Revised DR

[Petrosian]

[/B][/QUOTE]

To a certain extent. Unless their characters have a Monster Manual in their possession, they aren't going to know EVERY kind of monster in the world, or their weaknesses. Heck, I'd be surprised if they were even aware of all the different types of weapon materials that are available. You know what? I've never even heard of Cold Iron until this thread came up, so it would be very presumtuatous that my character would know what it is. Maybe he would, but I am sure he wouldn't know what all the other types of "rare" materials are as well.

yes, but he would know what was being sold in the weapon shop he is standing in and if he sees a "cold iron mace" and he knows that some materials are needed for some magical beasts, why would he not inquire?

The key is, by even low lecvels the prices of these things (using the current silver weapons as a guideline) is so low that it is silly to not take advantage of the opportunity. Encumbrance is not an issue and certainly wont be by the time the first couple of haversacks or bags of holding walks into play.

This is not a case of why but rather "why not"?

Common sense is about in-game knowledge, not metagame knowledge.

The tired old refrain. I knew that blessed crossbows killed rakshasas long before i played DND. I knew werewolves were hurt by silver long before i played dnd . i knew that vampires hated garlic and cast no reflections long before i played dnd. In the world of my characters, these things are not just legends but are real honest to god life threatening things.

Just because it is written down in a gaming manual does not mean the notion that it exists in the world as an even rumored quality is metagaming.

I've played characters that had no idea what Mithral or Admantine was, and I've played characters that knew what Nephelium was. Have you never played a character that DIDN'T know what something was?

yes, none of my characters know what metagaming is.

Knowing travel time in-game and knowing what monsters are out in the dark world along with all their powers and weaknesses are two ENTIRELY different things.

And please, point to the post where the latter was claimed by anyone?

If that is truly the way you play your character, you must carry at least one of EVERY item in the PHB. A 10 foot pole (you never know when you are gonna need to pole vault over a small pit), a 10 foot ladder (you never know when you're gonna need to climb out of the pit you fell into while pole vaulting), vial of holy water (never know when you are gonna run into a vampire inside a pit you tried to pole vault over), a monk's outfit (never know when you may find yourself in a monastery and need to dress like the locals), and so on... No harm in being prepared, right?

The holy water is dead spot on. Don't your characters get holy water? Ever? My guys will also tend to do things like get cure disease stuff, anti-poisons stuff, alchemist fire, tanglefoot bags and so on. They dont get them because they KNOW they will be needed in the next adventure but because they dont know they wont.

Interesting thought process here... So if I decide to NOT take any ranks in Escape Artist, because role-play-wise that isn't something my character would take, wouldn't the rules be punishing me when a Dire Lion Improve Grabs me? After all, if I took that skill I would have a better chance to escape the grab than my current BAB allows. Just as, if I took golf bag full of weapons would have improved my chances against creatures with DR. I guess in both cases I would be getting punished because of my roleplay choice, right?

In a sense yes, except that skills are a too few element. You cannot get them all or even close so its a matter of which holes will you leave open not "will you leave any."

The golf baggie is so cheap that its not a case of choosing to leave one open because you cannot cover them all, its just a roleplaying issue. With skills you spent those skills elsewhere and presumably got benefits.

There are always going to be cases where those who PLAY THE GAME win out over those who PLAY THE CHARACTER. The key is, lets not add more of them. lets not make it something that will figure directly into the character's main focus... being a fighter and doing damage to the bad guys.

I mean come on. I can come up with a a dozen (ok, maybe half a dozen, I am tired right now) reasons why my character would and would not choose certain things in game (feats, weapons, spells, skills). And when I choose not to pick something that would otherwise become handy later on down the road, have I been punished? Did I punish myself for the choices I made roleplay-wise?

the more cases and ways we add to make the PLAY THE GAME guy win out over the PLAY THE CHARACTER guy the worse this gets.

I can agree with this. If you continually run into the same type of creature or even different creatures that have the same DR vulnerabilities, maybe you'd be wise to pick up a weapon made of the special material. There is nothing wrong with that. Heck, even the first time you meet the creature you may want to go ahead and get said weapon. But to do so in advance doesn't make much sense IMO. It is all on how you approach it.

Well it seems to me that after seeing silver needed here and iron needed there when i next go into a weapons shop and see iron weapons and silver weapons and brass weapons and wolvesbane scneted weapons i am pretty stoopid if i just decide" nah, probably not real." if by expending a few coins, at the level when i am looking at easily handing over thousands for magic weapons and such, i can provide some cover to this issue, why wouldn't i?

Now when creating higher level characters, it would be acceptable that you have some more knowledge about DR of certain monsters, but you still don't know it all. Heck, even at level 20 there are still some things your character might not know about monsters and materials.

Does the fact that my character decides to carry or even decides it makes sense to carry some extra rations mean to you that I MUST BE CLAIMING total knowledge of every food in the world, every way of cooking it, and precise knowledge of every travel time from here to there?

No?

Then why does my character wanting to carry a silver, a blunt an iron a piercing a brass and so on weapon collection make you jump up and down about all this perfect knowledge nonsense?

Just curious?

If the MM included rules on rations and quality of cooking would you be jumping the metagaming bandwagon everytime the pCS bought food?

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Re: Preparation vs Paranoia 101

Its common sense to take 4 weeks of food if you know you are going to be traveling for 4 weeks. Preparation

It is paranoid to travel with 4 weeks of food at all times IN CASE it turns out you need it. Paranoia

Its common sense when you know you will be fighting lyncanthropes to buy a silver weapon, and perhaps keep it at the ready (ie- not in a HHH or some dimensional space). Preparation

Its paranoid to always carry every kind of weapon, just IN CASE you fight something that requires a special condition to beat it. Paranoia

These are generally PLAYER attributes, not CHARACTER attributes. A good dm does not punish a good player (ie- a player who plays a character well), but I may punish a metagaming caddy. As hyp pointed out a few pages ago, you CAN have a non-metagamed golfbagger, I personally think it will be rare, simply because special DR should not be common, and therefore it wont come up enough to warrant it. YMMV.

Technik

This would make sense if we were playing turnips and cows the life of farmers in a fantasy world. But no we're playing D&D, and we're playing adventurers. The guys and gals who go into dank dungoens fighting whooseits and whatsits, traveling into forbidden forests, over graveyards, and bumping into god knows what. These are the special forces the cops of the fantasy worls. And they will have a utility belt just like a cop will, with a spare clip even though most cops never have to draw their gun in their entire carreer.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

people talk about 'research' like it is a forgone conclusion of a scientific community.

How well will the fighter be able to gather info? He isn't very trained at research to begin with. And which info will he believe? He 'learns' that to hurt werewolves, you can only use two handed weapons. (afterall, the guy using a dagger did no damage at all, yet the halberd seemed to hurt it.) .

I'd suspect after hudreds of years of fighting these things most monsters that aren't rare have weaknesses that are somehat commn knowledge. Hec if you want to play the ignorant savages campaign go for it, but me I think INT 10 as the average means most people can figure things out after a couple hundred/thousand years of being chomped on by the beasties.

Now ifyou bump into the rare celery monster only hurt by peanut butter weapons, well yeah maybe you wont know. But I suspect major classes of creatures like undead, wear, fey etc is common knowledge.

 

[Grog]

Re: Preparation vs Paranoia 101

Its common sense to take 4 weeks of food if you know you are going to be traveling for 4 weeks. Preparation

It is paranoid to travel with 4 weeks of food at all times IN CASE it turns out you need it. Paranoia

Obviously you have never gone on an extended camping trip.

Go talk to some experienced campers. They will all tell you that you always take extra food with you when you're going on a long trip away from civilization.

Yes, it would be paranoid to take four weeks worth of food with you if you were going on an overnight camping trip 15 miles from town. But if you were going on a 2 week river trip WAY out in the wilderness? Any experienced camper would tell you that he'd take at least 3 weeks worth of food for a trip like that, and 4 weeks probably wouldn't be totally out of the question. Stuff like beef jerky and dried fruit is easy to carry.

Because, as anyone with an ounce of common sense will tell you, it's better to get back to town with some extra food than it is to have something go wrong and be stuck out in the middle of nowhere with no food at all.

Even the Boy Scouts understand this.

Its common sense when you know you will be fighting lyncanthropes to buy a silver weapon, and perhaps keep it at the ready (ie- not in a HHH or some dimensional space). Preparation

Its paranoid to always carry every kind of weapon, just IN CASE you fight something that requires a special condition to beat it. Paranoia

Again, this is not paranoia, no matter how much you try to claim it is. It's just common sense.

A silver weapon doesn't cost very much money and it's easy to carry because you can just put it in your haversack, so it's perfectly reasonable for characters to carry them around.

Because as anyone with an ounce of common sense will tell you, it's better to carry around a silver sword that you never use than it is to be attacked by a werewolf and have no way to defend yourself against it.

These are generally PLAYER attributes, not CHARACTER attributes. A good dm does not punish a good player (ie- a player who plays a character well), but I may punish a metagaming caddy.

If a DM punishes a player who takes the perfectly reasonable step of preparing for the unknown by arming himself with special material weapons he knows he might need, then it is the DM who is metagaming. Not the player.

Would you also punish your players for taking extra rations when they went on a wilderness trek? Because it's exactly the same concept at work.

As hyp pointed out a few pages ago, you CAN have a non-metagamed golfbagger, I personally think it will be rare, simply because special DR should not be common, and therefore it wont come up enough to warrant it. YMMV.

In your campaign, that may be the case. It doesn't mean it'll be the case in every campaign, and it doesn't mean that your players won't take the reasonable and sensible step of getting anti-DR weapons just in case.

 

[Left-handed Hummingbird]

Boy, people have really worked up a sweat about this. Ten pages? I hope some of the middle ones weren't that important.

Personally, though I agree that simplicity is best (or simply the easiest?), I think the focus on weapon of a certain type or material adds extra flavor to the monsters.

I don't think high level fighters will carry golf bags with different weapons - a magic weapon in the hand of a fighter will probably be able to punch through the reduced damage reduction most of the time. A good magic weapon and a few secondary weapons (thus, in fact no more than what is often in a typical fighter's inventory) will probably give him (or her) the best bang for his (or her) bucks.

Of course, the fighter will also now have the opportunity to prepare for certain encounters - should he know what he might face. This, I think, is only going to add to the player's satisfaction, when he is able to take down the baddie by exploiting its weakness.

My worry is not with the fighters. If anything they'll shine even more. I'm more worried about the secondary fighters - they lack the brawn the typical fighter has to punch through DR - silver, holy or frozen concentrated orange juice be darned - and thus, they might find themselves lacking any real part in the combat.

But then OTOH - is that really a result of the changed DR-rules? Weren't that the same before - perhaps even more so?

 

[WizarDru]

I think that's a valid point. The fighters benefit from these rules, IMHO, they aren't being punished. Since we can reasonably assume that most creatures will have DR5/X, and a lesser number DR10/X, the fighters will be just fine. A +1 Sword, power attack, weapon specialization, and you'll be doing plenty of damage at the appropriate level. Bards, rogues and clerics won't be doing as well, but they have other skills to help them, and probably will change somewhat under 3.5e.

My problem with DR is that under the current system, it's not just flavorless, it usually not terribly effective for the monsters in question. Scrolling down the SRD, the first monster (animated objects notwithstanding) that meets my eyes that has DR is the Barghest. CR4, with DR 15/+1, average of 33 hps. Horribly dangerous bugger. Unless you have a +1 Sword, Magic Weapon memorized, or some offensive spells memorized. Give the fighter a magic or enchanted sword, and it's over in two turns, maybe three if he's unlucky and no one else contributes.

How about the Bodak? A CR8 creature that kills with it's gaze attack, the terror of many a party. DR 15/silver, 58 hps. Immune to electricty, 20 resistance for fire/cold, and vulnerable to light. Whoopee. Why even bother GIVING him DR? If a party facing a CR8 creature doesn't have a fighter with a +1 weapon or a weapon with GMW running on it, something's out of whack. Otherwise, it's a waste. It's flavorless, dull, and if it's there to simulate something via a game mechanic, it's not working. He's there to be killed by the cleric or mage, not the fighter....unless he has the right weapon, in which case he fall like a tentpeg unless the fighter fails a DC 15 FORT save (which he has a better than 50% chance of doing at 8th level with no buffs).

The current rules punish a party for not having the mage or cleric memorize Greater Magic Weapon more than the proposed version would, IMHO. Mind you, I'm not even certain that forcing the players to carry more than one weapon is such a terrible thing, to begin with. The archer would normally carry several types of arrows, and the average fighter would usually carry more than one weapon. Rogues and rangers commonly have more than weapon, often wielded together or situationally. Wizards, Clerics and Druids have to select the optimal spells for the future, why not warriors selecting weapons? Adherence to the cost limitations mean that the players will make a choice: variety versus power. Either get three swords with special qualities, or one powerful one. Get a +1 Silver sword, +1 Cold Iron Mace and +1 Gold Sword....or get a +3 Flaming Scimitar.

 

[Felon]

Interesting thought process here... So if I decide to NOT take any ranks in Escape Artist, because role-play-wise that isn't something my character would take, wouldn't the rules be punishing me when a Dire Lion Improve Grabs me? After all, if I took that skill I would have a better chance to escape the grab than my current BAB allows. Just as, if I took golf bag full of weapons would have improved my chances against creatures with DR. I guess in both cases I would be getting punished because of my roleplay choice, right?

Nah, you're not getting punished for anything. You knew going in that your character was deficient in that area, and when the time comes you have to deal with it.

LISTEN UP, FOLKS! I'm going to make it real easy for everyone to understand. Contrary to the notion that ten pages of posters on this thread seem to have gotten into their head, the new DR rules aren't about forcing characters to carry around golfbags full of weapons. That's just how some characters will choose to deal with it.

THE WHOLE POINT of the new DR rules is this: sometimes when you encounter an opponent with damage reduction--now you may need to brace yourselves here-- some of the damage will be reduced! Yes, you heard it here first! Damage reduction that actually reduces damage!

I know it's a radical concept to accept for the poor warriors out there who do a mere 2d6+15 damage or so per greatsword swing that they might have to shave off 5 points of damage once in a while, but I think most of you will adapt quite admirably. Take heart! This is why the designers are lowering the amount of DR for most monsters, because now they're working under the assumption that DR isn't inherently irrelevant.

 

[Technik4]

Sigh

From the MM, creatures with DR:

Aboleth/no
Achaierai/no
Allip/no
Animated Objects/no
Ankheg/no
Aranea/no
Arrowhawk/no
Assasin Vine/no
Athach/no
Azer/no
Barghest/yes 15/+1
Basilisk/no
Behir/no
Beholder/no
Belker/no
Blink Dog/no
Bodak/yes 15/silver
Bugbear/no
Bulette/no
Carrion Crawler/no
Celestials/yes 10/+1 - 35/+4
Centaur/no
Chaos Beast/no
Chimera/no
Choker/no
Chuul/no
Cloaker/no
Cockatrice/no
Coutal/no
Darkmantle/no
Delver/no
Demon/yes 5/silver - 30/+3
Destrachan/no
Devil/yes 5/silver - 25/+2
Devourer/no
Digester/no
Dinosaur/no
Dire Animals/no
Displacer Beast/no
Doppleganger/no
Dragon/yes 5/+1 - 20/+3
Dragon Turtle/no
Dragonne/no
Drider/no
Dryad/no
Dwarf/no
Elemental/yes 10+1 - 15/+3
Elf/no
Ethereal Filcher/no
Ethereal Marauder/no
Ettercap/no
Ettin/no
Formian/no
Frost Worm/no
Fungus/no
Gargoyle/yes 15/+1
Genie/no
Ghoul/no
Giant/no
Giant Eagle/no
Giant Owl/no
Gibbering Mouther/no
Girallon/no
Gnoll/no
Gnome/no
Goblin/no
Golem/yes 15/+1 - 50/+3
Gorgon/no
Gray Render/no
Grick/yes 15/+1
Griffon/no
Grimlock/no
Hag/no, see Steely Skin slashing and piercing -1 dam, Bludg +1
Halfling/no
Harpy/no
Hell Hound/no
Hippogriff/no
Hobgoblin/no
Homunculus/no
Howler/no
Hydra/no
Invisible Stalker/no
Kobold/no
Kraken/no
Krenshar/no
Kuo-Toa/no
Lamia/no
Lammasu/no
Lillend/no
Lizardfolk/no
Locathah/no
Magmin/yes 15/+1
Manticore/no
Medusa/no
Mephit/yes 5/+1 - 10/+1
Merfolk/no
Mimic/no
Mind Flayer/no
Minotaur/no
Mohrg/no
Mummy/ 5/+1, see Resistant to Blows Phys Attack only 1/2 dam
Naga/no
Night Hag/yes 20/+3
Nightmare/no
Nightshade/no
Nymph/no
Ogre/no
Ooze/no
Orc/no
Otyugh/no
Owlbear/no
Pegasus/no
Phantom Fungus/no
Phase Spider/no
Phasm/no
Planetouched/no
Pseudodragon/no
Purple Worm/no
Rkshasa/yes 20/+3
Rast/no
Ravid/no
Remorhaz/no
Roc/no
Roper/no
Rust Monster/no
Sahuagin/no
Salamander/yes 10/+1 - 20/+2
Satyr/no
Sea Lion/no
Shadow/no
Shadow Mastiff/no
Shambling Mound/no
Shield Guardian/no
Shocker Lizard/no
Skeleton/no, see Immunities only 1/2 dam from pierc or slash
Skum/no
Slaad/yes 10/+1 and 20/+2
Spectre/no
Sphinx/no
Spider Eater/no
Sprite/no
Stirge/no
Tarrasque/heh, yes 25/+5
Tendriculos/no
Thoqqua/no
Titan/yes
Tojanida/no
Treant/no, see Half Damage from Piercing
Triton/no
Troglodyte/no
Troll/no
Umber Hulk/no
Unicorn/no
Vampire Spawn/yes 10/silver
Vargouille/no
Wight/no
Will-o'-Wisp/no
Winter Wolf/no
Worg/no
Wraith/no
Wyvern/no
Xill/no
Xorn/no, see Half Damage from Slashing
Yeth Hound/yes 10/silver
Yrthak/no
Yuan-Ti/no
Zombie/no
Animals/no
Vermin/no
Celestial Template/yes 5/+1 - 10/+3
Fiendish Template/yes 5/+1 - 10/+3
Ghost/no
Half-Celestial/no
Half-Fiend/no
Half-Dragon/no
Lich/yes 15/+1
Lycanthrope/yes 15/silver
Vampire/yes 15/+1

Ok, 20 creatures (yes there are various demons, devils, and dragons) and 4 templates. That aint a whole lot folks. I stand by my statement that you could adventure to level 20 and only see a couple of creatures with DR, it isnt overwhelmingly likely because dms traditionally enjoy messing with creatures with DR, but its certainly possible. As far as how the DRs will be, weve heard that fey may pick up a cold iron DR, skeletons will get blunt DR, Pit Fiends will have holysilver, and Lyncanthropes will still have silver.

I noticed a few creatures with just silver for their DR already, but I bet since magic trumps silver it was a rare thing for people to actually have to break silver out on them. Seems like a shame. I'll lead someone else to speculate on this data, I wasted most of my lunch break getting it, though anyone with a MM1 could have done it just as easily.

Also note, they did (I think) say that some monsters will still have a magical DR requirement. My vote would be dragons, golems, elementals, and the mighty Tarrasque. Which means in the grand scheme of things, some templates, a couple of handfuls of outsiders, some fey, and lyncanthropes are getting different DR. And we argued about it for almost 11 pages now.

I also still believe that if you buy every weapon you possibly can IN CASE you fight something that needs it, your are paranoid. Its not common sense, on the contrary it would appear to be uncommon sense, or as I like to put it, metagaming. Please dont confuse this with a dm cleverly leaving clues that you may need silver for an upcoming fight, or that its rumored the foul denizens of far off planes can not be injured by mere steel. I am talking about the guys who at first level will buy 1 of every weapon type and material, just in case. It is NOT the same as someone buying some food for an extended adventure.

Technik

 

[AuraSeer]

THE WHOLE POINT of the new DR rules is this: sometimes when you encounter an opponent with damage reduction--now you may need to brace yourselves here-- some of the damage will be reduced! Yes, you heard it here first! Damage reduction that actually reduces damage!

Have you even been reading the thread?
Go back and try again.
Look for all the various explanations of why it will NOT necessarily reduce damage.

If you're going to act superior and condescending, it'd be a good idea to know what you're talking about first.

 

[coyote6]

FWIW, one anecdotal perspective...

Lets think of current... did all fighters carrya slashing *and* bludgening weapon.

Yes, though sometimes the bludgeoning weapon was their shield.

Plus a melee *and* a range weapon? [/B]

Absolutely. Every character carries a melee and a ranged weapon, and has since level 1.

Did they always carry a fly potion? [/B]

No. But they all seem to try to have levitate, spider climb, fly, or the like. One party chipped in and bought the sorcerer a wand of spider climb; I expect they'd commission a wand of fly, if they had the money and felt the need (e.g., lots of flying opponents with ranged attacks in outdoor encounters). Of course, fly potions might yet become ubiquitous.

and water breathing?[/B]

No, though many of them do have that or a potion of swimming. OTOH, only one group has really had to deal with unexpected and unavoidable swim-or-die situations. The other groups have been able to rely on clerics with time to prepare water breathing, and/or having time to strip off armor (and sometimes get mage armor from an arcanist).

And a silver weapon? [/B]

No. They all got magic weapons, so they don't need silver weapons. Even so, though, I do recall seeing a lot of silver daggers and silver arrows/bolts on character sheets.

Note that the above answers are to the best of my recollection, and may be off (for example, I'm not positive the half-orc barbarian/fighter replaced his mace after being shipwrecked; he may be depending on doing ludicrous amounts of raw damage to carry him through battles with skeletons).