D&D 5E Do You Hint at Damage Resistance?

[plisnithus8]

As a DM, do you hint that an attack doesn't do full damage against a creature with damage resistance?

I have been, but they discussed it on the Cannon Fodder podcast (Glass Cannon podcast after show), and now I'm second guessing.

 

[Staffan]

Yes. I usually say something like "he doesn't appear to be as hurt as you'd expect him to be", which is basically code for "he resisted that attack." I see little reason in hiding that sort of thing from the players.

 

[Satyrn]

As a DM, do you hint that an attack doesn't do full damage against a creature with damage resistance?

I have been, but they discussed it on the Cannon Fodder podcast (Glass Cannon podcast after show), and now I'm second guessing.

I make it absolutely clear that damage resistance applies. Most of the time I'm saying something like "That attack only dealt half damage" or even "that attack's still doing half damage, you aren't gonna switch it up?"

 

[MarkB]

I make it absolutely clear that damage resistance applies. Most of the time I'm saying something like "That attack only dealt half damage" or even "that attack's still doing half damage, you aren't gonna switch it up?"

Pretty much this. I may initially keep the description in in-world terms, but I'll make it clear that there's damage resistance at work, not just high hit points, and if the players are in doubt, I'll clarify.

 

[cmad1977]

Yup.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Damage is a real, observable thing within the game world - it corresponds directly to how beaten up someone is - and skilled combatants can tell when they cause significantly less damage than they were expecting to.

I'll also tell the players how beaten up the enemy looks, when they ask or when it changes significantly. The players know when an enemy only has a few HP left. Likewise, the enemies also know when a PC is almost down, and can make decisions by taking that into account.

 

[Seramus]

I make it absolutely clear that damage resistance applies. Most of the time I'm saying something like "That attack only dealt half damage" or even "that attack's still doing half damage, you aren't gonna switch it up?"

The former is totally cool in my book. The latter is pushing things into dangerous territory.

 

[KarinsDad]

Telling the players this type of information sounds like really playing the numbers to me.


How do the PCs (let alone the players) know the difference between a CR 5 monster with 80 hits points and no damage resistance vs. a CR 5 monster with 40 hits points and damage resistance? From the perspective of the PCs, both of these monsters have taken the exact same percentage amount of damage with a 10 point non-magic weapon attack.

Just like the PCs (and players) should not know how many current or total hit points of damage a given monster has (with the possible exceptions of half damage as per the PHB, or nearly total damage), they also shouldn't know whether a monster has resistance or not (shy of a knowledge check).


If I Fireball a 200 hit point monster for 25 points, how exactly do I know that he took 25 (no resistance, no save) or 12 (resistance or save) or 6 (resistance and save) points of damage compared to a monster with 50 hit points, 100 hit points, or 500 hit points? The monster took some damage. The player might know that the monster saved or not (depending on table), but the PC should be mostly in the dark. The description "he doesn't appear to be as hurt as you'd expect him to be" is just as applicable an expression to the 25 point Fireball against a 500 hit point monster as it is for resistance.

 

[Caliban]

Telling the players this type of information sounds like really playing the numbers to me.

If that's the way you want to run it, go ahead. It just doesn't sound particularly fun or useful to me. As a DM, I let the players know, because their PC's know how the world and their abilities work.

It's reasonable for the PC to know what it looks like when someone successfully saves against their fireball as opposed to taking it full in the face and just shrugging off the damage. Or when they hit something with a solid sword blow and it just doesn't do the damage you would expect. Hit points are an abstraction, so using them to gauge the strength of a hit isn't that useful. That's what the DM is for - to use narrative and description to let the players know how the creature is reacting to the attack.

A creature that makes the save and evades some of the damage reacts differently than if they fail the save and resist the damage - one is maneuvering so that the spell doesn't impact them fully, the other just shrugs off part of the damage. They take the same damage, but they react to it differently.

A creature that both has resistance and makes the save would take far less damage than expected.

The actual hit point totals are almost irrelevant (other than a 50 hit point creature being hit by a fireball appears much more injured than a 500 hit point creature, regardless of the actual damage dealt). Telling the PC that 500 HP creature took the full brunt of the spell and seems only minorly injured is a narrative way of saying 'This thing has a ton of HP, buckle up."

I don't see value in withholding that information from the PC's. It's just not fun for the players.

 

[Ath-kethin]

I think it is unethical as a DM to keep resistance/immunity from the players. However, the "doesn't hurt it as much as you expect" line is cliche enough to garner eye rolls.

Instead, I try to describe what the characters actually see. The attack doesn't hurt as much as they expected - how do they gain that information? Does the blade stop after only sinking in a short distance? Does the wound heal immediately after the blow? Does the weapon pass straight through the creature? Etc.