Revised DR

[dcollins]

The play test for the changes was us. A lot of the rethinking of the rules was based upon the steady torrent of feedback from the consumer. There are external play tests going on right now. In fact I know someone who is a part of one such group.

Could you provide a quote or source for this "external play test" group for the Revised changes? Can anyone here chime in and confirm that they are part of such a group?

Frankly, I'm extremely skeptical. WOTC has not said anything about such playtests so far. With 3rd Ed., there were public calls for playtesters, and a huge list of credits in the PHB.

I guess your vague anecdotal reference isn't much help, sorry.

 

[LokiDR]

So the two-handed fighters are worried about carrying another weapon, while the two weapon fighters are worried that they can't do enough damage to pass the DR. If the two sides put their heads together, maybe they'd see the advantages their styles provided. (for those missing my point: two weapon fighters will want to carry weapons of differing materials so they are always able to bypass the DR, while two-handed fighters should think about increasing their ability to punch right through DR.)


-Rill

There is a balance issue in that. The TWF fighter needs to spend more cash, while the THF can take a feat or get a different weapon? The TWF would like to have backups for both of his weapons, the THF just needs one.

I think if they just removed the hierarchy of materials, and added the DR blunt, they would get most of the effect they want. Then again, there wouldn't be too much reason to buy the new MM, would there?

I am sure that at least a portion of this "revision" is economic. They want people to have a reason to buy the new books. WotC is still a business after all.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

That's a very good point. Dual-wielders are going to get royally screwed by this change.

This is a worry of mine as well. I happen to like the big ole weapon of doom style, but if they weaken two weapon style or weapon and shield style any more even if indirectly like through the DR issue, I may end up seeing even more big weapon of doom styles. I liked being unique with my huge sword in 1e and 2e, now there's a flood of em in 3e. If it gets worse, well there goes the diversity.

 

[Grog]

So the two-handed fighters are worried about carrying another weapon, while the two weapon fighters are worried that they can't do enough damage to pass the DR. If the two sides put their heads together, maybe they'd see the advantages their styles provided. (for those missing my point: two weapon fighters will want to carry weapons of differing materials so they are always able to bypass the DR, while two-handed fighters should think about increasing their ability to punch right through DR.)

I wouldn't call having to spend a ton of money on a bunch of different weapons an advantage.

If my two-handed weapon fighter has to carry around half a dozen different swords just to be a playable character at high levels, the problem is even worse for dual-wielders. They'll have to carry around a dozen different swords. This will cost them more money, and there will be more time involved in changing weapons. That's not an advantage in my book.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

Oh boy I friggin like the changes, all of them. The revision will rule!
Dont listen to the whiners and nay sayers, these things should have been in from the beginning. All major problems get solved one by one....its everything the game needs.
Now the game becomes more intricate and shows some versaitility for DM's to challenge even the most experienced players. I always hated it that for everything in the game, there was a way too simple aproach to solve it or be prepared within a few spells cast...these times seem to be over, thats a good thing!

As I pointed out before unless they remove any Transmute Materials spells, these spells will then work like GMW does now not realy solving the problem.

 

[Trine]

If my two-handed weapon fighter has to carry around half a dozen different swords just to be a playable character at high levels, the problem is even worse for dual-wielders. They'll have to carry around a dozen different swords. This will cost them more money, and there will be more time involved in changing weapons. That's not an advantage in my book.

Large weapon wielders deal all of their damage in large potent hits. Since DR's are going to be reduced to much smaller numbers now, between 5 and 15, the two-handed wielder will almost always be able to just smash through it anyway.

It looks like it is going to hurt the two-weapon fighter even more though. They tend to have hit more for smaller chunks. More attacks means more times that DR will apply, which means less damage overall.

I'm still going to wait for the final rules to come out though, to see how well they work in practice.

 

[LokiDR]

Large weapon wielders deal all of their damage in large potent hits. Since DR's are going to be reduced to much smaller numbers now, between 5 and 15, the two-handed wielder will almost always be able to just smash through it anyway.

It looks like it is going to hurt the two-weapon fighter even more though. They tend to have hit more for smaller chunks. More attacks means more times that DR will apply, which means less damage overall.

I'm still going to wait for the final rules to come out though, to see how well they work in practice.

Under 2e, dual-wielding fighters were rabid. Sword and board hardly gave you any AC, and two-handed was slow and not nearly as efficient.

Under 3e, I can see arguments for TWF, THF, and sword & board. These DR changes could upset that a lot. My point is that the folks at WotC should look at these aspects. If it causes you to fix TWF folks, perhaps it would be better left alone.

I do think that what I have read of the revisions will cause TWF lots of problems. If the rules then improve TWF to compensate, they might well knock something else out of whack.

 

[Shalewind]

TWF is being greatly over emphaized here. Yes, it is arguably balanaced with other fighting styles at the moment. Will TWF do less damage with each attack? Sure, against DR targets. However, consider that a TWF that faces DR enemies often might want to invest in, say a Holysiver and Coldiron pair of weapons. I'd say that will negate most of the material DRs. I mean (95% of baddies have to fit some demographic). If anything, I'd say a properly equipped TWF would be in a position to better defeat DR enemies.

Edit: none...

 

[Illuminae]

Assume you use special materials.

Now, you are a fighter. How do you deal with this?

Answer: The golf bag of weaponry. An extradimensional space to store weapons of the various flavors.

As a GM, is that what you want your characters to do?

The answer was no, that wasn't an improvement in the game style.

That is not by any chance what will happen.

You (all who believe the golf bag theory) are not considering the second aspect that changed: DR values.

With the new DR system, even if you don´t have the specific weapon, YOU CAN still beat them creatures.

And this ISN´T TRUE with the CURRENT rules.

With DRs like 30/whatever then you are required to have the beating stick of eternal doom.

Well, I guess having only 1 kind of weapon to affect is better for those of you who like random monster tables as opposed to a well created enviroment for the game, where it is possible to study it and and learn about its critters.

So, ranting that you will NEED a weapon with new rules is as broken as the current ranger.

With new rules, with DR caping at 15 or so, YOU WILL have freedom to choose weapons and still have a chance.


And I am sorry if my way of stress words sounded non-polite, that isnt the goal. I am just sleepy. And lazy

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Under 2e, dual-wielding fighters were rabid. Sword and board hardly gave you any AC, and two-handed was slow and not nearly as efficient.

Under 3e, I can see arguments for TWF, THF, and sword & board. These DR changes could upset that a lot. My point is that the folks at WotC should look at these aspects. If it causes you to fix TWF folks, perhaps it would be better left alone.

I do think that what I have read of the revisions will cause TWF lots of problems. If the rules then improve TWF to compensate, they might well knock something else out of whack.

An interesting point.

At high levels, I don't think there is a problem. The TWF dude should have a spare weapon to swap anyway and he can sneak damage in with energy enhancement. I think they will do okay.

My perceptive is TWF is a little weak at low and low-mid levels already, and the DR changes might exacerbate the problem.

(For the record, I think TWF is a very strong style a high levels.)