef up a grapple check. Grappling is a difficult ruleset to learn and a challenging one to master. The DM may not be as versed in the rules as you are and seeks to diminish the headache by ignoring it.

[nyarlathotep]

Also a lot of bosses can still act while grappled all of the following can be used while grappled: spell-like abilities, attacks with light weapons, and stilled spells. Also most giant monsters are large enough to not actually be immune but to be effectively immune.

[Red_Death01]

The boss fight sounds 1v1- in this case is it yes?

Also- I should mention: my character is full bab, large, and has imp grapple.

So that any grapples I attempt, will succeed and won't fail any check.

[Mystify]

The boss fight sounds 1v1- in this case is it yes?

Also- I should mention: my character is full bab, large, and has imp grapple.

So that any grapples I attempt, will succeed and won't fail any check.
If you become large, reaping mauler shuts down, since one of its feats is dependent on being small or medium. Its one of the big reasons its considered such a horrible class.

[Red_Death01]

If you become large, reaping mauler shuts down, since one of its feats is dependent on being small or medium. Its one of the big reasons its considered such a horrible class.

Goliath Race

[Big Fau]

The boss fight sounds 1v1- in this case is it yes?

Also- I should mention: my character is full bab, large, and has imp grapple.

So that any grapples I attempt, will succeed and won't fail any check.

As I said above, your DM needs to use more enemies during a boss fight. A singular boss does not work in 3.5, especially not against a grappler. Grappling makes such bosses a binary encounter (either it works or it doesn't work due to certain restrictions and abilities that you cannot overcome on your own).

[DementedFellow]

The boss fight sounds 1v1- in this case is it yes?

Also- I should mention: my character is full bab, large, and has imp grapple.

So that any grapples I attempt, will succeed and won't fail any check.

So are there other players? I know I sound like I'm repeating myself but are there other players who are getting their builds shut down totally?

Here are my suggestions:

1) Discuss your wishes with the DM. Any DM worth his salt will try to accommodate players within reason. Perhaps his desire to eschew grappling entirely comes from a deeper issue. Again if you can coach him on how to level the odds then maybe it won't be an auto-win for you.

2) Think about a different build. I realize this may not be a welcome idea, but if you want to play his game, you may have to play along with his rules (however arbitrary).

3) Think about a different DM. Perhaps grappling is the one sticking point this DM is adamant about. But if he is likely to behave in such a way, it's not that out of the way to think he may have a history. Without having any more information on the matter, I can't say either way. But if you want to play a game with a grappler without being nerfed all to hell, you may have to seek the game elsewhere.

I feel for you. I do. A while back I wanted to play a grapplizard but I encountered a DM who said wizards can't grapple because they risk having their fingers broken. I eventually had to move on completely.

Good luck.

[Red_Death01]

Is there something my DM can do to accommodate me besides throwing in more guys for me to deal with- in a 1v1 fight. Is there a way to deal with me besides having him be 2 size categories more than me?

[Mystify]

Is there something my DM can do to accommodate me besides throwing in more guys for me to deal with- in a 1v1 fight. Is there a way to deal with me besides having him be 2 size categories more than me?

Give the enemies light weapons to stab you while you are grappling, the enemies can have rouge minions that will sneak attack you while you are tied up in grapple, the enemy could have grapple-capable spells, the boss could utilize spells like balor nimbus which damage grapplers, he could utilize freedom of movement(which would consume some of their resources,and is something the party can counter, unlike an arbitrary added immunity), dimension door works great at getting out of grapple, have enemies that try to keep out of easy reach, etc. If the boss is this scrawny guy that stands there and lets you tie him into a pretzel, it is a problem, but so would a boss that sits there and lets spellcasters cast save or die spells on him.

[Red_Death01]

Give the enemies light weapons to stab you while you are grappling, the enemies can have rouge minions that will sneak attack you while you are tied up in grapple, the enemy could have grapple-capable spells, the boss could utilize spells like balor nimbus which damage grapplers, he could utilize freedom of movement(which would consume some of their resources,and is something the party can counter, unlike an arbitrary added immunity), dimension door works great at getting out of grapple, have enemies that try to keep out of easy reach, etc. If the boss is this scrawny guy that stands there and lets you tie him into a pretzel, it is a problem, but so would a boss that sits there and lets spellcasters cast save or die spells on him.

to attack, cast, move or do anything though requires opposed grapple checks doesnt it? even attacking with light weapons.

Speaking with my DM he has listed several Other immunities on his bosses:
-Grappling
-Death Effects
-Mind Control
-Stun/Paralysis/Nauseate
-Blindness/Deafness (to an extent)

"Anything that would instantly end the boss fight easily"

[Big Fau]

"Anything that would instantly end the boss fight easily"

It sounds like your DM has a low tolerance for Encounter Breakers. He may be the type that thinks that D&D combat should be capable of "epic battles of legend", which the system does not tolerate if the players have even a decent degree of system mastery (which, from the sounds of things, the party you are in does).

There's not much that can really be done about this other than teaching him proper system mastery.

[Mystify]

to attack, cast, move or do anything though requires opposed grapple checks doesnt it? even attacking with light weapons.

Speaking with my DM he has listed several Other immunities on his bosses:
-Grappling
-Death Effects
-Mind Control
-Stun/Paralysis/Nauseate
-Blindness/Deafness (to an extent)

"Anything that would instantly end the boss fight easily"
Things you can do in a grapple without a grapple check:
Activate a magic item, as long as its not spell completion.
Attack with an unarmed strike, natural weapon, or light weapon, at a -4 penalty. Can be full-rounded, but not dual-weilded
casting a spell, as long as it is a standard action, has no somatic componenets, and you have any material components or spell focuses in hand. You need a concentration check.
retrieving a spell component as a full-round action

Things that require a grapple check:
damage your opponent(not attack, simply deal damage)
draw a light weapon
escape from the grapple
move at half speed
pin your opponent
break another persons pin
use your opponent's light weapon against them

As long as you remain on the first list, you can act in a grapple even if they have an overwhelming grapple advantage.

Being pinned is more problematic, but it will be at least 1 turn before that happens. Anklet of translocation is a 1,400 gp magic item that lets you teleport 10 feet as a swift action. They work great for getting you out of a grapple before it becomes a pin.

Then they can also focus on not getting grappled in the first place. High touch ACs, miss chances, etc, can all help fend off the grapple attempt.

And there are things you can do even while pinned. Supernatural and spell-like abilities, for one. Even if you can't move or speak, you can use them, you aren't helpless. A silent, still spell, for another. Casters should have silent spells anyways, otherwise a silence spell can shut them down.

And seriously, D&D handles single powerful creatures very poorly. Without backup, a party will normally drop a single opponent through concentrated fire in short order, unless they have amazing defences. And if they have amazing defenses, why don't they have defenses against grapple?

[Godskook]

Yes and No, oddly.

Yes its fair cause the DM's primary responsibility is making sure the group has fun. A boss encounter that's immediately shut down by a single player doesn't allow for group effort, and since this is the boss encounter, group effort is part of the intended fun.

Its also fair cause DMs with poor system mastery often have a hard time doing things mechanically, but may still recognize the underlying problems that need to be 'solved'. Doing stuff like this is a stop-gap between a mechanically weak(but RP strong) DM and mechanically strong players.

And finally, its fair cause he told you he's doing it. He's not being dishonest or clandestine about it.

Its not fair cause you're basing your whole build on the concept of being effective in a grapple, and you're basically gimped against things immune to grapples.

Its not fair cause frankly, the game's not meant to work that way. Counters are, for the most part, supposed to be counter-countered. Freedom of Movement might counter grappling, but you can just dispel such things with proper preparation; such dispels can also be countered, etc etc. Blanket immunities to fundamental attack modes shouldn't really exist.

Honestly, its really a complicated situation, and depending on your DM's mechanical abilities, its either a sign that he needs to learn more about optimizing(or you do less), or you need to explain why FF bosses aren't what D&D is intended to do.

[LordBlades]

to attack, cast, move or do anything though requires opposed grapple checks doesnt it? even attacking with light weapons.

Speaking with my DM he has listed several Other immunities on his bosses:
-Grappling
-Death Effects
-Mind Control
-Stun/Paralysis/Nauseate
-Blindness/Deafness (to an extent)

"Anything that would instantly end the boss fight easily"

So pretty much all you're allowed to do in a boss fight is deal moderate amount of damage until he drops? I suppose large amounts of damage (in the 1-2 shot area) fall under "Anything that would instantly end the boss fight easily" as well.

[Red_Death01]

Yes and No, oddly.

Yes its fair cause the DM's primary responsibility is making sure the group has fun. A boss encounter that's immediately shut down by a single player doesn't allow for group effort, and since this is the boss encounter, group effort is part of the intended fun.

Its also fair cause DMs with poor system mastery often have a hard time doing things mechanically, but may still recognize the underlying problems that need to be 'solved'. Doing stuff like this is a stop-gap between a mechanically weak(but RP strong) DM and mechanically strong players.

And finally, its fair cause he told you he's doing it. He's not being dishonest or clandestine about it.

Its not fair cause you're basing your whole build on the concept of being effective in a grapple, and you're basically gimped against things immune to grapples.

Its not fair cause frankly, the game's not meant to work that way. Counters are, for the most part, supposed to be counter-countered. Freedom of Movement might counter grappling, but you can just dispel such things with proper preparation; such dispels can also be countered, etc etc. Blanket immunities to fundamental attack modes shouldn't really exist.

Honestly, its really a complicated situation, and depending on your DM's mechanical abilities, its either a sign that he needs to learn more about optimizing(or you do less), or you need to explain why FF bosses aren't what D&D is intended to do.

My DM definantly has much much much mroe backing on the game as well has been running the sessions longer than I have even been playing. However, he is definantly a very heavy RP player. His arguement for "instant" death effects I can understand however, I'm at ends with him on the grappling immunity because his arguement that it instantly ends fights I don't agree with. While it is true the character I'm playing has mainly focused so heavily on the task that if I roll Grapple a 1 is over 20 and I'm in the lvl6 range.

We have been going back and forth on this and he fills the only method that would make the encounter still fun and entertaining for the group is to add something for me to take on by myself while the boss fights the party. The problem I see with this is it doesn't fix the problem it is ignoring it.

LordBlades puts it in a good way: Mostly it sounds like the only form of killing a boss is to deal moderate damage to a huge health pool until he drops.

[Polarity Shift]

You're a grappling based character with no real grappling based abilities and no ability to get large enough to make grappling effective.

If the DM can't deal with that, he can't deal with anything. Time to find a new game.

[Nerd-o-rama]

He should just make you fight things with bigger grapple modifiers than you.

Or Freedom of Movement in some form.

Or Escape Artist skill.

Or flying.

Or a hydra to stand behind.

Or any of the other half-dozen ways to shut down melee in general and grappling in particular.

Really, grapple's nowhere near a silver bullet, nor are any of the other things listed. The DM should just put some actual thought into his "boss" design and have them be prepared for things (preferably with IC justification) rather than just saying "dun' work."

[Jerthanis]

I wouldn't say it's categorically unfair, since like... an Enchantment focused Sorcerer might be rendered nearly impotent by an Undead boss in the same way.

However, even such a Sorcerer will have other ways to contribute to a fight against an undead, such as buffing allies or contributing some small amount of damage, and the same can't always be said of grapple focused characters.

So basically, having a single guy in plate mail with a ring of freedom of movement is probably an unfair encounter for you, but a guy on the back of a dragon, who you have to first get to, but then you can disable him... and then the rest of the party still has a dragon to deal with... is probably a good way to structure such a battle.

Or, he could have a freedom-of-movement wizard use a scroll of Grasping Hand, or whichever one is the "Grapples at a score of (caster level + Intelligence bonus + 10) one. Then you'd have a case where any other person other than you would be totally thwarted by this, but you can wrestle your way out of it and thus your grapple ability benefits you without it meaning the battle is won for you the moment you put your hands on them.

[pwykersotz]

Yeah, I'm agreeing with the above posters on the fact that it's fair that he's telling you ahead of time, not so much how he's doing it. A Ring of Freedom of Movement is all well and good, but the DM needs to expand his options a bit.

When I went through that phase, my players were also too new to realize what I was doing, so I had to figure it out on my own. Being darned clever was easy for them, and eventually I had bosses that were immune to so many things that it was silly. Then someone played a heavily optimized Warblade. That broke my concept that damage to hp was the best way to do combat.

Now I don't worry about immunities, I stat the villain based on how their past would make them, and then I play them smart, depending on their personalities. Sometimes they run away frequently, making the party track them down all over again. Sometimes he shows up with a ton of henchmen. Sometimes he strikes from the shadows like an assassin.

So in the end, my advice is similar to what broke me of this pattern. If the DM is sticking to his guns despite your protests, be more clever than him. Find something the guy isn't immune to and shut him down. Force the immunities to get so high that the DM can't help but realize something is wrong. Note that I'm not recommending going to war with the DM, but just to do your duty as a player. Beat his challenge. Do it openly and by the book, don't use dirty tricks like infinite damage or wish abuse, just use one of the many dozen statuses that exist and afflict the big bad with that.

And then play a Warblade. :smalleek:

[Madeiner]

Oh well, i could write a 10-page reply to this but i really don't have the time to, so i'll try to summarize.

I REALLY like Boss fights, and i have managed to well, become quite good at it i suppose.

The FIRST thing that is important to me, is that a boss fight is different from everything else. It is a fight that concludes an adventure, something that should inspire fear and be hard to beat.
A Boss fight is perfectly tailored to the PCs, meant to give them a fair fight and eventually be beaten thanks to strategy, tactics and quick thinking on the part of the PCs.

I think it's perfectly fair, no, it's even REQUIRED that a boss should NOT fall for 1-round tricks, whatever they may be.
A boss does not even need to follow rules in my mind. Most of my bosses act an additional time a initiative 0, because it's funnier if he gets to do more things than one action per round. It is a boss. I do not need to explain WHY he can do that; he is a boss creature and is entitled to break the rules.

A boss does not deal damage based on his strenght score or template rules. He deals just the damage that i want him to deal, and that is based on the PCs of course. I design the boss to be able to kill the "tank" PC is 2-3 rounds, or a "soft" PC in 1 round or 2, and to fall in 6-7 rounds.

A boss should also be extremely resistant (effectively immune) to 1-round tricks.
It should instead be whittled down round after round, possibly NOT by damage piling but by some other strategy.

In my games, PCs have access to a spell that tells them their enemy's vulnerabilities and strong abilities, and players knew in anticipation that 1-round tricks are discouraged, and that 1-trick pony characters are not welcomed because i WILL find a way to neutralize single tricks in most combats.

One combat will have flying enemies so that melee only characters NEED a way to be effective, another will be on a ledge high in the sky where featherfalling-like spell don't work, another will be completely immune to spells (or type of spells), etc.

Here's a few boss-design that i made for the game in the past. I'm not posting the stats blocks as they are not important, but rather the strategy involved.


1) The Jailer (inspired from Darksiders the game)

A giant aberration that fights with an enormous metal cage for his weapon. He is completely immune to all damage, and to all damaging spells.
He has 3 "patches" on his skin that protect him. Two are on the front, one on the back. D&d doesnt' have "facing"? I don't care, this fight does.
The patches can be destroyed without much effort, but all three regenerate after a round unless they are taken out at the same time. One of the PCs MUST go to the back of the enemy to kill the final patch.
Once the patches are destroyed, the boss is vulnerable and stunned for 1 round, free to be pounded on. For the next 2 rounds, he enrages and tries to kill whoever is near enough with increased damage, probably scoring a kill unless the PCs retreat and heal.
Then, the patches regrows and the fight continues. In addition, skeletons inside the cages on its body are reanimated, and they launch negative energy attacks on the characters.
It is expected that the PCs destroy the boss with HP damage the second time his patches are destroyed and he becomes vulnerable.

Oh and i forgot, the combat takes place after the PCs have explored a Tucker's kobold dungeon that terminates in river of lava invading the entire place, so they have to go back to the entrance while carrying around 4 prisoners.
The combat area has a small lava river, and after a few rounds, lava will catch up with them and starts to slowly invade the entire cavern.


2) A blue dragon (actually disguised as a white one)

This dragon emerges from the sand in front of an army. He flies in the sky launching breath weapons attacks and spells.
He has four hp pools - one for the body, one for the wings, one for the claws and one for the tail.
You "kill" one of those, he is negated flight, tail attacks, or claws attacks.
The fight takes place in different locales; he starts in a desert killing the army where he summons giant worms, then retires to a plateu on top of a staircase and summons creatures that crawl up on the plateau that the PC must defend against or be swarmed, then when the wings are killed (or in the unlikely event that he sustains too much body damage) he destroys the plateau and falls inside a pit with the PCs, where he will finally be killed. If the PCs find themselves in melee in the pit and they haven't killed the claws or tail, then the damage he deals is probably too much for them and they get killed.

[Tr011]

The boss fight sounds 1v1- in this case is it yes?

Also- I should mention: my character is full bab, large, and has imp grapple.

So that any grapples I attempt, will succeed and won't fail any check.

LOL. You are at level 6+ (you got your PrC already) and the DM has problems with grappling for his end boss?
Usually you have three kind of goings vs. grappling:
1) You are a Monster. As in monster monster, as huge as possible, high str, high con, mass feats, high BAB. Those should have higher grapple check then you even without improved grapple.
2) Casters. Those have access to Freedom of Movement as similar stuff (Sor/Wiz 2 and Cleric 3)
3) Sneaky Guys. Those should not get close to you without some sort of instant escape. They also could go crazy on escape artist.

I once played a Half-Minotaur Neraphim permanently huge with improved grapple (BAB = ECL-2) and I had some problems with making the checks, but everything that was medium- and grappled for one turn was already dead (Fling Enemy rocks) xD

[Gavinfoxx]

@Madeiner: Why is it such a sin that, with good tactics and builds and intelligently purchased equipment and proper spell selection, the party is able to bring overwhelming force against the weaker aspects of their enemy, and thereby overcome them in a matter of seconds, or instants?

[Big Fau]

2) Casters. Those have access to Freedom of Movement as similar stuff (Sor/Wiz 2 and Cleric 3)

FoM is not on the Sor/Wiz list, and it is a 4th level spell for everyone who can cast it.

It is, however, provided by the effects of the Heart of Water spell, a 3rd level Sor/Wiz spell.

[Talyn]

Gavinfoxx: Because it's BORING. Because good villains deserve proper fight sequences before they go down.

[Gavinfoxx]

@Talyn: But the whole point of strategizing and determining the weaknesses and getting a plan to exploit them and then executing that plan with daring and focus is to make enemies go down. The fun is in the planning and the execution of a brilliant plan! If you just rush in, sure, you get a long lasting fight, and that can be fun, but if you take the time to plan and such, you should be rewarded with it working! IE, you are substituting the fun of lots of rounds of a fight with the fun of the questing and discovery for how to overcome them and the satisfaction for when it works!

[HunterOfJello]

Playing a grappling one trick pony doesn't sound like a great idea to me anyway. Especially if you're using Reaping Mauler to do it. Logically, a boss will either be:

1. Impervious to grappling via high grapple check or some type of ability that makes it pretty much immune
2. Vulnerable to grapple with a chance to avoid or get out
3. Absolutely vulnerable to grapple and not able to do much about it afterward

Why would you be interested in a character who turns every fight into one of these three situations and can't do pretty much anything else? Especially when the majority of situations will fall into category 1 or 3.

It would be different if you were actually making an optimized grappler build using Totemist and could then fall back on all of the other options that totemists have. If an enemy appeared to be immune to grappling in that situation, then you could at least turn around and bite his head off with one of your three dragon heads and ripping his body apart with your 4 girrallon arms instead.

~~~

If you want to do grappling and the bosses will still be immune to it, then I suggest going and making a Totemist. Use Girralong Arms and go to town with your 4 natural attacks (and that's just starting) and powerful grapple capabilities when enemies aren't immune to it.

[pwykersotz]

@Talyn

Yeah, but what's more boring is being unable to affect the outcome of the fight. What Madeiner just described wasn't a boss fight, it was a story sequence. The party has to throw themselves against a brick wall that doesn't follow established rulesets again and again and hope that the DM is feeling generous. That doesn't encourage effort. It doesn't reward the players who are clever or thorough. It doesn't seem to have the players in the equation much at all.

And I'm all for custom rules for bosses or for anything for that matter, but the way that was stated sounds horribly unfun, at least to me. As a player, I like my choices having an impact, even if that means I can make the wrong one and we lose. As a DM, I like the players to do something, I don't want to storyboard them into victory or loss.

[Mystify]

It is rather annoying to have a brilliant plan, execute it, and basically have the DM say "NO! You can't get an advantage here, he's immune!" and smash your plans to bits. A well-executed plan is a good thing that should be encouraged. The players may not always have the opportunity to create and execute such a plan. The enemy may be more prepared than they think. But unless it is a diety, whom are explicitly stated to be CrazyPrepared and are allowed to pull whatever they feel like out of nowhere, the boss should still be a part of the world, not some abstraction of a foe that the DM uses to counteract the players. If the boss is a bard, and the reaping mauler goes up to grab him, and it simply fails for no real reason, it breaks the world. If the enemy gets to act on the surprise round for no reason, just because the surprise round would let the players execute their plan, its an annoying trick the DM is pulling. If the party likes to execute such plans and nuke the end boss with a surprise strike, then make the boss tough enough that the alpha strike is a necessary advantage, not a steamroll. Having things fail due to DM fiat is a highly annoying thing for a player.

[NinjaStylerobot]

Madenier:

Its better to have a prepared boss then make him immune.

[Madeiner]

@Talyn: But the whole point of strategizing and determining the weaknesses and getting a plan to exploit them and then executing that plan with daring and focus is to make enemies go down. The fun is in the planning and the execution of a brilliant plan! If you just rush in, sure, you get a long lasting fight, and that can be fun, but if you take the time to plan and such, you should be rewarded with it working! IE, you are substituting the fun of lots of rounds of a fight with the fun of the questing and discovery for how to overcome them and the satisfaction for when it works!

Yes, there is a (big) point of strategizing and determining weaknessess.
They should give a significant advantage against a boss or a situation, and i agree with that.

You may discover the boss weaknesses, which may be glaring ones like my Jailer boss, and you can prepare accordingly.

HOWEVER, there MUST be a confrontation at the end, and it must not end without a big showoff.
What if Lord of the rings was a story about the characters up until the end of the second movie/book, and then they discover a way to teleport the ring directly into the volcano.
There you go, one spell, everything's solved, we all go home.
It would have been a TERRIBLE finale.
(Almost like the part where the lowly girl oneshots the terrible and fearful Nazgul and then prooceds to mock him)


@Talyn

Yeah, but what's more boring is being unable to affect the outcome of the fight. What Madeiner just described wasn't a boss fight, it was a story sequence. The party has to throw themselves against a brick wall that doesn't follow established rulesets again and again and hope that the DM is feeling generous. That doesn't encourage effort. It doesn't reward the players who are clever or thorough. It doesn't seem to have the players in the equation much at all.

And I'm all for custom rules for bosses or for anything for that matter, but the way that was stated sounds horribly unfun, at least to me. As a player, I like my choices having an impact, even if that means I can make the wrong one and we lose. As a DM, I like the players to do something, I don't want to storyboard them into victory or loss.

I probably haven't done enough justice to the fights, but all the players have had a great time with those fights and found them extremely memorable.
They DO have a major impact on the fight. I only wrote what it was supposed to happen, but they can try whatever they want. If they DON'T use tactics and just try and kill the bosses without thinking they WILL fail and they know it. It does indeed encourage cleverness, but not the "usual" kind that gets rewarded, like how many books you own and how many broken feats you can combine on your sheet


Madenier:

Its better to have a prepared boss then make him immune.

What do you mean by "prepared"?
If you mean the DM has to find the right feat or spell combination to achieve what is effectively immunity, then i wing that entire part because

1) I don't have the time for it
2) The players won't notice anyway
3) The DM is there to provide fun, and it isnt fun for anyone involved to scavenge for feats and spells just so your encounter is "credible"

If by "prepared" you meant to counteract specific offenses that you know your PCs can bring then yes, of course the boss is immune to mind affecting things and death effects, or at least severely reduces them to something that is not binary like Save or Dies

[NinjaStylerobot]

How is it "Fun" for the player when anything he can do that is clever or smart I get slapped in the face!

Might as well play a videogame then. Because at least they admit thier only giving you an ILLUSION of free will.

[Gavinfoxx]

HOWEVER, there MUST be a confrontation at the end, and it must not end without a big showoff.
What if Lord of the rings was a story about the characters up until the end of the second movie/book, and then they discover a way to teleport the ring directly into the volcano.
There you go, one spell, everything's solved, we all go home.
It would have been a TERRIBLE finale.
(Almost like the part where the lowly girl oneshots the terrible and fearful Nazgul and then prooceds to mock him)

The thing you are losing here is that a roleplaying game is NOT a book or movie. It is a game. And playing the game well enough --either through cunning strategy, or researching weaknesses, or whatever-- that you can one shot something without them getting a chance to act is something that should not be arbitrarily shut down. If you ask anyone who studies martial arts as a means to kill -- either in the military or studying martial arts as a way of learning historic methods and skills -- than acting to immediately shut down the enemy, 100%, with the enemy having no chance of impacting you is the entire goal. Why are you arbitrarily denying that do your players and their characters? Why are you putting long, drawn out fights on such a pedestal? Why do you need an epic confrontation? Why not just have surprise + overwhelming force on one side? That happens often enough in real life, too!

[Mystify]

The difference between the DM saying "This character is immune to x" and "this character has a ring/spell/item that makes him immune to x" is twofold.
A. That item or ability is factored into their resources. Because he got a freedom of movement ring, he didn't spend that resource on something else.
B. It gives a concrete mechanical reason for it to exist, so it can be interacted with. The spell can be dispelled, the item can be sundered, it will conk out in an antimagic field, whatever it may be. The players may not counter it, but the fact that they can makes it much more interesting.

[Madeiner]

The thing you are losing here is that a roleplaying game is NOT a book or movie. It is a game. And playing the game well enough --either through cunning strategy, or researching weaknesses, or whatever-- that you can one shot something without them getting a chance to act is something that should not be arbitrarily shut down. If you ask anyone who studies martial arts as a means to kill -- either in the military or studying martial arts as a way of learning historic methods and skills -- than acting to immediately shut down the enemy, 100%, with the enemy having no chance of impacting you is the entire goal. Why are you arbitrarily denying that do your players and their characters? Why are you putting long, drawn out fights on such a pedestal?

I agree with you totally on your ideas, just we draw different conclusions.

Yes, d&d is game, and a game is not different in purpose to a movie (book is kinda another ground): they both exist to provide FUN.

Martial artist try to end the fight before it even starts, yes, but that's because it is SAFE and EFFECTIVE because there may be real lives at risk.

A game is not meant to be SAFE for the characters. It is meant to be fun.
A boss fight is meant to provide players with a big problem, with the fear that their characters may die if they don't play it right.
There should be moments when it looks like the fight is almost over but then the boss heals up, or moments where they have to take a risky action or die. There may be moments when one PC may decide to sacrifice himself to help the others, or moments when all hope is lost and then hopefully regained.
Still, most of the fights should end with the heroes victorious, so they mustn't actually be TOO hard.

You can't have all these things when the first thing a player does is casting Finger of death and the boss drops dead. You can't have any of that tension building up until he FINALLY goes down.

I play with Maptools and monsters even have an "HP bar" that shows how close the monsters is to death (it's not precise, but segmented in 4 parts, so that players don't know the EXACT amount of health remaining, but they can judge it's condition).
Each time one of the characters drops a big attack and the boss only goes down a single 25% segment they know they are in trouble.

And for me, and for them, this is exciting. You cannot have all these things happen in a round, decided by a single dice roll initiated by a single player.

What will they tell when someone asks what they did in the fight?
You can't tell how you bravely jumped onto the big bad foe's back to provide an opening for your friends, nor you can tell about you charged the boss taking an attack of opportunity that could have killed you.
You can only say that you did nothing and could as well not have been there, because the wizard just oneshotted him like ANY other monster

[Gavinfoxx]

My point is that the tension can build in the skill bits, the characters going and doing research, the scrying on the weaknesses, the planning and all of that stuff -- BEFORE the fight. IE, you are actually replacing the fight's tension with planning and backup plans and contingencies and secondary plans and such.... so that when you go in, and you drop the boss in under six seconds like a force of nature, you are finally having that release of tension that has been building the entire time.

Also, I would never put a fighter in a game with an optimized wizard willing to play like that. Tier and optimization level disparity would be too high...

[BRC]

Personally, I'm all for giving bosses special immunities, but Grappling would not be one of them. I tend to make my bosses immune to Save or Lose spells, unless the Boss is at very low Hitpoints, in which case I let them work. Any minions the boss has during the fight are open game for SoLs.

However, the thing about Grappling, especially in a 1v1 fight, is that it dosn't end the encounter, it just changes the nature of it. If the PC is a grappler, the proper response should be to make the boss very good at grappling, capable of facing the PC on his own terms, rather than negating the player's entire strategy.


The thing you are losing here is that a roleplaying game is NOT a book or movie. It is a game. And playing the game well enough --either through cunning strategy, or researching weaknesses, or whatever-- that you can one shot something without them getting a chance to act is something that should not be arbitrarily shut down. If you ask anyone who studies martial arts as a means to kill -- either in the military or studying martial arts as a way of learning historic methods and skills -- than acting to immediately shut down the enemy, 100%, with the enemy having no chance of impacting you is the entire goal. Why are you arbitrarily denying that do your players and their characters? Why are you putting long, drawn out fights on such a pedestal? Why do you need an epic confrontation? Why not just have surprise + overwhelming force on one side? That happens often enough in real life, too!
Because it IS a game, and it's a story.

DnD is based around Combat as the primary means by which the characters achieve their goals, therefore the climax of the story SHOULD be a fight, a nice big epic one against a worthy opponent.

Now, a combination of Careful Planning and surprise is all well and good, but only if it takes effort to pull off. There should always be a Challenge in overcoming the boss, if the challenge is in setting up the fight to be in your favor, that works for me. For example, if the Rogue sneaks into the palace ahead of time and replaces the Boss's supermagical sword with a cursed replica, that works, the fight itself may be a joke, but there was a Challenge, in this case swapping out the sword.

Here's the thing, DnD provides FAR too many ways to end a fight without a challenge. For example, a Wizard just hits the boss with a Hold Person, the boss fails his save, then gets his head chopped off. There's no challenge involved in that, no big confrontation, no planning, it doesn't even require researching the boss's weaknesses beyond learning that the boss fits the spell's definition of "Person" and hasn't specifically protected himself against it. That's not a "Plan", that's just having a Win button that the DM won't use against you because it's boring.


Also, many big "Instant Win" schemes are basically just one character. In the above "Hold Person" example, only one member of the party can claim they contributed to the fight (maybe two, if you count swinging an axe at a paralyzed person "Contributing"), and that's no fun.


Let me give you an example of what I consider a good use of "Cunning Strategy". It was in a Western campaign I was running (Plenty of Homebrew), the characters were a Beguiler and a Gunslinger (modified Ranger). They were at an old falling-apart farmhouse, and were going up against a group of gnolls and a big nasty Ettin.

They set up dynamite traps, put illusions of walls over places where the farmhouse walls had fallen down, ect. When the fight started, the Beguiler used every trick in the book to keep the enemies running blind while the ranger picked them off. In my mind, that is how tactics should be used in games like this. In a straight fight, they could have been clobbered, but by using tactics they were able to keep control of the encounter and use the entire party's skillsets.

Mind you, I knew my players would come up with something clever, so I intentionally made that encounter overwhelming (having seen them use similar tricks to rip other encounters to shreds).

[Madeiner]

My point is that the tension can build in the skill bits, the characters going and doing research, the scrying on the weaknesses, the planning and all of that stuff -- BEFORE the fight. IE, you are actually replacing the fight's tension with planning and backup plans and contingencies and secondary plans and such.... so that when you go in, and you drop the boss in under six seconds like a force of nature, you are finally having that release of tension that has been building the entire time.

Also, I would never put a fighter in a game with an optimized wizard willing to play like that. Tier and optimization level disparity would be too high...

I see your point and if it works for your players, then it's great.
Me and my players don't find all the research thingie that fun, and it doesnt build tension for us. Even if it did, i think all that tension cannot be released in a single round. If that happened in my game, i'm sure the reaction of my players would be "that's it? we wasted so much time fearing this boss and we dropped it in one hit? It CLEARLY isn't the final boss, let's go find him instead".
How am i gonna tell them that this is indeed the final boss? They'd hate me :P

I also agree with the fighter/wizard party interaction. Well i don't allow powergamers and optimizers in my games at all, so it's ok for me :)
You wanna be a wizard, fine, but you let your friends shine too, or it's no-game for me.

[prufock]

The difference between the DM saying "This character is immune to x" and "this character has a ring/spell/item that makes him immune to x" is twofold.
A. That item or ability is factored into their resources. Because he got a freedom of movement ring, he didn't spend that resource on something else.
B. It gives a concrete mechanical reason for it to exist, so it can be interacted with. The spell can be dispelled, the item can be sundered, it will conk out in an antimagic field, whatever it may be. The players may not counter it, but the fact that they can makes it much more interesting.

I couldn't agree more. If you're going to give bosses resources beyond the normal, increase the CR and award more experience for it.


Speaking with my DM he has listed several Other immunities on his bosses:
-Grappling
-Death Effects
-Mind Control
-Stun/Paralysis/Nauseate
-Blindness/Deafness (to an extent)

"Anything that would instantly end the boss fight easily"

All of these can be dealt with tactically or through legal builds without resorting to a blanket immunity. I agree with your DM's desire not to have boss fights be one-shot kills, but not with his methodology. I mean, what about high-damage effects? Maximized Empowered damage-dealing spells? Critical hits? Does he outlaw uberchargers? Are all his bosses ghosts?

[Red_Death01]

Something my DM has mentioned which I feel is a good point is: "If I make every boss able to actually deal with your grappling or someones death effect or etc etc... they will all be the same just about and have no real unique aspect to them." While I definantly think there needs to be some sort of equilibrum here I can't find one easily. Something he has been doing and we've come to agree with thus far is he'd throw enemies at us which I would have to deal with so the party doesn't get killed- the problem with this I think is it doesn't solve the problem. It simply ignores it and makes the fight require something unrelated. I kill "bad guy's helper" and move to him we're back at square one.

I've been thinking and I'm wondering if saying:
death effects simply deal "lots of damage here" instead.
stuns/paralysis/nauseate only lasts "this long" instead.

However this doesn't solve the issue- My DM doesn't like grappling as a mechanic in general. I should mention- I've been playing my character for 3-4 sessions before finding out the bosses will be flat out immune to them. I was aware my DM didn't understand grappling to a fine tee (but really who can its confusing like ever) but, I didn't expect something like this for a boss fight.

While it is still true I can just say "ok I'll simply just start wailing on him" thats very boring for me when I designed my character to be unique. I've also focused upon other things like Bullrushing, trips, and etc. however, (THIS ISN'T FOR SURE) I believe I can't make the boss prone either through trips/rushs.

So I'd really like to know how do boss fights work for everyone's groups- does it usually turn into bob casts death spell and the boss rolls a 1- "WOOT" or are they long out "epic conclusion" which my DM does?

[Mystify]

Something my DM has mentioned which I feel is a good point is: "If I make every boss able to actually deal with your grappling or someones death effect or etc etc... they will all be the same just about and have no real unique aspect to them." While I definantly think there needs to be some sort of equilibrum here I can't find one easily. Something he has been doing and we've come to agree with thus far is he'd throw enemies at us which I would have to deal with so the party doesn't get killed- the problem with this I think is it doesn't solve the problem. It simply ignores it and makes the fight require something unrelated. I kill "bad guy's helper" and move to him we're back at square one.

I've been thinking and I'm wondering if saying:
death effects simply deal "lots of damage here" instead.
stuns/paralysis/nauseate only lasts "this long" instead.

However this doesn't solve the issue- My DM doesn't like grappling as a mechanic in general. I should mention- I've been playing my character for 3-4 sessions before finding out the bosses will be flat out immune to them. I was aware my DM didn't understand grappling to a fine tee (but really who can its confusing like ever) but, I didn't expect something like this for a boss fight.

While it is still true I can just say "ok I'll simply just start wailing on him" thats very boring for me when I designed my character to be unique. I've also focused upon other things like Bullrushing, trips, and etc. however, (THIS ISN'T FOR SURE) I believe I can't make the boss prone either through trips/rushs.

So I'd really like to know how do boss fights work for everyone's groups- does it usually turn into bob casts death spell and the boss rolls a 1- "WOOT" or are they long out "epic conclusion" which my DM does?
If he is making bosses immune to tripping, he has gone way too far. More often than not, tripping a boss is a waste of time since he'll be able to kill you, from prone, then stand up. That was how my first chain tripper died. I found a dragon, tripped it, and it mauled me to death.