[+] Tiered damage resistance

[CapnZapp]

If you're going that route, you may need to consider modifying Magic Weapon and similar spells to give greater equivalents

Actually there's no need for "Greater Magic Fang" and somesuch spells, since the 5E Magic Weapon spell comes with built-in scaling!

 

[Stalker0]

I do like the idea of a “key material” counting as a +, ala the +1 adamantine weapon vs the golem.

 

[Schmoe]

Given 5e's focus on weapon rarity as opposed to plusses, I think it may make more sense to tie DR to rarity. In fact, I may do something very similar for my 3e campaign.

 

[77IM]

For creatures that are straight-up immune, instead of making them immune to magic weapons of less than +X, you could downgrade to resistance. So the creature would be immune to non-magic weapons, resistant to weapons of less than +X, and takes full damage to weapons of +X or better.

 

[Gadget]

I would prefer a more simplified Damage Resistance: regular as-we-have-it-now DR, and Legendary DR, resistant to all weapons, magic or not. This may seem to disadvantage the weapon users, but there could be rare "bane" type weapons that would overcome even Legendary DR. And your regular +x weapons are still hitting more often and getting a bit more damage, even if it is halved.

 

[dave2008]

The problem is this: for any monster, except possibly those of the lowest CR, that features damage resistance (or immunity etc), like this...

Resistances bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage from nonmagical attacks​

...this trait is essentially fluff, unless you run a non-standard low magic campaign.

I would say the probability of a golem or devil actually benefiting from damage resistance against level-appropriate heroes is very low or even non-existing. Almost every adventure I've seen for 5e will have handed out a magic weapon by level 5 or so. Bothering to tell us Iron Golems or Pit Fiends or Kraken need magic weaponry to be damaged fully is basically a joke.

What i find interesting is that the DMG seemed to suggest that you take this into account and not include this in the CR calculation for a particular level of PCs. However, I have been told that XGtE specifically indicates that CR assumes a party with no magic weapons. I don't have XGtE so I am not sure, but that is what I was told.

Personally, I don't mind it being fluff (I like some fluff with my stats), but it definitely should be part of the CR calculation if the way the game is generally played is with magic weapons. Heck, even a conservative DM like me gives at a +1 weapon and here and there.

 

[Sunseeker]

Wouldn't it be simpler to just make DR more straight-forward and less nuanced?

DR Bludgenoning is now against any damage that produces bludgeoning. Magical or not.
The creature remains exactly as tough against "the town guard" as it was before, and it is now a little extra tough against more powerful characters, who will have to think a little harder about how to get around the damage reduction, than just "Use magic on it!"

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

I would prefer a more simplified Damage Resistance: regular as-we-have-it-now DR, and Legendary DR, resistant to all weapons, magic or not. This may seem to disadvantage the weapon users, but there could be rare "bane" type weapons that would overcome even Legendary DR. And your regular +x weapons are still hitting more often and getting a bit more damage, even if it is halved.

Wouldn't it be simpler to just make DR more straight-forward and less nuanced?

DR Bludgenoning is now against any damage that produces bludgeoning. Magical or not.
The creature remains exactly as tough against "the town guard" as it was before, and it is now a little extra tough against more powerful characters, who will have to think a little harder about how to get around the damage reduction, than just "Use magic on it!"

Poor martial classes...

 

[cbwjm]

I think I prefer the old 3e/4e methods where creatures reduced damage from ifferent damage types by X amount, however, the current resistance in 5e is certainly easier to remember since creatures either have resistance or they don't instead of having to check if the have DR 5/+2; Fire 10, Lightning 5, etc. I think if I were going to buff the resistances to nonmagical/magical weapons that I would use 3.5's method where DR was negated by magic, a specific material (eg cold iron), or a specific kind of keyword (eg. holy or epic). Attacking a demon with a magic sword would still run into its resistance, but if that magical weapon was also silver (or perhaps just silver) then its resistance is negated. Utilising the magic bonuses does work, but I never really liked the requirement for weapons of a certain magical bonus needed to hurt monsters. It became better from 3e onwards, but man, you really had to be careful what you threw at your players in the earlier editions because they would often be straight up unable to hurt some monsters because you forgot that they had only +2 weapons instead of +3 weapons.

 

[Sunseeker]

Poor martial classes...

Well sure, if it's "all physical damage" resistance or immunity.

But you can freely add "magical immunity" in there to creatures too. I've done that to a hilarious level of fun again casters.