Legendary Actions + Forcage

[fikoantunes]

I'm running a side-quest adventure for half of our group (as the other half is still away due to vacations). There will be 3 high-level characters (1 cleric, 1 cavalier and 1 hexblade). They will face a boss that not only has Legendary Actions but also can use forcecage once. I'm aware they have no way to bypass the forcecage effect. So when this spell take place and traps 1 out of 3 heroes, what would you do with the Legendary Actions?

The player inside the forcage would be basically just watching the fight. Does this means that...

1) the boss gets a legenday action on that player's turn also? So the other two heroes would face 3 legendary actions. By RAW it seems correct, but it sound strange that just by having some eyewitness the boss can perform better in battle;
2) the boss takes a legendary action only if that character is technically having its action inside the forcecage (casting a spell, using a item, etc.)?

Please tell me how would you, as the DM, would arbitrate this and why.

[Unoriginal]

Think of this like that way: if one of the PC is knocked out, completly unconscious, does the boss still get the Legendary action for them?

[Easy_Lee]

I wouldn't use forcecage on players because it's not fun to be forcecaged. Assuming I did, I certainly wouldn't trigger legendary actions off of turns that players didn't really take.

[tieren]

Can you use the version of forcecage with the bars and make sure its the cleric that gets trapped? (He should still be able to do something useful in that case)

[fikoantunes]

Think of this like that way: if one of the PC is knocked out, completly unconscious, does the boss still get the Legendary action for them?

Hm, I think I would go with the option where the boss doesn't use all its legendary actions. Once 1 out of 3 heroes is out of combat, he will therefore use 2 legendary actions per round.

But someone inside a forcecage isn't unconscious; it can still buff itself (for the time when the spell expires), heal, use and item. It's like an "upgraded unconscious" state...

[fikoantunes]

I wouldn't use forcecage on players because it's not fun to be forcecaged. Assuming I did, I certainly wouldn't trigger legendary actions off of turns that players didn't really take.

The problem is that I want to do it, for the adventure's plot sake.
This fight will happen in the middle of the adventure, where they will have their ass kicked (but saved by a third group). They will face the boss again only at the ending, where they will have help.

[fikoantunes]

Can you use the version of forcecage with the bars and make sure its the cleric that gets trapped? (He should still be able to do something useful in that case)

Yes, I could; but the boss is smart and is willing to nullify the cleric in battle. As I said, it's part of the plot that the heroes have their ass kicked in this fight :smallamused:

[Easy_Lee]

Yes, I could; but the boss is smart and is willing to nullify the cleric in battle. As I said, it's part of the plot that the heroes have their ass kicked in this fight :smallamused:

No. Stop right there, criminal. You just violated one of the unspoken rules of being a DM. Under no circumstances should you ever intend for the players to "have their ass kicked." EVER.

Never ever, ever. Never ever ever? Never ever ever.

Your job is to present your players with challenges then watch how the players try to overcome those challenges. You are an architect and a judge. You are NOT the storyteller. The players are telling the story. All you do is provide the setting and the setup.

Nobody, not your players, not this forum, not your mother or your girlfriend, cares how YOU want the story to go. Because YOU DON'T MATTER. D&D is not about you, it's about the world and how the players interact with it.

[Vaz]

You could just say that using the Force Cage ability takes one of the Legendary Actions away for the rest of the day. Do they seriously not have Dimension Door or similar as a Hexblade (or Disintegrate within the party)? Perhaps give them the ability to go shopping for disintegrate scroll from the favourite shopkeeper beforehand?

Tactical Teleports are wonderful fun, might be worth throwing them a magic item that allows them to do that. One of my groups favourite items is a 3 Charge Misty Step (1 charge = 10ft movement) that provokes opportunity attacks when activated. Regains D3-1 charges at dusk (the number of times they roll 1 on the D3 is rather funny).

[fikoantunes]

No. Stop right there, criminal. You just violated one of the unspoken rules of being a DM. Under no circumstances should you ever intend for the players to "have their ass kicked." EVER.

Never ever, ever. Never ever ever? Never ever ever.

Your job is to present your players with challenges then watch how the players try to overcome those challenges. You are an architect and a judge. You are NOT the storyteller. The players are telling the story. All you do is provide the setting and the setup.

Nobody, not your players, not this forum, not your mother or your girlfriend, cares how YOU want the story to go. Because YOU DON'T MATTER. D&D is not about you, it's about the world and how the players interact with it.

I'm sorry, but I disagree.

D&D is about having FUN. I've been DMing for this group for years, and they are aware my campaigns are "railroad" sometimes. Yet we all have had some great times together. I'm not the perfect DM at all; railroad-ing is my flaw, but I do try to deliver some fun moments for all of us. They know it and they buy it: that's what is worth.

Back to my post:

That boss fight in the middle of the adventure is to make them mad at the villan and ready themselves for the payback. A little bit of explanation: the villan is a new and powerful individual how (apparently) never crossed their path, and it will atttack them with (also apparently) no reason. Remember I said it is just half of the group playing? They can't beat this new villan alone; so, after being saved by a third group, they will journey to find out who is that villan (and how he is deeply connected to the characters) and its weak point. Then, the final battle will be much richer with the players not only knowing who the guy truly is but also wanting to get revenge for their previous defeat.

My question about the use of the forcecage remains... Though now due to all replies I'm inclined to not count the legenday action for the cleric locked away by the spell.

[Vaz]

If your players are okay with watching a cut scene, where there actions have no effect, then sure, you consider that fun, and you know your players better than we do. Just be aware that a lot of people don't think that watching a dude move toys across a board and making pew pew noises another isn't really considered fun.

[fikoantunes]

You could just say that using the Force Cage ability takes one of the Legendary Actions away for the rest of the day. Do they seriously not have Dimension Door or similar as a Hexblade (or Disintegrate within the party)? Perhaps give them the ability to go shopping for disintegrate scroll from the favourite shopkeeper beforehand?

Tactical Teleports are wonderful fun, might be worth throwing them a magic item that allows them to do that. One of my groups favourite items is a 3 Charge Misty Step (1 charge = 10ft movement) that provokes opportunity attacks when activated. Regains D3-1 charges at dusk (the number of times they roll 1 on the D3 is rather funny).

That's great! It seems your are reading my mind.

First the party is defeated; then they will learn the villain's weakness and will return with methods to circumvent his main offensive abilities. Technically speaking, they will sort of "emulate" the lack of arcane spellcasters in their three-man party. The Hexblade will "learn" Dimension Door, for instance (the adventure will also be an excuse to "fix" the bad building of that player's character; he asked me to help optimising his char and the adventure's plot will help with this). They will earn a way to cast a Disintegrate just for that final battle too, like you professed :)

Your suggestion of the item with Misty Step charges is very good... I will consider that also!

[fikoantunes]

If your players are okay with watching a cut scene, where there actions have no effect, then sure, you consider that fun, and you know your players better than we do. Just be aware that a lot of people don't think that watching a dude move toys across a board and making pew pew noises another isn't really considered fun.

Yeah, I know that. I've been in their shoes in a campaign where another player is the DM... He's found of writing passages to read aloud to the player's, and he does it beautiful as he has a knack for writting.

However he writes so much that the player's are constrained by it – we either follow that path he's hinting or he is the one who gets frustrated (because he has to throw away pages of text).

After the last campaign with this DM, I even asked the player's "Do I also DM like that?" and the honestly said "nah, you're ok!" :smallsmile:

[Zonugal]

No. Stop right there, criminal. You just violated one of the unspoken rules of being a DM. Under no circumstances should you ever intend for the players to "have their ass kicked." EVER.

Never ever, ever. Never ever ever? Never ever ever.

Your job is to present your players with challenges then watch how the players try to overcome those challenges. You are an architect and a judge. You are NOT the storyteller. The players are telling the story. All you do is provide the setting and the setup.

Nobody, not your players, not this forum, not your mother or your girlfriend, cares how YOU want the story to go. Because YOU DON'T MATTER. D&D is not about you, it's about the world and how the players interact with it.

I am also going to disagree with this because hey, the Dungeon Master is also an active participant in this.

Unless you are being paid to DM for a group, the Dungeon Master should be allowed the freedom to tell the kind of story they think will best engage with their players.

This idea that the DM is the complete servant to the players is hogwash as the DM is putting in the most effort/energy/time, they ought to get something out of the experience as well.

[Easy_Lee]

I am also going to disagree with this because hey, the Dungeon Master is also an active participant in this.

Unless you are being paid to DM for a group, the Dungeon Master should be allowed the freedom to tell the kind of story they think will best engage with their players.

This idea that the DM is the complete servant to the players is hogwash as the DM is putting in the most effort/energy/time, they ought to get something out of the experience as well.

The DM controls literally every character and thing except the PCs. Trapping your players in a forcecage, no save, from which they cannot escape, is functionally no different from taking control of their characters.

I've noticed that people always use the exact same argument, that the DM puts in the most work and should get something for that, to justify the worst DM behavior. This is comparable to saying that volunteers at soup kitchens are justified in treating their customers like crap.

If you DM, you volunteered for it. Don't pretend you deserve special status or privilege beyond what the position already affords you.

[Zonugal]

The DM controls literally every character and thing except the PCs. Trapping your players in a forcecage, no save, from which they cannot escape, is functionally no different from taking control of their characters.

I've noticed that people always use the exact same argument, that the DM puts in the most work and should get something for that, to justify the worst DM behavior. This is comparable to saying that volunteers at soup kitchens are justified in treating their customers like crap.

If you DM, you volunteered for it. Don't pretend you deserve special status or privilege beyond what the position already affords you.

Stories can sometimes feature impeachable challenges and momentary loss of agency.

So yeah, the person putting in 90% of the effort should be afforded the trust from their players to tell their story.

What you are presenting is a doctrine where no D&D campaign can feature a total defeat for the players, which is absurd. Failure is an important tool in stories!

[No brains]

I think Easy_Lee might have went a little too Imperial Watch with their response, but generally I agree with their point. There are exceptions* that won't make you criminal scum, but locking down a player no save for drama's sake is a little objectionable. When I sit at the adventure table, I want to be more than a technical liability. People play TTRPGS because they can do weird stuff that isn't constrained by expectations of genre.

And that's another major component of D&D you wanna look out for: are you SURE your players can't do anything about the Forcecage? It's a pretty airtight trap, but it is not completely infallible, Clerics and Hexblades can have some good tricks up their sleeves and even a Cavalier might be able to pull something off. Just suppose your players found a way to foil the cage, are you prepared for the tables to turn on your BBEG? Are you willing to accept that twist just as your players would be willing to accept yours?

But to answer your question, the answer is dependent on the nature of the villain. Are they trying to prove a point/ put the PCs in their place? If that's the case, then they would probably forgo their Legendary Action just because they made their point to that one character already. If they are fighting to the death/ out of survival, then they should pull every 'unfair' trick they could get away with. The PCs would if their lives were on the line.

*If your players actually like having the story like that, then you're free to make them regret, rue, and lament that decision. If you were going for something like a JRPG tone, a 'cutscene boss' is right up that alley. Also there are times when players choose to face certain death, whether out of drama or stupidity. If someone wants to face an army alone or throw trash at the Lady of Pain, they still choose their fate.

[Vogie]

You can also make edits to the spells the boss uses. For example, it's not generic forcecage, but a unique one... For example:

The Violet Forcecage has Hit Points, so the person trapped inside can fight their way through. They can get through faster if one of the other players attacks or uses spells against the cage.
The Azure Forcecage has a concentration-esque component, where damaging the boss a certain amount can make it dissolve temporarily. This also allows the forcecage to be more dynamic - Player A is caged away, the concentration is interrupted freeing player A, but now Player B is caged away.
The Ruby Forcecage is created by an object, like an amulet, wand, rod, or staff. Destroying the object drops the Ruby forcecage.


You can also introduce items that allow the PCs out, such as mentioned above. Alternatively - An Spear or arrow that creates an Antimagic Zone. A dagger that can disrupt force constructs, because they ran into a Wall of Force-mancer earlier.

[fikoantunes]

I think Easy_Lee might have went a little too Imperial Watch with their response, but generally I agree with their point. There are exceptions* that won't make you criminal scum, but locking down a player no save for drama's sake is a little objectionable. When I sit at the adventure table, I want to be more than a technical liability. People play TTRPGS because they can do weird stuff that isn't constrained by expectations of genre.

And that's another major component of D&D you wanna look out for: are you SURE your players can't do anything about the Forcecage? It's a pretty airtight trap, but it is not completely infallible, Clerics and Hexblades can have some good tricks up their sleeves and even a Cavalier might be able to pull something off. Just suppose your players found a way to foil the cage, are you prepared for the tables to turn on your BBEG? Are you willing to accept that twist just as your players would be willing to accept yours?

But to answer your question, the answer is dependent on the nature of the villain. Are they trying to prove a point/ put the PCs in their place? If that's the case, then they would probably forgo their Legendary Action just because they made their point to that one character already. If they are fighting to the death/ out of survival, then they should pull every 'unfair' trick they could get away with. The PCs would if their lives were on the line.

*If your players actually like having the story like that, then you're free to make them regret, rue, and lament that decision. If you were going for something like a JRPG tone, a 'cutscene boss' is right up that alley. Also there are times when players choose to face certain death, whether out of drama or stupidity. If someone wants to face an army alone or throw trash at the Lady of Pain, they still choose their fate.

Yes, there's always that chance the player's will surprise the DM and turn a programmed defeat into victory. But it is a tiny chance: the group is very melee-oriented (even the cleric, who is a War one, and the hexblade).

Part of the fun of this particular adventure is that the villain is exploring the fact the group is smaller and spellcaster-less (the other three characters who are missing in this adventure are an evoker, and illusionist and another cleric!)... And the players know that the villan is taking advantage on them being without arcane resources.

But then again: it's all for the fun. Our group likes the eventual "cinematic approach", and even more when it engages them into play.

[fikoantunes]

You can also make edits to the spells the boss uses. For example, it's not generic forcecage, but a unique one... For example:

The Violet Forcecage has Hit Points, so the person trapped inside can fight their way through. They can get through faster if one of the other players attacks or uses spells against the cage.
The Azure Forcecage has a concentration-esque component, where damaging the boss a certain amount can make it dissolve temporarily. This also allows the forcecage to be more dynamic - Player A is caged away, the concentration is interrupted freeing player A, but now Player B is caged away.
The Ruby Forcecage is created by an object, like an amulet, wand, rod, or staff. Destroying the object drops the Ruby forcecage.


You can also introduce items that allow the PCs out, such as mentioned above. Alternatively - An Spear or arrow that creates an Antimagic Zone. A dagger that can disrupt force constructs, because they ran into a Wall of Force-mancer earlier.

Wow! Another one who's reading my thoughs :smallsmile:

They will run into a artificer who was supposedly dead... He will provide the means (like you and other poster said) for the characters to overcome their lack of abilities to deal with this villain. And trust my words: one of those items is even a dagger like you said!...

[Easy_Lee]

Stories can sometimes feature impeachable challenges and momentary loss of agency.

So yeah, the person putting in 90% of the effort should be afforded the trust from their players to tell their story.

What you are presenting is a doctrine where no D&D campaign can feature a total defeat for the players, which is absurd. Failure is an important tool in stories!

Don't mistake me for that strawman. If the players fail because of dice rolls or their own mistakes, that happens. That's story. But when the players fail because the DM decided that would be best for his narrative, that isn't story anymore, it's destiny.

Deciding your players are going to fail kills tension just as quickly and surely as does deciding your players are going to succeed.

This is not the difference between a hero story and a tragedy. In both, the main character's actions led him to the end. Instead, this is deus ex machina, where the world's ruler decides the outcome. It's not compelling, nor is it fun.

Just because the DM is more necessary does not make him more important, nor does it create any sort of pedestal from which his actions can be judged via a double standard. No player, including the DM, ought try to force the story to go the way he wants it to. D&D is no one's story, it's everyone's story. At a miminum, you do not strip other players of their agency.

And furthermore, don't assume that the DM is the one doing most of the work. I've been in many campaigns where individual players were better prepared than was the DM.

[Malifice]

I wouldn't use forcecage on players because it's not fun to be forcecaged. Assuming I did, I certainly wouldn't trigger legendary actions off of turns that players didn't really take.

Huh?

An unconscious PC still has a turn (he makes a death save) as does one in a forcecage, paralysed or whatever. The monster gets a legendary action after the trapped/ unconscious Pcs turn ends.

I do echo your sentiments on forcecage vs a PC though. It's a bit of a suck move.

[Telok]

It may be possible to engineer a situation where the fight location becomes so dangerous that everyone has to leave. Normally when this happens players want to leave in the same direction as the villain and chase them down. In this case the villain could Forcecage himself and leave while the PCs are away. Lava, avalanches, stampeding hippo herds, ships sinking in a storm, all can work.

[BruceLeeroy]

No. Stop right there, criminal. You just violated one of the unspoken rules of being a DM. Under no circumstances should you ever intend for the players to "have their ass kicked." EVER.

Never ever, ever. Never ever ever? Never ever ever.

Your job is to present your players with challenges then watch how the players try to overcome those challenges. You are an architect and a judge. You are NOT the storyteller. The players are telling the story. All you do is provide the setting and the setup.

Nobody, not your players, not this forum, not your mother or your girlfriend, cares how YOU want the story to go. Because YOU DON'T MATTER. D&D is not about you, it's about the world and how the players interact with it.

Lies, filthy lies. The DM isn't the storyteller? You must be playing a different game. What a line of drivel. The DM is the most important person at the table.

It's perfectly acceptable to plan a situation wherein the player characters will likely lose. That's called a "difficult challenge". Which is different than using DM fiat to declare the outcome, because the game should always have the possibility of going down an unplanned route due to random chance and player ingenuity.

[Malifice]

No. Stop right there, criminal. You just violated one of the unspoken rules of being a DM. Under no circumstances should you ever intend for the players to "have their ass kicked." EVER.

Never ever, ever. Never ever ever? Never ever ever.

Your job is to present your players with challenges then watch how the players try to overcome those challenges. You are an architect and a judge. You are NOT the storyteller. The players are telling the story. All you do is provide the setting and the setup.

Nobody, not your players, not this forum, not your mother or your girlfriend, cares how YOU want the story to go. Because YOU DON'T MATTER. D&D is not about you, it's about the world and how the players interact with it.

Yeah nah.

Remember the half dragon NPC in HoTDQ? Whole point of that encounter is for the PCs to lose.

Not die (and a DM who kills a PC In this encounter is either a douche or messed up). But lose.

It creates a nemesis and sets up a showdown later on.

[Mellack]

Yeah nah.

Remember the half dragon NPC in HoTDQ? Whole point of that encounter is for the PCs to lose.

Not die (and a DM who kills a PC In this encounter is either a douche or messed up). But lose.

It creates a nemesis and sets up a showdown later on.

That was an encounter that was strongly complained about. It literally didn't matter as even if they somehow won, the half-dragon was just replaced later so there was no effect. Actually I thought it was a terrible module. It also sets level 1 characters against an adult dragon. Any reasonable level 1 should be running for their lives.

[Easy_Lee]

That was an encounter that was strongly complained about. It literally didn't matter as even if they somehow won, the half-dragon was just replaced later so there was no effect. Actually I thought it was a terrible module. It also sets level 1 characters against an adult dragon. Any reasonable level 1 should be running for their lives.

I agree. I've run several players through that module and not a single one of them liked the half dragon encounter. Players don't enjoy situations where they have no agency, where their choices make no difference.

[MxKit]

No. Stop right there, criminal. You just violated one of the unspoken rules of being a DM. Under no circumstances should you ever intend for the players to "have their ass kicked." EVER.

Never ever, ever. Never ever ever? Never ever ever.

Your job is to present your players with challenges then watch how the players try to overcome those challenges. You are an architect and a judge. You are NOT the storyteller. The players are telling the story. All you do is provide the setting and the setup.

Nobody, not your players, not this forum, not your mother or your girlfriend, cares how YOU want the story to go. Because YOU DON'T MATTER. D&D is not about you, it's about the world and how the players interact with it.


I agree. I've run several players through that module and not a single one of them liked the half dragon encounter. Players don't enjoy situations where they have no agency, where their choices make no difference.

I think I see where you're coming from here, and I also see why people are disagreeing with you? I think everyone is kind of talking at cross-purposes.

I think that "the players are guaranteed to use by DM fiat, whatever they do it doesn't matter because the DM has already decided what happens ahead of time, their actions and choices make no difference at all, there's no agency" is nearly always a terrible idea. (Though I can believe that, used sparingly at tables where the DM and players are all very used to and trust each other and the DM knows they're okay with/enjoy that sort of thing, it can be just fine. Just as a "99.9% of the time and don't just assume you're the exception because your vision is just so glorious" rule.)

However, intending for the players to get their ass kicked, weighing a fight heavily towards that outcome, while still providing legitimate ways the characters can avoid that and being willing to change your plans if they do... That's an entirely different thing, I think. It's a major challenge, but it doesn't totally take away agency in the way that "you have to fight this enemy, they're going to take you out, if by some miracle they don't or you manage to defeat them I'll find a way for them to win/they'll just be replaced by an identical enemy later so it doesn't matter/the bomb will still go off because that's what I want to happen" does. I think that's what most people think you were also arguing against, and what they're arguing in favor of.

And while I would 100% agree that the players are just as important as the DM, and very much disagree with anyone saying the DM is the most important person at the table, I honestly don't think it's fair to say that the DM doesn't matter at all or help incorporate to the shared story being built. I think that's also why you're getting pushback—you went a bit too hard, a bit too far in the other direction.

[Easy_Lee]

And while I would 100% agree that the players are just as important as the DM, and very much disagree with anyone saying the DM is the most important person at the table, I honestly don't think it's fair to say that the DM doesn't matter at all or help incorporate to the shared story being built. I think that's also why you're getting pushback—you went a bit too hard, a bit too far in the other direction.

Perhaps so, but I think there's a bigger problem in place. The first thing someone said in response to me was, "This idea that the DM is the complete servant to the players is hogwash as the DM is putting in the most effort/energy/time, they ought to get something out of the experience as well." The bolded part is not true.

Many D&D players assume that the DM is more important, puts in more work, or that being the DM is less desirable than being a player. They use that assumption as justification for railroading, antagonistic DMing, favoritism, and all manner of bag DMing practices.

I'm not accusing anyone here of doing exactly that. But it's not a strawman so much as an extreme version of muddy reality. The DM is not the most important person at the table, nor should any DM think it's his job to direct the story. Players direct the story, and the DM is just one more player. When I say no one cares what the DM thinks, I mean it, because the DM by himself is nothing without regular players. D&D is a collective, and that means that above all else, people need to play nice with each other.

Regardless, no one enjoys having their agency taken away. Before doing anything, a DM ought ask himself: if I was a player who was only kind-of into this campaign, would I appreciate what I'm about to do? If the answer is no, reconsider.

[Malifice]

I agree. I've run several players through that module and not a single one of them liked the half dragon encounter. Players don't enjoy situations where they have no agency, where their choices make no difference.

They are not supposed to know.

The beat down sets up a showdown with him later on where players can feel awesome about kicking the ars* of someone who was clearly better than them before.

[Easy_Lee]

They are not supposed to know.

The beat down sets up a showdown with him later on where players can feel awesome about kicking the ars* of someone who was clearly better than them before.

Do you think players are stupid? It's easy to tell when you're not supposed to win.