Trainz said:
Does it mean that PC's will be walking around with a whole armory on their back ?
I picture a Long-Sword Specialist Fighter with, on his back, a silver long-sword, a cold-iron long sword, a holy long-sword, a lawful long-sword, a chaotic long-sword, and a regular plushfour long-sword (for those beasts that don't have a weird DR immunity and you want to apply the full power of a "pluses" weapon)...
That's not a fighter, that's a peacock.
I really strongly disagree.
It is well known that the magnitude of DRs are being reduced.
DR5/adamanite or 10/holy silvered will in no way cripple a fighter with an otherwise "normal" +3 longsword any more than an SR22 monster cripples a wizard.
When a wizard faces a 50/50ish SR, he needs to consider indirect effects, ally buffs, or simply risking a waste of a spell.
Now fighters can have the same tactical challenges. If I can normally deal 15 to 20 points of damage per hit, am I willing to take that down to 5 to 10? Or should I try to focus on helping the rogue flank? Or guard the wizard or cleric? Grapple? Go toe-to-toe, but fight defensively to buy time while my allies do something? Other....
It is far more interesting.
As I fighter, I would never consider diluting my funds for magic items on a wide variety of minimum power catch alls. Give me a nice +3 Holy and I can take on DR X/magical and X/good. If I face DR X/Cold Iron or X/Chaotic, then I look at my tactical options. But that sounds better than droppping my primary weapon down to +1 Holy so that I can have a cold iron sword, an adamatine sword and a +1 lawful sword all sitting in a golf bag useless 95% of the time.
If you are in a Monty Haul campaign where you can afford to have that many magic weapons, then I don't see the point in complaining about this. And I'm not slamming MH games. I'm just saying that the new DR system is trivial if you are playing that way.