Here's another question for you: I have an Annointed Knight in my campaign (from the Book of Exalted Deeds) who has damage reduction 3/-. He'd wanted to know if buying armor that provided damage reduction would stack with his damage reduction, and I assume that the answer is no, since damage reductions don't usually stack. Am I correct?
Correct. Like type bonuses never stack.
Damage reduction from items does not stack with the extraordinary ability damage reduction. However, DR from multiple sources as an extraordinary ability DO stack.
Damage reduction is one of those rules that has never been fully explained in any one location, unfortunately.
For instance, say you have a mummy barbarian (yes, I know his rage would be pretty pathetic, but bear with me): Mummies innately have DR 5/-. So when he gained DR as a class feature, would that stack or overlap? I'm pretty sure that the invulnerability ability for armor (DR 5/magic) does not stack with a young dragon's DR 5/magic... or does it? There's conflicting information on the subject.
I do know that if two Damage Reductions protect against different types of damage (for instance, DR 3/- and DR 5/magic), they overlap - the character has DR 5 against nonmagical attacks, and DR 3 if he is attacked with a magical weapon.
Related note: In my campaigns, DR /magic is broken up into minor, moderate, major, and epic levels, as per the detect magic spell. That way a great wyrm's DR is actually relevant... So a +1 invulnerable chain chirt (CL 18) would provide DR 5/magic (strong), which is bypassed by a +4 weapon (CL 12) or perhaps a +1 flaming burst weapon (CL 12). A young adult red dragon would have DR 5/magic (strong), anything above that being (epic), requiring that the weapon used have come from an epic creator to bypass it.
I like that system, Thanis. I didn't enjoy the 3.0 version of having damage reduction require various +'s, but it seemed wrong to me to have the alternative just be "magic" in general, as it is so easy to overcome. What system do you use to determine the level of magic needed to overcome DR? CR? HD? Simple adjudication?
Also, thanks for clearing up the overlap issue re: different types of DR. I'd actually been meaning (and consistently forgettign) to post a question like that for weeks now.
I like that system, Thanis. I didn't enjoy the 3.0 version of having damage reduction require various +'s, but it seemed wrong to me to have the alternative just be "magic" in general, as it is so easy to overcome. What system do you use to determine the level of magic needed to overcome DR? CR? HD? Simple adjudication?
Well, when a creature has innate DR overcome by an alignment or magic, treat the level of magic (or aura of alignment) needed to overcome it as if the creature's HD equaled its caster level. For instance, a latern archon (1 HD) has DR 10/magic and evil. So, a weapon with minor magic and a faint aura of evil overcomes.
Here's the list of weapons from the DMG that overcome the various magic levels:
Faint: (any of the following)
+1 weapon
merciful, thundering, throwing
natural attacks of a creature with DR /magic and 5 or less HD
Moderate: (any of the following)
+2 or +3 weapon
anarchic, axiomatic, bane, defending, distance, flaming, frost, ghost touch, holy, icy burst, keen, ki focus, mighty cleaving, returning, shock, shocking burst, speed, unholy, vicious, wounding
natural attacks of a creature with DR /magic and 6 to 11 HD
Major:
+4 or +5 weapon
brilliant energy, dancing, disruption, flaming burst, seeking, spell storing, vorpal
natural attacks of a creature with DR /magic and 12 to 20 HD
Epic:
+6 or greater weapon
any epic ability on a weapon
natural attacks of a creature with DR /magic and 20 or more HD
Here's another DR-related question:
I have a PC with the drunken master prestige class- he was in a battle with a lich last game I ran and he was using a chain as an improvised weapon. He says it should have bypassed the lich's DR (bludgeoning and magic) since he's high enough level monk to bypass DR/magic with his unarmed strikes. I thought snce he was using a weapon and not his actual unarmed strike it wouldn't. In order not to hold up the game I went ahead and said it did, but looking at the improvised weapon entry for drunken master I can see how it could be misinterpreted- it says, quote, "A drunken master's improvised weapon deals as much damage as his unarmed strike plus an extra 1d4 points."
So, which is correct? Does it bypass bludgeoning and magic DR or no?
Here's another DR-related question:
I could answer that, but it would just be a gut ruling - you really could go either way. So just choose one way and stick with it (might want to allow it so that the drunken master's class features stay applicable at high levels), or maybe send the question in to the Sage (sageadvice@paizo.com).
I think I'll go ahead and send it in to the sage- when I get a reply I'll put it up here JIC someone else has the same question.
I have to disagree with you slightly on DR Thanis. While I like your idea (and its been used by other gamers) I don't see how a +1 flaming burst weapon is equal to a +3 weapon in terms of overcoming DR. Sure, a +1 flaming burst weapon has the same strength of magic that a +3 weapon has, but the magic is different. An enchantment that creates a flaming weapon that bursts with flame on a critical hit is not the same as an enchantment which makes the blade sharper and stronger. The difference is minor, but important. The flaming burst feature is worth +2 in terms of price and cost, but does not make the weapon a +3 weapon in terms of attack bonus or additional damage. I think that's why weapons in your system would have bonuses above +1 and not special abilities, specifically to tackle DR.
I have to disagree with you slightly on DR Thanis.
Technically, flaming burst is equal to a +4 weapon (major magic) for beating DR under my system. The flaming burst quality requires a 12th level caster to create, and the caster level to create a +X weapon is equal to three times the enhancement (minimum 5th, of course). Any magical item that has a caster level of 12th - 20th radiates as strong magic by detect magic.
The way I see it, however, is that DR should not be that numerically based "+x or better needed to hit/overcome DR," but rather based on how powerful the weapon's aura is. Just looking at the list above of weapon properties, you can definitely see the power levels between each category. A +2 merciful sword (moderate in my system), or a +1 brilliant energy sword (major in my system): which seems more powerful to you?
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I was going to make the point about only having the +'s apply to DR, but I think Thanis's system is a nice hybrid of 3e and 3.5 and works well without bringing the +x element from before.
I probably scanned over this, but how do materials play into your system Thanis? I've seen an article by Monte Cook where he recommends allowing magic weapons to overcome DR (+1 weapons overcome silver, +3 mithril, +5 adantimum, IIRC).
As a slightly off topic question, does anyone allow magic weapons with special abilities but not plus? I know the rules require a + before adding a special ability, but I tend to ignore that rule because it pushes off the cool weapons into higher levels. Does anyone else do that?
I probably scanned over this, but how do materials play into your system Thanis?
I haven't done anything with the special materials, and I'm not sure that I will. There's supposed to be something intrinsic about these, that only special magic could emulate (such as the metalline ability from underdark, though I'm still not sure if I would allow it in my game as is). I mean, would you allow a sword to overcome /bludgeoning DR just because it was +3? While an adamantine sword is certainly a powerful weapon, it's powerful in a different way than any form of magic sword. Plus, I'd rather have the characters role play getting the star metal (or whatever ore) needed to forge their uber-weapon that they need to defeat the aberrant vampire/lich/golem lord.
As a slightly off topic question, does anyone allow magic weapons with special abilities but not plus?
I don't, but more because I haven't done any experimenting with it than any aversion to it. I suppose it wouldn't really disrupt the play balance, but then, would it? After all, a flaming burst longsword is 10,000 gp cheaper than a +1 flaming burst longsword...
I usually just use a 1 for 5 conversion with DR. Every + bypasses 5 points of DR/magic.
Example: DR 20/Magic = 4 degrees of 5. So a +1 weapon bypasses 5 points of the DR, a +2 bypasses 10, and so on, until a +4 or greater ignores it completely.
I like it because it values the "normal" plus without making it so neccessary that "effective" plus type enchantments become liabilities, but it also prevents the "+1 is enough" paradigm of 3.5.
I didn't enjoy the 3.0 version of having damage reduction require various +'s,
That was a holdover from 1e/2e rules. There was no DR, but different creatures required a different + weapon to do any damage to them. I think the 1e vampire required a +2 weapon to hit. If you didn't have a +2 weapon, you did no damage whatsoever.
I usually just use a 1 for 5 conversion with DR. Every + bypasses 5 points of DR/magic.
Example: DR 20/Magic = 4 degrees of 5. So a +1 weapon bypasses 5 points of the DR, a +2 bypasses 10, and so on, until a +4 or greater ignores it completely.
I like it because it values the "normal" plus without making it so neccessary that "effective" plus type enchantments become liabilities, but it also prevents the "+1 is enough" paradigm of 3.5.
Actually, I like this system even better. Although, I'd still count the + by total weapon enchantments, not just the numerical modifier on the front.
I personally wouldn't allow for magical special abilities on weapons without the +, just because I don't feel like tampering around to see if it would affect play balance or not, and I don't have a problem with the current system. NWN allowed special abilities without +'s, and that got really weird sometimes.
I also wouldn't allow magic to overcome other forms of damage reduction. That was one of the things I hated about 3.0- special material DRs quickly meant nothing, because even a +1 weapon trumped it completely, so why bother having it? No, if you want to do significant damage to the werewolf, get yourself a silver weapon!
|
I usually just use a 1 for 5 conversion with DR. Every + bypasses 5 points of DR/magic.
Example: DR 20/Magic = 4 degrees of 5. So a +1 weapon bypasses 5 points of the DR, a +2 bypasses 10, and so on, until a +4 or greater ignores it completely.
I like it because it values the "normal" plus without making it so neccessary that "effective" plus type enchantments become liabilities, but it also prevents the "+1 is enough" paradigm of 3.5.
Actually, I like this system even better. Although, I'd still count the + by total weapon enchantments, not just the numerical modifier on the front.
I personally wouldn't allow for magical special abilities on weapons without the +, just because I don't feel like tampering around to see if it would affect play balance or not, and I don't have a problem with the current system. NWN allowed special abilities without +'s, and that got really weird sometimes.
I also wouldn't allow magic to overcome other forms of damage reduction. That was one of the things I hated about 3.0- special material DRs quickly meant nothing, because even a +1 weapon trumped it completely, so why bother having it? No, if you want to do significant damage to the werewolf, get yourself a silver weapon!
I like that also but not sure about allowing the various special abilities to add on a +1 for +1 basis. I think maybe 1/2 rounded down, still allows the special abilities to help but makes the +'s mean more. For Example: +1 speed weapon would be +2 vs. DR (+1 from bonus and +1 from 1/2 rounded down of +3 special ability) instead of +4 vs. DR if you count for a 1 to 1 basis.
The reason I would do this is so everyone doesn't just buy a +1 keen(+1), ghost touch(+1), icy burst(+2), disruption(+2) weapon and be able to bypass DR/35 on a creature that may not be vulnerable to a few of the abilities, so the above weapon would be able to bypass DR/20 if you halved the spec. abil. bonuses. Still a good amount of DR bypassing.Just a thought.
FH
I still think that special abilities should apply on a plus-for-plus basis for one simple reason: keeping track of it in your description sounds hard. =/ I suppose the player could just write down their weapon's "+ vs. DR", however. Nevertheless, the simpler, the better, in my eyes.
I would make one stipulation, however; if an ability doesn't work against a creature, it doesn't count towards overcoming its DR. So, a flaming burst weapon is effectively two +'s lower vs. red dragons, due to their Fire subtype. This may fly in the face of my first paragraph, but oh, well.
I usually just use a 1 for 5 conversion with DR. Every + bypasses 5 points of DR/magic.
Example: DR 20/Magic = 4 degrees of 5. So a +1 weapon bypasses 5 points of the DR, a +2 bypasses 10, and so on, until a +4 or greater ignores it completely.
I like it because it values the "normal" plus without making it so neccessary that "effective" plus type enchantments become liabilities, but it also prevents the "+1 is enough" paradigm of 3.5.
For what its worth, that’s almost exactly what I do in my game also. It makes a +3 weapon far more important than a +1 one when fighting high CR opponents. And it means that a +2 weapon is still somewhat effective against DR 15/magic – reducing it to DR 5/magic. I’ve always used straight + bonus to determine this, my thinking being that the issue to determine if a weapon can overcome damage reduction is the strength of the enhancement bonus, not the strength of the enchantment magic. Otherwise it just doesn’t make sense to enchant a sword as a +3 weapon when you could have made it a +1 holy weapon, or a +1 bane weapon, or a +2 shocking weapon.
On a side note, I’ve always assumed that mithril could overcome silver damage reduction – a holdover from the true silver concept of Tolkein. I’ve also toyed with the idea of allowing a very strong enhancement bonus to overcome material or weapon type damage reduction – treat a +4 weapon as a +1 silver weapon for damage reduction purposes, etc.
Also, am I the only one who thinks the magic bonus not stacking with the masterwork bonus is ridiculous? Its been years now, but didn’t material bonuses (mithril +1, adamant +2 or some such) and masterwork bonuses stack with enchantments in v.1 or v.2? I realize they tried to keep this flavor with the damage reduction, but I think I preferred the old system.
Damage reduction from items does not stack with the extraordinary ability damage reduction. However, DR from multiple sources as an extraordinary ability DO stack.
That's incorrect, though a common house rule. Officially, DR doesn't stack. Period.
Many people (and I'm one of them) think it's unfair that a barbarian's DR X/- doesn't stack with, say, the DR 2/- you get from an adamantine breastplate. But officially, they don't.
Well i still use the system from old 1st / 2nd ed i like the system it allows monsters to be slightly more frightening and at the same time i never allow my players to buy magic items witch is an idea i personaly find crazy. but anyway. the "+1 or better to hit" made it so some monsters where stronger then others, a great deal stronger in alot of cases and players had to do intellagant things to defeat said monster... Vampires may have had +2 or better to hit, but that wont save his toasted undead butt from the flameing oil they poured on him. Fact is i cant stand the 3.5 system.... with out changing it to ways mentioned here a silly noob adventure with a +1 sword could hurt any DR/magic creature out there. if that where the case in 3.5 every single household with a ok job would eventualy have +1 magic items around... but anyway enough of my rant, i choose to stick with the 2nd ed / 3.0 system for my DR since my players and i liked it. and as to the improvised melee weapon thing, sure i'd allow it. that bonus is only for overcomeing DR in the first place and i allow my monks Ki strike class feture on any Monk weapon if it is unenchanted.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
The issue of materials is a matter of practicality vs. flavor. I like the flavor of having certain types of damage resistance require items made of special materials, but as a practical matter, it's annoying for players to have to carry a half dozen weapons to punch through a foe's potential DR.
I suppose the optimal solution to me is to have monsters with material specific DR either be "boss monsters" where you want to encourage your players to play to its weaknesses or a themed adventure, where the players encounter weaker minions with the material based DR early and have a chance to arm themselves appropriately prior to proceeding further into the adventure.
That being said, the easiest way to get around material based DR's, and the way subsequent expansions seem to have handled the problem, is to allow an enchantment that shifts the metal type of the weapon. I find this to be lacking in flavor and defeats the purpose of the material based DR's in the first place.
I should probably start another thread re: abilities on weapons w/o plusses, but am curious as to the potential balance issues that people see. I always figured it was a flavor restriction and haven't had too many problems with the house rule (though note that I don't allow such weapons to puncture magic based DR).
|
Thanis, I also like your house rule system, although I wouldn't use it myself. The only part I found confusing was your example. In your description, you seem to say that a dragon with DR "number"/magic(Strong) would require epic weapons to overcome. This is contrary to the standard practice of writing damage reduction with the minimum bypassing weapon or quality after the slash (/). Against a dragon with damage reduction of that type, I would expect a +4 or +5 weapon, as well as epic weapons, to bypass that protection.
In the standard world economy, your basic commoner earns a living between a few coppers and a few silver per day, and pay for their own living expenses. Adding up what they need to save to afford a +1 sword (2,000g) should imply that magic weapons are quite rare to the general public, but not to the high risk/high rewards life of an adventurer.
In my experience, and from what I can remember from the illustrious Sage, damage reduction works like this:
1. A barbarian high enough to have DR 1/- negates one point from (nearly) any physical source of damage, even magic weapons or falling damage.
2. Let's say this barbarian puts on medium armor that is made of adamantine, which grants a damage reduction 2/-. These bonuses do not stack, so the higher DR of 2/- is used. This is because DR from class abilities and feats do not stack with the bonuses granted from items or special materials.
3. The same barbarian (DR 1/-) puts on a new suit of armor with the Invulnerability quality (damage reduction 5/magic). He now subtracts the first 5 points of damage dealt from attacks, unless the weapon is magical. In that case, he will apply his original DR 1/- to any damage suffered from that weapon.
4. To clear up another problem about stacking, the barbarian CAN take feats or classes that increase his damage reduction, and in (some) of these cases, the bonuses DO stack. That is because these qualities become innate to the character. There are classes and Prestige Classes that grant damage reduction different from the barbarian's. If they allow an attack or quality (silver, piercing, magical, etc.) to bypass the DR, then they do not stack because they are not of the same type as the character's original DR.
If I'm wrong on these points, I'd appreciate correction.
I miss the 3.0-e "+1 trumps silver" rule, etc. It always seemed silly to me that in 3.5-e an epic +6 holy artifact sword can't defeat a lowly lycanthrope's DR. And don't get me started on characters who are forced to carry silver, adamantine, cold iron, obsidian, magic, lawful, and good weapons (does the DM turn a blind eye to encumbrance rules, just to keep them viable?). And every new book brings in a new special material. The "and" DRs make it even worse ("DR 5/palladium AND mashed potatoes"). Soon every character will need a quiver of Ehlonna holding weapons all known materials in all possible combinations.
Thanis, I also like your house rule system, although I wouldn't use it myself. The only part I found confusing was your example. In your description, you seem to say that a dragon with DR "number"/magic(Strong) would require epic weapons to overcome. This is contrary to the standard practice of writing damage reduction with the minimum bypassing weapon or quality after the slash (/). Against a dragon with damage reduction of that type, I would expect a +4 or +5 weapon, as well as epic weapons, to bypass that protection.
Sorry, I suppose I could have been a little clearer.
A young adult red dragon would have DR 5/magic (strong), anything above that being (epic), requiring that the weapon used have come from an epic creator to bypass it.
What I mean here is that, when a red dragon reaches the young adult category (at 19 Hit Dice), it gains DR 5/magic (strong), which is bypassed by any weapon carrying a strong or epic aura. Once the dragon reaches 21 HD, its DR becomes 5 (epic), then 10, 15, and 20 at the usual Hit Dice (again, epic). Does that make sense?
I miss the 3.0-e "+1 trumps silver" rule, etc. It always seemed silly to me that in 3.5-e an epic +6 holy artifact sword can't defeat a lowly lycanthrope's DR. And don't get me started on characters who are forced to carry silver, adamantine, cold iron, obsidian, magic, lawful, and good weapons (does the DM turn a blind eye to encumbrance rules, just to keep them viable?). And every new book brings in a new special material. The "and" DRs make it even worse ("DR 5/palladium AND mashed potatoes"). Soon every character will need a quiver of Ehlonna holding weapons all known materials in all possible combinations.
Hmm...in my DMing experience I've found that DR really isn't all that unless you're talking an enemy with 20/something obscure and something else obscure. The melee types are usually doing more damage than DR 5 or even 10/whatever really helps with, and if nothing else they're at least buying your spellcaster of choice time to set it on fire.
On another note, does anyone else think that /magic DR is kind of useless once you get past 4th level (mainly for creatures, but it's still somewhat true for PCs)? Virtually everyone is going to have a magic weapon by that point unless you're running a specifically low-magic game. *shrug* Just my 2 cents.
If two different classes give DR 1/-, do they stack to give a total of 2/-?
No. DR doesn't stack. Ever.
I miss the 3.0-e "+1 trumps silver" rule, etc. It always seemed silly to me that in 3.5-e an epic +6 holy artifact sword can't defeat a lowly lycanthrope's DR... The "and" DRs make it even worse ("DR 5/palladium AND mashed potatoes").
To each his own, I guess. I'm the exact opposite of you. I think the 3.5 rules make much more sense and are a lot more fun to use. (And I can't think of any good reason why a +6 holy artifact sword should penetrate a lycanthrope's DR when it isn't silver!)
|
If two different classes give DR 1/-, do they stack to give a total of 2/-?No. DR doesn't stack. Ever.
Thanks -- I don't suppose you know where I might be able to find that offically written anywhere?
(And I can't think of any good reason why a +6 holy artifact sword should penetrate a lycanthrope's DR when it isn't silver!)
By the time you should be able to have a +6 holy artifact sword, the 10/silver DR shouldn't matter that much anyway.
A friend of mine did an extremely expansive mathematical model of the various "pluses" of enchantment and their impact upon the D&D game. Interestingly enough, the standard "+1 enhancement" is actually the most mathematically powerful enchantment to get. Within the confines of the game engine, a straight +5 sword is inherently more powerful than a +2 keen, flaming, shocking sword.
I can understand the sentiment of adding non-enhancement pluses, especially on a "get what you pay for" standpoint. But I disagree with it on thematic and practical purposes. Thematically, because it has been stated that only enhancement bonuses bypass DR. Whatever arcane fortifications the creature has are only disrupted by the fortifications built into the sword itself. "Secondary" enchantments have no appreciable effect, beyond their own individual purposes. On a level of practicallity, tracking 1/2 pluses and the like, especially when they interact with creatures who may ignore them (flaming Vrs Red Dragon) seems like more bookwork and complexity. If your group doesn't mind that, all well and good.
Ah, the old rules from 2nd edition, glad we left those behind. Doesn't mean the idea doesn't have merit, just that its not functional in its current (or past) incarnation.
Regarding material DR, these are fundamentally different. First, they are not dispelled in antimagic fields. As such, they care literally nothing for how high the "plus" of a weapon is, even epic. I find material DRs to be excellent reminders to PCs that there is always something that can surprise them. Most PCs I've DMed for tend to either "be prepared" and carry a few spare weapons for dealing with the like, or they "go it alone" and hope they will be able to soak through damage or at least hold the creature off while other party members use other means of damage.
DR doesn't stack.Thanks -- I don't suppose you know where I might be able to find that offically written anywhere?
I do.
It's in the description of the Damage Reduction special ability (DMG, page 292): "If a creature has damage reduction from more than one source, the two forms of damage reduction do not stack."
I also find the entry in the Monster Manual on p307 very helpful for purposes of clarifying DR, which is a subject of ongoing debate in my group, and the SRD says it eloquently and succinctly as well here:
[url]http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#damageReduction[/url]
To each his own, I guess. I'm the exact opposite of you. I think the 3.5 rules make much more sense and are a lot more fun to use. (And I can't think of any good reason why a +6 holy artifact sword should penetrate a lycanthrope's DR when it isn't silver!)
Is this a great hobby, or what? The best thing about the game is that we can each have it our own way; if I were to play in your campaign, we'd do it your way, then we'd maybe try a house-rule in mine. The fun of the game, for me, isn't actually compromised either way, because the rules just facilitate play; they don't create an unbreakable straightjacket for it.
ok, i researched the dmg page vegepygmy noted. this is what the designers state:
a lyc with dr 10/silver and has some other dr granted to it (lets say 5/chaotic) works such that a non-silver weapon deals 10 less damage to it. a silver weapon still deals 5 less damage to it. it takes a chaotic silver weapon to defeat all the creatures dr. i take this to mean that dr stacks, but not in the traditional "stacking" sense... its much like the dr x/blah and bleh, like liches have, only its dr x/blah and y/bleh, or similar.
(not trying to steal your thunder, vegepygmy, its just there is more there that is important to the discussion at hand.)
tog
I usually just use a 1 for 5 conversion with DR. Every + bypasses 5 points of DR/magic.
Example: DR 20/Magic = 4 degrees of 5. So a +1 weapon bypasses 5 points of the DR, a +2 bypasses 10, and so on, until a +4 or greater ignores it completely.
I like it because it values the "normal" plus without making it so neccessary that "effective" plus type enchantments become liabilities, but it also prevents the "+1 is enough" paradigm of 3.5.
I really like your system. Its wxtremely simple, which is a big plus in my book, and yet adresses the problem of damage reduction becoming virtually useless once every player in the group has a +1 weapon.
That said it may be that the issue is not really all that relivent. Generally speaking a party has the required magic items to deal with the challanges they are likely to face. Hence most of the time the whole issue is moot. If the players are facing Demons that require +3 weapons for them to be really effective its likely that the players have +3 weapons simply due to the fact that they are probably at least 12th level to face such a demon in the first place.
Here's another question for you: I have an Annointed Knight in my campaign (from the Book of Exalted Deeds) who has damage reduction 3/-. He'd wanted to know if buying armor that provided damage reduction would stack with his damage reduction, and I assume that the answer is no, since damage reductions don't usually stack. Am I correct?
Anointed Knight - now thats a pretty unbalanced class...but I digress.
There are a couple of places I have seen stacking DR's. The Endure Blows feat in the Dracinomicon stacks - but I think it is a monstrous feat that requires the Dragon Type and hence rarely available for Anointed Knights. A better option might be Greater Resiliency from the Complete Warrior.
I usually just use a 1 for 5 conversion with DR. Every + bypasses 5 points of DR/magic.
Example: DR 20/Magic = 4 degrees of 5. So a +1 weapon bypasses 5 points of the DR, a +2 bypasses 10, and so on, until a +4 or greater ignores it completely.
I like it because it values the "normal" plus without making it so neccessary that "effective" plus type enchantments become liabilities, but it also prevents the "+1 is enough" paradigm of 3.5.
Not a bad idea at all....I'll have to remember that one for future consideration.
a lyc with dr 10/silver and has some other dr granted to it (lets say 5/chaotic) works such that a non-silver weapon deals 10 less damage to it. a silver weapon still deals 5 less damage to it. it takes a chaotic silver weapon to defeat all the creatures dr. i take this to mean that dr stacks, but not in the traditional "stacking" sense...
The word you are grasping for is "overlaps." Both DRs apply, but their effects do not add onto each other (which is what "stacks" means in D&D).
(not trying to steal your thunder, vegepygmy, its just there is more there that is important to the discussion at hand.)
No offense taken. :)