D&D 5E Magic Resistance: What was Old is New

One option might be "if the magical effect does not allow a save or make an attack roll to hit, the creature gains a save, as an <Ability> save.

Another would be to make it (semi-)separate from a save, at a static DC that is checked first before the save/attack roll is made. If trying to mimic old magic resistance, the caster's level would affect the DC the creature needs to achieve.

Last option I could think of would be to just make it another defense, like AC or a Saving Throw. The creature can require the spell to either use the normal method (vs. AC or Saving Throw) or use the Magic Defense (whichever is better) and the caster uses level or proficiency bonus to "attack" that value.

ex. Creature has a Wis save of +3, AC 15 and a MR 17. If a wizard casts firebolt that would target the AC of 15, the creature can instead force it to target the MR of 17. Instead of making a Wisdom save against charm monster, the caster would have to make an attack against the MR of 17. Against a magic missile, the caster doesn't hit automatically, but instead makes an attack against MR 17.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

There are a couple of spells like that (Power Word Kill, etc.) that I need to think about how to address. Any suggestions?
The save might be just the MR + d20 vs. the spellcasting DC. This reflects the inherent difficulty in avoiding such spells, but with MR it is, in fact, possible.
 

I am making some changes to the format / layout of my monster stat blocks. As part of this process I am thinking about return to old school (1e) magic resistance instead of the current 5e version. For those who don't know, here is what 1e had to say about magic resistance:
r lower for a 10th level Wizard.


The DM would need to roll at or below 18 - the spell's caster level. So an 8 or lower for a 10th level Wizard.
Without having read the thread, absolutely no roll under!! Roll under is badwrongfun. Except it's not fun.

Why not use Spell Resistance from 3e? The concept was the same as 1e, as I recall, only the caster actually get to do something, i.e. rolling the die.
I seem to recall players getting more and more tired of SR back in the day. Nothing like wasting your round and resource. In 5e, at least you whittle down magic resistance.
 

If a pre-existing magical effect on an area or item is subject to being suppressed or dispelled, such as an arcane lock, MR can be used to attempt to temporarily ignore the effect as applies to the creature but not actually dispel the spell. The drow would merely attempt to open the door and check its MR. A wall of force, however, cannot be dispelled and could not be bypassed with MR. Similarly, protection from evil would not cease to function around a demon with MR because it does not directly restrict or target the demon.
This part confuses me. Wouldn't the Arcane Lock be a spell that is affecting the environment? The spell is directly affecting the door, not the drow.
 


There are a couple of spells like that (Power Word Kill, etc.) that I need to think about how to address. Any suggestions?

I could just add something like:

A monster's magic resistance can also nullify spells and magical effects that do not typically allow a Saving Throw. In this case, if the monster succeeds on an unmodified saving throw against the caster's or magic effect's spell DC, the magic is nullified for the monster and it has no effect. On a failure the spell works normally.
I don't think it should be unmodified. Those spells are not inherently more powerful than others of their level. Under what you propose here, a creature would get MR against Imprisonment or Prismatic Wall, but not Power Word Kill. I'd just have MR grant a normal save against any spell that does not give one. That would put those spells on par with others of their level.
 

I don't think it should be unmodified. Those spells are not inherently more powerful than others of their level. Under what you propose here, a creature would get MR against Imprisonment or Prismatic Wall, but not Power Word Kill. I'd just have MR grant a normal save against any spell that does not give one. That would put those spells on par with others of their level.
Yes, that was my intent (and what my update does). I was suggesting you don't add the MR bonus to the roll, thus "unmodified by the MR bonus" is what I should have said.
 


Yes, that was my intent (and what my update does). I was suggesting you don't add the MR bonus to the roll, thus "unmodified by the MR bonus" is what I should have said.
That still makes those spells inherently more powerful than others of their level, though. I'm saying that the MR bonus should be included. MR just always grants a save so those effects can be ignored under the rule.

If you look at 1e, MR didn't get worse when Power Word Kill targeted a creature with it. You got the same roll that you did against any other 9th level spell.
 

Without having read the thread, absolutely no roll under!! Roll under is badwrongfun. Except it's not fun.
This has already been change. It is a set bonus to your Saving Throw or AC (if a spell attack). The save succeeds or the attack misses, the spell has no effect on the monster.
Why not use Spell Resistance from 3e? The concept was the same as 1e, as I recall, only the caster actually get to do something, i.e. rolling the die.
I seem to recall players getting more and more tired of SR back in the day. Nothing like wasting your round and resource. In 5e, at least you whittle down magic resistance.
I would have to look that up. I skipped 3e and I am not familiar with spell resistance (don't remember it if it was a part of 1e - we never played with that is for sure).
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top