Thread by @mattcolville

Still puzzling over the intended player behavior around legendary resistance.

There must be some category of spell, designed to make the choice difficult.

In fact, there must be three categories of spell, right?

1: Spells so low the DM wouldn't bother using LR.
2: Spells so nasty the DM would ABSOLUTELY use LR.
3: Spells between these two.

So the expectation is; the players use Category 3 spells until the DM uses LR 3 times, and then the battle can end when the enemy fails their save against a CAT 2 spell?

I think it's tempting to imagine LR as not being meaningfully different from just rolling well on saves.

But you CHOOSE to use it. So you ONLY use it on a failed save that would be Real Bad.

I think I get it.

We want the players to win. This is the End Boss, we expect you're gonna beat it. So LR isn't there to stop you from winning, we assume you're gonna win.

And it's ok to win on a single failed save. LR doesn't stop that, only postpones it. 1/

So winning from a single failed save is NOT considered anticlimactic. It's only anticlimactic if that happens at the start of the battle.

LR allows the Boss to live long enough to Do Its Thing. THAT is what LR is for.

2/

If the Boss completely wrecks your party, THEN dies from a single failed save, you feel like "HOLY SHIT THANK GOD!"

3/

This does not, however, address the intended player behavior. There probably is none. This is meta-design.