[Playtest 2] Vulnerabilities and Resistances

[Olgar Shiverstone]

From the new playtest packet ... I like them. Simple, easy to apply, and effective.

For those without the packet, it's essentially 2X damage if you're vulnerable, and 1/2 damage if you have resistance. Easy, peasy.

What say you?

 

[GX.Sigma]

It was like that in the first packet too. Works fine.

 

[ferratus]

Anything that makes the math simple and quick is excellent in my opinion. That's why I liked 4e's weakened condition rather than draining the strength ability score.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

It doesn't give rules for the interaction between the two, especially when damage has multiple types.

 

[Tyapth]

It doesn't give rules for the interaction between the two, especially when damage has multiple types.

I would just rule it that they both cancel each other out. The attack would do normal damage.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

It doesn't give rules for the interaction between the two, especially when damage has multiple types.

That's easy. Don't allow multiple-type damage.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

That's easy. Don't allow multiple-type damage.

Don't know, mixing damage types can be neat.

But it could work just like advantage. IIRC, advantage and disadvantage cancel each other out, neither stack, and the number of advatnage and disadvantage granting effects don't matter for this to decide.

So, if a creature is vulnerable to both damage types of a multi-damage-type effect, it takes double damage, as if it was vulnerable against only one. if it's resistant to one and vulnerable to the other 10 in the attack, it's normal damage, if it's resistant to multiple of the damage types, it's half damage.

 

[Li Shenron]

From the new playtest packet ... I like them. Simple, easy to apply, and effective.

It's the same as in first playtest, isn't it? I like it too, simple and definitely all that I need. Well... I also need monsters with total immunities, but that's even simpler.

It doesn't give rules for the interaction between the two, especially when damage has multiple types.

If it was up to me, I'd just treat sources of 2 damage types as 50% damage of the first type and 50% of the second type. Then applying vulnerabilities and resistances separately would still be very simple.

 

[Dice4Hire]

My question is how much it will be sued. 4E made a system for resistances and vulnerabilities but it basically only applied to PCs, who could get resistances.

Most monsters (with the exception of undead) had no resistances or vulnerabilities, which make the system kinda useless.

If the system is gonna use that kind of system many monsters should have some kind of resistance or vulnerability. Somewhere around 70%, especially higher level monsters.

 

[Estlor]

Having lived through the 4e era, I think the devs will be careful about stacking damage types on a single attack. Expect most of them to replace each other.

The only real concern I could see would be the interaction between weapon type (slashing, piercing, bludgeoning) and damage type (fire, holy, etc) on a creature vulnerable to a type of damage but resistant to a type of weapon. Nothing in the current playtest fits this yet; we'll just have to keep our eyes open for it down the line.