Damage Reduction Redux

[Tharen the Damned]

Hi,

I think we can use Monte Cooks idea for Damage reduction and magic items.

Have a look at Damage Reduction Redux.

I used this in my campaign for a year and it worked out very well. A plain vanilla +3 Sword was again the Players favorite.

[Charles Evans 25]

From a story-telling point of view, in Western European traditions at least (I do not know much about the details of other cultures) there have been requirements for items made of special materials or with unique properties (iron or items blessed by a holy man/woman in particular vs some fiendish things) to be able to harm or drive off particular nasty creatures. The fact that 'magic' weapons do not often exist in these tales, (not least since magic is often associated with forces inimical to mankind) complicates the issue from a D & D point of view, since in the worlds of D & D there is an assumption that magic is often a more neutral, unaligned and 'natural' force if I understand correctly.

Questions are raised to my mind over how much D & D is about the traditions that some of its inhabitants come from, and how much it is a game which has moved on and completely shed those roots. I know I personally prefer (but I am very much one for certain traditions/story-telling) the 3.5 version of damage reduction to the 'if you have a magical enough weapon you can ignore most of it completely' of 3.0; but I realise that there are many people out there who value PC's being able to kill things with minimum bother over requirements that they have to research, be prepared, and have a broad selection of appropriate tools for their jobs.

I see what is often referred to as 'golf bag syndrome' as being very much part and parcel of PC's being hunters of dangerous creatures in a world where not everything shares the same vulnerabilities. However, I appreciate that other people will have positions on this different from mine, some very much so, and all as valid in the games which they wish to play.

With particular regard to the article which Tharen provides a link to above, I would hope that PFRPG will at the least offer a rules option for valuing weapons for a system where specific qualities continue to be required to bypass damage reduction.

[Tharen the Damned]

Charles Evans 25 wrote:

With particular regard to the article which Tharen provides a link to above, I would hope that PFRPG will at the least offer a rules option for valuing weapons for a system where specific qualities continue to be required to bypass damage reduction.

Well, it is far easier for PCs to get their hands on a Cold Iron Sword and the Cleric uses the align spell than on to get a +3 Sword.

My point was not so much to diminish special materials (I love them) than to make a the plain "plusses" at a magic sword cool again.
At the moment, most PCs rather want a +1 frost Axe than a +2 Axe because one plus more is less disireable than 1d6 of frost damage.

[erian_7]

I'll throw in another thought--something I'd like to see to reduce complication in the game.

Combine the Natural Armor and Damage Reduction mechanics in some meaningful way. I would prefer getting rid of the "recalculate your damage because of DR X" and would instead just not whether an attack actually damaged the opponent. So creatures with a DR instead get a bonus to AC that can be bypassed if the attacker uses the proper material. I use a system like this right now and it definitely speeds up combat. I grant a +1 AC bonus for every 2.5 points of DR, like this:

DR 1-4 = +1 AC
DR 5-7 = +2 AC
DR 8-9 = +3 AC
DR 10-12 = +4 AC
DR 13-15 = +5 AC

For the above comments, I do also like a "magic equivalence" mechanic to make having +5 sword more meaningful than just a better chance to hit and do damage.

[Kirth Gersen]

Tharen the Damned wrote:

I think we can use Monte Cooks idea for Damage reduction and magic items.

Hail Monte! I looked at that a while ago, and we adapted a variant that's been highly successful:

+1 beats /magic
+2 also beats /silver
+3 also beats /cold iron
+4 also beats /any material other than adamantine
+5 beats any material

The /good and /bludgeoning, etc., we've kept as in 3.5e.

In this system, there is strong incentive to have a bonus higher than +1, but you can still have a masterwork cold iron weapon, for example. The way DR works in 3.5, you're basically stupid if you have a bonus higher than +1, especially given the upward spiral in cost.

[Neithan]

Hm... I have to say I'm really a fan of the 3.5e damage reduction. Hutzing a werewolf with a silver weapon or a magical weapon might still be fun at 3rd level, but becomes redundant at level 6 or so. When +2 weapons get through everything, damage reduction is essentially out of the game once you get one. It's a bit of a nuisance, but I think it's always cool when the hero makes his own silver bullets at the kitchen table in preperation for a raid.

I don't think of DR as "you need such a weapon to hurt them", but as "if you use such a weapon, it REALLY hurts them!".
Not having the right weapon doesn't make the fight harder. But having one at hand may make it easier than normal.
You could also say, "cold iron blades cause +5 points of damage".

Though it is somehwhat strange with regard to outsiders. You have to use a good aligned weapon to increase your damage by 10 or 15, and because of its enchantment you also get +2d6 damage on top.

[Lewy]

Agree with Neithan. As most DR's are 5 or 10, most weapons get past them anyway once magic. They just do less damage which is fine. If you happen to have the right one (most likely meaning you researched your enemy and prepared) then you're much better off.

Either that or design your adventures properly. There were some really effective weapons vs' evil outsiders handed out in the Shattered City AP just ebfore the players go to the Abyss. It worked fine and made them stand out as extra special weapons the party cared about.

[tergiver]

The problem I had with damage reduction wasn't the golf-bag syndrome, but the difference in effectiveness between a two-weapon fighter and a charging lance user. If they both do 30 points of damage in a round, but the first character does it in three attacks and the second does it in one, then DR is much much less meaningful for the second character.

How I dealt with this was to double or triple the damage reduction before applying the damage - so an x3 spirited charging lance against a DR 5 creature effectively encounters DR 15. Still triple damage, but not 'who cares about DR?'

[delabarre]

Here is what I came up with for my house rules.

Spoiler:

1. Damage Resistance
How partial DR operates is modified to allow magical weapons with high basic attack/damage bonuses to bypass it, as detailed below.
1.1. Partial Damage Resistance
Each partial DR type is now modified to allow a magical weapon with a high enough basic bonus to bypass it.
3.5 DR Type -> Becomes
X/magic -> X/mithral|+1
X/bludgeoning -> X/bludgeoning|+1
X/piercing -> X/piercing|+1
X/slashing -> X/slashing|+1
X/cold iron -> X/cold iron|+2
X/silver -> X/silver|+2
X/chaotic -> X/chaotic|+3
X/evil -> X/evil|+3
X/good -> X/good|+3
X/lawful -> X/lawful|+3
X/adamantine -> X/adamantine|+4
The first bypass term indicates a specific material or alignment that will bypass that creature’s DR; the second bypass term indicates a specific magical weapon bonus that will also bypass that DR.
1.2. Bonus Damage
If a weapon possesses both of the bypass criteria for an opponent’s damage resistance (e.g. a +2 cold iron longsword versus DR 5/cold iron|+2) then that weapon not only bypasses the DR but deals an additional +2 damage on each strike (this bonus damage subject to critical multiplier).
1.3. Monk Ki Strike
This class ability allows a monk’s unarmed strike to act as a magic weapon at 4th level, as a magic/lawful weapon at 10th level, and as a magic/lawful/adamantine weapon at 16th level. In addition, at 8th level a monk’s unarmed attack is treated as a +2 weapon for purposes of bypassing damage resistance; +3 at 12th level, +4 at 16th level, and +5 at 20th level. Ki Strike never stacks with itself for bonus damage as described in 1.2. However, a monk 4th level or higher can deal bonus unarmed attack damage against creatures with DR X/bludgeoning|+1.
1.4. Warlock Damage Resistance
The Warlock damage resistance class ability is changed as follows: starting at 1st level, the warlock gains DR (Con Mod)/cold iron|+2 and is vulnerable to bonus damage as detailed in 1.2 (minimum DR 1). At 3rd level, the warlock’s DR increases by 1; it increases again at 7th, 11th, 15th, and 19th levels (maximum DR Con Mod + 5).
1.5 Absolute Damage Resistance
Absolute damage resistance (e.g., DR 5/-) is not changed.

[Charles Evans 25]

Another thing which I have belatedly remembered about damage reduction is a point associated with the 'hardness' of materials in 3.5. If you check some creatures with damage reduction (particularly certain constructs) it becomes apparent that the damage reduction may be equating to the 'hardness' of certain materials that cover or at least partially form those creatures- which since admantine bypasses hardness of most materials, thematically makes sense that adamantine bypasses the damage reduction, as the damage reduction may in fact be a represention of an object's hardness.

If in a rules revision magical weapons simply because they are 'powerful enough' bypass some types of damage reduction which may have been hardness related in 3.5, I would think that that a case could be made that those weapons should also perhaps ignore hardness in that rules revision?