Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MerricB" data-source="post: 9644205" data-attributes="member: 3586">These arguments are making me want to put back in resistances to tiered magic weapons +1, +2, +3, etc. into the game.And you're wondering, "Why do you hate your players so much?""I'm an old school DM. It's what I do!" <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />But it's actually more nuanced than that. The trouble with the current resistances is that they're pretty much all just affecting spellcasters. There's nothing impeding fighters from just using the same tactics fight after fight. And I find that really, really boring. There was a fight against a jackalwere in a DDAL adventure once where the designer (Shawn Merwin) made sure to include a couple of silver weapons. What then did the rest of the fighters do? They grappled the jackalwere, knocked him prone, and held him down. (My cleric then cast inflict wounds on him. You have a much better chance of hitting a prone jackalwere!)I have no quibble with those who feel that resistance to non-magical weapons is mostly meaningless in 5E. It absolutely is past very low levels - and the balancing of monsters has been very bad even ignoring that (and gets worse when it's part of the game). But I don't really want to remove it. I want to ramp it up so it matters more.But - with that - comes a few game design issues you need to consider. And primary amongst them is how can the players deal with the situation where they don't have the right weapon. This is something that 3E (in particular) tended to handle better. Because you had spells and consumable magic items that would allow you to temporarily overcome the problem. It wasn't perfect. It is an aspect of the game that requires a lot of thought in how to implement well. I've been playing a lot of computer games recently - especially JRPGs and their modern versions. And resistances and vulnerabilities are everywhere. They're a large part of the fun of those games - the puzzle of finding the best tactics to overcome these monsters. (I spent a lot of time in Final Fantasy VII Remake trying to work out how to defeat the big challenge fights in the virtual arena).Meanwhile, I sit down to run my D&D 2024 games, and I find that the sorcerer has access to cantrips and spells which allow them to switch damage type at no cost. So, they always have the best weapons against a monster. So why are we bothering with vulnerabilities and resistances at all?There are adventure design considerations when you go for a more robust resistance situation. Monsters that might not be best faced first time - but only after retreat and research - so it helps when the adventure doesn't require you to defeat everything First Time. (Too many adventures don't even admit the possibility of retreat, and suffer greatly when a group has bad luck... so, why are these cultists still staying in the same place? Oh, it's because if they leave, the adventure falls over because the party can't continue!)Honestly, I also want to make the artificer feel more varied than the one-trick-pony they often turn into. (Without a reason to vary their tactics, why would they?) Having an artificer who is tinkering and creating different solutions for the different problems they face is far more my ideal than what I see the artificer play as most of the time.As a side note, I'd also like the answer to every difficult combat to not be "have a paladin in the group". (Radiant damage and permanent saving throw bonuses together? Argh!)Drawing on the JRPG experience, I'm tempted as a first step really leaning into resistances and vulnerabilities for the elemental types AND bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage types. There's also the thought of a major resistance - reducing damage to 1/4. Immunity can be too punishing at times, but for a select few monsters having major resistance could really ramp up the impact.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. It's not something that can just be done - there's a support structure that needs to go with it. Consumable items (oil of magic weapon), spells, class abilities and the like. Is it possibly too much work? Yeah. But, honestly, at present I'd really like move more in that direction than the current bland version of 2024 combat where the answer to every situation for the fighter is "hit with big stick".Cheers!</blockquote>

Verification