DR and immunities

[Firedancer]

A lot of things can happen in the game world that isn't necessarily spelled out at the gaming table. PC1 may cast a fireball, and then gasp or look astounded when it does almost no damage to the creature. It's perfectly acceptable in my mind that other PCs can pick up on subtle clues that something didn't work as well as the wielder/caster wanted. They can also be talking to each other, too. I think that if a PC is in earshot/eyeshot of another PC they're allowed to share information like whether a monster has DR or resistances.

So you let all players have this knowledge, straight away as soon as one of them has encountered a special defence? This is why I asked the question; I wanted to see how others handled it.

 

[hong]

So you let all players have this knowledge, straight away as soon as one of them has encountered a special defence?

Not worth worrying about. Even if you clamp down this time, they'll know about it the next time they fight that monster.

 

[Merkuri]

So you let all players have this knowledge, straight away as soon as one of them has encountered a special defence? This is why I asked the question; I wanted to see how others handled it.

I haven't actually DM'd a game in a while, but yes, I would let them know that it seems to have DR or immunities to the attack/spell that just happened. I don't think I would tell them exactly how much DR, but the fact that it has something that is rendering the attack less effective is something they should know, IMO.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

So you let all players have this knowledge, straight away as soon as one of them has encountered a special defence? This is why I asked the question; I wanted to see how others handled it.

I usually do in my games because it saves time. I tried handing the one player who would notice a note or pull him or her aside, and you know what they did? They had their PC shout out "Fire immunity!" or "It's got DR!" to the rest of the group.

Now I just assume their PCs are communicating important information to each other in combat. Its faster to just give it direct to everyone.

 

[Reynard]

I usually do in my games because it saves time. I tried handing the one player who would notice a note or pull him or her aside, and you know what they did? They had their PC shout out "Fire immunity!" or "It's got DR!" to the rest of the group.

Now I just assume their PCs are communicating important information to each other in combat. Its faster to just give it direct to everyone.

Although, there is a certain charm to making the players actually act like a well oiled, tactical machine.

 

[Firedancer]

Although, there is a certain charm to making the players actually act like a well oiled, tactical machine.

You've obviously not met my players! The only time "well oiled" is apporpriate is during some inapproriate RnR!

Fractitious barely held together bunch of misfits seems more fitting to the characters they throw together!

 

[hong]

You've obviously not met my players! The only time "well oiled" is apporpriate is during some inapproriate RnR!

Fractitious barely held together bunch of misfits seems more fitting to the characters they throw together!

There's also a certain charm to watching a fractious, barely held-together bunch of misfits prevail, despite all appearances to the contrary.

 

[jollyninja]

You've obviously not met my players! The only time "well oiled" is apporpriate is during some inapproriate RnR!

or perhaps when they have set off a two part trap, where the second part is alchemists fire?

 

[+5 Keyboard!]

It comes down to the flow of actions. Pc1 hits, notices not all damage going through. Fine with him next round shifting to something different (piercing, silvered, whatever). But for his compatriot who has yet to hit this foe to know this particular creature has DR, and to shift from his standard weapon to something different to attempt to overcome the DR...that's metagaming - applying out of game knowledge to a characters actions.

Switiching from fire spell to sonic spell after witnessing your fire spell absorbed is perfectly reasonable action in the next round. Likewise Pc1 switching to his piercing weapon next turn is fine*. Pc2 already trying this out a fraction of a moment after Pc1 has discovered some DR is the metagaming I was refering to; particularly as it stems from the description of a blow another Pc made. How does Pc2 recognise the difference between DR3 and Pc1 rolling a 1 on his d6? Apparently its automatic.

* this does illustrate an in-built expectance of a level of metagaming. A novice Pc is unlikely to have come across gaming-world DR personally, whilst his player knows all about it and can have his Pc act accordingly when he thinks he's encountering it. Really when a novice adventurer strikes a foe to see the wound close up or the iron hard skin show no blemish he should think about a sharp exit, not "its only DR, I'll try silver next, Pc2 can try piercing, etc".....Most people find it acceptable that various party members will switch to various weapons once they recognise a creature might have DR, no matter the Pc's experience. Not saying there's a problem with this, just that it is an accepted level of metagaming.

Please note the distinctions between Pc and player.

I've got your back on this one, Firedancer. Though you didn't actually say this, I'm reading between the lines here. In a fluid combat round where all of the characters are acting pretty much at the same time with only a fraction of time differential, it falls within the scope of unacceptable metagaming when PC1 acting on initiative 20 takes a swing at the creature with DR 10/magic with his non-magic weapon and does no damage at all and then PC2 acting on initiative 17 announces he is dropping his non-magical sword and pulling out his magical dagger to attack the thing.

The acceptable metagaming, IMO, is using their knowledge of game mechanics the following round when everyone who actually saw the interaction can react appropriately, be it trying a different energy descriptor for damaging spells, a different weapon material, or whatever.

I always bug my players about at least announcing these borderline metagaming tactics to one another in character so at least there's plausibility in their decision making. If none of them communicates a thing to each other and one of their characters that was in a completely different area and couldn't possibly see what happened all of a sudden runs into the room where the action is taking place and has the perfect solution to the problem, that to me is complete rubbish and I'll usually find a way to punish that kind of gaming in some form or another.

 

[Himoura]

our DM generally allows a knowledge roll just before combat is initiated so if we know any immunities and DRs we have time to spread the knowledge. Often he just tells us after the first around or second round of combat, and then we just tell him what damage we do with DR taken into account.

What i do find ammusing is no matter how many times we run across certain creates we still have to make the knowledge rolls to see if we 'remember' the DR/immunities but i don't mind so much my character has all the knowledge skills with at least 5 points (int +2 and 3 ranks) so i get to make lots of rolls.