That's sort of what I was saying earlier--some BBEGs can be expected to have defenses like that, but it's illogical for them all to unless you're treating it explicitly as a game that you need to balance such that the players can only do what you want them to rather than a living world. Say, for example, you've got a nomadic barbarian warlord leading an army of tens of thousands on an invasion through known lands. Why would they have thick magical protections on wherever they happened to be encamped beyond "because DM says they do"?
Why would they
not?!You're a powerful warlord leading a huge army in a world where an evil wizard can
pop out of nowhere and
blast the living fucking shit out of you. Why would
anyone with any mediocum of power not be buying charms to block scrying and teleportation when it's not allowed by them?
You argue that it's in the rules that it's fine if it works line that. If it's in the rules,
it's been done by someone else already in game. I mean, Sweet Baby Jesus, we don't have magical powers in the real world but people have sold charms for millenia blocking the evil eye, in a world where the evil eye exists then you'd
always have one.
Yeah, and that's a plausible interpretation. But it doesn't mean that every barbarian warlord ever had a pet wizard. A certain level of metaplay is inevitable, but treating a D&D world like a video game where everything has a full set of counters for every equivalent-tier threat is pretty stupid.
Honestly, if you're going to hamfistedly bar your players from certain tactics, at least have the decency to tell them so at character creation so that nobody ends up with a character who can't do shit because they're oriented around a particular role which you've decided after the fact/behind the scenes that you don't want to allow. It's like letting someone make a sneak attack oriented Rogue and then two sessions in reveal that the BBEG and all of their minions are undead or some shit.
I honestly don't know if you're intentionally misinterpreting what we're saying or you honestly don't understand the fundamental differences between assembly line Optimised Conjuration Whizzard #54566 soloing a dragon designed to fight the entire party and a rogue in some den somewhere being killed by a fireball, but there really is one.
I'm amused watching those who get upset over one encounter, thinking I'm doing it wrong. Play how you want to play. I had a great time tonight, and it was a nifty challenge to overcome. Now that it's out of the way for now, of course, I can continue to provide Haste and tactical support to the party instead of going toe to toe with the big boss. I'd much prefer a good dungeon crawl where you fight enemies in a 10 ft. by 10 ft. corridor, have the rogue scouting for traps, and kick open the door to see what horrible creature's on the other side.
You had a great time, but did the rest of the party?
Honestly, man, you really seem more suited to video games than you do pen and paper.
It's your group's choice, but when one player can literally take over the game whenever they want to it becomes a major problem and tends to completely ruin the enjoyment.
Okay, what's the most optimized bullshit character you've ever designed which:
1. Was intended for an actual game.
2. Didn't get DM-veto'd.
3. Had a backstory/character identity that couldn't be summarized in one line.
Vitalist thrallherd who was essentially a lucky anime harem character. So all his thralls were girls between the ages of 16-30 and his main thrall was a tsundere barbarian. He didn't know he was a psionic mind-rapist and all his powers were based around "Nakama" and "Ganbaru!".
Sadly I didn't play it because
I ended up feeling it was too strong compared to everyone else. I played a lawful evil anti-paladin instead and it was great if inefficient.