D&D (2024) 2024 - Do magic weapons bypass resistance now?

[James Gasik]

I'm not sure it's really "kid's nowadays" or even a new phenomena. I think it's always been pretty group dependent even going back to AD&D or before. I still run encounters now and then where the players know they can't win and have to look for alternative but it's not going to be "get X to defeat Y" it's more how to sneak around, avoid, distract, run away to get reinforcements, something other than defeating the enemy using the direct approach where you can win because you managed to obtain the whisk broom of infinite sweeping to take on the legendary dust elemental.

We all have different approaches and preferences of course. But if I did have a gargantuan dragon turtle that could only be defeated by the spatula of flipping, I'm going to have an NPC or tome explicitly tell them. They may see the turtle taking out a well fortified fort first but I will probably also just flat out tell them that they're overmatched and that they have little or no chance of winning in a direct attack. Then, if they decide this is something they need to deal with there will be options to find what is needed. Similar to how I thought wererats made sense as antagonists for lowish level characters a while back so I ensured they had silver weapons. I'm just glad I don't have to do that from now on unless I want it to be a truly special standout threat.

Maybe, but when you look at how modern D&D is geared more towards players being able to take on challenges as they face them and less about picking and choosing your battles, I don't think it's any fault of players expecting to be able to take down things they fight as opposed to fleeing and strategizing- if that's what the system teaches you, of course you're going to learn it. And if the vast majority of fights don't require you to flee and strategize, it's going to be an underdeveloped skill.

You can combat this by making more fights that require escape plans, prep, and lateral thinking, of course, but at some point, you may end up fighting the system as it's intended to function in order to do so.

 

[AlViking]

Maybe, but when you look at how modern D&D is geared more towards players being able to take on challenges as they face them and less about picking and choosing your battles, I don't think it's any fault of players expecting to be able to take down things they fight as opposed to fleeing and strategizing- if that's what the system teaches you, of course you're going to learn it. And if the vast majority of fights don't require you to flee and strategize, it's going to be an underdeveloped skill.

You can combat this by making more fights that require escape plans, prep, and lateral thinking, of course, but at some point, you may end up fighting the system as it's intended to function in order to do so.

I'm sometimes convinced that back in ye olden' days we had completely different set of rules for the people I played with. I do agree that we are going towards a more intentional difficulty approach than we used to have. I guess I still don't have a problem pushing the limits of what the players can handle, I'm just less likely to do it by accident because I didn't read the text closely enough or think through some of the consequences.

 

[James Gasik]

I'm sometimes convinced that back in ye olden' days we had completely different set of rules for the people I played with. I do agree that we are going towards a more intentional difficulty approach than we used to have. I guess I still don't have a problem pushing the limits of what the players can handle, I'm just less likely to do it by accident because I didn't read the text closely enough or think through some of the consequences.

I mean, if you're an old hand, running the game your way is probably easier. But I think we have to look at what it means for a new DM when they encounter an element that runs contrary to what they have experienced. You may know perfectly how to employ Shadows, Wights, Rust Monsters, Were-things and thing-weres in order to make certain they are teaching events and not TPK's waiting to happen, because you have played with such things for a long time.

Now imagine the guy who played AL for a season, with short adventures, no retreats, limited rests, and battles with fairly basic tactical requirements (generally, "kill all enemies while using minimal resources"). You decide to start running games of your own, and either by accident (running a pre-written module) or design (you think monster X sounds cool or just picked something of the right CR) you put your party face to face with something they can't fight, and they haven't had to learn how to deal with things like that because pretty much all of their experience has led them to think that the answers to all problems are on their character sheets.

It might lead to a lesson learned. Or it might lead to frustration. Puzzle enemies might be a tool, but it's one that not everyone is able to use effectively. Best to let people who know how to use it do so, and not put it in the hands of someone lacking the skill.

You might say "well, how do they get the skill if we don't give them the opportunity", and that's a fair question. But I'd rather err on the side of "everyone has an enjoyable experience" than court with a potential ragequit.

 

[Maxperson]

One of my absolute favorite fights from Curse of Strahd was when the PCs fought a vampire spawn at low level, had no good way to really hurt it, and used the druid's bear shape to wrestle it into a creek so that running water annihilated the spawn. It got carried downstream, screaming and sparking and smoking and gurgled under the surface. It was awesome.

During 2e my ranger who like 4th or 5th level and by himself for a night on the town decided to pick a fight with a guy at the tavern. Turns out he was a vampire. The only weapon I had that could hurt a vampire was a single +3 arrow which I pulled out and stabbed it with. The vampire, having just been stabbed with what amounted to a +3 wooden stake, decided discretion was the better part of valor and took off, leaving me relieved as hell. Alone I would have died fairly quickly had it stuck around to fight.

 

[Maxperson]

And if you had a magic weapon it wouldn't of been very interesting.

For instance, my first experience with werewolves was 3.5 whej i was playing an Artificer and kept handing out +1 magic weapon buffs. Werewolves just seemed like slightly tougher goblins. No puzzles to solve.

I didn't realize till long afterwards that they where supposed to be on very different levels of creature.

Giving them a weakness to silver makes sense.
Giving them a weakness to magic weapon doesn't.

And there should still be a Flee action. Dead characters can't recover from setbacks.

That's why I liked grades of magic weapons being needed to hit. Maybe you had a +2 sword in 2e, but if you ran up against an iron golem that needed a +3 or better weapon in order to damage it, you weren't doing anything. Between different grades of weapon enchantments needed and special materials, fights were more interesting, often resulting in fight avoidance, which I rarely see these days.

 

[Maxperson]

I prefer a lower level magic item campaign. That scarcity of magic items is exactly why I dislike immunity like the Jackalwere's. At CR 1/2 I should be able to throw several of this monster at even a level 1 party but because they lack the proper equipment I never would.

Why not make them an enemy that the party learns about in advance? If the players are smart, the PCs will do research and bring silvered weapons with them. If they make a bad decision and just go charging in, they learn the hard way and hopefully live to retreat and then do the research.

You don't have to just throw them at the party without warning.

 

[Maxperson]

So, why am I still tempted to have resistances to +1 to +3 weapons? Well, partly it's just to make the thrill of discovering a better weapon part of the game. I love giving out magic items. (Honestly, the players never will use them all anyway). But it's also to restore the importance of magic weapons that the 2014 version of weapon resistance didn't really capture.

More than that, it also lets the DM present monsters as more powerful. When the fighter's +1 sword fails to hurt the demon, he immediately recognizes that THIS demon is more powerful than others he has met. Then he puts his +1 sword away and pulls out his +3 dagger, because 1d4+whatever is a lot better than 0.

When everything from an Imp to a Pit Fiend is hurt by a +0 magic sword, the resistance doesn't have much meaning.

 

[James Gasik]

Of course, then there are those characters who, for whatever reason*, don't get access to magic weapons and have to run the gauntlet of lower CR foes with annoying resistances/immunities.

*Be it lack of meaningful guidance on when/where/how to add magic weapons to the game or who insist that magic weapons "aren't necessary" and didn't read Xanathar's at all lol.

My first 5e character was a Halfling Battlemaster archer, and it took forever to get a +1 shortbow playing in AL. Bleah, lol.

 

[SkidAce]

Of course, then there are those characters who, for whatever reason*, don't get access to magic weapons and have to run the gauntlet of lower CR foes with annoying resistances/immunities.

*Be it lack of meaningful guidance on when/where/how to add magic weapons to the game or who insist that magic weapons "aren't necessary" and didn't read Xanathar's at all lol.

My first 5e character was a Halfling Battlemaster archer, and it took forever to get a +1 shortbow playing in AL. Bleah, lol.

What level did they get it?*



*I've never played AL, so am curious

 

[Maxperson]

Of course, then there are those characters who, for whatever reason*, don't get access to magic weapons and have to run the gauntlet of lower CR foes with annoying resistances/immunities.

*Be it lack of meaningful guidance on when/where/how to add magic weapons to the game or who insist that magic weapons "aren't necessary" and didn't read Xanathar's at all lol.

My first 5e character was a Halfling Battlemaster archer, and it took forever to get a +1 shortbow playing in AL. Bleah, lol.

The game is balanced around no magic items, though. The monsters are balanced around PC abilities gained by their races and classes. Those "annoying" low CR creatures become easier and effectively even lower CR if the party is armed with magic swords.

And yes, I've read Xanathar's. It doesn't assume magic weapons will be had. Just minor/major and random rolls(DMG) or selection(Xanathar's).

Further, since the game doesn't assume any particular items are had by PCs, or balance encounters around any magic items at all, the DMG even offers up advice for no magic campaigns.

DMs need to be careful with how many magic weapons they hand out, or else throw twice as many "resistant" creatures at parties armed with magic weapons.