Revised DR

[Grog]

Those guys who love using the One Big Weapon will consistently see the short end of DR. Most of the time they'll just have to brute-force their way through the enemy DR. But, on the flip side, they'll always be able to brute-force their way through the enemy DR.

Everyone is too focused on the question of whether or not a character can get through DR. That is not the right question, people.

The question is, can the character get through the DR and still do enough damage to have an impact on the enemy?

A 1st level rogue with a 10 strength and a shortsword can get through the DR of a skeleton with 5/blunt. That doesn't mean the rogue is going to be a factor when the party fights said skeleton.

If my damage is 2d6+8, I can get through 10 points of DR very easily. But look at the effect it has. My average damage is 15. Against a DR 10 creature, that drops to 5. My damage is 1/3 of what it normally is. Say I have two attacks. Against an enemy with, say, 100 hit points, I go from being a significant factor in the combat to being insignificant. And that happens despite me being able to punch through the creature's DR with ease.

Two-weapon user? They'll be just fine. You already had to enchant two weapons anyway, right? So now you have a +3 silver weapon in one hand and a +3 cold iron one in the other. Unlike those people who use one weapon, you're practically guaranteed to have a weapon at hand that bypasses the DR; just put that one in your main hand.

That supposes that there are only two material types in question. It looks like there will be more. And even if there are only two, that means that you aren't a two-weapon user whenever you have to fight something with DR.

Archer? Okay, so 5 of the 50 arrows you had GMW'd this morning are silver. If by some miracle you run up against a lycanthrope, you just pull out the right arrow for the job. You can react to this sort of thing far more quickly than the fighters, and with less loss in power.

Yes - until you run out of arrows tipped with the proper metal type.

 

[LokiDR]

Re: Youve got to be kidding....

On GMW: Please. Dont insult anyone here, GMW is so much more than a spell to bypass DR. It makes archers sick, prevents fighters from needing any enhancements beyond +1 and sure striking, and lasts way too long.

I agree with all of that. Changing GMW might go ways to fix the "DR Problem", or at least make archer less sick.

On Cheap: Oh please. Whats your golfbag going to have? A +1 version of every material weapon? Then youll just about be able to afford +1 Armor and some potions. Its a game of choices, why dont you start statting up some fighters who buy HHH and a bunch of different weapons from different materials. It just wont fly. You might have 2 decent magic weapons, and a few masterwork versions, but at high levels youre probably better off having one maxed magic weapon with mods and a decent alternate, plus a ranged weapon. I dont think thats much more than people have now.

I agree that price will keep the golf-bag down. But if you don't have the weapons, and there aren't spells published, what you going to do? If your answer is "the DR is lower, so suck it up" read on.

On Low DR: Whats the point? Are you kidding? You are arguing both sides of the argument. Either DR is so low that it doesnt matter to peasants (and therefore fighters) so you just use a couple weapons and suck up the few points per round, OR its a big pain and everyone will need a golf bag. Think of it like this, any +5 weapon essentially "negates" 5 DR. So your 20th level fighter has a +5 Flaming Keen Longsword. Its made out of Cold Iron lets say. You gonna switch to your golfbag to fight lyncanthropes, or accept a few points of damage less per round? If you accept the damage, that monsters power is keeping him alive a little longer, especially if its a werewolf with 15 class levels or something. See how the DR means something? In regular play, you just negate his DR because you have a magic weapon. And really, most characters get a magic weapon of appropriate level to deal with the monsters because DMs dont want to be too "hard" on the players. You wont have to worry "Oh my players havent persued silver weapons, maybe they cant take this werewolf" because his DR isnt too powerful, it will aid him in the fight, and the characters may afterward think about looking up some ways to fight lyncanthropes more effectively, but thats about it.

I don't like the "negate DR" swords any more than you do. But losing 5 or 10 pts off every attack can have a HUGE effect on the outcome of the battle. If they are killed just before the PC in front of them before, now they will live with HP to spare. I used a DR 5/+2 against a party who didn't have +2 weapons. If I had one more good shot, there would have been death. Without the DR, I didn't have a chance in the world. It was a 5th level druid vs an APL 9 party. That little DR went a looong way.

NOTE TO WOTC: consider changing CRs for strange DR creatures.

On How many Materials: I said we only know about 2. These are actually referred to in the phb and MM now, they just dont come into play much. What other materials? Well adamantine, mythril, and dark wood are already referred to. Then theres the differentiation between slashing/piercing/blunt weapons. Theres a lot of room for different weapons even if the only actually add cold iron, silver, and holysilver. Plus theres the subject of "blessed weapons". I think this makes for plenty of options, and I think the whole golfbag scenario is still negated by PC wealth per level.

Assuming 2 different materials, 5 different levels of "plus", 3 damage types, and "with or without holy", you get 60 different types of DR. Yes, WotC could do this and still agree with the DR material they have pre-published.

My point is that the number of different DR types should be kept fairly small, for those who like "monster of the week". If you don't play that way, then DR under current or revised rules won't make much difference to you. You will alread have what you need.

As far as running away if you dont have the right material? Yeah right. Im a 10th level fighter and get caught up in a den of wererats. Am I gonna run away with my +2 flaming greatsword or start taking names? Yeah, its not silver, but hopefully Im not alone. I may not take the spotlight this fight, but so WHAT. Groups that work as a team are always more successful than those made up of power-gamers looking to tweak out their characters. And guess which one most resembles fantasy novels?

If they have DR 10/silver, they have just gone from an annoyance to real threat. That change has to be accounted for, either the golf-bag, DM choices, or CR. And if they are going to ripple through that much, perhaps they should consider if they are making the best change. Just because it can be better doesn't mean it must be changed in the rules for everyone. So I question the change.

As I said earlier, you arent forced to buy anything. If you are the DM, use the SRD as you please and change what you like. No one is going to force you to buy anything. If you are a player, the DMs rules go. I cant think of many dms that would let a fighter run around with a golfbag (or sack as the case may be). Suck it up, now there are things to be afraid of besides will saves.

If this is your opinion, then you must not understand marketing much. One or two changes to monsters, most people will use the SRD. Changing CR, DR, and giving an explanation of the conversion only in the MM is another story. Then most people will "have to" buy the new MM to stay current. One chage costs WotC a lot of time and MONEY, with little money from sales. The other costs slightly more, but they make a whole lot more money.

If I were them, I would choose option 2. I don't fault them for it. I want the game to be around, and the company needs to be there to support it. Then I would argue for the minimal change that gets the result (sales, more flavor in DR) with the minimal upset (balance between TWF/THF, backwards compatability, 3rd party compatability, golf bags)

As to whether golf-bags belong in D&D or not, along with "how close is D&D to fantasy stories" I say: Not A Rules Problem. You change the flavor by house rules, or metagame disscussion. These are different for every group. The rules need to be balanced as RULES first, and flavor second.

 

[Victim]

In case you didn't notice Tecknik, all those material costs are becaus the weapon actually does something. You can get upgraded damage by using those materials. Fever Iron isn't exclusively to penetrate the defenses of ice creatures, it adds a point of fire damage to every hit. Silver, gold, etc weapons provide a significant boost to base damage.

Those material types are expensive because they have inherent value, and not because they can be used to bypass DR. It costs only a couple GP to get a silvered, werewolf beating weapon.

 

[Technik4]

Grog: Did you also have issues with wizards only having a certain number of spells per day? The classic wizard/fighter argument is that while the wizard can be much more spectacular, he eventually runs out of steam. The fighter however can fight all day, and then fight at night, and as long as he has hp. His classic flaw was the will save. If you remove will saves from the game, the fighter is equally good in all situations, now there are potential for situations where he is not at optimum levels.

I'll sidetrack here for a second. Did you ever play diablo 2? Ok, loaded question I know, but lets not get into rollplaying or roleplaying, its just a fun game. Well at some point they realized that it wasnt really fair making some of the monsters (and at higher levels, all of the monsters) have resistances to all the elemental spells, because you get to the point where the "wizards" are just too weak, even though they are at range and fighter types had to get in the monsters face. So they made Damage Resistance, which functioned exactly like the elemental resistances, there was no way to get around it, and ohhh, how those fighter types complained.

Sorry for the sidetrack, but that example illustrates an analogy between the d&d classes as well. Do you think rogues are happy about creatures with no critical places so they cant get sneak attacks or crits? No. Those encounters usually kind of suck for the rogue. How about for clerics when its NOT an enemy directly opposed to your deity and you prepared tons of stuff to hose evil doers? Well ok, the cleric is strong enough to still be integral, but lets not get into THAT debate. The point is, the fighter was overpowered in some respects. Primarily when it came to DR, which was more of a gauge of a creature, if the DR was too high, then do not throw it against the party.

Sub-optimal is fine. No one character deserves to shine in EVERY combat in d&d, even if you have taken many levels of a class called "fighter". So what if you fight 1 thing which reduces your damage by 66%? Do you hear wizards complaining when enemy's have SR, elemental resistances, high saves, and evasion? An opponent with DR can still be tripped, disarmed, grappled, or bullrushed. The game is forcing you to use more tactics and to make more choices as someone else said.

Wizards dont even get a chance to cast a spell with some freaky component that would negate elemental resistances, fighters can just suck it up, buy a golfbag (and, imo, sacrifice a substantial amount of gold into said golfbag (see earlier post)), or get lucky and have the appropo weapon.

If you dont like it, dont use it. But dont try and cry that its unnecessary or broken because you don't like it. It makes you sound narrowminded, among other things.

Victim: I wouldnt say those effects are very major. Silvered only gives a +1 damage vs creatures with silver DR. For 1,500gp. The other weapon bonuses give +1 damage, usually an elemental type. Those arent major bonuses, and I wouldnt be surprised if the old silver costs got raised *gasp*.

Technik

Edited to reply some more.

 

[Aloïsius]

I would hardly even call the haversack of weapon de jour using your brain.

rant mode on//

So, confronted to an ennemy against whom your weapon is inneficient, you are unable to have another idea than seeking another weapon ? If you read my post, you will have a few suggestions.

This exactly what I don't like with the current system : it's so easy to use the simplest way to kill things (just need a +x weapon, or the dreaded GMW) that people forget that there are other things to do.

As I said :

flank, aid another (two version), trip, disarm, sunder, grapple, tank (expertise+defending weapon+fighting on the defensive), bullrush, overun, throwing holy water/alchemist fire, carry a wounded fellow to safety, creative use of the environment...

But no. All you want is slash, hack and smash. That's as boring as the Diablo game. I think the great advantage of tabletop RPG is that you may make any action you want.

Back in ad&d2 planescape, I encountered a monster only wounded by +2 weapon, which I haven't. I used tapestry on the wall to blind and entangle it, so the fighter with the +2 sword has an easier time to cut it in pieces.
Of course, I could have sit down, whining "what is this game, I can't kill the beast cause my sword is not big enough, I need more sword, more magical sword, boohoo, you silly DM"

I'm tired of this golfbag argument. The player who will use such a tactic already use it anyway :
one ghost touch, one dragon bane, one holy, one sure striking...

 

[besnode]

I would hardly even call the haversack of weapon de jour using your brain.

its just common sense for an uncommon world.

Petrosian, I really think you're getting upset over nothing. It seems to me that the creature that can be killed only by some exotic material is pretty standard in fantasy fiction, and even in D&D. Heck, I'm old enough to remember when Gygax wrote an encounter with an Iron Golem that wielded a flaming sword in one hand and a whip of cockatrice feathers in the other, and that could be harmed only by one weapon, which it guarded.

Does Conan carry around a golfbag of weapons? I think not - yet he frequently ran into critters that had unusual vulnerabilities. He figured out what they were and then found or developed a weapon to exploit them. Likewise in D&D - creatures with regeneration can be a rea pain until you figure out what they're vulnerable to, but you don't carry around one of everything just in case.

What you're talking about it is the extreme end of munchkin powergaming. To the extent that it happens at all, I expect most GMs will be able to discourage it if they don't want such things in their games.

--Paul

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

With DR ratings going down, it is not as if a melee specialist can't just punch through the DR. Once you have a +2 or +3 weapon, it is not that big a deal to ignore DR 5.

The net effect is that we will see more variability in combat. I don't think anyone will be hosed, but it is too soon to tell without real details.

Let's not say the sky is falling over one acorn.

 

[Grog]

Grog: Did you also have issues with wizards only having a certain number of spells per day? The classic wizard/fighter argument is that while the wizard can be much more spectacular, he eventually runs out of steam. The fighter however can fight all day, and then fight at night, and as long as he has hp.

The key phrase there is "as long as he has hp". The fighter runs out of steam too. He is much more likely to take damage than the wizard, and he has to be healed. Healing is typically a limited resource, so the fighter will also reach a point where he can't go on. It simply happens in a different way than it does for the wizard.

His classic flaw was the will save. If you remove will saves from the game, the fighter is equally good in all situations, now there are potential for situations where he is not at optimum levels.

That's ridiculous. If you think will saves are the only flaw fighters have, you simply don't have a very imaginative or creative DM.

For example:

Incorporeal and invisible/concealed creatures. A 50% miss chance cuts the fighter's damage in half. Magic hurts these creatures just fine, in most cases.

High AC creatures. The fighter can't damage what he can't hit.

Flying creatures. Sure, he may have a bow so he won't be totally helpless, but the fighter's big greatsword of doom is useless against them.

Enemies firing from behind arrowslits.

Enemies with a long reach and "stopping" feats, like Large and in Charge. Or, enemies with a long reach and improved grab.

Enemies who disarm the fighter.

Enemies who use magic to avoid letting the fighter close to meele range.

Enemies who attack from prepared ambush and have lots of obstacles and traps in place to stop charging fighters.

The list goes on and on. Fighters aren't equally good in all situations. Not even close. Sure, in a straight, stand up, bash the monster fight, fighters are great (though they'll most likely get bashed quite a bit in return). But if every single fight is like that, the game gets boring pretty fast.

Sub-optimal is fine. No one character deserves to shine in EVERY combat in d&d, even if you have taken many levels of a class called "fighter". So what if you fight 1 thing which reduces your damage by 66%? Do you hear wizards complaining when enemy's have SR, elemental resistances, high saves, and evasion? An opponent with DR can still be tripped, disarmed, grappled, or bullrushed. The game is forcing you to use more tactics and to make more choices as someone else said.

Wizards, by their nature, usually have more options than fighters. If the enemy has SR, use buff spells on your party members. If the enemy has elemental resistsance or evasion, use a non-damaging spell like Polymorph Other or Hold Monster. If the enemy has high saves, use buff spells or spells that don't allow a save.

Fighters, on the other hand, tend to have more limited options and are more geared towards doing straight damage. Take away their damage dealing ability, and you cripple them. Sure, they can trip, disarm, grapple, and bullrush, but since it's common for them to fight things that are both larger and stronger than they are, those aren't always viable options. How do you disarm a dragon? How do you grapple a pit fiend? See the problem?

If you dont like it, dont use it. But dont try and cry that its unnecessary or broken because you don't like it. It makes you sound narrowminded, among other things.

So everyone who disagrees with you is narrow-minded. Cute.

Again, I just don't see why DR is so important to some people. I find 3E to be perfectly enjoyable with it the way it is now. There are lots of things I'd rather see fixed before DR even enters into the picture.

 

[besnode]

If you won't let your players buy silver weapons, or you invent creatures that can only be hit by holy golden blades covered with cheese, then you're making a conscious decision to make the fighters in the party less useful relative to the spellcasters. If the fighters can't do enough damage to make a difference in the fight, all they can do is be meat shields for the spellcasters, who can do enough damage to take the critters down. Playing a meat shield is not a lot of fun, and if that situation comes up often enough, you'll probably find that your fighters simply won't enjoy the game anymore. Not a desirable outcome for anyone concerned.

This is just nonsense IMO. It's no worse than hitting the party with a critter with high Spell Resistance or with high resistance to the energy form(s) that the spellcaster can produce. It's commonly assumed on boards like this that EVERY spellcaster has Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Mestil's Acid Breath, Cone of Cold, and Shout prepared at all times, just in case they run into a critter that is effectively immune to all but one energy form. However in practice that is simply not the case. In reality parties do run into monsters that the spellcasters can't damage effectively. They deal with it.

Fighters can learn to do the same, without carrying a ridiculous assortment of oddball weapons.

Even a 5/* DR will make a significan't difference in a fight - no, a 1st level commoner cannot deal effective damage to such a creature: their weapons do 1d6 or 1d8 by and large, and they tend to have STR in the 10-12 range, for average damage of 3-5 hp per attack. So low DR is not useless. High DR is rare, and it should make monsters truly fearsome. I think we all know that the Pit Fiend was severely underpowered before. Giving it DR15 with a vulnerability to something exotic (likely holy or blessed weapons) will make it more dangerous, as it should be.

The amount of whining on this subject has been simply amazing. I think it will work out just fine in-game.

--Paul

 

[Technik4]

No. Narrowminded people are closed to new ideas and cling to the way things have worked. I didn't say you were narrowminded. Regardless, most of this is conjecture without having seen the entire system. I just seem willing to give it a chance whereas you seem like its a non-issue, "it aint broke so dont try and fix it" kinda attitude. Just because it isnt quite broken doesnt mean it as as good as it could be, or even that it is as good as it was intended to be.

I think you took me a little too literally (or perhaps I was too literal). Hp are obviously a factor, as are the evasion qualities of his enemies, but by and large the cleric will heal him and the mage will insure he can get to the enemy. Since he will sport the most hp, nearly the highest AC if not the highest AC, and generally does not need a variety of "toys" (just upgrades on his standard equipment) if you take away will saves you make him the strongest character by far. Not that it was really my point.

I have seen very rare situations (usually very low level) when the fighter cannot hit the AC with a reasonable amount of ease. At high levels, its almost a guarantee that he will hit with at very least his first attack.

As another posted pointed out, sometimes a fighter may need to think outside the box. Its not a computer game, be unorthodox if your main and all of your secondary attacks wont work.

My point about wizards vs fighters is that at some point the wizard is out of his 3 highest levels of spells. The dm pops another encounter. The cleric through wands or spells has ensured that everyone is at full hp. The fighter is ready to rock, 100% as if the day had just started. The wizard, is quite a ways from being as he was at the beginning of the day. Hes been using all of his touted "options" all day. He may be reduced to doing more menial work, like buffing characters in case the enemy cast dispel magic, or countering a dispel magic. He is running at sub-optimal level. Even worse for the wizard whose spells didnt even work that day because of SR, resistances, saves, etc. Poor wizard.

The fighter goes into every fight at optimum levels assuming his hp is decent. Yeah, there are incorpereal creatures, and guys behind arrow slits. My dm is imaginative to have thought of those things, but regardless those are advantages against the whole party, not just in the fighter's realm. DR is primarily a fighter's concern, though it affects clerics and rogues to an extent as well. The rogue can still try for a flank and hope to get some damage through with a good sneak and maybe a crit, the cleric of course has spells. The fighter can still try for a crit, or as has been pointed out, try a bevy of other things.

You flank a dragon for your rogue buddy. You grapple a pit fiend for your rogue buddy. You "take 1 for the team". Youre a fighter, part time asskicker, part time meatshield - full time party member.

Technik