D&D 5E Vulnerability And Resistance

[Mistwell]

The rules for these are:

Resistance. If a target has resistance to a type of damage, that damage is halved against the target.

Vulnerability. If a target has vulnerability to a type of damage, that damage is doubled against the target.

I see plenty of monsters with them. What do people thing of how this part of the system is working?

 

[Atomo]

Resistance is to take half damage from that particular source. Vulnerability is to take double damage. I personally think it is simpler than damage reduction and functional.

 

[the Jester]

It's very intuitive and easy.

 

[MortalPlague]

I love it. Resistance and vulnerability both matter in huge ways, and it's easy to explain. At PAX, whenever the skeletons showed up, the players with bludgeoning weapons had a field day. Fire mages have a reason to celebrate while facing down a shambling mound. Damage times actually matter, since resistance and vulnerability are so potent.

 

[Li Shenron]

I like the simplicity, and I think resistance is generally a better rule than DR because it won't completely negate damage (except when damage is 1).

 

[Mistwell]

I attacked my 2nd level party with a couple of Wights last night. As they only had one magic sword amongst them (and a wizard), the resistance to non-magical damage was frequent. It really worked well to demonstrate resistance. I had fun describing how their desiccated, sinewy flesh pushed back against their weapons when hit...except when the magic sword struck, which sank deep without resistance.

 

[Kinak]

Mechanically, it works way better than numeric resistance/vulnerability. Resisted players are still able to do something and vulnerability doesn't cause skyrocketing damage with multiple smaller attacks, which became an issue in 4e.

Two thumbs up!

Cheers!
Kinak

 

[Sadrik]

I think it is too simple. I think it works, but it needs to take into account hardness. When a fireball goes off what happens to the surroundings?

 

[Mistwell]

I think it is too simple. I think it works, but it needs to take into account hardness. When I fireball goes off what happens to the surroundings.

That question is answered under Dungeon Features, with a couple of charts for object hit points, in the DM Guidelines, page 12.

So just treat it like anything else with hit points. If you think the wood table with 10 hit points was painted with a flame-resistant coating, give it resistance to fire like anything else. If you think the wood is particularly prone to alight from fire, give it vulnerability to fire.

Why would you need hardness on top of resistance and vulnerability, for objects?

 

[Sadrik]

I do not agree, I do not think that section is right. I think that pretty much everything is destroyed in a room when a fireball goes off. I also think DC 10 STR check is too small to break down a door.

Also, even an adamantine door with resistance to all damage types. It is too easy to plink away at and destroy. Say with a infinite cantrip. Even with half damage it will still likely do 1 or more damage per round and that means maximally only 120 rounds and you have destroyed an adamantine door with a level 0 plink spell. Problem is no threshold for damage. I think this makes the game more complex, and I think there is a solid reason to not want it in the game, however I think there can be some unreal scenarios of weak things taking out tough stuff.