I personally MUCH prefer the 3.5 version, where magic didn't help overcome damage reduction. The concept of specific materials working against DR is, I think, really cool, and I'm kind of disappointed at how we changed it in Pathfinder. I'm pretty sure that as a result you'll still be seeing some +3 mithral weapons or +4 adamantine weapons showing up in our products now and then for a month or two. At least adamantine weapons still have a few things to do that an enhancement won't do... but those poor mithral weapons! :(
I already knew I'd be houseruling some stuff anyway, I guess! (shrug)
I think you hit on the exactly right compromise. 3.5 went too far in the direction of devaluing high plus items. Who needed a plus over +1 at that expense? Better to get an energy power added on.
Now, there's an actual valuable choice to be made going for a higher plus beyond extra damage and hit bonus.
The wizard has to memorize a single spell to cover all of the parties weapons.
Umm. It targets one weapon. Not all weapons of a party. Your standard party would likely have at least 2 weapons that need enhancing, perhaps 3 or 4 if you have a TWF'er. That's a lot more than a single spell.
The wizard has to memorize a single spell to cover all of the parties weapons.Umm. It targets one weapon. Not all weapons of a party. Your standard party would likely have at least 2 weapons that need enhancing, perhaps 3 or 4 if you have a TWF'er. That's a lot more than a single spell.
Why did you stop reading his post after one sentence? He explains himself in sentence #2.
Agreed, perhaps capped at +4? Same sort of thing with bull strength, which maxes at +4, getting the remaining +2 is probably the soul reason people get enhancement stat items.I was thinking the min/level duration on Bull's Strength and the ilk was the main reason.
When extend becomes a regularly available, you could just cast buff spells for stats as well, just like GMW could you not? If they didn't get something more, but have it read all day long, wouldn't we have the same problem?
Why did you stop reading his post after one sentence? He explains himself in sentence #2.
I didn't stop after one sentence, I just didn't think that was a very good explanation. To me it is a ridiculous scenario that a Wizard would expend his Rod of Metamagic and multiple Pearls of Power every day in order to give the frontline fighters something they could simply buy.
Wizard PC's I've played with typically like to actually do something in combat with those items; they'd use their Extend on Mage Armor or Stoneskin, and recall Fireballs or Lightning Bolts with Pearls of Power :)
I'm going to stop arguing this now; those who like the change aren't likely to be swayed by my arguments, and vice versa :)
GMW aside, the difference between different base enhancements is pretty big. +1 to damage sounds pretty lame, but the +1 to hit makes a huge difference, especially for those tertiary attacks at level 12.
D&D Online has a pretty interesting answer to the golf bag approach: Metalline/Transmuting. The benefit of this enchantment is it can bypass any material-based damage reduction, and it's only worth +1. So the golf bag of weapons gets reduced to +1 metalline weapon, +1 ghost touch weapon, +1 holy weapon, (maybe) +1 axiomatic weapon.
Without modding in a new enhancement, it should be important to give the players some intel on what they're going up against. Rather than spring this big nasty werewolf on the players on the spur of a whim, let them know that people have been showing up brutally slaughtered on nights of the full moon. The evil wizard they're after is known to have an iron golem defending his stronghold. Etc.
I like that a high weapon enhancement bonus cuts through DRs... it's a nice nod to us old timers who used to fight against critters who *couldn't be hurt* by anything lower than say, a +3 sword. (this is why 2nd edition vampires were NASTY)
I like enhancement bonuses getting over DR. I find it rediculous that a +5 adamantine greatsword wouldn't do proper damage to a lycanthrope when it is clearly a far superior weapon to an alchemical silver greatsword.
|
That is the thing, though, it is the Lycanthrope that is weak against silver. Not the weapon that is better than the other. I honestly also think that 3.5 and than Pathfinder went further away from the "old timer" gaming, by making it easier to overcome all DR easily.
In "old timer" gaming, the werewolf could be hit by silver or +2 weapons, couldn't it?
Why does GMW keep getting mentioned? Someone already pointed out that it specifically doesn't overcome DR like a normal enhancement bonus would. Me confused.
The point is that if you have GMW available, then the different metals aren't obsolete. That's in response to posters like Are who said: "There's just no competition for a plain +5 weapon anymore"
|
That is the thing, though, it is the Lycanthrope that is weak against silver. Not the weapon that is better than the other. I honestly also think that 3.5 and than Pathfinder went further away from the "old timer" gaming, by making it easier to overcome all DR easily.In "old timer" gaming, the werewolf could be hit by silver or +2 weapons, couldn't it?
and in myth (depending on which set of Lycanthropic mythos you're using) sometimes couldn't be hurt by silver, but only by magic, or only by 'strong magic wielded by the strongest hunter of the tribe' (I believe that's how one of the native American mythos puts it)
|
Can you get something done about the price of the mithral weapon? Something more along the line of a set cost, like adamantine. This new revelation makes a mithral weapon even less worth the cost.
Hiya,
I remember your previous post on the subject.
I also remember an old medieval transcription of "La Morte d'Artur" which I read a long time ago. In one of the chapters of this book, I remember a knight of the round table having to spend a long time training in the domain of the lady of the lake (or another one of the same kind) and marvelling athe the gift she makes for him : a sword that is so light and yet so strong, so he can carry it much longer than a standard sword.
I guess that from a pseudo-realistic point of view that would work : mithril is lighter than iron, so you can bear carrying it longer than an ordinary sword, and thus you can fight longer.
It mùakes some sense I guess.
Hope it helps
...critters who *couldn't be hurt* by anything lower than say, a +3 sword.
Yeah, this whole thread keeps giving me gargoyle flashbacks. :)
Hmm... here's an idea which might be easier to apply on the fly: change all DR to DR/-. Anything which is listed as overcoming the creature's natural DR, deals an extra 5 points of damage on a successful hit. (No "or" or "and" involved.)
...critters who *couldn't be hurt* by anything lower than say, a +3 sword.Yeah, this whole thread keeps giving me gargoyle flashbacks. :)
Hmm... here's an idea which might be easier to apply on the fly: change all DR to DR/-. Anything which is listed as overcoming the creature's natural DR, deals an extra 5 points of damage on a successful hit. (No "or" or "and" involved.)
Hmm... that would include damage types such as slashing or bludgeoning as well?
Hmm... that would include damage types such as slashing or bludgeoning as well?
Yeah. And the bonus damage would be multiplied on a critical hit. This is essentially a buff to DR at the high end; it mitigates the (already half-mythological) golf bag effect by reducing the effect of an "appropriate" weapon to something less than completely bypassing DR 10 or 15. Having the right weapon is still very nice, but it doesn't turn the fight into a cakewalk. Dragons aren't so laughable with their DR/magic, a holy and cold iron weapon only negates 10 points of Mr. Balor's DR, etc.
Meanwhile, at the low end, a warhammer crit against a skeleton is a lot more fun. :D
Hmm... that would include damage types such as slashing or bludgeoning as well?Yeah. And the bonus damage would be multiplied on a critical hit. This is essentially a buff to DR at the high end; it mitigates the (already half-mythological) golf bag effect by reducing the effect of an "appropriate" weapon to something less than completely bypassing DR 10 or 15. Having the right weapon is still very nice, but it doesn't turn the fight into a cakewalk. Dragons aren't so laughable with their DR/magic, a holy and cold iron weapon only negates 10 points of Mr. Balor's DR, etc.
Meanwhile, at the low end, a warhammer crit against a skeleton is a lot more fun. :D
And there is a marked difference in how well a weapon hits. I like it!
Edit: Wait... I just realized that the weapon is not bypassing the DR just getting 5 damage. Which means against a DR of 10 it just reduces it to DR 5. This actually raises the challenge of many monsters. Even more so on those that have DR and Fast Healing.
Dragons are already not "laughable" even with the DR they do have because of how much HP and how high an AC a typical dragon has. The DR/Magic is mostly just there so that your common squad of soldiers is not going to march out and slay the dragon instead of the heroes.
Perhaps make it so the bonus damage equals the DR amount?
Perhaps make it so the bonus damage equals the DR amount?
I'd thought about that, but it becomes way too strong after critical hits are added to the mix. And personally, I really like the idea that DR actually matters after level 15. With the RAW method, at that point it basically vanishes.
There's a good mid-point, though, which preserves the spirit of the current PF implementation: make a +3 weapon reduce any DR by 5, +4 by 10, and +5 by 15. As above, an appropriate material deals +5 damage. So now against the high-level stuff, that bonus is just a bonus; endgame DR is nerfed even farther than PF already nerfed it, but at least special materials don't stop being special. DR/magic is made slightly weaker again (because you get both benefits, so a +4 weapon essentially bypasses DR 15/magic).
Perhaps make it so the bonus damage equals the DR amount?I'd thought about that, but it becomes way too strong after critical hits are added to the mix. And personally, I really like the idea that DR actually matters after level 15. With the RAW method, at that point it basically vanishes.
There's a good mid-point, though, which preserves the spirit of the current PF implementation: make a +3 weapon reduce any DR by 5, +4 by 10, and +5 by 15. As above, an appropriate material deals +5 damage. So now against the high-level stuff, that bonus is just a bonus; endgame DR is nerfed even farther than PF already nerfed it, but at least special materials don't stop being special. DR/magic is made slightly weaker again (because you get both benefits, so a +4 weapon essentially bypasses DR 15/magic).
I've always thought DR/Magic was silly to put on high CR monsters to begin with. Cutting a dragons hide should require adamantine by my opinion.
I like DR/Magic specifically for lower level monsters. Certain monsters require heroes to slay them because your standard farmer cannot just pick up his trusty crossbow or pitchfork and go kill it himself.
At one point I had campaign design in mind where magic was relatively rare and was going to limit class selection. In this campaign the Soulknife would have a nitch in that they could create a weapon that could harm these DR?Magic enemies right off the bat.
|
That problem was solved in 3.5, where +1 and +5 where equal, in that both would overcome DR /magic. It instead introduced the golf-bag problem. Now everyone has at least three weapons (one each of bludgeoning, piercing and slashing made from mithral/silver, adamantine and cold iron) and hopes they don't encounter something with DR / bludgeoning and cold iron when their warhammer is silver.
The truly sweet part of this change from 3.0 to 3.5 (and by 'sweet' I mean 'appalling') was a developer posting how it was necessary to *reduce* 'golf-bag syndrome.' It was like, 'You said it was hot, so I've set you on fire! You feel cooler now, right? Right?'
There were two changes I loathed in 3.5. Mindless undead becoming evil and golf-bag damage reduction requirements. I didn't notice this change in Pathfinder, and I've got a smile on face to see this 3.5 change taken out behind the woodshed.
Some sort of scaling damage reduction, like DR 15 (+3 or better to avoid) might have been a neat ideas, with a +2 weapon still suffering DR 5 and a +1 weapon suffering DR 10 and a nonmagical weapon suffering the full DR 15, might have been interesting. But it also brings back memories of magic resistance in 1st edition, with like 50% versus 11th level casters +/- 5% per level below or above that number, which was like shooting pain right behind the eyes...
|
|
Perhaps make it so the bonus damage equals the DR amount?I'd thought about that, but it becomes way too strong after critical hits are added to the mix. And personally, I really like the idea that DR actually matters after level 15. With the RAW method, at that point it basically vanishes.
There's a good mid-point, though, which preserves the spirit of the current PF implementation: make a +3 weapon reduce any DR by 5, +4 by 10, and +5 by 15. As above, an appropriate material deals +5 damage. So now against the high-level stuff, that bonus is just a bonus; endgame DR is nerfed even farther than PF already nerfed it, but at least special materials don't stop being special. DR/magic is made slightly weaker again (because you get both benefits, so a +4 weapon essentially bypasses DR 15/magic).
I've always thought DR/Magic was silly to put on high CR monsters to begin with. Cutting a dragons hide should require adamantine by my opinion.
I like DR/Magic specifically for lower level monsters. Certain monsters require heroes to slay them because your standard farmer cannot just pick up his trusty crossbow or pitchfork and go kill it himself.
At one point I had campaign design in mind where magic was relatively rare and was going to limit class selection. In this campaign the Soulknife would have a nitch in that they could create a weapon that could harm these DR?Magic enemies right off the bat.
Or you could just reintroduce a Scale of 1 to 5 depending on CR for any creature with DRx/Magic... just saying
--The Vrocketeer!
|
|
That problem was solved in 3.5, where +1 and +5 where equal, in that both would overcome DR /magic. It instead introduced the golf-bag problem. Now everyone has at least three weapons (one each of bludgeoning, piercing and slashing made from mithral/silver, adamantine and cold iron) and hopes they don't encounter something with DR / bludgeoning and cold iron when their warhammer is silver.The truly sweet part of this change from 3.0 to 3.5 (and by 'sweet' I mean 'appalling') was a developer posting how it was necessary to *reduce* 'golf-bag syndrome.' It was like, 'You said it was hot, so I've set you on fire! You feel cooler now, right? Right?'
There were two changes I loathed in 3.5. Mindless undead becoming evil and golf-bag damage reduction requirements. I didn't notice this change in Pathfinder, and I've got a smile on face to see this 3.5 change taken out behind the woodshed.
Some sort of scaling damage reduction, like DR 15 (+3 or better to avoid) might have been a neat ideas, with a +2 weapon still suffering DR 5 and a +1 weapon suffering DR 10 and a nonmagical weapon suffering the full DR 15, might have been interesting. But it also brings back memories of magic resistance in 1st edition, with like 50% versus 11th level casters +/- 5% per level below or above that number, which was like shooting pain right behind the eyes...
+1. I totally agree!
Why does GMW keep getting mentioned? Someone already pointed out that it specifically doesn't overcome DR like a normal enhancement bonus would. Me confused.The point is that if you have GMW available, then the different metals aren't obsolete. That's in response to posters like Are who said: "There's just no competition for a plain +5 weapon anymore"
No. The GMW that's coming up seems to be based around 3.5 mechanics. It's a statement that, in 3.5, the "GMW Solution" was what people were paying for instead of the +s of their weapon. They'd load up at 20th level on a +1 Keen Flaming Frosting Burst Holy Anarchic Dragon Bane Scimitar instead of a +5 Keen Flaming Frosting Burst scimitar and cast Greater Magic Weapon to up the + to a full +5 for a significantly better weapon with less overall investiture.
It has nothing to do with using GMW to overcome DR in PF. It's about one of the reasons why +s overcome DR in PF.
Honestly, I do not like this change. I like my DR having meaning, and I've never really seen the Golf-Bag problem. My dervish in the last game I really played in ran around with a pair of light maces for skeleton issues, and a greatsword for when finesseable, precision based damage was negated, but she primarily used one set of base weapons without much incident. In the game we're playing now, the Fighter/Barbarian routinely does so much damage with the same Greatsword she's been using the entire game, enchanted up to just a +1, and we're 12th level. We hacked through a pair of Stone Golems in about 3 rounds without a single adamantine weapon, and we didn't weep and gnash our teeth at all.
Maybe it's just my groups and manner of playing, but I keep hearing this "golf bag" thing being tooted around, and I'd say it's really never been my experience. 3.5 made a point of (generally, except for the grick) lowering DR such that PCs might have a chance of regularly hurting an opponent without actually needing the appropriate thing, rather than 2nd ed and 3.0's "You must have this much + to play" restriction. Honestly, who ever could deal with DR 50/+3 except for PCs with a +3 weapon, at which point DR might as well not have existed. In 3.5, you'd have DR 15/Adamantine, and if you had a +5 weapon, you'd at least be doing more damage to bypass the DR. Now, that DR might as well not be wasting the ink. Perhaps straight +s needed to be boosted, or maybe they just needed to have their cost reduced compared to the special effects. But this was not the fix that I think was really needed. It just goes the wrong way.
|
I agree. I like DR to mean something and think this was the exact oposite direction it should have gone. Additionally, the point of GMW is because casters usually don't have the money to keep up with weapons (buying spells, scrolls, and components in addition to gear), so it is kind of crap that GMW does not act the same way, in my opinion. I blame organized play.
I'd like to point out that you're all missing the killer halfling fighter two weapon fighter that uses two small mithril knives at only 250GP extra cost per knife, and all the feats to up the dam....
Okay, I'll shut up now :)
Yeah, those small guys get it good with mithral.
Yet another reason to make it standard as per weapon type, like adamantine.