Brown Jenkin
First Post
Trine said:
I just reread ENWords 3.5 comelation page and could fnd nothing that even hinted that SS and FF would be forward compatable.
Revised DR
- Thread starter IceBear
- Start date
I just reread ENWords 3.5 comelation page and could fnd nothing that even hinted that SS and FF would be forward compatable.
Brown Jenkin
First Post
IceBear said:
Your right, the 5th option is not there under 3.0 either, so the "Fix" does not realy fix anything. So if you are going to Fix a problem then please do so, don't make a change that is so sweeping, but dosen't realy solve anything.
I think you've expressed my point better than I did. Good show.IceBear said:
The same problems do exist in the current system, and changing to special materials does not fix it. If you're about to go against a high-DR monster, the problem may become "find our first holysilver weapon" instead of "find our first +3 weapon", but it's still exactly the same problem.
The actual fix, which they have done, is to lower the amount of damage that DR absorbs. This seems to be a good idea, and it will usually prevent monsters from being immune to normal weapons. Really powerful monsters will still not be killable with rocks and sticks, but that's good, because they're the powerful monsters.
Once they have lowered the numbers, the current issues with DR are mostly fixed. The special materials thing is a completely independent change, which seems not to fix any problems at all. IMHO it won't add flavor either, and in the worst case, it may detract from the game by needlessly increasing complexity. It strikes me as purely gratutious, change for the sake of change, and there's really no point to it.
IMHO, that is.
IceBear said:
Do you think the creature is going to just stand there while the players bash it over and over and over again until it finally falls down?
Lots of times, the players can't afford to have it take a lot longer to defeat a creature - because every extra round it takes is a round that the creature is doing damage to the PCs. If the players had trouble beating a creature when its DR wasn't a factor, that same creature is going to become extremely deadly when given DR that the PCs can't bypass. A fight that the players just barely survived under the old DR rules could very well end up in TPK under the new rules.
The golf bag is the only way around this.
IceBear
Explorer
AuraSeer - don't get me wrong, I'm not a big fan of the new rules, I was just curious as to what the "answer" was to your question. I can appreciate that this is a charged thread, but I really was wondering what the "answer" was - it wasn't to defend the 3.5 DR rules. I, too feel, that the DR "fix" was something that didn't need "fixing" - other than lowering the numbers.
Again, not defending the 3.5 DR, but I don't understand this point. In the current rules, you'd probably have 30/+3 so NO ONE is going to hurt it unless they have the correct weapons. If they lower the DR to 10 or something (like they said) then even without the correct weapons then the party has SOME chance to inflict damage. Isn't it MORE likely to have a TPK in the old rules than the new?
Again, not defending the 3.5 DR, but I don't understand this point. In the current rules, you'd probably have 30/+3 so NO ONE is going to hurt it unless they have the correct weapons. If they lower the DR to 10 or something (like they said) then even without the correct weapons then the party has SOME chance to inflict damage. Isn't it MORE likely to have a TPK in the old rules than the new?
IceBear said:
Well, by the current rules, the party would most likely already have +3 weapons (or a GMW good enough to make +3 weapons) by the time they fought anything with DR 30/+3. But under the new DR rules, they might not have the holy platinum weapons dipped in cheese needed to penetrate the monster's DR.
IceBear
Explorer
Grog said:
Sigh - you didn't even read my original post. AuraSeer said that the DM put in a monster because it was cool and fit the scenario, but the party had no way of overcoming the DR. He then gave 4 options on this (one of which was, not to use the monster). I said, well, what if I want to use a 30/+3 monster in my current game and I know that my party don't have +3 weapons and don't have GMW. That was my point about the same problem exisiting in the current rules.
So, with the new DR rules, yes, the chances of the party being in that scenario where they can't overcome the DR might become more frequent (without the golfbag), but WHEN it does occur, there is less chance of a TPK occuring in the new rules than with the old. That was what I was trying to say. Yes, TPKs (because of DR) might be more frequent in 3.5, but in my SPECIFIC scenario, the chance of a TPK is higher with the old rules than the new.
And, yes, I'm well aware that the CR of a 30/+3 monster is probably sufficient that the appropriate party WOULD have +3 weapons or GMW. I was going with the flow here and assuming the DM was picking the monster based on flavor than balance.
IceBear
Last edited:
IceBear
Explorer
Grog said:
But AuraSeer didn't like that option - which was why I asked what he thought the correct option was (and I think what he's saying is keep the right side of the DR slash the same, but lower the value on the left, so DR 30/+3 becomes DR 10/+3 or something similar - which I like too.)
I was just pointing out that the same problem exists in the current system and you jumped in with a point I couldn't understand - in this SPECIFIC case, so let's not go back in a circle on this now
IceBear
Last edited:
IceBear said:I was just pointing out that the same problem exists in the current system and you jumped in with a point I couldn't understand - in this SPECIFIC case, so let's not go back in a circle on this now
Well, I've heard the argument advanced that players will be okay under the new DR rules even without a golf bag, since DR values are being lowered. I was pointing out that that's not true. If that's not the argument you were making, I apologize for the misunderstanding.
