Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Bobson 06-26-07, 04:28 PM	DR has always bothered me some. My preference in melee characters is to play a dual-wielding character, and whenever we went up against monsters which had DR of anything that affected me (DR/good and silver, for instance), I was always much worse off than my fellows with a two-handed weapon. And this is on top of spending many feats on being able to dual-wield in the first place, and having to pay for both weapons being enchanted. (More on this later) This dislike was further exacerbated when I started running games of my own, and putting my players up against dragons. Dragons are supposed to be tough. They get DR/magic going all the way up to 20, which is more DR (although much easier) than even Solars and Balors get. But it's DR/magic. A simple +1 sword bypasses it completely, and what party won't have a multitude of magical weapons by the time they face a dragon with DR 10/magic or higher (CR 12-19, depending on color)? In addition, this strongly encourages people to get other enchantments on their weapon instead of straight +bonuses. A +1 weapon's already going to bypass any DR it's capable of bypassing, so why not give it lots of other cool things too! DR in 3.0 was mostly worse. High DRs could make a creature almost invulnerable, until you got a powerful enough weapon, in which case they became much easier to kill. Just look at a balor's 30/+3, for an example - very few characters can do more than 30 damage in a single melee hit on a regular basis, but getting a +3 weapon by the time you fought one was pretty trival, and then it only had 110 hp... In addition, this practically required people to add +bonuses to their weapons before adding any other enchantments, because otherwise they wouldn't be able to bypass DR... All that being considered, when I started a new campaign with some rule tweaks, I decided to fiddle with DR/magic. Here's what I came up with, for feedback, suggestions, or your own use: Any magic weapon will bypass DR/magic up to it's enchantment bonus*4. (Thus a +1 weapon bypasses 4 points of DR, a +2 bypasses 8 points, and a +5 bypasses 20.) Against DR/epic, a weapon is treated as having an enchantment of 5 lower (so a +5 weapon doesn't bypass at all, a +6 weapon bypasses 4...) If the creature has combo DR (such as: DR/magic and bludgeoning, DR/magic and silver), a weapon without the other property does not bypass anything, and a magical weapon with that property bypasses the DR as per above. The way I see it, this encourages improving the +bonus of your weapon, but doesn't mandate it the way 3.0 did. Your +2 flaming dragonbane longsword of speed (A +7 weapon) will bypass 8 of that black wrym's DR 20/magic, leaving it with an effective DR 12/- Still something to worry about, but not as invulnerable as the 20/- it would have in 3.0 after your +2 weapon failed to penetrate it's 20/+3 DR, and not as vulnerable as the DR 0/- it would have in 3.5. Adding another +1 to the weapon, to make it a +3 flaming dragonbane longsword of speed (a +8 weapon), would drop the effective DR by 4, to 8/-, which makes a lot more sense for a +1 enchant than dropping it by 20 (3.0) or by 0 (because it can't go any lower in 3.5). Thoughts? Alternatives? This doesn't address the dual-wielder problem at all (They'll still have to spend feats and enchant both weapons), although I don't think it makes it too much worse for them.
Valoy_Muniz 06-27-07, 09:57 AM	If you are going this path you should make it that it ignors 5 points of dr per real + on the wepon. This way a creature with 15 dr/magic would have a dr of 10 verse some one with a +1 flaming sword but a dr of 10 vers some one with a +2 sword. This way it will encurage your players to get a normle + on the wepon and thing twice about the other + as that seems to be what you want.
Tomkin 06-27-07, 10:06 AM	Well, it depends. The system is nice, though I agree it should be 5 per instead of 4 per, but it's also complex. If your group doesn't mind doing a bit of extra math, and you don't mind remembering two or three different DR values for that dragon, then go for it. Also, let me point out that this makes DR (or at least DR X/magic) stronger, which in turn makes spellcasters (who don't have to worry about DR) more powerful. Since it is a general opinion that spellcasters are powerful enough already, you might want to try and balance it a little more. :twocents:
Bobson 06-27-07, 10:46 AM	Well, I was originally going to use 5 instead of 4, but then I realized that it caps at +4 (nothing has DR 25/magic), +5 is useless for penetrating DR, and then +6 starts being useful again (for epic), so I scaled it based on that. I haven't playtested it yet (my party has yet to encounter anything with DR/magic), so I'm willing to change it if you have a good enough reason. I also agree that it's complex. I won't know if it's too complex until I try it, but I think I can manage it - just need to get the players to say "I do 15 damage with a +1 weapon" whenever they hit. And that's a good point about making spellcasters more powerful - I hadn't considered that. I don't have any arcane casters in the group right now, so it may be less relevant for my campaign, but I'll keep it in mind for when they die and reroll... I may tweak SR some too, eventually, or I may get rid of this if it's unduly nerfing the melees.
Lord_of_Omnipotence 06-28-07, 07:30 PM	In addition, this strongly encourages people to get other enchantments on their weapon instead of straight +bonuses. A +1 weapon's already going to bypass any DR it's capable of bypassing, so why not give it lots of other cool things too! What's wrong with encouraging players to get cool things on their weapon??? Most players, even with this rule, elect to upgrade their weapon's magic bonus and just buy augment crystals.
Hugin 06-28-07, 09:50 PM	Also, let me point out that this makes DR (or at least DR X/magic) stronger... I think this is a good thing as DR x/magic seems to be the weakest of the damage reductions. Weapons with magical bonuses are so much more common party-wide compared to weapons of the other DR types like alignment, adamantine, silver, cold-iron, damage type, etc. This may be presented to my players to see how they like it. (I don't have to worry about nerf-whinning unless it truly does nerf for no meaningful reason).
koiulpoi 06-29-07, 03:15 PM	This also has the benefit of making players with DR more powerful. Take the Tattooed Monk PrC from CW. He gets additional DR 2/magic every odd level if he takes the Crab tattoo (DR 10/magic at level 10). This is effective, as-is, against almost no creatures at that level. However, if we use your system, a monster needs a +3 weapon to bypass all the monk's DR. This means you need to consider what monsters have what "effective plus" for defeating his DR. Monks are also a good example because their fists are considered "Magic" for purposes of bypassing DR (level 4, I believe). How much would it bypass in your system?
hawkinsthedm 06-29-07, 06:02 PM	Personally, on things like the Half-Celestial and Half-Fiend, I just change the damage reduction from DR X/Magic to DR X/Opposite Alignment (usually Good or Evil, occasionally Lawful or Chaotic) --Hawkins
Cheza 06-30-07, 10:18 AM	I changed it, but this is not like your rule. I realized the same problem, when I looked at "Protection from Arrows". In 3.0 this spell was quite ok, but in 3.5 it doesn't prevent a single damage point. For your calculation, I would change it a bit: Instead of reducing the value for every enchantment bonus you have, you should limit this, so they can't reduce it below +1. A +2 sword would reduce the DR by 5 points and you will have to wear a +5 sword to negate 20/magic.
Feeble_Kobold_Wizard 06-30-07, 09:40 PM	I'm a big fan of your adjustment, it seems fair and reasonable. As for minks fists I would just have the plus go up effectively as their hand damage went up. It adds a lot of balance the way you set it up and it makes the ridiculous price of a set of invulnerability armor ( a +4 equivalent) worht it and not easily trumped by a magic weapon spell. Nice job, kudos :)
Tomkin 06-30-07, 10:18 PM	I'd say monsters whose natural weapons are treated as magic have an "effective enhancement bonus" of +1 for every four HD. That syncs up nicely with the amount of DR they ignore. It might be too much, though, if you want players' DR to have an impact.
runestar 06-30-07, 10:31 PM	How would this affect the monsters' cr? Their cr would have been partially decided by the ease with which their dr would be overcome. Now that it is harder to penetrate dr/magic (as is the case for dragons), are there any guidelines you can provide for revising their cr upwards?
VDOS 07-01-07, 03:11 AM	The way I see it, this encourages improving the +bonus of your weapon, but doesn't mandate it the way 3.0 did. Your +2 flaming dragonbane longsword of speed (A +7 weapon) will bypass 8 of that black wrym's DR 20/magic, leaving it with an effective DR 12/- Still something to worry about, but not as invulnerable as the 20/- it would have in 3.0 after your +2 weapon failed to penetrate it's 20/+3 DR, and not as vulnerable as the DR 0/- it would have in 3.5. Dragonbane would put the sword to be a efficient +4 weapon against the dragon so the DR reduction should be 16 not 8. But other then that i also think it should be 5 be point of enchantment bonus mainly because most things that come with damage reduction come in fives.
Bobson 07-01-07, 03:23 AM	How would this affect the monsters' cr? Their cr would have been partially decided by the ease with which their dr would be overcome. Now that it is harder to penetrate dr/magic (as is the case for dragons), are there any guidelines you can provide for revising their cr upwards? As everyone who I've talked to who has ever put a dragon against a party could tell you, a dragon's already not nearly as fearsome in straight-up combat as it's CR makes it out to be. Dragonbane would put the sword to be a efficient +4 weapon against the dragon so the DR reduction should be 16 not 8. But other then that i also think it should be 5 be point of enchantment bonus mainly because most things that come with damage reduction come in fives. Very true. I didn't actually add the bonus for Dragonbane. And you're right about DR coming in 5's. My initial version had it go down by 5... but then going +4 to +5 doesn't help any... If you can come up with some other way DR is affected by that step, I'd love to hear it. I'd say monsters whose natural weapons are treated as magic have an "effective enhancement bonus" of +1 for every four HD. That syncs up nicely with the amount of DR they ignore. It might be too much, though, if you want players' DR to have an impact. I'm not sure that per 4 HD is quite right, but the idea is good. I'll try to take a look at some monsters with DR/magic later and see if the 4HD rule works. For your calculation, I would change it a bit: Instead of reducing the value for every enchantment bonus you have, you should limit this, so they can't reduce it below +1. A +2 sword would reduce the DR by 5 points and you will have to wear a +5 sword to negate 20/magic. Huh? If a +2 sword reduces it by 5 points, and a +5 sword does 20, what's a +1 do?
runestar 07-01-07, 04:32 AM	As everyone who I've talked to who has ever put a dragon against a party could tell you, a dragon's already not nearly as fearsome in straight-up combat as it's CR makes it out to be. Really? I was actually under the impression that dragons were slightly more powerful than their cr lets on...:P
Cheza 07-02-07, 07:16 AM	Huh? If a +2 sword reduces it by 5 points, and a +5 sword does 20, what's a +1 do? Nothing special... beside +1 attack & damage. Your calculation reduces DR by 4 points per enhancement bonus: +1: -4 DR/magic +2: -8 DR/magic +3: -12 DR/magic +4: -16 DR/magic +5: -20 DR/magic I suggested the following rule: +1: no special +2: -5 DR/magic +3: -10 DR/magic +4: -15 DR/magic +5: -20 DR/magic A standard magical +1 weapon would not bypass any DR/magic except for the +1 damage bonus. Of course, this would make DR/magic better than the normal 3.0 version of DR 5/+1. This is the result, because I rather handle it like a special enhancement (similar to ghost touch, defending, ...) than a "free gift" for every damage enhancement (+1, +2, ...). If you wish to add those specials to a weapon it has to be at least a +1 weapon.
Bobson 07-02-07, 12:44 PM	I get it now. I'm not sure if I like it or not - I'll have to think on it some, but it does make some sense.
Robotic_Christmass_Elf 07-03-07, 01:43 AM	Really? I was actually under the impression that dragons were slightly more powerful than their cr lets on...:P It depends, if they just run in and smack, they can be kind of underwhelming, if they use their spells, movement modes and breath weapon properly, not to mention if the party isn't prepared for them they can be really nasty. Add some Dracanomican goodies, and they become truly hideous. I am against this rule, my DM used the *5 version and I didn't really like it, for several reasons. Firstly, weapons with flat enhancements are already one of the better choices for high damage high BAB types, as while pluses to damage are nice, pluses to hit are harder to get and scale better, so they don't really need to be "made more worthwhile". Secondly, it makes Dragons and especially things like liches, vampires and night hags unnecessarily tougher (while the Fighter will obviously have a magic weapon, will his backup dagger/shortsword be magic? if he wants to cut out of some giant creatures belly, it makes it much harder. Do you really expect for people to have a +3 bludgeoning weapon or a +2 cold iron/silver weapon to get through these creatures damage reduction?) I think it should be possible for a well prepared fighter to get through most damage reduction, and requiring +3 weapons of a specific type, starts to make it essentially impossible. Thirdly, remember, while the PC's will get through the DR, cohorts, summoned monsters and NPCs will have more trouble. Frouthly, it adds book keeping for no benefit I can see, I don't really see how it makes the game more fun. However, it is your game, and your decision, so if you feel you have good reasons for it, here a some suggestions. a)make it times 5, it makes the math easier b)consider not applying to creatures with magic & something else (although magic OR something else is fine) as this already often requires at least a moderate amount of preparation or effort to get through and does not need buffing. -EDIT uh, why wouldn't you want a +1 weapon to do anything? this would mean that unless your weapon is FLAT +something, you're often going to have trouble with DR/magic Try to remember most players don't get to choose their main weapon, it's whatever they find in the dungeon, setting it up like that will make it a lot harder for the main tank to damage creatures with DR/magic and penalizes them even more for not having control over their magic items, not to mention that spending the cash on a +1 weapon is already kind of lame as you're only getting +1 to damage not to hit, it's probably not necessary to be this harsh.
eamon 07-03-07, 10:14 AM	I wouldn't do this. The Augement crystals make higher enhancement bonuses nice to have anyhow, and higher to hit is definitely balanced vs. more damage from say, a frost weapon or something - esp as many enemies can have or easily get energy resistance. Then there's the issue that even though most PC's can get through DR/magic, often summoned creatures can't, nor can some other weapon-like spells, so it does occasionally have an impact. If you want people to appreciate high-enchantment weapons, leave some greater augment crystals lying about, and let them encounter (very rarely) a sundering NPC. Also let them encounter extremely high AC's from time to time. A dragon's challenge is generally far greater than his CR signifies, not easier. Even just a "large" dragon can use shield and mage armor for instance to pimp his AC by 8. Their breath weapon is also extremely nasty. The speed at which they can fly, and use fly-by attack also makes them damn nasty. At 150ft fly movement, with flyby, they can often inconvienience the party into moving about and wasting actions, because they can't reach the dragon. If at all, I'ld say a dragon is much much more difficult that the CR suggests. They also have insane spot and listen modifiers, and extremely capable blindsense (whoops, sorry, no mirror images for you!), and long-distance darkvision. Unless the party know exactly what they're up against, it's liable that the dragon will be buffed when the party arrives, and quite possibly the party will even be surprised...
Cheza 07-03-07, 10:28 AM	I am against this rule, my DM used the *5 version and I didn't really like it, for several reasons. Firstly, weapons with flat enhancements are already one of the better choices for high damage high BAB types, as while pluses to damage are nice, pluses to hit are harder to get and scale better, so they don't really need to be "made more worthwhile". Did you ever fought against monster with "regeneration"? Then tell me, if a +X enhancement is better than an elemental enhancement. And if you compare the standard damape output of a +1 flaming sword vs. a +2 sword, I think it's ok, that +X damage should have their "shining moments". Secondly, it makes Dragons and especially things like liches, vampires and night hags unnecessarily tougher (while the Fighter will obviously have a magic weapon, will his backup dagger/shortsword be magic? if he wants to cut out of some giant creatures belly, it makes it much harder. It's all too easy to get out of a "giant creature belly" by now... especially if you have resistances against acid. And the normal rule is too stupid, because if you are trapped inside, it should be hard to miss. If you treat it similar to "attacking a treasure chest", it seems balanced. And the belly action isn't harder than to disarm the fighter and pick up that weapon by yourself. (standard action + move action) I think it should be possible for a well prepared fighter to get through most damage reduction, and requiring +3 weapons of a specific type, starts to make it essentially impossible. It's cost-intensive. But's the same with DR x/adamantine or anything else. You can calculate for yourself, how much you have to pay to overcome X/adamantine, X/good & silver and X/cold iron. You won't have a weapon, that fulfills all these criterias. ;) So this rule changes only one thing. X/magic (except for 5/magic) will be as expensive to overcome as any other damage reduction. Thirdly, remember, while the PC's will get through the DR, cohorts, summoned monsters and NPCs will have more trouble. What does your cohort, summoned monster, NPC do against DR 10/good? How much damage can they do against X/adamantine? You might find it worth to equip them as well or have greater magic weapon/fang ready. routhly, it adds book keeping for no benefit I can see, I don't really see how it makes the game more fun. That's why I use it as a weapon special. However if you can keep track of any material your weapon has (including any elemental enhancement), you should be able to know your standard weapon enhancement as well. ;) Uh, why wouldn't you want a +1 weapon to do anything? this would mean that unless your weapon is FLAT +something, you're often going to have trouble with DR/magic By the time you have a +1 weapon, your enemies will have DR 5/magic. So if you substract -1 because of your damage enhancement, your enemies negate 4 damage per attack. That's nothing unbeatable or unbalancing because it could be 5/bludgeoning and you are an archer or you play a weapon finess guy equipped with a rapier. :P So the monster would be tougher than normal and this is included in a slight increase in CR. However if any magical weapon can ignore 5/magic, you could skip this bonus, because by the time you have an adequate level to fight against monster with DR 5/magic, you should wear a +1 weapon. So the monster with DR isn't any tougher than a monster without that bonus. Try to remember most players don't get to choose their main weapon, it's whatever they find in the dungeon, setting it up like that will make it a lot harder for the main tank to damage creatures with DR/magic and penalizes them even more for not having control over their magic items, not to mention that spending the cash on a +1 weapon is already kind of lame as you're only getting +1 to damage not to hit, it's probably not necessary to be this harsh. First: You don't get paid just do be rich. ;) You might find it quite adequate that your players can BUY weapons, not just use found weapons. It would be a hard time for a wizard, if he can't buy scrolls at well. And if your DM allows only found weapons, than he should be wise enough to send adequate monsters. He should have the same problem with monsters that have any other damage reduction. If you found a cold iron sword, it should be tough if your DM let you fight against a monster with DR 10/adamantine... Second: The cost calculation for magical items is a crappy thing even without any changes on DR/magic. Did you ever tried to find out, why a club (1 gp) needs as much money as a greatsword to be made "masterwork"? What does a weaponsmith do with that club to add +1 attack? Third: Give your wizard "Protection from arrows" or "Reflect arrows" and than think about that crappy x/magic rule. You might find it adequate to change stoneskin to 10/magic as well, because both spells (Prot. vs. Arrows & Stoneskin) could have a damage reduction of x/+5 in the 3.0 edition... so they should have the same DR in 3.5.... and DR/+X is transfered into a flat x/magic. :P