• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

DR/materials -> Bane

Will

First Post
Some discussion on rpg.net about the annoyances of the DR/materials system (IE: DR/silver, and so on) got me thinking... there's a principle in game design that players enjoy mechanics of reward more than mechanics of punishment.

The point of DR/materials rules is to reward forethought and cleverness on the part of the players; an archer who was resourceful enough to put some silver arrows and dragonbane arrows in her quiver, a warrior who bought silversheen once the group found out they would be facing werewolves.

On the other hand, the feeling of being punished because you don't have the 'golf bag' of weapons is annoying. It was really terrible in 3.0, with DR 50/+4 and the like. Now, failing to bypass DR mainly is a problem for the people like the bard trying to supplement party's damage with arrows while he sings a song.

My idea:
Monsters have vulnerability to materials as part of their subtype. So a werewolf would be 'Humanoid, subtype: Shifter, Vulnerable to Silver'.
(Note: Any ideas on good terms for 'vulnerable to X' that sounds a little cooler?)

Any item that fits the vulnerability acts as 'bane' to a creature with that subtype: +2 to attack, +2d6 damage. The weapon need not be enhanced, or even masterwork, and includes improvised weapons, like a silver candlestick.

The price of materials is unchanged. This still encourages a bit of the golfbag syndrome, but note that it makes having a cold iron weapon for 40 gp or less attractive when it functions as Fey-bane.

DMs may wish to remove certain bane options and require, instead, players choose materials. For example, given the great overlap of Cold Iron and Fey-bane, the DM may say that there are no Fey-bane weapons, and a character interested in such choose a cold iron weapon. Alternately, a DM may allow effectively double-bane weapons.
(Thoughts on this?)

One exception: an evil creature with DR /evil will be affected twice by a Holy weapon; once for the Holy effect that damages evil creatures, a second time for DR.

Finally, creatures with DR swap it out for something else. Here's where I need help with the idea...

+2 Natural Armor would effectively act like 'supernaturally tough except for the proper material, which ignores the natural armor (since it's +2 to hit).'
Bonus to Con? Since DR typically scales by CR (5 per 5, more or less), swapping it for scaling hit point bonus seems sensible.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Well, for quick thoughts:

I don't really see a lot of difference between "you get a penalty if you don't" and "you get a bonus if you do" on the player side.

On the plus side, it would allow characters who aren't weapons specialists and who don't have a bag full of weapons of the appropriate materials to take down some creatures.

On the down side, it means that a sufficiently large crowd of eight-year-olds throwing rocks can take down an iron golem in short order - and that there's not much need for characters with special equipment to deal with lycanthropes and such.

Finally, allowing double-bane effects seems like it might be a bit overdone - and at higher levels could even lead to an even bigger grab-bag of weapons. A +1 double-bane weapon at the rough cost of a +3 weapon is a pretty good deal compared to a +5 weapon with +4 worth of damage-enhancing bonuses.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top