Who cares DR 20 if a martial character can do 40+ damage with a normal hit?
Ok .. your 'max DPS' are reduced due to DR but if you use the term 'max DPS' then quit PF and restart playing WOW.
The problem is that different styles are differently affected by DR. Casters don't care as when they do damage, it's energy damage, but if they're smart they are not using damage spells but save or suck. Archers can pool all their damage into what counts as a single hit so having that 20 DR only apply once in their 4+ attacks, so if he deals 25 damage average with each shot thats stil 80 damage coming through. Two-handed fighters have to suffer the 20 DR on every attack, so if their attacks do an average of 50 damage each their effectiveness is nearly halved, say he has 2 attacks, that reduces 100 damage to 60. A two-weapon fighter will deal less damage than a two-handed fighter while making more attacks, so lets be generous and say the two-handed fighter deals an average of 25 damage per attack with 4 attacks, netting a whopping 20 damage.
The above is assuming every attack hits. With characters of BAB 6 to 10 without buffs or attack number increasing enchantments. They would all deal 100 damage if hitting every time to a creature without DR. With DR it suddenly gets skewed massively.
In my home game, +x weapons don't exist--the enhancement bonus is a feature that the characters pick up, not their weapons.
Under this rule, special material DRs never go away -- but you also don't have to worry about getting magic versions of each material. (I find the golf bag effect much truer to the source folklore than the big 6 Christmas tree effect.)
At any rate, it's a house rule, and its fair game for the gm. Ideally, it's something that's written and available before the game, but house rules have to come from somewhere, and often that somewhere is the middle of a campaign where the problem the gm is trying to solve rears its ugly head. In that case, it's reasonable to ask that he let you finish out the combat / session / until your next shipping trip under the rule you thought you were using.
Most folklore that requires you to find special material/plot device X only has one thing to overcome. The game has many types of DR.
As an example if this were a movie you might need to adventure to find the only weapon that can pierce the hide of a dragon. You would not need to find a weapon for every different skin type of various creatures so the "special item" trope has less meaning in pathfinder.
He's only being a tool if this rule suddenly started applying without prior knowledge or warning, or if he only applies it to some of the pcs and not the rest.
Besides, just because the player has memorized the weakness of every monster in every bestiary doesn't mean that the character has a freaking clue that he needs a silver weapon against a devil when he's never encountered one before.
I think it's a fine rule. One that could possibly lead to more roleplay and out of combat options as the players make knowledge checks to discover the aforementioned weaknesses, find/hire someone to make said weapons, or even as an excuse to finally use that craft skill you spend a couple of points on as part of your character backstory.
On the other hand, if all you care about is hack'n'slash and "maximum damage output" then I can see where you'd think he WAS being a tool. I guess it all boils down to your particular play style.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe, that part of the problem is how to design an adventure. Now, our group don't play PFS, published adventures, or AP (steal from them a lot, yes), so no particular jab intended.
Nobody forces a GM to put werewolves in Room1 and nymph in Room2, following by a golem in Room3 and erynie/succubus loving pair in penthouse. If one does just that, no wonder players either get frustrated of get golf bags. For that type of games the rule of DR negation by enough +x on a weapon is a working patch on a problem, but a problem is in a adventure design not in DR idea itself. But I agree that PF has too many DR types, especially if used together. It dilutes the idea, makes it trivial.
It could be an awesome adventure wraithstrike mentioned: to find a weapon to pierce a dragonhide, but for that to work either no-one except that dragon should have a DR in this adventure or the dragon DR must be unique and not shared by other monsters. Mechanically it's the same, but narratively first option is better, because it makes DR truly unique quality.
You probably cannot easily achieve that when strictly following RaW, but I think it's better to have a more options from which to chose (to put in houserules) then being restricted in following just one narrow rule set.
Halforc magus racial heritage goblin burn burn burn and firebrand (The one that makes torches count as light maces for purposes of damage)
you can use the improvised weapon feats with it
get an adamantine torch, Done
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now, I am not a GM who OP mentioned, but I share similar feelings. As a GM, I made same houserule in my home games. Players were familiar with it from the start of course and you know what? It hardly even matters. Most DR types they bypass somehow and those that don't substract very little damage. I will say that there is a limit of brainpower that GM can do to make things challenging. The more it is easier for players to defeat something, the more thinking it requires to keep it challenging.
Malag
it's unfair to fighters, and other martial characters, especially fighters whom have one weapon they specialize highly in. it doesn't do much to archers, but it cripples melee builds, especially 2WF fighters.
That's what DR is designed to do though. . . DR is there to tone down the damage of Fighters so that fights can last longer. If having random + weapons overcome DR negates that, then DR isn't having the game effect it was designed to have.
That's like me saying its unfair for Spellcasters to have to overcome spell resistance-- thing put into the game to hinder spellcasters hindering them is as intended, not unfair.
DR hindering martials is as intended, not unfair.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
. . .
Besides, just because the player has memorized the weakness of every monster in every bestiary doesn't mean that the character has a freaking clue that he needs a silver weapon against a devil when he's never encountered one before. . . .
However, sometimes it's the opposite. I don't live in a fantasy world. My character does. He just might have the skills, or possibly a party member who has the skills, to know what is necessary.
Knowledge: . . .
Monster Lore. . .
You can use this skill to identify monsters and their special powers or vulnerabilities. In general, the DC of such a check equals 10 + the monster’s CR. For common monsters, such as goblins, the DC of this check equals 5 + the monster’s CR. For particularly rare monsters, such as the tarrasque, the DC of this check equals 15 + the monster’s CR or more. A successful check allows you to remember a bit of useful information about that monster. For every 5 points by which your check result exceeds the DC, you recall another piece of useful information. . . .
As part of the trope, you go to a wise one to find out what you should do... lo and behold! He's in your party.
"I'm sorry, Aragorn. You just need to sit this one out. Only a weapon of familial silver blessed by an angel will be able to scar that foul creature's hide. That's why I have hold monster ready, because even though their hide is nigh invulnerable, his will is weak. We will then suffocate him to death by placing his head in a fish bowl for hilarity. Hardly heroic I know... but we will make up some story for the townsfolk."-Gandalf, the unknown tales.
Makes Vital Strike chain (considered under powered) balanced, and useful.
I was just about to say "Maybe take the Vital strike chain feat."
You beat me to it!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually like the golfbag trope.
I like that werewolves should be fought with silver, and faeries with cold iron. And yeah, you'll want something that's just as hard as the golem to damage it, and that demon scoffs at anything but truly holy weapons. You can recognize the experienced monster hunter because he's more prepared than a high-powered thug.
Defaulting everything to just having sufficient +X enchantment is easy, but I think it steals away a lot of the flavor.
Anyway, I'd go with an adamantium main weapon, and a backup cold iron weapon. Also carry silversheen. The adamantium weapon is desirable anyway, because it'll help you smash through physical obstacles with ease.
I'm currently trying to figure out how to implement such a house rule in a fair way; one that doesn't set back martials but doesn't bother casters. Important is that the house rule be ready before the game starts; house rules that make things harder for the PCs should be well-advertised far in advance. House rules that make things easier can come later.
I'm thinking to change the DR X/[this AND that] into mostly DR X/[this OR that]. I haven't figured out exactly how to easen the DR Y/[this OR that] variant though. Maybe just reduce the DR by 5? If it's no longer one-weapon-cuts-all, then DR could go down a little bit.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm probably in the minority; I actually like your DM's houserule. Did he tell you beforehand that he'd be implementing this change?
I don't think DR based on damage type (bludgeoning, slashing, & piercing) are very hard to bypass; they're usually only 5 points of damage or so, which isn't much.
DR based on metal types (adamantine, cold iron, & silver) are a different story, as they can actually hurt your damage output, but then again--that's the whole point. DR makes monsters more intimidating, which I like.
On another note, allowing any weapon with a sufficiently high enough enhancement bonus to bypass DR is, I think, a problem because it robs these monsters of their individual flavor and variety, especially at higher levels when DR becomes bland and meaningless.
Edit: Ninja'd by Ascalaphus.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to dissent from the general opinion that house rules must always and only be applied before the campaign begins. A typical campaign at least in the groups I play with can last for years. Punishing the GM and potentially the group for failing to realize that some obscure rule or item was a problem before it became one in his or her game seems kind of rough. Some house rules (though not this one) might involve stuff from new books which wasn't even available when the game began.
That said, not all house rules are good decisions, and if everybody besides the GM hates one it is probably a bad house rule even if it was made up before the campaign starts. By the "you shouldn't change something once it is in play" principle Paizo should never go back to FAQ or errata stuff. I guess some people would agree with that, but I mostly don't.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
it's unfair to fighters, and other martial characters, especially fighters whom have one weapon they specialize highly in. it doesn't do much to archers, but it cripples melee builds, especially 2WF fighters.That's what DR is designed to do though. . . DR is there to tone down the damage of Fighters so that fights can last longer. If having random + weapons overcome DR negates that, then DR isn't having the game effect it was designed to have.
That's like me saying its unfair for Spellcasters to have to overcome spell resistance-- thing put into the game to hinder spellcasters hindering them is as intended, not unfair.
DR hindering martials is as intended, not unfair.
There is only 1 SR. There are many types of DR so it is not the same. They don't even work in the same manner. One is all or nothing, and the other is a reduction, but a caster can almost autobypass SR if he really wants to. Martials can't.
PS: Before you even ask me how. A caster can get close to +10 bonus to his caster level through various means.
Makes Vital Strike chain (considered under powered) balanced, and useful.I was just about to say "Maybe take the Vital strike chain feat."
You beat me to it!
You will do more damage on a full attack so vital strike is not the answer, even if you are struggling to get past DR.
I actually like the golfbag trope.
I like that werewolves should be fought with silver, and faeries with cold iron. And yeah, you'll want something that's just as hard as the golem to damage it, and that demon scoffs at anything but truly holy weapons. You can recognize the experienced monster hunter because he's more prepared than a high-powered thug.
Defaulting everything to just having sufficient +X enchantment is easy, but I think it steals away a lot of the flavor.
Anyway, I'd go with an adamantium main weapon, and a backup cold iron weapon. Also carry silversheen. The adamantium weapon is desirable anyway, because it'll help you smash through physical obstacles with ease.
I'm currently trying to figure out how to implement such a house rule in a fair way; one that doesn't set back martials but doesn't bother casters. Important is that the house rule be ready before the game starts; house rules that make things harder for the PCs should be well-advertised far in advance. House rules that make things easier can come later.
I'm thinking to change the DR X/[this AND that] into mostly DR X/[this OR that]. I haven't figured out exactly how to easen the DR Y/[this OR that] variant though. Maybe just reduce the DR by 5? If it's no longer one-weapon-cuts-all, then DR could go down a little bit.
I like the flavor when it is restricted to small number of ways, but due to the large number of ways DR can be placed on monsters it is not really flavorful. DR 5 is not that bad. However DR 10 to 20 is a nuisance and at higher levels DR is a lot more common. That is why the higher weapons bypass more DR's.
All this does is make archers more appealing since carrying various arrows is much better than carrying 10 weapons.
|
Even James Jacobs has mentioned that he really doesn't like the rule, that the OPs GM seems to have suspended. And frankly I am not a huge fan either.
To be honest, there are so many ways to ignore damage reduction, that I hardly consider it a serious obstacle these days.
But since we really do not have sufficient information about the campaign, the need for ways to overcome damage reduction and how the GM deals with loot, there is only so much we can say to “help” here.
After all maybe the GM wants certain materials to be scarce, or he has another reason. Dropping houserules on players in the middle of an adventure, isn’t a great idea but we don’t know the reasoning behind this decision.
All we know is, that a player has come to this forum to complain about his GM, in his first and only post so far, so I would suggest talking to his GM about it. After all you could get thousands of people on this forum to agree with him, but that is in no way binding for anybody.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just make a character that can do a lot of damage. That means avoiding TWF though.
The OP has also never posted anywhere else, ever.
Probably a hissy fit post... and my "we're not getting the full story" sense is tingling...
Yes, your DM is a huge tool.
Look, people here are right, he is within his rights to houserule things.
But if he does it on the fly, just because he doesn't like you being effective, he's a huge knob. If this wasn't told to you before rolling up your character or the first session, he's a huge knob.Thing is, we don't know if this is a new houserule or if this was made before the game started.
One house rule I've seen is that a Gm allows the +X to bypass DR, but it has to be purely +X, not an equivalent. So like, you need a +3 longsword to bypass whatever, instead of, say, a +1 flame burst weapon (which would be a +3 enhancement). The former would work, while the latter wouldn't. Unsure how I felt about it, but it certainly was interesting.
Um, that's not a house rule, that's how it actually works...
|
Um, that's not a house rule, that's how it actually works......Thing is, we don't know if this is a new houserule or if this was made before the game started.
One house rule I've seen is that a Gm allows the +X to bypass DR, but it has to be purely +X, not an equivalent. So like, you need a +3 longsword to bypass whatever, instead of, say, a +1 flame burst weapon (which would be a +3 enhancement). The former would work, while the latter wouldn't. Unsure how I felt about it, but it certainly was interesting.
Then why does the chart that shows how much of a bonus you need say "Weapon Enhancement Bonus Equivalent"?
Equivalent meaning that enhancement bonus is equivalent to that material.
The whole point of that change from 3.5 to PF was to keep players from getting a +1 then putting special qualities on it and just GMWing it daily.
Ignore the table and read the actual text referenced. It doesn't say equivalent.
Um, that's not a house rule, that's how it actually works...Yes, your DM is a huge tool.
Look, people here are right, he is within his rights to houserule things.
But if he does it on the fly, just because he doesn't like you being effective, he's a huge knob. If this wasn't told to you before rolling up your character or the first session, he's a huge knob.Thing is, we don't know if this is a new houserule or if this was made before the game started.
One house rule I've seen is that a Gm allows the +X to bypass DR, but it has to be purely +X, not an equivalent. So like, you need a +3 longsword to bypass whatever, instead of, say, a +1 flame burst weapon (which would be a +3 enhancement). The former would work, while the latter wouldn't. Unsure how I felt about it, but it certainly was interesting.
Honestly, I'd actually prefer a houserule that went the other way: that a +1 Flame Burst Longsword counts as a +3. Just piling on enhancement bonuses is already superior in most cases, and it is, frankly, very boring. A +3 Longsword doesn't feel any more magical to me than just a standard longsword, except that you have better to hit and damage with it. But a Flaming Burst longsword actually feels like a magical sword. Were it not just so inferior, I'd want every magical weapon to have a non-enhancement bonus.
I wish I were better at working out how to spread the bonuses, because I'd vastly prefer to make a houserule that gets rid of enhancement bonuses (and the big 6 in general) and makes it so you get them off of character level, so you can use all the slots that are usually filled with boring static bonus stuff with more interesting magic items.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, look, another 'fighters can't have nice things' GM.
Honestly, I'd actually prefer a houserule that went the other way: that a +1 Flame Burst Longsword counts as a +3. Just piling on enhancement bonuses is already superior in most cases, and it is, frankly, very boring. A +3 Longsword doesn't feel any more magical to me than just a standard longsword, except that you have better to hit and damage with it. But a Flaming Burst longsword actually feels like a magical sword. Were it not just so inferior, I'd want every magical weapon to have a non-enhancement bonus.
I wish I were better at working out how to spread the bonuses, because I'd vastly prefer to make a houserule that gets rid of enhancement bonuses (and the big 6 in general) and makes it so you get them off of character level, so you can use all the slots that are usually filled with boring static bonus stuff with more interesting magic items.
I hear ya. You could just give everyone lvl/4 to everything. Then rare magic items feel special.
Or play E6. Like it or not PF isn't the game for that style.
Also IIRC that somewhere years ago, the higher DR numbers eg. 20/30 etc were lowered from 3.0 to 3.5 because so that cohorts, companions and summoned monsters could overcome it.
But DR 30/+2 in 3.0 ed didn't apply to every attack, it was amount of DR for the whole round. So if first person dealt 30 damage on his whole turn, he didn't do any, but second person wouldn't be affected by DR at all.
Ontopic, i really really don't like your DMs house rule. I hate the golf-bag with a passion. But I don't care for Mythic version that weapon special properties count towards penetrating DR.
Did your GM announce his house rule before play? Did you decide to play in his campaign despite said house rule? Did you not bring up possible issues with the ruling to your GM then?
If so, then your GM is hardly a jerk.
You will do more damage on a full attack so vital strike is not the answer, even if you are struggling to get past DR.Makes Vital Strike chain (considered under powered) balanced, and useful.I was just about to say "Maybe take the Vital strike chain feat."
You beat me to it!
Unless you're that Crusader a$&+&+~. *grumble grumble*
Oh, look, another 'fighters can't have nice things' GM.
Gee, I hate that meme, but yeah- why nerf martials? Of course, maybe the DM has some serious wizard nerfs on tap also.
Doubtful the, "It's magic!" excuse tends to work alot better than, "I'm the most experienced fighter in the universe wielding a sword so magical that it puts Excalibur to shame so I can easily cleave through Werewolf hide, Golems of Adamantine, or even Demonic magical resilience!"Oh, look, another 'fighters can't have nice things' GM.Gee, I hate that meme, but yeah- why nerf martials? Of course, maybe the DM has some serious wizard nerfs on tap also.
Basically, yes. Kind of a lazy cop-out.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
holy cow, golfbagging, what a silly term, Or you could just NOT haul around a weapon for every job. I've never seen my players come up with such a silly idea. yes lets buy 8 various high cost weapons to save 10-20 points of damage a round.
Am I the only one who realizes just how crazy that sounds?
maybe you research before you leave the city and just deal with it if you run into a creature you aren't perfect against.
It's ok to fight something that you aren't perfectly prepared against.
If you can't do direct damage, find another way to help, perhaps positioning or aid another bonus's, you have options other than hoping to win the lottery, jeez
EDIT: may have ranted a bit here, but this is a pet peeve of mine, since the old days where I had fighters that would sit in a battlefield sulking because they only have a sword and it's not fair they get attacked by flying creatures.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But DR 30/+2 in 3.0 ed didn't apply to every attack, it was amount of DR for the whole round. So if first person dealt 30 damage on his whole turn, he didn't do any, but second person wouldn't be affected by DR at all.
I do not believe that is correct. The 3.0 SRD does not describe it like that.
That is the actual rule. A +3 weapon is a +3 weapon. A +1 holy weapon is a +3 equivalent for pricing, but it is not a +3 weapon.Yes, your DM is a huge tool.
Look, people here are right, he is within his rights to houserule things.
But if he does it on the fly, just because he doesn't like you being effective, he's a huge knob. If this wasn't told to you before rolling up your character or the first session, he's a huge knob.Thing is, we don't know if this is a new houserule or if this was made before the game started.
One house rule I've seen is that a Gm allows the +X to bypass DR, but it has to be purely +X, not an equivalent. So like, you need a +3 longsword to bypass whatever, instead of, say, a +1 flame burst weapon (which would be a +3 enhancement). The former would work, while the latter wouldn't. Unsure how I felt about it, but it certainly was interesting.
Huh, well, color me surprised. You learn something every day. I guess I was confused by the equivalent part on the table.
I'll remember that next time.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
holy cow, golfbagging, what a silly term, Or you could just NOT haul around a weapon for every job. I've never seen my players come up with such a silly idea. yes lets buy 8 various high cost weapons to save 10-20 points of damage a round.
Am I the only one who realizes just how crazy that sounds?
If you can't do direct damage, find another way to help, perhaps positioning or aid another bonus's,....
If a critter has DR 10, and you have 3 attacks + haste, then you are doing 40 pts less. And, some things, like bleed, have no effect unless you get thru.
Pretty much, the ONLY thing a martial can do is direct damage.
In the case of a spellcaster, if they run into a monster with high SR, they can just buff the party, or put a pit behind the monster, or.... or....but a martial- does damage.
Look, I am not part of the group that things martials are nerfed in PF, i actually think there's a fair balance.
BUT, there's NO reason to nerf martials int his way.
I find it funny that in one thread I hear about martials killing things in one or two rounds, and then here I read about a change slowing that down being reason to toss pejoratives.
Or even better.. "Martials can't have nice things". Which is normally nothing to do with DPR, but rather "everything else".
.
Now, that said, it's not fun to have this dumped on you mid-game. I'd say that no matter what the reasons, it's better to have this figured out pre-game, and either wait until the next campaign, or discuss it with the group to see if they are okay with the change mid-game.
.
Lastly, if I were to overhaul the system, I'd institute some (or all?) of the following changes instead:
1. Remove the + = bypass rule. Add an "Alloy" weapon enhancement that does something similar to the Transformative weapon enhancement, only changing it's metal type (perhaps even wood?) on command. Make it a flat gp cost, like transformative (so it won't mess with enhancing weapons).
2. Add a melee attack feat that works like Clustered Shots. Call it "Hammer Through" or something and have Hammer the Gap as a prerequisite (so a 2 feat investment w/ BAB 6+ or higher level limiter).
3. Change Holy (and Unholy) weapons to bypass all the DR of an evil (or good) outsiders. Don't have cold iron or silver? No biggie... you have a Holy Weapon. The weapon itself is the anti-thesis of the outsider, and shouldn't be limited because it wasn't cold iron or silvered.
4. "Burst" weapon enhancements can, on command, change all physical damage dealt by the weapon to be treated as it's element (only one such element at a time with weapons that have multiple burst enhancements).
Remember, energy damage bypasses DR (although you now deal with resistances/immunities).
.
I think those kinds of changes still gives a lot of options for dealing with DR, but makes it more... flavorful? in how it's done.
Basically, the melee combatant gets through the DR because he's either got a unique weapon that can alter itself; a weapon that was made to kill it's enemies; keeps hitting the same spot over and over, exploiting that weakened point; or the weapon simply changes into pure fire or electricity or something.
Feels more like how I see "special weapons" hurting normally "hardened" creatures in stories.
it's unfair to fighters, and other martial characters, especially fighters whom have one weapon they specialize highly in. it doesn't do much to archers, but it cripples melee builds, especially 2WF fighters.That's what DR is designed to do though. . . DR is there to tone down the damage of Fighters so that fights can last longer. If having random + weapons overcome DR negates that, then DR isn't having the game effect it was designed to have.
That's like me saying its unfair for Spellcasters to have to overcome spell resistance-- thing put into the game to hinder spellcasters hindering them is as intended, not unfair.
DR hindering martials is as intended, not unfair.
There is only 1 SR. There are many types of DR so it is not the same. They don't even work in the same manner. One is all or nothing, and the other is a reduction, but a caster can almost autobypass SR if he really wants to. Martials can't.
PS: Before you even ask me how. A caster can get close to +10 bonus to his caster level through various means.
DR; is more like a Beef Gate. something you must have a way to reliably bypass if you intend to continue growing stronger. the issue with the concept of DR, is that it is far easier to increase caster level enough to make SR irrelevant, than it is to do the Same for DR. which is the unfair part. there are ways for an archer or 2hander build to increase damage to mitigate DR, but there is no such benefit for 2WF or S&B builds.
Doubtful the, "It's magic!" excuse tends to work alot better than, "I'm the most experienced fighter in the universe wielding a sword so magical that it puts Excalibur to shame so I can easily cleave through Werewolf hide, Golems of Adamantine, or even Demonic magical resilience!"Oh, look, another 'fighters can't have nice things' GM.Gee, I hate that meme, but yeah- why nerf martials? Of course, maybe the DM has some serious wizard nerfs on tap also.
But that's not what you're arguing for. . . you aren't arguing for martials to have abilities or options to by pass DR, you are arguing for Wizards to be able to mass produce weapons that by-pass everything.
With this rule implemented its no biggie though-- I just have to through DR 10/- and Fast Healing 10 on to every monster the players ever encounter to make sure they live long enough for players to have fun.
That or triple listed hit points. . .