Damage Reduction - Sage Response

[CRGreathouse]

I thought that the number after the slash was the enchantment necessary to overcome DR. In the case of a DR 4/- it would mean that a dagger +1 would always do full damage, but a longsword would do 1d8 -4 (effectively).

No, the barbarian's DR is always effective - even against the sword of Kas's +6 enhancement bonus.

As for my position, I was the devil's advocate. I brought up the question a while back, but no one had a conclusive answer.

 

[kreynolds]

As for my position, I was the devil's advocate. I brought up the question a while back, but no one had a conclusive answer.

Actually, my original answer still sticks, and I wouldn't let barbarians bypass each other's DR either. Of course, nobody believed me. But...well...I am wrong half the time...oh well

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Funny. A few hours ago I read in my DMG about Special Abilities, and... well, let`s quote:
DMG, page 73-74; Damage Reduction, 2nd paragraph, especially important the emphased sentence:

Usually, a certain type of weapon - usually a magic weapon - can overcome this reduction. This information is seperated from the damage reduction number by a slash. For example, a werewolf`s damage reduction is 15 / silver, meaning the werewolf ignores the first 15 points of damage reduction from every normal attack unless the weapon is made of silver. If a dash follows the slash (as with the damage reduction that is a class feature of the barbarian), thn the damage reduction is effective against any attack that does not ignore damage reduction.

In the same passage, a few paragraphs later on page 74

For purposes of harming other creatures with damage reduction, a creature`s natural weapons count as weapons of the type that can ingore its own innate damage reduction. The amount of damage reduction is irrelevant. For example, a Large air elemental (damage reduction 10 / +1) deals full damage to a werewolf, as if the elemental`s attack were with a +1 weapon. Hower, damage reduction from spells, such as stoneskin, does not confer this ability.

Well, it seems as if the sage made a... well, not a house rule, let`s call it a sage rule...
The statement in the DMG is pretty clear, IF you consider barbarians unarmed attacks as natural attacks (and you consider this if you allow Magic Fang on Monks ), then a barbarians unarmed attack begins at at a certain point to completely ignore damage reduction.
And his own damage reduction does always work against natural and weapons attacks, unless these attacks specifically state that the ingore Damage Reduction...

 

[kreynolds]

OH MY GOD! I'm not going through this again. Ice! Greathouse! What was the thread that this originally came up in? Mustrum_Ridcully, if they remember the thread, go read it. It had a lot of really useful info in it, after you sifted through all the junk anyway.

 

[Wolfspider]

"I punch the dragon."

I think I may just have found my new sig.

 

[whatisitgoodfor]

By CRGreathouse:

As for my position, I was the devil's advocate. I brought up the question a while back, but no one had a conclusive answer.

NO! I was the original Devil's Advocate for this topic.

Back when OA came out, I started up the thread "Trolling for Barbarian Haters" which was about this exact idea. To the best of my knowledge this was the first time the question was posed.

It might have come up before then, but I had already been browsing these boards for about a year and had never seen it before. So, if it came up before, its been a long time.

Sorry, for jumping, but I can't stand to have credit for my troll work stolen.

 

[drnuncheon]

High-level barbarians can't attack unarmed!

The statement in the DMG is pretty clear, IF you consider barbarians unarmed attacks as natural attacks (and you consider this if you allow Magic Fang on Monks ), then a barbarians unarmed attack begins at at a certain point to completely ignore damage reduction.
And his own damage reduction does always work against natural and weapons attacks, unless these attacks specifically state that the ingore Damage Reduction...

Not really...look again:

"For purposes of harming other creatures with damage reduction, a creature`s natural weapons count as weapons of the type that can ignore its own innate damage reduction."

The barbarian's fist counts as a weapon of the type that can ignore his own damage reduction.

There is no weapon that will ignore the barbarian's damage reduction.

Therefore, the barbarian's fist does not count as any kind of weapon.

Taken to the extreme, that means he can't even attack unarmed.

 

[whatisitgoodfor]

DrNuncheon:

There is no weapon that will ignore the barbarian's damage reduction.

Almost. There are attacks that completely ignore DR, such as fire, acid, sonic, and cold attacks.

Therefore, it can be extrapolated that the high level barbarian's unarmed attacks deal damage with the (barbarian) elemental modifier.

 

[melkoriii]

Re: High-level barbarians can't attack unarmed!

Not really...look again:

"For purposes of harming other creatures with damage reduction, a creature`s natural weapons count as weapons of the type that can ignore its own innate damage reduction."

The barbarian's fist counts as a weapon of the type that can ignore his own damage reduction.

There is no weapon that will ignore the barbarian's damage reduction.

Therefore, the barbarian's fist does not count as any kind of weapon.

Taken to the extreme, that means he can't even attack unarmed.

Well no. His fists are weapons just not of any spacific type. So they do not bypass any DR.

Now that means that a WereWolf's DR effects all attacks that are not silver. So the statment that a Elemental with DR 10/+1 will still not bypass a WereWolf's DR as it is not the type silver.

 

[kreynolds]

By CRGreathouse:

NO! I was the original Devil's Advocate for this topic.

Back when OA came out, I started up the thread "Trolling for Barbarian Haters" which was about this exact idea. To the best of my knowledge this was the first time the question was posed.

It might have come up before then, but I had already been browsing these boards for about a year and had never seen it before. So, if it came up before, its been a long time.

Sorry, for jumping, but I can't stand to have credit for my troll work stolen.

Oh YEAH? Well...I was on these boards...um...before your momma was born! Yeah! That's it! Before your momma was born...or after...or something...but it was before you! Um...yeah...before...