Best Type of Damage Reduction?

[the Jester]

I was thinking about damage reduction by whatever name. Over the course of D&D history we have had the following broad variants on the theme:

• +2 or better weapon to hit
• Damage Reduction 20/+2
• Damage Reduction 10/Magic
• Resist weapons 5 (which is pretty darn rare, btw)

I don't know that I've missed anything- probably, but so it goes. Anyway, what do you think the best version is and why?

 

[Ahnehnois]

Damage reduction based on a certain +X feels metagame-y and the numbers were so extreme it made the monsters unbalanced. The older monsters you couldn't damage at all were even worse. The /magic (and /metal or /alignment) DR system was by far the most dynamic, intuitive, and balanced.

 

[Crothian]

One of the best adventures from 2e had my thief spending 4 rounds to get into position to back stab some demon, have me roll great but not have a magical enough weapon to damage it, and then it attacking my character and nearly killing him in one round. Good times!

 

[Mark CMG]

Best Type of Damage Reduction?

Emotional?

 

[Desdichado]

I was thinking about damage reduction by whatever name. Over the course of D&D history we have had the following broad variants on the theme:

• +2 or better weapon to hit
• Damage Reduction 20/+2
• Damage Reduction 10/Magic
• Resist weapons 5 (which is pretty darn rare, btw)

I don't know that I've missed anything- probably, but so it goes. Anyway, what do you think the best version is and why?

I'm not sure if you're #3 is the 3.5 system, where magic did not trump all over damage reduction types as it did in 3e.

From a flavor perspective, that was pretty cool. From a practical game playing perspective... it was mostly really frustrating. And it led to needing to hire a caddy to carry around your silver, your cold iron, your flaming, your thundering, and your adamantium weapons.

 

[Nifft]

Anyway, what do you think the best version is and why?

The best version for me, personally, to have? The first one, since there are no magic weapons, so I'm invulnerable.

The best type for the game? I liked 3.5e's version, where you were rewarded for having the right tool for the job, but the job wasn't impossible even if you lacked that tool.

I think I'd like it even better if it took a page from 4e and turned the penalty-for-lacking into a bonus-for-having. Like, have silver weapons deal +1d6 damage to devils and shapeshifters and some other random critters, for the price of a +1 bonus (so they're equivalent to the Bane property - useful more often, therefore slightly less than half the damage benefit). Or have silver weapons stop regeneration for 1 round on a hit. Or both.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Desdichado]

I didn't know that's how it worked in 4e. That's kinda cool. I could back port that into my 3.5 game. Although I'd have to arbitrarily increase HP totals for creatures like devils and demons and whatnot by a good 20-25% or so to compensate, probably.

 

[Nifft]

I didn't know that's how it worked in 4e. That's kinda cool. I could back port that into my 3.5 game. Although I'd have to arbitrarily increase HP totals for creatures like devils and demons and whatnot by a good 20-25% or so to compensate, probably.

This is actually an area where 4e fails to follow the 4e philosophy, unfortunately. They mostly just did away with DR, except in a few rare cases, but they did handle regeneration "correctly" (i.e. hitting a troll with Acid or Fire damage stops its regeneration for a round).

The main DR people will encounter is the Insubstantial property some critters have. This means you deal half damage unless you take that one specific feat ("Inescapable Force") and you have some attacks that deal Force damage (i.e. you are a Wizard). Insubstantial critters generally have about 50% the HP of regular critters, so it's not all that bad if you lack a Wizard with that one specific feat, but if you DO have the one specific combo you will shoot through schools of Shadows.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Jhaelen]

I like the 3.5 variant very much, however DR/magic isn't really an appropriate one. All DR types should be based on different materials (silver, cold iron, adamantine, etc.), imho.

I like the 4e approach even better, using the opposite, i.e. vulnerable 5 (cold iron, etc.). Many more monsters should have vulnerabilities and not all of them should result just in additional damage.

 

[Doug McCrae]

These days I'm not a big fan of binary-ism in rpgs - "You have power X? You win easily! You don't have power X? You fail utterly!" - so I voted for option #3. Magic weapons are good but not essential.

I've heard an argument that affecting otherwise immune critters is actually the main benefit of magic weapons, not the plus, though that was in the early 90s. I think that's correct. In those days, it probably was the key feature.

The idea of immunity definitely fits the source material. And it justifies monsters that can only be beaten by a Big Damn Hero. Even an army of mooks can't touch it. This is actually a pretty useful thing in rpgs because otherwise questions can arise like, "Why doesn't the baron just send a hundred of his trusted men-at-arms to kill it? Why did he hire this gang of mercenary weirdoes?"

Immunity is fine, I think, if those who don't have the necessary weapons can still do something else reasonably useful. For example, the cleric can cast healing spells, even if his mace has too low a plus. Aid another doesn't meet my personal threshold of useful.

How rare are magic weapons? Does every melee guy in the party have two (one for use and one for Sunday best), plus one for his henchman? If so, then immunity to non-magic weapons is irrelevant.

I think it's better if it's more specific and more plot-based. Not a type III demon that requires a +2 or better weapon to hit, but a specific named creature that can only be hurt by one specific weapon - the Knucklebone Demon of the Forest of Orwold can only by harmed by the Iron Star of Isis. Specific is good. D&D often isn't specific enough. It only seems to arise at high level, typically, when you get artefacts and monsters with names. Imo it should appear at a much lower level.

Pixel bitchery could be an issue here, but I think it's fine so long as the PCs don't absolutely have to deal with the demon at all. Or other approaches, like bargaining with it, hiding, trapping it, etc work too.