Mearls talks about how he hates resistances

[Cadfan]

Neat or not, I'm not going to have sympathy for the player if he finds that all of his spells aren't of much help against a red dragon, salamander noble, or barbed devil. And if the monster is appropriately placed, I'm not going to change the monster just so he can feel useful. He's going to have to creatively dig his way out of the hole he dug for himself.

There is a HUGE DIFFERENCE between how you, as a DM, should react to a player who intentionally takes poorly chosen spells knowing full well that his decisions could screw him over, and how WOTC, as game designers, should react to people's desires to take suites of spells which, in the present system, could screw them over.

 

[I'm A Banana]

then you need to stop and smell the roses

there is a lot more to the simple things in life if you take the time to enjoy them

Sure, and if you'd like to talk about philosophies for enjoying life, I'm game for that conversation.

But I believe the point was in regards to game design, yes? Not such an applicable philosophy there.

 

[CapnZapp]

1) Elemental damage is only half a spell's damage. Think of 3e's flame strike. Half is fire damage, half is holy. In the case of wizard spells, half would be just plain magical power. That would make even ice spells have some function against cold resistant creatures.

Doh, that doesn't work.

Instead of doing 40 points of ice damage being reduced by Resistance 15 to 25 points, you'd do 20 points of ice damage and 20 points of regular untyped damage which would be reduced to 5 points of ice damage and 20 points of regular damage. For a total of 25 damage, which is exactly as before.

 

[rounser]

The actual problem is that this thread is striving to find a mechanical solution to a flavor problem.

I'd argue it's the familiar 4E solution of stomping flavour when it does something inconvenient mechanically. It's the main reason I saved to disbelieve in the 4E illusion, something I've never had a problem with in any version of the game before.

 

[DaveyJones]

Sure, and if you'd like to talk about philosophies for enjoying life, I'm game for that conversation.

But I believe the point was in regards to game design, yes? Not such an applicable philosophy there.

why can't you apply a life lesson to game design? isn't that part of the verisimilitude some are seeking?

in practical ways it just means not rushing the process. testing the parts before forming them into an amalgam.

 

[Dausuul]

IMO, the solution to the "ice mages in the arctic" issue is simple: Make ice magic stronger in arctic regions.

Here's how I'd work it. Regions on the world map can have keywords. Thus, an arctic region would have the Cold keyword, a desert region would have Fire, and so forth. The same principle can also apply on a smaller scale; an undead-haunted crypt might have the Necrotic keyword.

Within such a region, powers with the appropriate keyword get some kind of bonus, something like +3 damage per tier. This compensates for the fact that you'll encounter a disproportionate number of critters with resistance to that keyword. It also adds to the flavor; when you go into the desert, the pyromancer gets stronger.

 

[billd91]

Doh, that doesn't work.

Instead of doing 40 points of ice damage being reduced by Resistance 15 to 25 points, you'd do 20 points of ice damage and 20 points of regular untyped damage which would be reduced to 5 points of ice damage and 20 points of regular damage. For a total of 25 damage, which is exactly as before.

It works against things that are immune like red dragons, salamanders, and devils are to fire. That's damage you otherwise couldn't have done. Same for damage amounts lower than the creature's level of resistance.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

A solution for ice mages in the high north could be following:

- because the air is already very cold, all damage from powers with the ice keyword do an extra 5 points of damage

- fire damage is less effective and does 5 points damage less

problem nearly solved...

actually a +2 defense bonus vs cold spells would work better than resistance, because of the same reason why armor doesn´t reduce damage (imparity between staus effecting vs damaging spells and dagger vs greataxe)

all cold spells would get an enviromental bonus to hit, which effectively negates the defense bonus...

 

[Jhaelen]

Doh, that doesn't work.

Instead of doing 40 points of ice damage being reduced by Resistance 15 to 25 points, you'd do 20 points of ice damage and 20 points of regular untyped damage which would be reduced to 5 points of ice damage and 20 points of regular damage. For a total of 25 damage, which is exactly as before.

But that's not what the 'fix' was trying to achieve. It was supposed to help in the situation that you do 15 points of ice damage being reduced by Resistance 15 to 0 points. With the fix you're now doing 7 points of damage.

Anyway, I don't think this 'fix' is fixing anything 'fix-worthy', either.

Did I mention that I LIKE resistances? Imho, the best and most memorable fights have always been those where the pcs had to think outside of the box, because their 'standard' approach didn't work. Often, this was due to a monster's immunities or resistances.

Obviously, it isn't a good idea to hose the pcs continously by having them encounter monsters that are immune to everything they are good at doing. But using such encounters sparingly has a positive effect. It keeps them on their toes and rewards their creativity.

Should creating a one-trick pony be rewarded by the DM?
Should the DM adjust every encounter to ensure the pcs can make optimal use of their chosen powers?

For me the answers to these two questions are crystal-clear: No and no.

 

[I'm A Banana]

why can't you apply a life lesson to game design? isn't that part of the verisimilitude some are seeking?

Not really. Verisimilitude would be a goal of game design; applying life lessons to game design would be more of a method. And, anyway, that's not really what I, or, I think, mearls, was referring to.

in practical ways it just means not rushing the process. testing the parts before forming them into an amalgam.

Taking your time is a good idea, but that's different from the rules simplicity that mearls expressed affection for, and that I am skeptical of.