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

[dave2008]

Might I suggest a version 4:

Spell Resistance (+X)
Anytime a creature is subject to magical effects that generate a saving throw, roll a d20 roll, +the magic resistance bonus (DC 15).

On a success, the spell fails to affect the monster, and the monster becomes immune to that spell. On a failure, the spell works as normal, and no further magic resistance rolls are needed against that magic effect. Both of these effects last for 1 hour.

(and can always add in this clause to for certain monsters).
Spells higher than level Y are not subject to spell resistance

This is general more complex than what I want (I think). I don't see a need for the immunity or the time limits. I want simple spell failure (for the magic resistant creature).

 

[KentHusker]

I thought about reintroducing 1st edition magic resistance to my 5e game, but after some thought, there is a reason the game has moved towards downgrading certain abilities and effects that essentially neutralize certain types of characters whether melee or spellcasters. And so decided against it.

For those creatures I wanted more resistant, I went with similar mechanics already used for some in the Monster Manuel and just give them advantage on saves. This gives them a better chance to avoid spells, while still being penalized going against high DC casters. This is also WAAAY simpler to use than adding that old complicated mechanic.

 

[Emerikol]

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:
<snip of some nice stuff>
What do you think? Is this better or worse than Advantage on Saving Throws and/or Legendary Resistance? Is it to complicated or time consuming? Could it be improved?

I agree that SR was a move in the wrong direction. I like MR.

I'd probably just do it differently and make it more 1st edition like. I'd have a flat number that a wizard has to beat by rolling a d20 and adding his level. So an old fiend that had a 95% MR would have MR: 30. I'd roll that before any saving throws.

I would allow any existing magical force to be ignored on a successful MR roll but it would not extinguish it. So a Fiend could walk through a wall of force for example. Anything that can be dispelled by dispel magic is magic in progress. I do not think things like walls of stone etc... should be ongoing magical but that is another debate.

 

[dave2008]

I agree that SR was a move in the wrong direction. I like MR.

I'd probably just do it differently and make it more 1st edition like. I'd have a flat number that a wizard has to beat by rolling a d20 and adding his level. So an old fiend that had a 95% MR would have MR: 30. I'd roll that before any saving throws.

I would allow any existing magical force to be ignored on a successful MR roll but it would not extinguish it. So a Fiend could walk through a wall of force for example. Anything that can be dispelled by dispel magic is magic in progress. I do not think things like walls of stone etc... should be ongoing magical but that is another debate.

Yes, that is the way I am leaning. I just have to many other things on my plate at the moment.

 

[Mannahnin]

I’m pretty sure that was originally there to replicate the Balrog breaking Gandalf’s “Hold Portal” spell when they are fleeing Moria

I think there are other pulp fictional situations where magical creatures break through magical barriers (and I'm 100% sure I've seen this in Dr. Strange comics and such), but I'm not coming up with any specific examples off the top of my head.

Of course, Hold Portal has almost always had a "balrog clause" of one kind or another written into it. At least prior to WotC.

1974: "Dispel Magic will immediately negate it, a strong anti-magical creature like a Balrog will shatter it and a Knock spell will open it."
1977: "A dispel magic will negate it, a strong anti-magical creature like a Balrog will shatter it and a Knock spell will open it."
1978: "Note that any extra-dimensional creature (demon, devil, elemental, etc.) will shatter such a held portal. A magic-user of four or more experience levels higher than the spell caster can open the held portal at will. A knock spell (q.v.) or dispel magic spell (q.v.) will negate the hold portal. Held portals can be broken or battered down."
1981: "A creature of 3 hit dice (or more) greater than the caster may break open the held portal in one round."
1983: "Any creature of 3 or more hit dice greater than the caster (including characters) may break open a held portal in one round's time, but the portal will relock if allowed to close within the duration of the spell."
1989: "Any extra-planar creature (djinn, elemental, etc.) with 4 or more Hit Dice can shatter the spell and burst open the portal. A wizard of four or more experience levels higher than the spel caster can open the held portal at will. A knock spell or a successful dispel magic spell can negate the hold portal. Held portals can be broken or physically battered down."
2003: "The magic affects the portal just as if it were securely closed and normally locked. A knock spell or a successful dispel magic spell can negate a hold portal spell. For a portal affected by this spell, add 5 to the normal DC for forcing open the portal."
2008: No Hold Portal, but Arcane Lock also sets a DC to open using Strength or Thievery. The DC is your Arcana check +5.
2014: No Hold Portal, but Arcane Lock goes a similar route to 3rd ed, but with a +10 to the break down DC instead of just 5.

 

[KentHusker]

...

 

[Zardnaar]

I agree that SR was a move in the wrong direction. I like MR.

I'd probably just do it differently and make it more 1st edition like. I'd have a flat number that a wizard has to beat by rolling a d20 and adding his level. So an old fiend that had a 95% MR would have MR: 30. I'd roll that before any saving throws.

I would allow any existing magical force to be ignored on a successful MR roll but it would not extinguish it. So a Fiend could walk through a wall of force for example. Anything that can be dispelled by dispel magic is magic in progress. I do not think things like walls of stone etc... should be ongoing magical but that is another debate.

Castles and Crusades has something similar to that.
The old 3.5 minis game used 6, 11, 16 flat till on d20 to beat that for spell to have effect.