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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Primal" data-source="post: 6375673" data-attributes="member: 30678">I think that's better left for high-tier monsters. Yet the clay golem is a mid-level challenge (CR 9), and I'd hate to see golf bags return to 5E. AFAIK there are more than a handful of monsters that are immune to non-magical and non-silver/adamantine (and perhaps other materials as well, e.g. cold iron?) weapons. IMO total immunity to damage was frustrating back in AD&D, and I still find it extremely annoying and frustrating. I'm not getting any younger, and these days I often have to travel 500 miles to play, so I kind of take it personally if I'm killed in the first encounter because I "played badly" (i.e. failed to carry a golf bag of weapons to the dungeon). Damage reduction 10/X can be handled; the characters are at a disadvantage, but it's doable. Immunity isn't, because you need a certain kind of a weapon to defeat the monster, and it grinds the action to a halt. It's annoying for the players and the DM, if the characters leave the dungeon to go shopping for magical adamantine weapons just to defeat a single monster -- unless the adventure has a scripted bypass option (e.g. knocking the golem into a pit or something). I don't think it's good design, and I honestly think quite a many players will not be thrilled about this. In my group the fighter would just ask the wizard: "Once again it's your time to shine .. can you do it, or do we leave to go shopping for weapons in Waterdeep?". <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/ponder.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":hmm:" title="Hmmm    :hmm:" data-shortname=":hmm:" /></blockquote>

Verification