DR Vs DR

[Voadam]

Stalker is correct that the demons and devils need to use natural weapons to benefit from their own DR

from the srd:

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 amount of damage reduction is irrelevant.

So expect a lot of comments like "I don't need a sword to deal with the likes of you!" when demons throw down with DR opponents and want to impress everybody in the area.

 

[Skaros]

Agreed. It only makes sense it doesn't extend to wielded weapons.

Always nice when the actual rules make actual sense

-Skaros

 

[Taloras]

But that's only with natural weapons.

No the barb doesn't get to bypass all damage reduction with his 1/-

Yes, but what about an ex-monk barbarian using his fists?

 

[Stalker0]

Yes, but what about an ex-monk barbarian using his fists?

Well your a sick one aren't you


Its actually a good point, since fists are considered natural weapons, does teh barb's DR gives them DR penetration against all other DR?

If I remember though, x/- type of DR isn't listed in teh DMG listing of DR types, lowest being silver highest being /+5, so I would think that you couldn't say /- DR is better than the others and so would penetrate them.

 

[Berk]

ummm, barbarian fighting without weapons would be able to overcome any dr since blah/- is the highest form of dr there is. that's of course as long as he is only fighting with his fists.

 

[Wolf72]

el-nope ... a barbarian's DR does not give the ability to affect any other creature with DR ... DR x/+5 is the highest there is ...

DR 2/- is a form of DR that always works (and the most efficient i think)

 

[kreynolds]

a barbarian's DR does not give the ability to affect any other creature with DR

Wolf is correct. A barbarian with DR can't even bypass another barbarian's DR. Nothing. Natta. Zip. Zilch. Bupkiss. So, please, for the love of all that it is good, just accept this and move on.

 

[kreynolds]

No, read the DMG, page 74. If the DR completely negates the damage, it also negates most special damage.

Vorpal is not even remotely similar to injury type poison, a monk's stunning attack, or injury type disease, all of which specifiy that damage must be dealt along with the attack in order for them to be effective. Vorpal is a magical effect, a magical enhancement, just like a flaming weapon. It doesn't state that it requires you to deal damage in order to be successful, and there are weapon enhancements that do in fact have this requirement. IMO, it sits in the "Magical attacks and energy attacks (even mundane fire) ignore damage reduction" category. But, like I said, that's my opinion.

 

[Mahali]

Does that apply to wielded weapons as well or is that just for a Forsaker?

 

[kreynolds]

Does that apply to wielded weapons as well or is that just for a Forsaker?

To what are you referring to?