I learned D&D during second edition and loved it, though I realized even then that there were quite a few flaws. I praised third edition for cleaning up a lot of them. I loved 3.5 for cleaning up even more...but then there's that old adage "don't fix it if it's not broken".
Specifically I'm considering damage reduction. DR/magic is simpler than DR/+1 or +2 or etc..., but I wonder. Isn't DR/magic only to a DM's advantage at low levels when a character's possession of magic is in question? After low levels, there is never any question as to magic weaponry; even a wizard is likely to have a +1 dagger, not to mention the fighter with two backup +1 longswords. As I understand it, DR is meant to make certain monsters harder for characters with lower levels to defeat while making it easier for higher level characters. So what's a great wyrm dragon to do against a horde of slightly lower level adventurers?
So my question is this: Does DR/magic not take away the bit of DM control over damage potential that it was originally meant to give?
OK point taken, but I still have doubts. What about those monsters, dragons for example, who only have DR/magic no matter their CR? Something that I meant to mention before: I've been using the 3.5 rule since it came out and as a result have had players buy +1 mercurial vorpal wounding swords, which seems a little...weird?
Thanks for the input.
|
I personally think that 90% of the creatures with DR and SR shouldn't have them. I haven't figured out a solution yet, but I would love to find a way to get rid of or convert DR and SR into something else for a creature......perhaps immunities of some sort or spell reflection of some kind. I haven't had time to develope an alternative yet but I have it stewing for now.
FH
Personally, I use a mixture of 3.0 and 3.5 rules anyway, taking what suits my style just fine. I honestly didn't see a point to the 3.5 revision, it mainly only nerfed the buffs and made it even harder to play anything non-standard.
Now, the DR ruling for 3.5 I still can't totally accept. The special materials are fine, the aligned weapons are ok, but the DR/magic I have the biggest problem with. I personally see that as being utterly useless. I mean, the converted DR of the deities (and the overlords from Eberron) is like 50/magic....what character higher than 4th-level would not have a magic weapon? Because of this, I use whatever DR is least to the party's benefit, and if it says DR x/magic, well I'm going to the 3.0 version. If there isn't a 3.0 version for some reason, then I make a judgement call on the individual creature.
But, this is just me and the way I run games. :-D
I personally think that 90% of the creatures with DR and SR shouldn't have them.
FH
Why don't you like DR and SR? Too easy for characters to bypass? Just curious.
|
|
I always felt that DR and SR were created for special purposes and that they did work back in the early incarnations of the game (must have a silver weapon to hit a werewolf and all that). I just feel that it has been overused due to lack of imagination. Instead of spell resistance/30 give a creature immunities based on environment/biological makeup/magical experiences. I resist spells with my saving throws (if they are spells which allow saves), why can't a monster do the same. Oh wait, they can and usually have good saves to boot!
Brass golem (mm2)-cr 10 construct. Has DR15/+3 and magic immunity and 90+ hp, reach attacks at +19/+14/+9 for, on average, 19 damage each hit. AC31. Doesn't DR15/+3 seem a bit too much on top of all the other abilities. What party could tackle that at 10th level? I almost never have a +3 weapon at 10th level and 15DR is a huge amount to overcome. Transmute stone to mud wouldn't be a bad option if you have that ready.
another example:
Dune Stalker (mm2)-cr9 medium outsider. Dr10/+1 and SR20 and some decent saves. First you need to overcome the SR, and more than half the time you would, then you need to hope it fails its save. If you can hit it in the first place with a sorcerer/wizards BAB. It just strikes me as being pretty redundant. Either increase saves, AC or make certain magic immunities but not all of the above and DR on top of it.
Too much needless work to done in an action-packed (hopefully) combat. 3.5 has slowed combat to a crawl once level 5 is obtained, due in strong part to the overuse of SR, DR, and immunities.
You used to be able to go through a dungeon with 7-10 encounters, after town encounters/roleplay in a single 4 hour session. Now my group is lucky if we get through town/roleplay and 3-4 encounters. Some combats last 1-1.5 hours.......for 5-7 rounds of combat that is a bit ridiculous.
Every player in my group is a veteran player of at least 12 years, so it is not lack of familiarity with the game. It is strictly that combat encounters are bogged down by too many variables, with DR and SR being major contributers to the mess.
IMO of course,
FH
This got me thinking...
why would anyone want a weapon with a greater bonus than +1? beyond that, a bane or energy weapon is better than a +2 weapon, even if it doesn't affect every foe.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Now, the DR ruling for 3.5 I still can't totally accept. The special materials are fine, the aligned weapons are ok, but the DR/magic I have the biggest problem with. I personally see that as being utterly useless. I mean, the converted DR of the deities (and the overlords from Eberron) is like 50/magic....what character higher than 4th-level would not have a magic weapon? Because of this, I use whatever DR is least to the party's benefit, and if it says DR x/magic, well I'm going to the 3.0 version. If there isn't a 3.0 version for some reason, then I make a judgement call on the individual creature.But, this is just me and the way I run games. :-D
Why not use DR x/epic for dieties? That would solve that particular problem.
I'm actually of two minds on the DR change. On the one hand, I like DR/magic rather than DR/+n because it strikes me as more flavorful. On the other hand, I don't like the swiss army style of having to carry around weapons composed of every obscure alchemical metal known to man.
Monte Cook actually has a decent fix for it. His system lets weapons of a certain magical caliber bypass different DR's. So, a +2 weapon could bypass DR/silver even if it is not made of silver. That solves the problem of carrying multiple weapon types and gives +n weapons more room to shine.
Here's the link:
http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?otherd20_damage_reduction
why would anyone want a weapon with a greater bonus than +1? beyond that, a bane or energy weapon is better than a +2 weapon, even if it doesn't affect every foe.
Extra "pluses" in a weapon's enhancment bonus improve a weapon's attack bonus, damage bonus, hardness, and hit points, at the very least.
why would anyone want a weapon with a greater bonus than +1? beyond that, a bane or energy weapon is better than a +2 weapon, even if it doesn't affect every foe.Extra "pluses" in a weapon's enhancment bonus improve a weapon's attack bonus, damage bonus, hardness, and hit points, at the very least.
You're right, I didn't think about the hardness and hitpoints. Still, the average damage from a energy weapon (flaming or frost) is a lot better than the average damage from a weapon of equal power (+2 instead of +1 flaming). And that extra +1 to hit is only really worthwhile in a combat where hitting the foe is more important than damaging it (such as foes with a high AC and low hp)