Thanks everyone - sorry for the delay in response - real life...
The GM had this rule documented from the beginning but we started at 1st and DR has not come up too much before.
The GM runs very tough encounters and will actually have monster coup characters if they can. Because of the limited damage my guy put out he was unable to drop a very wounded vampire before he put the fang on my buddies character.
In that case I'm leaning towards "unintentionally unfair" (and even that could be a bit of a stretch) and nowhere near "jerk".
Yes, you knew the rule in advance but if you had no prior experience to base it on you really couldn't be expected to sit and work out how it might affect you over time.
Given that you could just accidently-suicide the character to get a rebuild anyway (assuming he allows you to start the replacement character at the same level), personally I'd make a judgement call of allowing you to tweak your build based upon what you've learned in the name of fairness and keeping things fun for everyone.
Note I haven't checked the rules to see if there actually *is* a way to offset this with a different build... if not I'd consider other ways around it. At the end of the day if the game isn't fun, it's up to the group to talk about options.
Abbadon what type of melee character are you playing? Is it TWF, sword and board are two handed weapon user?
Thanks everyone - sorry for the delay in response - real life...
The GM had this rule documented from the beginning but we started at 1st and DR has not come up too much before.
The GM runs very tough encounters and will actually have monster coup characters if they can. Because of the limited damage my guy put out he was unable to drop a very wounded vampire before he put the fang on my buddies character.
In that case I'm leaning towards "unintentionally unfair" (and even that could be a bit of a stretch) and nowhere near "jerk".
Yes, you knew the rule in advance but if you had no prior experience to base it on you really couldn't be expected to sit and work out how it might affect you over time.
Given that you could just accidently-suicide the character to get a rebuild anyway (assuming he allows you to start the replacement character at the same level), personally I'd make a judgement call of allowing you to tweak your build based upon what you've learned in the name of fairness and keeping things fun for everyone.
Note I haven't checked the rules to see if there actually *is* a way to offset this with a different build... if not I'd consider other ways around it. At the end of the day if the game isn't fun, it's up to the group to talk about options.
I'm in favor of the rule, but the answer to the question for me just changed to "yes he is a jerk" assuming he is actualy coup de grace-ing PCs, that's just bad form.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is on version of SR and 5 versions of resist energy. That is not even close to all the types of DR. On top of that a caster can just use another spell. The melee types can't just go to weapon B and be as effective as they were before. You point about flavor stands since that is a personal preference.
How can't melee types just go to weapon B? Explain this. In most of cases, both in PFS and home games, people are completely lazy to either switch a weapon or use an oil to bypass DR because wasting a full-round action is "terrible" in their game terms. I had a player claiming that drinking potion is "terribly inefficient" in combat which mechanically is but his character would never even think of that in most cases. So in the end, you have a lot of "mix-maxing" of actions inside of combat.
Malag
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, because when monsters are eating your face, taking a couple of rounds to apply a weapon oil GETS YOU KILLED.
That's not min-maxing, that's survival instinct.
Drinking a potion in combat is a bad idea because you almost certainly won't heal enough to make up for the free shot you're giving everyone.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are some good points brought up in this thread. Whether the OP's intent was to whine or not, the arguments are valid. It's unrealistic to expect a Player Character to have to carry every variation of damage reduction around to be ready. However wanting monsters' special defenses to be part of the challenge of encountering them, and also the flavor of the world is a valid argument.
I think it comes down to the type of game you run. If a GM instituted that rule and then had really random encounters that didn't really connect with one-another during an adventure or a dungeon crawl - or even odd mixes that make no sense why they'd be cooperating in the same encounter - like a DR 10/Good, DR 10/Evil, and DR 15/Cold iron enemy all united in killing you and your group, that seems like the DM is just being intentionally mean (although, if your group is very effective, maybe this is necessary to increase the challenge).
However if you have an adventure around a particular type of monster with DR, and want their strengths and weaknesses to be part of the thrill and identity of the monster, I can see the value. I would say just make sure the flavor aspect is played out. Like make the adventure about the Lycanthropes and their abilities. Maybe finding the weaponry to deal with them is part of the adventure itself. So early on they struggle royally buy as they find the resources and tools to deal with them they get to go in guns blazing. Then you marry that weakness with a sense of hard work and accomplishment so they don't feel like you cheated them out of an advantage just to be mean.
I think how the campaign allows this rule to play out will determine its value.
I have played this game in one form or another for close to 20 years. Not a single time has a Burning Hands hit more than one character.
Do you really want to get into the math again? Haven't we proven that martials do more damage enough times so we can move onto the "narrative power" segment of the argument?
I'm really not sure offhand how you are doing 10d4+anything with Burning Hands, the spell does 5d4 + nothing max. I can't think of a +1 or +2 level metamagic feat to double dice. . .
20 years and you haven't seen an effective blaster or an area spell hit more than one target?
Crossblooded Draconic/Orc Sorcerer 1/Admixture Wizard 5.
+1 damage per die of any damage spell and +1 damage per die of any fire spell
Spell Specialization, Intensify Spell, Mage's Tattoo(Evocation), Bloatmage Initiate(Evocation), Spell Focus Evocation, Trait: Magical Knack, Trait: Wayang Spell Hunter
Effective Caster Level 10. Spell Slot level 1(Wayang Spell Hunter).
Intensified Burning Hands amplified with Goblin Fire Drum(2,000 gp).
10d4+32 Reflex Save DC16
Optimized for Fireball
Trait: Wayang Spell Hunter, Trait: Magical Lineage, exchanged Intensify Spell with Empower SpellSpell Slot level 3, ECL 9
Empowered Fireball amped with Goblin Fire Drum.
(9d6+29)x1.5 Avg Damage: 90 Reflex Save DC 18The math shows that...casters do stupid amounts of damage. He gets 4 of these fireballs a day. 1 Base, 1 Int Bonus, 1 School, 1 Arcane Bond(A bad ass cape that flows in the wind)
So, your one trick is built around stacking several feats, relies on the reduction for a meta-magic effect from a trait being able to reduce that to zero (something which I would never allow regardless), and on being allowed to take 1 level in Crossblooded Sorcerer to apply +2 damage per die to spells you cast from another class?
Cool. I guarantee reasonable GMs would see no problem with that. . .
Cool story bro. Come back to me when a Fighter isn't stacking Weapon Training (Heavy Blade), Dueling Gloves, Power Attack, and Weapon Specialization (Greatsword) to get hsi damage...
Yes, but he has very little variety, and if the foe is immune to fire, he's toast... so to speak.
20 years and you haven't seen an effective blaster or an area spell hit more than one target?Crossblooded Draconic/Orc Sorcerer 1/Admixture Wizard 5.
+1 damage per die of any damage spell and +1 damage per die of any fire spell
Not at all... He loses 10 damage at level 10 from one half of his sorcerer dip... Whoop...
Funny thing about Admixture wizards, they can change elements on the fly...
|
|
Yes, because when monsters are eating your face, taking a couple of rounds to apply a weapon oil GETS YOU KILLED.
That's not min-maxing, that's survival instinct.
Drinking a potion in combat is a bad idea because you almost certainly won't heal enough to make up for the free shot you're giving everyone.
Not every action in character's life has to be 110% efficient and characters can afford themselves typically 1-2 rounds of doing whatever they want.
Not every action in character's life has to be 110% efficient and characters can afford themselves typically 1-2 rounds of doing whatever they want.Yes, because when monsters are eating your face, taking a couple of rounds to apply a weapon oil GETS YOU KILLED.
That's not min-maxing, that's survival instinct.
Drinking a potion in combat is a bad idea because you almost certainly won't heal enough to make up for the free shot you're giving everyone.
This entirely depends on the situation.
You sneak up on a monster with DR. Sure, it'd make sense to throw some oil on that weapon of yours.
Said monster ambushes you and has you in it's mouth. Not really the time to pull out the oil.
With this particularly it's less about beingn 110% efficient and more about what makes sense.
Not every action in character's life has to be 110% efficient and characters can afford themselves typically 1-2 rounds of doing whatever they want.Yes, because when monsters are eating your face, taking a couple of rounds to apply a weapon oil GETS YOU KILLED.
That's not min-maxing, that's survival instinct.
Drinking a potion in combat is a bad idea because you almost certainly won't heal enough to make up for the free shot you're giving everyone.
FACE. EATEN.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I rarely see a monster more than a round before initiative is rolled.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I rarely see a monster more than a round before initiative is rolled.
That's what you get for not having a scout. I'd recommend getting a Rogue for that as they do it so well, and then you and the rest of your party can sit back and wait for the signal.
The signal is a blood-curdling scream followed by an abrupt silence.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I rarely see a monster more than a round before initiative is rolled.That's what you get for not having a scout. I'd recommend getting a Rogue for that as they do it so well, and then you and the rest of your party can sit back and wait for the signal.
The signal is a blood-curdling scream followed by an abrupt silence.
IT's OVER, IT's ALL OVER!!!!
and I announce without further ado the winner of the "Finding something the rogue does better then anyone else statement of the month.... no wait Year!"
proceed to the nearest rogue is useless thread to claim your prize.
ps: Sorry I really couldn't resist :D
I rarely see a monster more than a round before initiative is rolled.That's what you get for not having a scout. I'd recommend getting a Rogue for that as they do it so well, and then you and the rest of your party can sit back and wait for the signal.
The signal is a blood-curdling scream followed by an abrupt silence.
In out parties the signal is when the Rogue makes the sound of a dying giraffe. . .
|
MY GM does not allow weapon enhancement to by pass specific material DR. It has started to hurt my character's effectiveness and quote "I think the weapon enhancement rule is bullsh$t and is a lazy persons way out of being perpared
I'm not going to ready through all these pages, I will just say this, YES, your GM is a jerk. He/she has to be, GMs cannot be GMs unless they are jerks. It's in the code. No matter the sceario, weapon enchantment, can't use touch AC for gunslingers, this, that, the other. JERK JERK JERK
The good news is that you get to be one too, when you GM.
In out parties the signal is when the Rogue makes the sound of a dying rogue. . .I rarely see a monster more than a round before initiative is rolled.That's what you get for not having a scout. I'd recommend getting a Rogue for that as they do it so well, and then you and the rest of your party can sit back and wait for the signal.
The signal is a blood-curdling scream followed by an abrupt silence.
FIXT
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is on version of SR and 5 versions of resist energy. That is not even close to all the types of DR. On top of that a caster can just use another spell. The melee types can't just go to weapon B and be as effective as they were before. You point about flavor stands since that is a personal preference.How can't melee types just go to weapon B? Explain this. In most of cases, both in PFS and home games, people are completely lazy to either switch a weapon or use an oil to bypass DR because wasting a full-round action is "terrible" in their game terms. I had a player claiming that drinking potion is "terribly inefficient" in combat which mechanically is but his character would never even think of that in most cases. So in the end, you have a lot of "mix-maxing" of actions inside of combat.
Malag
Note that he said "as effective as".
Most martials I know of will put most of their loot in enhancing their primary weapon as much as they can. Which means that any "weapon B" is less effective than weapon A, simply because it has a lesser enhancement. Asking them to spread the enhancement among several weapon mades of different materials is not realistic/fair. Even worse when it is cold iron.
If the rule was there since the beginning a vial of silver sheen might have been a nice investment. I agree that spending a round to apply it when a monster jumps out and ambushes you might be a mistake, but sometimes the PCs can run away to plan and prepare before coming back to take out a serious threat.
@Nathaniel Love - If you think the OP's GM is a jerk for using coup de grace against PCs I wonder how you'd like our Second Darkness GM who not only uses coup de grace but actually had a drow stop moving towards a Bard PC who was shooting them with a bow to coup de grace an unconscious Ranger PC not once but twice since he somehow managed to survive the first attempt. I believe the drow got shot to death by the Bard.
I have played this game in one form or another for close to 20 years. Not a single time has a Burning Hands hit more than one character.
Do you really want to get into the math again? Haven't we proven that martials do more damage enough times so we can move onto the "narrative power" segment of the argument?
I'm really not sure offhand how you are doing 10d4+anything with Burning Hands, the spell does 5d4 + nothing max. I can't think of a +1 or +2 level metamagic feat to double dice. . .
20 years and you haven't seen an effective blaster or an area spell hit more than one target?
Crossblooded Draconic/Orc Sorcerer 1/Admixture Wizard 5.
+1 damage per die of any damage spell and +1 damage per die of any fire spell
Spell Specialization, Intensify Spell, Mage's Tattoo(Evocation), Bloatmage Initiate(Evocation), Spell Focus Evocation, Trait: Magical Knack, Trait: Wayang Spell Hunter
Effective Caster Level 10. Spell Slot level 1(Wayang Spell Hunter).
Intensified Burning Hands amplified with Goblin Fire Drum(2,000 gp).
10d4+32 Reflex Save DC16
Optimized for Fireball
Trait: Wayang Spell Hunter, Trait: Magical Lineage, exchanged Intensify Spell with Empower SpellSpell Slot level 3, ECL 9
Empowered Fireball amped with Goblin Fire Drum.
(9d6+29)x1.5 Avg Damage: 90 Reflex Save DC 18The math shows that...casters do stupid amounts of damage. He gets 4 of these fireballs a day. 1 Base, 1 Int Bonus, 1 School, 1 Arcane Bond(A bad ass cape that flows in the wind)
So, your one trick is built around stacking several feats, relies on the reduction for a meta-magic effect from a trait being able to reduce that to zero (something which I would never allow regardless), and on being allowed to take 1 level in Crossblooded Sorcerer to apply +2 damage per die to spells you cast from another class?
Cool. I guarantee reasonable GMs would see no problem with that. . .
Well I hope your GMs are not allowing 2 level dips into monk...
Or a level dip into Oracle for Paladins...
Or a Level dip into Oracle for barbarians...
because, you know, them level dips are hella broken right?
There is on version of SR and 5 versions of resist energy. That is not even close to all the types of DR. On top of that a caster can just use another spell. The melee types can't just go to weapon B and be as effective as they were before. You point about flavor stands since that is a personal preference.How can't melee types just go to weapon B? Explain this. In most of cases, both in PFS and home games, people are completely lazy to either switch a weapon or use an oil to bypass DR because wasting a full-round action is "terrible" in their game terms. I had a player claiming that drinking potion is "terribly inefficient" in combat which mechanically is but his character would never even think of that in most cases. So in the end, you have a lot of "mix-maxing" of actions inside of combat.
Malag
I said they can't go to weapon B and be as effective, and sometimes weapon B, also known as the one that works, may not be availible. If the weapons were easily availible and did not eat into WBL as much, and GM's did not put restrictions on how many you could carry this would not be an issue.
As for lazy players, you have to talk to them about that. If I am doing 5 damage after DR, and I don't change weapons I have a word for it, but it is not lazy.
As to the less effective statement--> You are fighting 2 different enemies with different DR types. That is possible annoying. Casters dont have to deal with different SR type so SR is not DR. Now two different monsters might have different resistances to different types of energies but a caster can drop a debuff or use battle field control or any other number of things. The damage is usually left to the martials so dealing damage is not normally a caster's problem anyway.
If you don't do enough damage to obliterate damage reduction in F at levels when it comes up you have bigger issues, martials using their favorite golfclub will hardly be slowed by 15 points of DR.
If you don't do enough damage to obliterate damage reduction in F at levels when it comes up you have bigger issues, martials using their favorite golfclub will hardly be slowed by 15 points of DR.
Which goes to show just how little of the system you know...
A Greatsword/Falcion wielding fighter might not care but what about the sword and board? Or the Dual-wielder? I mean both of those already get shafted enough with rediculous walls of feat requirements as it stands. Unless what you are suggesting is "tough, deal with being utterly useless for not pure out optimizing" and that people shoudl either be forced to pure optimize or to just be incapable.
If you don't do enough damage to obliterate damage reduction in F at levels when it comes up you have bigger issues, martials using their favorite golfclub will hardly be slowed by 15 points of DR.
15 points of DR is shaving off 45 to 60 points of damage a round so while using your two-handed fighter you still get to bring the pain, but it is a lot less pain.
For those using sword and board or TWF'ers or skirmishers that 15 points hurts a lot more. Not everyone runs around with a two-handed weapon. The monster might see you as enough of a non-threat compared to another party member that he just goes for another target.
|
|
I said they can't go to weapon B and be as effective, and sometimes weapon B, also known as the one that works, may not be availible. If the weapons were easily availible and did not eat into WBL as much, and GM's did not put restrictions on how many you could carry this would not be an issue.As for lazy players, you have to talk to them about that. If I am doing 5 damage after DR, and I don't change weapons I have a word for it, but it is not lazy.
As to the less effective statement--> You are fighting 2 different enemies with different DR types. That is possible annoying. Casters dont have to deal with different SR type so SR is not DR. Now two different monsters might have different resistances to different types of energies but a caster can drop a debuff or use battle field control or any other number of things. The damage is usually left to the martials so dealing damage is not normally a caster's problem anyway.
Okay, I slightly missunderstood you initially, but my question still remains. What's so terrible at DR?
If you are doing 5 points of damage after DR, then a martial like you has problems on his own already. I never encountered a player that would do so very little damage (and we are talking about characters who specialize in melee combat) after applying DR unless creature was encountered in early levels.
Regarding weapons, I am unsure what's so problematic also. Buy cold iron and silver weapon, but don't even enchant them. You might consider +1 enchantment at higher levels, but that's it. I am also unaware who is this mystical GM who limit's player's weaponry?
Caster's are having bigger problem with SR since SR can invalidate entire spell. DR only slows down the martials.
In the end, there is several feats that help out against DR. My player who plays a fighter at home campaign took Penetrating Strike and it works great. Only DR 15 can slow him down a bit, and 25+ damage which he does with a single handed melee weapon isn't bad at all.
Malag
Okay, I slightly missunderstood you initially, but my question still remains. What's so terrible at DR?If you are doing 5 points of damage after DR, then a martial like you has problems on his own already. I never encountered a player that would do so very little damage (and we are talking about characters who specialize in melee combat) after applying DR unless creature was encountered in early levels.
Regarding weapons, I am unsure what's so problematic also. Buy cold iron and silver weapon, but don't even enchant them. You might consider +1 enchantment at higher levels, but that's it. I am also unaware who is this mystical GM who limit's player's weaponry?
Caster's are having bigger problem with SR since SR can invalidate entire spell. DR only slows down the martials.
In the end, there is several feats that help out against DR. My player who plays a fighter at home campaign took Penetrating Strike and it works great. Only DR 15 can slow him down a bit, and 25+ damage which he does with a single handed melee weapon isn't bad at all.
The point is that heavy restrictions on how you bypass DR affect different martials differently.
TWFers get hit the hardest since they can't pump their strength as much and they feel the reduction so much more since their damage relies on greater numbers of attacks. The Onehanded Fighter/Sword and Board feels it too. Penetrating Strike is a nice fix, it's a shame it's a 12th level feat and outside most folks' play areas. Archers can get Clustered Shots and 2Handers can deal enough damage with big hits to not feel it as much. It's also much easier to get special arrows or weapon blanches for arrows than it is otherwise.
SR is completely trivial for well built Casters to bypass so it isn't a good comparison point.
So house ruling on the enhancement not penetrating DR is a ruling in favor of nerfing TWFers and One Handed/Sword and Board martials in favor of 2Handers and Bows. And...thats not cool considering how superior archery and 2handers are already.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This, so much this. I am pleased that somebody else sees the same problem with this idea that I do.
So house ruling on the enhancement not penetrating DR is a ruling in favor of nerfing TWFers and One Handed/Sword and Board martials in favor of 2Handers and Bows. And...thats not cool considering how superior...
Even worse. It nerfs martials in favor of spellcasters, which is going the wrong direction.
|
|
@Scavion
Let's say for a moment that you are correct, which you are, I know you are, but that's calculations on paper which are fairly different from the real combat PF situations. Technically, TWF-ers, natural based attackers and similar types are at disadvantage there, but this disadvantage doesn't really show up in real gameplay.
My experience with numerous player population in PFS area and home campaign tells me that it's a small obstacle to players but never a real threat. At worst, it cut's the damage by half, but that's worst possible case that I saw. Player's don't have to be 110% good at everything. It's natural for them to encounter problems in their adventures and cooperative party can always find means to help each other out. Ambushes are fairly rare and players can prepare themselves often enough even before battle begins.
Malag
@Scavion
Let's say for a moment that you are correct, which you are, I know you are, but that's calculations on paper which are fairly different from the real combat PF situations. Technically, TWF-ers, natural based attackers and similar types are at disadvantage there, but this disadvantage doesn't really show up in real gameplay.
My experience with numerous player population in PFS area and home campaign tells me that it's a small obstacle to players but never a real threat. At worst, it cut's the damage by half, but that's worst possible case that I saw. Player's don't have to be 110% good at everything. It's natural for them to encounter problems in their adventures and cooperative party can always find means to help each other out. Ambushes are fairly rare and players can prepare themselves often enough even before battle begins.
Malag
Where are you getting 110% from? A Player shouldn't be reduced to next to nil effectiveness. Nobody likes whiffing at the air for 6 rounds. Nobody wants to seriously consider using Aid Another because their character was reduced to uselessness.
And nobody especially likes that when they could have built a different character and avoided the problem entirely.
The biggest problem with this, is that it hamstrings the more flavorful and less effective builds in favor of the 2handed, Archer machines of destruction.
Your second paragraph doesn't apply to them. Why does it need to apply to these fellas?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mastery of 2 Layers (Combat)
You swiftly strike the same spot in succession, exploiting the weakened resistance of the targeted area, a technique called the mastery of 2 layers.
Prerequisites: Quick Draw, base attack bonus +6, Dexterity 15, 2 Weapon Fighting
Benefit: When you use a full-attack action to make multiple melee weapon attacks against the same opponent, total the damage from all hits before applying that opponent’s damage reduction once to the total damage dealt.
Special: If the massive damage optional rule is being used (Core Rulebook 189), that rule applies if the total damage you deal with this feat is equal to or exceeds half the opponent’s full normal hit points (minimum 50 points of damage).
homebrewed Solution
named after a technique used in Rurouni Kenshin, that allowed a monk to completely Bypass DR of Punch through Castle Walls with his bare hands.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Player's don't have to be 110% good at everything.
Here's the thing. Martials are only good at ONE thing, and that's hitting things with a stick until they die from it. They're not even really mediocre in anything else, they have a single, solitary purpose, and that's El Kabong.
Take that away from them, make them 40% effective, and it stops being fun really quick.
My player who plays a fighter at home campaign took Penetrating Strike and it works great. Only DR 15 can slow him down a bit, and 25+ damage which he does with a single handed melee weapon isn't bad at all.
IIRC(without checking the book) I think that is a fighter only feat. Not everyone is a fighter. Rangers, rogues, inquisitors, and any other sword and board or TWF'er is going to suffer. I don't mind DR as a whole. It is the variety of DR's that is the problem. I have run fights where players struggle with DR. It is only to mitigate damage, but it felt like the character was mitigated since he was not using a two-handed weapon.
Mastery of 2 Layers (Combat)
You swiftly strike the same spot in succession, exploiting the weakened resistance of the targeted area, a technique called the mastery of 2 layers.
Prerequisites: , base attack bonus +6, Dexterity 15, must have either 2 Weapon Fighting and Double Slice or be Monk level 6
Benefit: When you use a full-attack action to make multiple melee weapon attacks against the same opponent, total the damage from all hits before applying that opponent’s damage reduction once to the total damage dealt.
Special: If the massive damage optional rule is being used (Core Rulebook 189), that rule applies if the total damage you deal with this feat is equal to or exceeds half the opponent’s full normal hit points (minimum 50 points of damage).
Optional; a Fighter Focused on 2handed weapons may Substitute Power Attack and Furious Focus in Place of 2 Weapon Fighting and Double Slice for the purpose of meeting prerequisites at DM discretion
Optional; a Ranger with the 2 Weapon or Sword and Board combat styles may take this feat as a bonus combat style feat at 6th level and ignore the prerequisites
Optional ; a Monk may take this feat as a bonus feat at 6th level and ignore the prerequisites
Optional ; a Rogue or Ninja may take this feat in place of a rogue talent or Ninja Trick if they are 6th level or higher and ignore the prerequisites
updated version
|
|
Where are you getting 110% from? A Player shouldn't be reduced to next to nil effectiveness. Nobody likes whiffing at the air for 6 rounds. Nobody wants to seriously consider using Aid Another because their character was reduced to uselessness.
And nobody especially likes that when they could have built a different character and avoided the problem entirely.
The biggest problem with this, is that it hamstrings the more flavorful and less effective builds in favor of the 2handed, Archer machines of destruction.
Your second paragraph doesn't apply to them. Why does it need to apply to these fellas?
110% is figure of speech. Players always want more actions per round, full-attacks, more spells per round and their weapon to be 100% effective on every monster they encounter. It's unrealistic to expect such things to be always available to your character.
And where are you getting nil effectiveness? Doing 50% of your damage per round is still something and not worth talking about Aiding Another.
What doesn't apply to them? DR applies to ranged attacks normally. I am not sure what you mean.
Where are you getting 110% from? A Player shouldn't be reduced to next to nil effectiveness. Nobody likes whiffing at the air for 6 rounds. Nobody wants to seriously consider using Aid Another because their character was reduced to uselessness.
And nobody especially likes that when they could have built a different character and avoided the problem entirely.
The biggest problem with this, is that it hamstrings the more flavorful and less effective builds in favor of the 2handed, Archer machines of destruction.
Your second paragraph doesn't apply to them. Why does it need to apply to these fellas?
110% is figure of speech. Players always want more actions per round, full-attacks, more spells per round and their weapon to be 100% effective on every monster they encounter. It's unrealistic to expect such things to be always available to your character.
And where are you getting nil effectiveness? Doing 50% of your damage per round is still something and not worth talking about Aiding Another.
What doesn't apply to them? DR applies to ranged attacks normally. I am not sure what you mean.
For archers there is feat called clustered shots that only only applies DR once for a full attack instead of for every attack in that full attack.
|
|
My player who plays a fighter at home campaign took Penetrating Strike and it works great. Only DR 15 can slow him down a bit, and 25+ damage which he does with a single handed melee weapon isn't bad at all.IIRC(without checking the book) I think that is a fighter only feat. Not everyone is a fighter. Rangers, rogues, inquisitors, and any other sword and board or TWF'er is going to suffer. I don't mind DR as a whole. It is the variety of DR's that is the problem. I have run fights where players struggle with DR. It is only to mitigate damage, but it felt like the character was mitigated since he was not using a two-handed weapon.
I am gonna semi disagree again. Inquisitors are doing quite fine with one-handed weapons. Dwarf Inquisitor in home group is doing 40 damage per hit. It's enough to bludgeon stone giant to death in one round. This is without Power Attack I believe, but I am not sure. Rogues might struggle if they can't land sneak attacks, but that's another issue.
But not that I wanna be a bad guy in a topic, I wanna know how would you handle DR then without removing it. This is only reason why I am even pursuing this topic. I know that people won't change their opinions.
110% is figure of speech. Players always want more actions per round, full-attacks, more spells per round and their weapon to be 100% effective on every monster they encounter. It's unrealistic to expect such things to be always available to your character.And where are you getting nil effectiveness? Doing 50% of your damage per round is still something and not worth talking about Aiding Another.
What doesn't apply to them? DR applies to ranged attacks normally. I am not sure what you mean.
Archers can acquire Clustered Shots which reduces the effectiveness of DR to near nil. They also have the easiest time with weapon blanches, special ammunition and such.
2Handers deal such a large amount of damage in fewer hits that DR has less of an effect on them as well.
And it's not 50% even. I have a TWFer whose DPR drops from 140 to 40ish against DR10/Adamantine. That's a 72% difference. At 12th level. If you're only dealing 40 damage on a full attack, only the gods know how pitiful you'll be when you have to reposition, adapt to the terrain and have enemy spells slinging at you.
This houserule unfairly targets builds that are already less effective than the big 2 martial paths.
|
|
@Scavion
You aren't alone in your party and there is other people to help you out. Your calculations are wrong also, it's technically not possible to do 40 with regular 140 DPR. Even with 7x attacks each doing 20 damage, you are doing 70.
DR is meant to slow you down as it is. The mechanic isn't best in the world, but it works in favor of monsters. It's a challenge meant to be overcome.
My player who plays a fighter at home campaign took Penetrating Strike and it works great. Only DR 15 can slow him down a bit, and 25+ damage which he does with a single handed melee weapon isn't bad at all.IIRC(without checking the book) I think that is a fighter only feat. Not everyone is a fighter. Rangers, rogues, inquisitors, and any other sword and board or TWF'er is going to suffer. I don't mind DR as a whole. It is the variety of DR's that is the problem. I have run fights where players struggle with DR. It is only to mitigate damage, but it felt like the character was mitigated since he was not using a two-handed weapon.I am gonna semi disagree again. Inquisitors are doing quite fine with one-handed weapons. Dwarf Inquisitor in home group is doing 40 damage per hit. It's enough to bludgeon stone giant to death in one round. This is without Power Attack I believe, but I am not sure. Rogues might struggle if they can't land sneak attacks, but that's another issue.
But not that I wanna be a bad guy in a topic, I wanna know how would you handle DR then without removing it. This is only reason why I am even pursuing this topic. I know that people won't change their opinions.
I am sure if he is doing 40 per hit he is buffed up, and what level is he? Let say he is doing 40 per hit and he gets the hits. That is 120, assuming no misses, but with DR in place it could drop to 90 or 75. That is a big drop off, and one player doing it does not mean the rest can do it. I know I would have to put in a lot of effort to get in 40 points of damage with a one-handed weapon
Let's see. assumes level 16
str +10
assuming longsword 1d8= 4.5
power attack = 8
Before buffs it is 22.5
-------------------------------
How would I pursue it?
I would not have so many different types of DR, but let's assume PF's version is not availible.
IIRC there is way to make a weapon change metal types. I would have that as a flat cost, and not a +X equivalent price.
I might have another enhancment that lets a weapon transform into another weapon as long as they are in the same category(two-handed, one-handed, light).
That just means you have to worry about alignment.
PS: My first two ideas would require standard actions for each one. That makes having more than one weapon a good idea, so they are not spending two rounds transforming a weapon, and it reduces the golfbag affect. It also keeps the cost down for TWF'ers. As for TWF'ers I might have the TWF feat chain automatically improve based on your BAB so they dont need all of those feats.It would take two feats away.
@Scavion
You aren't alone in your party and there is other people to help you out.
That might be true, but it does not help that player feel better if he is dex based and using TWF. You might be doing 7d6(1d6 is for the weapon)+3=24 average..DR 10 drops it to 14, and DR 15 drops it to 9 per attack
Now some will say rogues dont count so lets go with a ranger
1d6main weapon + 6(favored enemy)+ str 3= 12.5 DR 10 2.5 DR 15 =0
Now we know str based TWF'ers do better, but that just that DR pigeon holes you into STR builds if it is too hard to overcome.
Being well below your normal damage is ok sometimes, but at higher levels where DR is common certain builds will really suffer.
|
|
@Wrathstrike
I never really checked his math because he is usually correct in it. Off the top of my head, he is using currently (buffed up with his own spells) adamantine warhammer +3 (greater magic weapon), Greater Bane, Judgement, 18 Strength which equals around 30+ average damage before other party buffs and temporary buffs like divine favor and divine power come into play. Party is currently level 14 and pretty much running around with perma buffs.
I like some of those ideas about metal changing for a flat cost, but for a standard action I doubt my party would even bother. They still prefer to use blunt-force trauma as soon as possible, meaning they will full-attack when they see chance. There is also no guarantee to know what kind of DR it is.