Why I Don't Like 3.5 Damage Resistance

[ptolemy18]

As for my preferrence of editions, I much prefer 3.5 to 3.0. Many of the changes either institutionalized my own house rules (the DR rules) or improved on areas that were, IMO, very weak (3.0 Ranger was so bad that I'd banned it from my games, despite loving the archetype).

I don't like DR in 3.5 because it doesn't work for my current campaign which is alignment-less and not set in Greyhawk. Things like "damage resistance 10/good" are useless to me.

Also, even if I were running a campaign with alignment, I'd prefer the nature of magical weapons (specifically "magical weapons +whatever number) to be some sort of generic thing that I can flesh out myself for my own campaign's purposes.

I mean, really, what the hell **is** a "+3" sword? It could be ANYTHING!!! And I mean this in the GOOD sense. Who knows what kind of bizarre, weird-ass mystical properties are represented by that number "+3"?... And "+5"!? Wow! The mind boggles!

In short, I don't want "the sword that can kill the big bad monster/demon/thing" to be tied to some particular D&D world's mythology about "adamantine" and "holy silver" and whatever. I want to be able to say things like "in my campaign, the only +5 swords are pulled out of the spines of dragons... or created by high level wizards, of course."

Guess I can't expect WotC to keep things intentionally more generic for my own enjoyment, though. Oh well. Eventually my preference will probably resurface in the form of some alternate-rules supplement...

Jason

 

[Imret]

Testify!

I apologize that this isn't the most thought-out response, but this sums up most of my thinking on the subject, lacking only "God that's stupid" . The best magical swords are fashioned of bizarre materials; starsteel, forged souls, magically treated glass, and the like. Just wanted to contribute an assenting opinion.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

I'm not completely sure what you're trying to say...it almost seems like two completely different arguments. Maybe I'm just tired...but I'll try anyway.

It IS generic. Thing is, it simply uses some base assumptions about Core D&D. Alignment being a major one. If you cut that out, you aren't playing Core D&D anymore and you ARE going to have to change other things.

But how is a +# sword not generic?(Or maybe I'm just confused by what you're saying...) It doesn't tell you ANYTHING beyond a bonus to damage and attack. You can say whatever you want for your own campaign, but you have to accept that house rules and things like that will have other effects through the game system.

 

[hong]

I don't like DR in 3.5 because it doesn't work for my current campaign which is alignment-less and not set in Greyhawk. Things like "damage resistance 10/good" are useless to me.

You should know that when you start making house rules, you might have to tweak stuff.

I mean, really, what the hell **is** a "+3" sword? It could be ANYTHING!!! And I mean this in the GOOD sense. Who knows what kind of bizarre, weird-ass mystical properties are represented by that number "+3"?... And "+5"!? Wow! The mind boggles!

Well, whatever bizarre, weirdass mystical properties that a "+3" represents, they must be some kind of smaller bizarre, weirdass mystical properties than the bizarre, weirdass mystical properties that a "+5" represents. Funny world, where mystical weirdassness implies an ordinal scale.

 

[Li Shenron]

Heh, the gaming world is nice because it's various Everyone likes something and dislikes something else in each RPG or edition. And you're perfectly allowed to change what you don't like in your games, especially if it doesn't fit with your campaign issues.

In my opinion, the 3.5 DR is better than the 3.0 version because it's less straightforward. But I agree with Monte Cook's opinion that after the revised DR the pricing for +X enchantments to weapons is quite off.

One thing that is rarely mentioned is that the new 3.5 actually has at least 2 changes: (1) all the DR Y/+X have changed to DR Z/Magic and (2) new DR types have been introduced. Almost always it sounds like people are using either the whole old 3.0 or the whole new 3.5 version, but there are also at least two possibilities in between to consider. For instance, to me it seems that using the new alignment-based and material-based DR enriches the game, but I could keep the different effects for more degrees of +X.

 

[ptolemy18]

I'm not completely sure what you're trying to say...it almost seems like two completely different arguments. Maybe I'm just tired...but I'll try anyway.
It IS generic. Thing is, it simply uses some base assumptions about Core D&D. Alignment being a major one. If you cut that out, you aren't playing Core D&D anymore and you ARE going to have to change other things.

You're right, it's true that removing alignment from D&D is a major change and "on my own head be it." I'm definitely not saying "alignment sux" or anything... in fact, I'm pretty happy with how it's handled in 3.0/3.5 for the most part.

But I don't like adding it to the DR system. I prefer the idea of high "plus" magic weapons just being "awesomely powerful things which are able to harm almost anything." Regardless of whether they're demons or devils, good or evil, lawful or chaotic, whatever. And I like the idea that higher numbers indicate higher levels of "awesome powerfulness", so that the sword which is magical enough to fight the little demon might not be able to fight the big demon, and so on and so forth. Seems reasonable to me... and less abuse-able than the idea of carrying around a "spice rack" of different swords made of different materials and charged with different alignments. ("Why... a formian? Let me bring out my CHAOS SWORD!... What's that, a Chaos Beast? Let me bring out my LAW HALBERD!... What? A golem? Let me bring out my ADAMANTINE HOOKED HAMMER!")

But how is a +# sword not generic?(Or maybe I'm just confused by what you're saying...) It doesn't tell you ANYTHING beyond a bonus to damage and attack.

No, I mean I like the +# DR system BECAUSE it's generic. That way, as a DM I can make up whatever house "flavor" I want for the nature of magic weapons.

Admittedly, if I were a player who's new to D&D I probably wouldn't think twice about it. The whole "adamantine, cold iron, holy silver" thing doesn't really hurt the game, but it doesn't help it either.

Jason

 

[ptolemy18]

You should know that when you start making house rules, you might have to tweak stuff.

Just trying to stick to the 3.0 goodness... (well, aside from the "no alignments" thing, which is my own messy addition...)

Jason

 

[ptolemy18]

I apologize that this isn't the most thought-out response, but this sums up most of my thinking on the subject, lacking only "God that's stupid" . The best magical swords are fashioned of bizarre materials; starsteel, forged souls, magically treated glass, and the like. Just wanted to contribute an assenting opinion.

There's a scene in the old fantasy novel THE KING OF ELFLAND'S DAUGHTER where the witch makes a magic sword in the following way:

* she goes to her garden
* she digs underneath the cabbages and finds a lightning bolt growing there (hey, they're sort of shaped like roots...)
* she takes the lightning bolt back to her house and forges it into a sword.

Yes, I know this is silly...

Jason

 

[Anabstercorian]

But then you also have to change the rules about weapon crafting, since apparently a +1 weapon is no longer upgradable to +5.

 

[Tarrasque Wrangler]

I prefer the idea of high "plus" magic weapons just being "awesomely powerful things which are able to harm almost anything."

But see, that's just the problem. A +5 weapon wasn't really "awesomely powerful", at least not when you're a 20th level fighter who's walking around with at least a +20 to-hit anyway - except for the rather artificial DR requirements. Besides the piddling 1 point difference which you probably didn't need anyway, there was no real reason to carry a +5 sword over a +4 except for the handful of creatures that could only be fully hurt by the +5. In most campaigns I witnessed, this led to an arms race to see who could get the highest plus first, and little thought was paid to a character's style, taste, or history. Since the flat "DR/Magic" came along, it's become OK for a character to hang onto his cherished old +1 sword for anything other than ceremonial purposes that he got waaaay back at 3rd level.

To me, at least, this is a Good Thing. You may have a point on aligned weapons and special materials, but these seem like easy enough things to kitbash on your own.