| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| diegosephroth07-22-07, 10:47 PM | Being objective- Do creatures with damage reduction /- trespass all kinds of reduction with its natural attacks? What if they strike other creatures with the same kind of reduction? (/-) |
| runestar07-22-07, 11:02 PM | No. |
| Talisman07-23-07, 01:26 AM | Generally, a creature with DR/(magic) bypasses DR as if its attacks were magic, and often (but not always) a creature with DR/(alignment) bypasses DR as if its attacks were of the opposite alignment...i.e., celestial with DR/evil bypasses DR as if its attacks were good. Unless otherwise specified, creatures with DR/(material) or DR/(nothing) have no special ability to penetrate DR. I suppose you could argue that creatures with DR/-- bypass DR as if their attacks were --...which is to say, nothing...:P |
| Morwen07-23-07, 10:31 PM | The rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#damageReduction) state the following: -A creature with DR/magic bypasses DR as if its natural weapons were magical (so it bypasses DR/magic). -A creature with DR/epic bypasses DR as if its natural weapons were epic (so it bypasses DR/epic and DR/magic). -A creature with an alignment subtype bypasses DR as if its natural and manufactured weapons were of that subtype (so a creature with the Evil subtype bypasses DR/evil). No other forms of DR are bypassed in this way. |
| Banatine07-24-07, 08:42 AM | I think that creatures also ignore that damage reduction of other creatures of the same type as themselves. e.g. a lycanthrope would bypass the DR of other lycanthropes. |
| cwslyclgh07-24-07, 04:01 PM | I think that creatures also ignore that damage reduction of other creatures of the same type as themselves. e.g. a lycanthrope would bypass the DR of other lycanthropes. not by the rules as they are written. |
| Morwen07-25-07, 01:21 AM | I think that creatures also ignore that damage reduction of other creatures of the same type as themselves. e.g. a lycanthrope would bypass the DR of other lycanthropes. That is not correct. |