DR Based On HD, Plus Other Potential Changes

[Shadowknight12]

I am considering changing a few things about DR in the campaign I'm running, but I wanted some advice before doing so.

* DR no longer exists on fixed amounts (such as 5/Silver or 15/Adamantine), it now equals the creature's HD. Example: A creature with 18 HD has a DR of 18.

* DR affects damage from ALL sources (this includes spells, manoeuvres, the environment and abilities as well).

* All types of DR except for DR/Magic give a bonus to saves, SR and AC vs. spells, SLAs and supernatural abilities equal to the amount of DR they provide.

* DR/- is extremely rare. Class or racial features that provide DR/- are replaced with DR/Adamantine. Exceptions at DM discretion.

* Class features that grant DR override the DR = HD rule. A creature does not gain DR/Adamantine equal to their HD if they take barbarian levels. In the case that the creature acquires another type of DR, the different types of DR are combined as per the rules below. In the case of different kinds of DR (such as the case of a werewolf with barbarian levels) the highest DR is the one that remains. All other types of DR are combined with that one.

* DR/Magic only applies to Aberrations and other creatures deemed to be especially vulnerable to magic (it's a setting thing).

* Doing away with individual DR (except for a few iconic cases) and instead apply "blanket DR" by more general criteria, such as Type, Subtype, Template and the like. If a creature meets more than one criteria, their DRs are combined and joined by an "and." Example: Fey have DR/Cold Iron. Creatures of the Chaotic subtype have DR/Lawful. Creatures with the Lycanthrope template have DR/Silver. Liches and skeletons have DR/Bludgeoning. A satyr with the Chaotic subtype has DR/Cold Iron and Lawful. A werewolf with the Chaotic subtype has DR/Silver and Lawful.

* If a creature possessed a type of DR before receiving a template or class ability that gives it another type of DR (regardless of whether the template makes the creature ineligible for its previous DR), their DR stack as per the previous point. Example: A satyr barbarian with the Chaotic subtype receives the Lich template. He has DR/Cold Iron and Lawful and Bludgeoning and Adamantine*.

In case this is of relevance, summoning and calling magic (as well as shapeshifting into monsters) is extremely restricted. Likewise, immunity to mind-affecting effects has been lifted from anything that is not mindless (Int = 0) or has a special exception. Also, since it was pointed out to me, the Orb spells have been changed to be Evocation and have SR: Yes.

So, dear forumites, what am I missing? Any glaring problems? Does this affect the magic users in any way, or are they still going to auto-win any fight against any monster ever?





*: Yes, this means that in order to bypass his DR, one needs to craft a bludgeoning weapon of both Cold Iron and Adamantine and enchant it to be Lawful. The system to calculate the price of such a weapon (in regards to the special materials) is to take the prices of the same weapon made of Cold Iron and Adamantine, add them together and then divide by 2. If the weapon requires more special materials (such as alchemical silver), you add up all the individual prices and divide by the amount of special materials used. A weapon made of alchemical silver and cold iron does not bypass DR/Cold Iron or DR/Silver, it only bypasses DR/Silver and Cold Iron.

[Tvtyrant]

Well as it has no effect on control spells, no it doesn't hamper casters much. It basically makes the casters stronger relative to the melee types by granting them equal defenses, while giving casters options that bypass it.

[Shadowknight12]

Well as it has no effect on control spells, no it doesn't hamper casters much. It basically makes the casters stronger relative to the melee types by granting them equal defenses, while giving casters options that bypass it.

Hmmmm, excellent point. I was foreseeing it would have no effect on self-buffing and protections, but I had not thought of battlefield control. Still, that's only a matter of giving more Fly/Burrow/Climb/etc speeds and things like Blindsense.

I have no idea what you mean on the second part, since a caster is actually NOT going to be able to bypass these defences unless he's a gish. It's actually intended to make melee vital in the process of taking down a monster, since a caster will have increased difficulty in affecting foes.

[Gnoman]

* If a creature possessed a type of DR before receiving a template or class ability that gives it another type of DR (regardless of whether the template makes the creature ineligible for its previous DR), their DR stack as per the previous point. Example: A satyr barbarian with the Chaotic subtype receives the Lich template. He has DR/Cold Iron and Lawful and Bludgeoning and Adamantine*.


*: Yes, this means that in order to bypass his DR, one needs to craft a bludgeoning weapon of both Cold Iron and Adamantine and enchant it to be Lawful. The system to calculate the price of such a weapon (in regards to the special materials) is to take the prices of the same weapon made of Cold Iron and Adamantine, add them together and then divide by 2. If the weapon requires more special materials (such as alchemical silver), you add up all the individual prices and divide by the amount of special materials used.

I think a better way is to just add the extra DR instead of combining it. So, for example, instead of (for a level 18 barbarian using your example)

DR 18/Cold Iron and Lawful and Bludgeoning and Adamantine

He would have

DR 18/Cold Iron
DR 18/Lawful
DR 18/Bludgeoning
DR 18/Adamantine

Any DR-related bonus would only be 18.

This would be 72 DR, but each property would bypass 18 of it. So a lawful Cold Iron Greatclub would only have a DR of 18. This is how I already handle stacked DRs in my game, and it works pretty well.

[ILM]

Well for a start you give all these details, but you don't answer the first, most obvious question: why?


So, dear forumites, what am I missing? Any glaring problems? Does this affect the magic users in any way, or are they still going to auto-win any fight against any monster ever?
Considering every creature gets +HD to all their saves vs. spells (and SR), that's definitely going to change the paradigm. Expect to see lots of orbs flying around. And about that: what type is the HD-provided DR? DR/-?


If a creature possessed a type of DR before receiving a template or class ability that gives it another type of DR (regardless of whether the template makes the creature ineligible for its previous DR), their DR stack as per the previous point. Example: A satyr barbarian with the Chaotic subtype receives the Lich template. He has DR/Cold Iron and Lawful and Bludgeoning and Adamantine*.
Ok, the DR type stacks, what about the amount? What if a creature has DR 5/Cold Iron and gains DR 10/Piercing?


Yes, this means that in order to bypass his DR, one needs to craft a bludgeoning weapon of both Cold Iron and Adamantine and enchant it to be Lawful. The system to calculate the price of such a weapon (in regards to the special materials) is to take the prices of the same weapon made of Cold Iron and Adamantine, add them together and then divide by 2. If the weapon requires more special materials (such as alchemical silver), you add up all the individual prices and divide by the amount of special materials used.
I don't think that works like you think it does. It only means I can make a weapon of every type of metal ever, and all it'd cost me is the average of all those, which is actually cheaper than the most expensive materials. In short, an Alchemical Silver Adamantine sword costs me (20 gp + 3000 gp)/2 = 1510 gp. Awesome, cheapo adamantine weapons!

[Shadowknight12]

This would be 72 DR, but each property would bypass 18 of it. So a lawful Cold Iron Greatclub would only have a DR of 18. This is how I already handle stacked DRs in my game, and it works pretty well.

That's... not how I understand DR works. DR doesn't stack. In the case we're referencing, the creature in question only receives 18 less damage from all sources and receives a +18 to saves, SR and AC vs. spells and etc. And what's more, a bludgeoning weapon does not bypass it at all. Same for a Lawful or Cold Iron or Adamantine weapon. The only weapon that bypasses the DR is the same one I described, the one that combines all four qualities (which is why DR/- becomes extremely rare or outright non-existent, since it's effectively impossible to overcome).


Well for a start you give all these details, but you don't answer the first, most obvious question: why?

Because I think that the DR system is not used properly and it can be revamped to make it more relevant and bring melee into prominence, while making casters less likely to dominate an encounter.


Considering every creature gets +HD to all their saves vs. spells (and SR), that's definitely going to change the paradigm. Expect to see lots of orbs flying around. And about that: what type is the HD-provided DR? DR/-?

Not every creature. Humanoids don't have DR (unless they take very specific classes or templates), and they make up for the majority of playable races.

Thanks for reminding me about the orbs. I'm going to make an addendum about those (in short, they are Evocation and have SR: Yes as a house fix).

HD provided DR? I never said that HD gave DR. I said that instead of having a DR of 5 or 10 or fixed numbers, creatures that have DR instead have a number that equals their amount of HD. I'll clarify my OP.


Ok, the DR type stacks, what about the amount? What if a creature has DR 5/Cold Iron and gains DR 10/Piercing?

A creature does not have, actually, DR 5 or 10. It has a DR equal to their HD. If the creature has 2 HD, their DR is 2/Cold Iron and Piercing.


I don't think that works like you think it does. It only means I can make a weapon of every type of metal ever, and all it'd cost me is the average of all those, which is actually cheaper than the most expensive materials. In short, an Alchemical Silver Adamantine sword costs me (20 gp + 3000 gp)/2 = 1510 gp. Awesome, cheapo adamantine weapons!

That is not a weapon made of adamantine. It's a weapon made of alchemical silver AND adamantine. It does not bypass DR/Silver or DR/Adamantine. It bypasses DR/Silver and Adamantine.

[T.G. Oskar]

I am considering changing a few things about DR in the campaign I'm running, but I wanted some advice before doing so.

* Equalling DR with HD. Example: A creature with 18 HD has a DR of 18.

* DR affects damage from ALL sources (this includes spells, manoeuvres, the environment and abilities as well).

* All types of DR except for DR/Magic give a bonus to saves, SR and AC vs. spells, SLAs and supernatural abilities equal to the amount of DR they provide.

* DR/- is extremely rare. Class or racial features that provide DR/- are replaced with DR/Adamantine. Exceptions at DM discretion.

* DR/Magic only applies to Aberrations and other creatures deemed to be especially vulnerable to magic (it's a setting thing).

* Doing away with individual DR (except for a few iconic cases) and instead apply "blanket DR" by more general criteria, such as Type, Subtype, Template and the like. If a creature meets more than one criteria, their DRs are combined and joined by an "and." Example: Fey have DR/Cold Iron. Creatures of the Chaotic subtype have DR/Lawful. Creatures with the Lycanthrope template have DR/Silver. Liches and skeletons have DR/Bludgeoning. A satyr with the Chaotic subtype has DR/Cold Iron and Lawful. A werewolf with the Chaotic subtype has DR/Silver and Lawful.

* If a creature possessed a type of DR before receiving a template or class ability that gives it another type of DR (regardless of whether the template makes the creature ineligible for its previous DR), their DR stack as per the previous point. Example: A satyr barbarian with the Chaotic subtype receives the Lich template. He has DR/Cold Iron and Lawful and Bludgeoning and Adamantine*.

In case this is of relevance, summoning and calling magic (as well as shapeshifting into monsters) is extremely restricted. Likewise, immunity to mind-affecting effects has been lifted from anything that is not mindless (Int = 0) or has a special exception.

So, dear forumites, what am I missing? Any glaring problems? Does this affect the magic users in any way, or are they still going to auto-win any fight against any monster ever?





*: Yes, this means that in order to bypass his DR, one needs to craft a bludgeoning weapon of both Cold Iron and Adamantine and enchant it to be Lawful. The system to calculate the price of such a weapon (in regards to the special materials) is to take the prices of the same weapon made of Cold Iron and Adamantine, add them together and then divide by 2. If the weapon requires more special materials (such as alchemical silver), you add up all the individual prices and divide by the amount of special materials used.

Well...quite frankly, it'll make your players pull their hairs trying to survive one battle.

The first thing is rocket tag; unless your players can pull off 300-400 points of damage per round on a single attack (and that's perfectly possible with most builds), the rapidly scaling DR will eventually make them worthless unless the melee characters find super-specialized equipment.

The second thing is that it won't affect spellcasters in any way. You can get a creature with DR infinite/-, immunity to magic (as per a golem) and whatnot, and a spellcaster will STILL find a way to beat your character given some time. While your idea addresses some of the concerns of most people regarding the game (calling and summoning magic), it doesn't address most of the others (no save/no SR spells that cause status effects, for example). Insta-hit, no save/no SR, just-suck spells DO exist, and DO bypass nearly all the restrictions. Also, if you consider DR even for ability damage, you're basically providing a lot of late-game creatures with immunity to ability damage and ability drain, and that might not affect Enervation one bit (because True Strike will provide a decent chance to hit).

I'd personally go with DR turned into percentages (for example, DR 2/magic would reduce all incoming weapon damage by 10%, to a minimum of 2 points of damage, except for damage from magic weapons) and keep that as-is; probably also make energy resistance based on percentages. That is much more of an equalizer than just stacking DR in a way you need an epic weapon that deals slashing, bludgeoning AND piercing damage, made of silver, adamantine, cold iron and probably byeshk (or heck, just a Metalline weapon) that's simultaneously Chaotic, Lawful, Evil and Good aligned JUST to make ends meet, or just deal 300 points of damage and still kill it, period. I might sound harsh, but it really seems like a brute force solution that has some thought behind it (it's still a brute force solution, tho).

[Shadowknight12]

Well...quite frankly, it'll make your players pull their hairs trying to survive one battle.

That's good. I don't do combat much. Combat is fairly rare and plot-important. It's good that whenever it happens, the players take it seriously.


The first thing is rocket tag; unless your players can pull off 300-400 points of damage per round on a single attack (and that's perfectly possible with most builds), the rapidly scaling DR will eventually make them worthless unless the melee characters find super-specialized equipment.

Can't I just add a handful/truckload of HD or class levels onto a creature to solve that? I'm simultaneously boosting their HP and overall resistance to spells in one move.


The second thing is that it won't affect spellcasters in any way. You can get a creature with DR infinite/-, immunity to magic (as per a golem) and whatnot, and a spellcaster will STILL find a way to beat your character given some time. While your idea addresses some of the concerns of most people regarding the game (calling and summoning magic), it doesn't address most of the others (no save/no SR spells that cause status effects, for example). Insta-hit, no save/no SR, just-suck spells DO exist, and DO bypass nearly all the restrictions. Also, if you consider DR even for ability damage, you're basically providing a lot of late-game creatures with immunity to ability damage and ability drain, and that might not affect Enervation one bit (because True Strike will provide a decent chance to hit).

That is actually an excellent point. Tell me, are those spells you mention specific individual spells that can be fixed/eliminated/etc. Or are they like summoning/calling/polymorph and therefore very numerous?


I'd personally go with DR turned into percentages (for example, DR 2/magic would reduce all incoming weapon damage by 10%, to a minimum of 2 points of damage, except for damage from magic weapons) and keep that as-is; probably also make energy resistance based on percentages. That is much more of an equalizer than just stacking DR in a way you need an epic weapon that deals slashing, bludgeoning AND piercing damage, made of silver, adamantine, cold iron and probably byeshk (or heck, just a Metalline weapon) that's simultaneously Chaotic, Lawful, Evil and Good aligned JUST to make ends meet, or just deal 300 points of damage and still kill it, period. I might sound harsh, but it really seems like a brute force solution that has some thought behind it (it's still a brute force solution, tho).

Hmmm, that's a good suggestion, don't get me wrong, but I really dislike the idea of calculating percentages so often, especially with the "to a minimum of" caveat on top. I don't deny that perhaps your way is more of an equaliser, but I don't think I'd find it comfortable to use.

Also, keep in mind that one of the changes I'm suggesting for DR makes it affect all kinds of damage, including energy damage. Then you have energy resistance on top of that. So an Orb of Sound that hits a creature with DR 12 and Sonic resistance 10 ends up taking 22 less damage from that spell.

Metalline weapons would help emulate the metal qualities, yes, but that costs an enhancement and has no bearing on DR/alignment, DR/bludgeoning, piercing and slashing, or any other type of DR I might invent to make it more complex.

Brute force solution? I'm unfamiliar with the term applied to D&D. If you mean that this is a very simple and specific change meant to be easy to swallow for players and ready to implement on a campaign, then... sure? I guess so?

[Greenish]

Can't I just add a handful/truckload of HD or class levels onto a creature to solve that? I'm simultaneously boosting their HP and overall resistance to spells in one move.Also boosting their attack and (probably) damage.


Metalline weapons would help emulate the metal qualities, yes, but that costs an enhancement and has no bearing on DR/alignment, DR/bludgeoning, piercing and slashing, or any other type of DR I might invent to make it more complex.Shadowstriking, then. I know I'd pay an arm and a leg for that, when all the enemies have DR. (Of course, arms are cheap, and legs don't cost that much either.)

[Shadowknight12]

Also boosting their attack and (probably) damage.

Shadowstriking, then. I know I'd pay an arm and a leg for that, when all the enemies have DR. (Of course, arms are cheap, and legs don't cost that much either.)

Considering that buffing and protection magic are utterly unaffected by this change, that doesn't seem to be a problem.

Oh, lovely, off I go to scour the CharOp boards to find out what that means before it can actually come up in a game and take me by surprise...

Thanks for the heads up, though. :smallsmile:

EDIT: It costs a +3 enhancement. I'll make it a +5 and then it'll be perfectly fine by me.

[Gnoman]

That's... not how I understand DR works. DR doesn't stack. In the case we're referencing, the creature in question only receives 18 less damage from all sources and receives a +18 to saves, SR and AC vs. spells and etc. And what's more, a bludgeoning weapon does not bypass it at all. Same for a Lawful or Cold Iron or Adamantine weapon. The only weapon that bypasses the DR is the same one I described, the one that combines all four qualities (which is why DR/- becomes extremely rare or outright non-existent, since it's effectively impossible to overcome).



I know that it doesn't stack that way. You're making a house rule. I suggested a different house rule that I think would work better than the one you suggested. That's part of making up rules.

[Greenish]

EDIT: It costs a +3 enhancement. I'll make it a +5 and then it'll be perfectly fine by me.As someone who fancies two-weapon fighting, I find the idea of being forced to buy two +6 weapons to be able to scratch the enemies more than a tad annoying.

[Shadowknight12]

I know that it doesn't stack that way. You're making a house rule. I suggested a different house rule that I think would work better than the one you suggested. That's part of making up rules.

Oh, okay. So let me get this straight. You say that the only difference it makes is that DR gets multiplied by the amount of "bypass" options it has, but only for the effects of damage and not the bonuses? And that individual "bypass" components reduce a part of this?

Well... it's not a bad idea, I'll give you that. The only problem I can think of is the fact that it ends up hurting melee more and does not faze spellcasters at all (since blasters are exceedingly rare).


As someone who fancies two-weapon fighting, I find the idea of being forced to buy two +6 weapons to be able to scratch the enemies more than a tad annoying.

As another fan of two-weapon fighting (honestly, I've yet to play a non-caster who does not dual-wield), I wholeheartedly sympathise. Think of it this way, though: You have a chance at bypassing it at all. The casters don't. You are the one bringing the monster down. As a corollary, you don't have to buy the shadowstriking property. You have oils and spells that simulate DR-bypassing properties for a short time. The shadowstriking property buys you security. You know you can bypass anything. You can just stroll from encounter to encounter without bothering with prep time or research. That should be a commodity. An expensive commodity.

[T.G. Oskar]

That's good. I don't do combat much. Combat is fairly rare and plot-important. It's good that whenever it happens, the players take it seriously.

There's a big difference between "taking things seriously" and "making combat difficult".

A good example of how resources can be managed to make battles serious without much effort is shown with Tucker's kobolds. Essentially, the idea is "strength by numbers", which will deliver a bucketload of XP at high levels but few at low levels, but they don't engage the enemy directly. They take advantage of positioning and preparation. I've never seen them in action, but I do recall in a game I was playing, and that was split between two DMs at one moment, that they ended up absolutely terrified of kobolds, and that was because they swarmed the group and took advantage of flanking, spellcasting, possibly sneak attack and ranged combat. And a trap or two. And that's perfectly fine, since those are all options that are core-specific.


Can't I just add a handful/truckload of HD or class levels onto a creature to solve that? I'm simultaneously boosting their HP and overall resistance to spells in one move.

Again, issues with "rocket tag". Basically, you add many HP, BAB, damage and whatnot only to cover for someone who did his job rather well. That, and Blur reduces the chances of that attack being successful at all.

One of the things that most people are advised here is that solving the situation of highly optimized characters with higher numbers is generally a bad idea. That's because it motivates characters to up their ante even more (hence, rocket tag: one hit, one kill, and it all depends on who shoots first), and because it implies a high reward for the risk: upping HD also implies upping CR, thus upping the challenge but also the XP, meaning that they level up much faster. With few battles, that's possible, but if they win ALL battles despite that, you'll end up without a challenge soon enough. And if that challenge can be bypassed entirely, then...


That is actually an excellent point. Tell me, are those spells you mention specific individual spells that can be fixed/eliminated/etc. Or are they like summoning/calling/polymorph and therefore very numerous?

Grease and Sleet Storm are two examples. The first works in a small area, while the second works at a larger area. Both impose a fairly low, almost inconsequential skill check (Balance DC 10 check), but you get two things out of it: if they don't pass that DC 10 check, they can't move; if they fail by 5 or more, they fall prone and thus they need either to stand up or take penalties to their AC (meaning you attack slightly better). That might not seem as much, but there's two things that emerge from that: first, most characters and NPCs don't have the appropriate Balance checks (and they incur ACP, so wearing armor makes that worse) to pass it instantly, so they might end up on the floor or just plain halted a lot of times, AND since they're locked the players have the movement advantage (a reach weapon and no movement means the opponent can't counterattack, meaning that the risk lessens). Both spells are easily accessible from level 1 to level 6, depending on the class that casts it. It doesn't do any damage, it doesn't do any status effect, one has a Reflex save but since you also need to do a Balance check it still works, and the other takes you straight to the Balance check. If someone is balancing (i.e. has to make a Balance check to remain standing, such as what Grease or Sleet Storm do), they lose their Dex bonus to AC (yet another benefit, this time for Rogues and Ninja) as well.

Web is another example. While the Reflex save might seem like the main treat, the real treat is that it creates difficult terrain, so the enemy will have difficulties moving around without a Strength check, and the Strength check is pretty high. Since it can't move, you can attack it from a distance, hence invoking the same trait.

Notice that in no moment the spells deal damage or depend exclusively on dealing status effects; they work by forcing the creature into a specific spot where the enemy can't move, or can't attack, or can't act at all, thus aiding those who DO the actual work of dealing damage (the melee characters) by lessening the risk of taking actual damage and setting their enemies in an excellent position. It doesn't matter how many defenses the enemy has, if you lock it into a single position in which it cannot make its attacks or deny their chance of actually pulling their moves, they're effectively stuck and you can chip away bit by bit until they perish.

Also, notice none of them are calling, summoning or polymorph spells, and removing them from your game seems silly because their effect requires your players to think.


Hmmm, that's a good suggestion, don't get me wrong, but I really dislike the idea of calculating percentages so often, especially with the "to a minimum of" caveat on top. I don't deny that perhaps your way is more of an equaliser, but I don't think I'd find it comfortable to use.

By now, no respectable DM (unless it's an awesome, genius DM that has no need for it) lacks a calculator (or a computer). Someone who deals 300 points of damage against an enemy with DR 2/- would actually deal 270 points of damage (DR 2/- would imply a 10% reduction [amount of DR x 5%], 10% of 300 is 30, so 300-30=270). It might seem like lots of work, but you're dealing with multiple additions at once if your players don't sum up their rolls beforehand (and adding extra bonuses adds even more calculations to the action), so it's not really that difficult. But, it makes damage reduction more effective because it loses its worth slower than the current version (because the developers thought that dealing many points of damage was the realm of spellcasters, not of melee characters) and it's fair to both those who deal lots of damage in a single blow and those who deal less damage but multiple times.

Of course, not everyone will feel comfortable (as you mentioned), but consider that perhaps it's much simpler and much more elegant that way. It works like a patch, not a full tweaking, and it also implies a natural limit (if each point of DR equals a reduction of 5% in damage, then you have to consider what happens when DR exceeds 20, since that's basically invulnerability to damage).

Also: do you roll for treasure? That's an awful lot of percentages, actually, and you have to roll those, not simply have a cheat sheet nearby and do a much simpler multiplication.


Also, keep in mind that one of the changes I'm suggesting for DR makes it affect all kinds of damage, including energy damage. Then you have energy resistance on top of that. So an Orb of Sound that hits a creature with DR 12 and Sonic resistance 10 ends up taking 22 less damage from that spell.

Once again, rocket tag.


Metalline weapons would help emulate the metal qualities, yes, but that costs an enhancement and has no bearing on DR/alignment, DR/bludgeoning, piercing and slashing, or any other type of DR I might invent to make it more complex.

Not a very expensive enhancement, but the fact is that it'll probably be less expensive than fine-tuning the weapon to a specific enemy. Having ONE weapon that might be sorta weaker but can punch through four or five types of DR will be MUCH, MUCH more valuable than 5 different weapons that punch only one type of DR, or worse, work on ONE type of monster exclusively. You'll drain your player's wealth so badly, they'll eventually feel frustrated because they won't have the right tool for the battle, which hurts melee characters more than it hurts spellcasters (which don't deal with weapons in the first place).


Brute force solution? I'm unfamiliar with the term applied to D&D. If you mean that this is a very simple and specific change meant to be easy to swallow for players and ready to implement on a campaign, then... sure? I guess so?

Simplicity is not the only type of solution. At first it seems simple, but your solution is actually pretty complex, because it involves more than one houserule applying at once, and it's not really easy to swallow (HD applying to BAB, DR, saves [twice!], AC, skills...just about everything, scaling by level...you'll have to add that manually, and that'll lead to very big numbers; then add energy resistance on top of DR and...you get the idea).

However, what worries me isn't really simplicity but elegance. Hence, why I refer this as a "brute force" solution: you simply increase the target numbers in several ways in hope that you can cover AC, damage and saves to target spellcasters, but those affect martial characters in the process, and you work an impressively hard method to allow the martial characters to bypass that, but they'll be absolutely creamed with any type of random encounter (which is a handy DM trick), and they'll still be creamed by non-AC, non-DR defenses (concealment is much, much better than AC or DR because it negates damage entirely; so does blindness). Since it implies pretty much rewriting ALL monster stats you want to use each time you use them or alter them, the end result is not pretty. DR and energy resistance as means of percentages is a much more elegant solution because you can simply have a sheet nearby detailing the changes, but it doesn't force you to rewrite the monster stats because you're using the same stats, just improving one or two things. It's both simple and elegant since it involves very little alterations, in comparison to your idea which seems quite complex.

Blanket fixes to things are rarely elegant, and IMO deceptively simple. Eventually you'll find something that doesn't fit, and you'll have to make an exception for it OR eventually tone down, and probably it'll cause enough problems that you'll be forced to take it away or run with it even if you don't like it. A blanket increase in the target numbers is also rarely elegant, if actually rather simple. It also involves whether the players get the same benefit or not (I'm thinking not, which implies a big problem), since it rapidly approaches a binary solution; either the player has little problem because it has DR and saves that allow it to bypass just about everything, or it has none and it has to face enemies that are insanely hard to hit AND can beat you with little problem.

[Greenish]

If someone is balancing (i.e. has to make a Balance check to remain standing, such as what Grease or Sleet Storm do), they lose their Dex bonus to AC (yet another benefit, this time for Rogues and Ninja) as well.They don't only lose Dex to AC, they become flat-footed (without 5 ranks in balance, that is).

[Shadowknight12]

There's a big difference between "taking things seriously" and "making combat difficult".

A good example of how resources can be managed to make battles serious without much effort is shown with Tucker's kobolds. Essentially, the idea is "strength by numbers", which will deliver a bucketload of XP at high levels but few at low levels, but they don't engage the enemy directly. They take advantage of positioning and preparation. I've never seen them in action, but I do recall in a game I was playing, and that was split between two DMs at one moment, that they ended up absolutely terrified of kobolds, and that was because they swarmed the group and took advantage of flanking, spellcasting, possibly sneak attack and ranged combat. And a trap or two. And that's perfectly fine, since those are all options that are core-specific.

Yeah, I don't see your point, really. The entire point of a rule fix is precisely so that the DM isn't forced to outsmart or outwit the players in other to present them with a decent challenge. The way I see it, a DM who actively wants to outsmart and "out-strategize" his players in combat should utterly crush them, not merely provide them with an adequate challenge.


Again, issues with "rocket tag". Basically, you add many HP, BAB, damage and whatnot only to cover for someone who did his job rather well. That, and Blur reduces the chances of that attack being successful at all.

Who are you giving the hypothetical advantage of Blur? The player or the monster?

Secondly, what's your point? If someone is playing their character in such a way that level-appropriate encounters are too easy, then the solution is precisely to make the encounter more difficult. The easiest way to do so is to increase the monsters' stats.


One of the things that most people are advised here is that solving the situation of highly optimized characters with higher numbers is generally a bad idea. That's because it motivates characters to up their ante even more (hence, rocket tag: one hit, one kill, and it all depends on who shoots first), and because it implies a high reward for the risk: upping HD also implies upping CR, thus upping the challenge but also the XP, meaning that they level up much faster. With few battles, that's possible, but if they win ALL battles despite that, you'll end up without a challenge soon enough. And if that challenge can be bypassed entirely, then...

Not necessarily. I don't have to up CR with HD, since CR is a subjective way of measuring encounters. The CR system estimates that the party must spend a certain percentage of their resources in overcoming the encounter. If the party does not spend the calculated percentage, why should I up the CR?


Grease and Sleet Storm are two examples. The first works in a small area, while the second works at a larger area. Both impose a fairly low, almost inconsequential skill check (Balance DC 10 check), but you get two things out of it: if they don't pass that DC 10 check, they can't move; if they fail by 5 or more, they fall prone and thus they need either to stand up or take penalties to their AC (meaning you attack slightly better). That might not seem as much, but there's two things that emerge from that: first, most characters and NPCs don't have the appropriate Balance checks (and they incur ACP, so wearing armor makes that worse) to pass it instantly, so they might end up on the floor or just plain halted a lot of times, AND since they're locked the players have the movement advantage (a reach weapon and no movement means the opponent can't counterattack, meaning that the risk lessens). Both spells are easily accessible from level 1 to level 6, depending on the class that casts it. It doesn't do any damage, it doesn't do any status effect, one has a Reflex save but since you also need to do a Balance check it still works, and the other takes you straight to the Balance check. If someone is balancing (i.e. has to make a Balance check to remain standing, such as what Grease or Sleet Storm do), they lose their Dex bonus to AC (yet another benefit, this time for Rogues and Ninja) as well.

Grease allows for a Reflex save, for starters. The change in DR would give the monsters a bonus on that save. The other effect (the one that imposes Balance checks) is fine. It requires strategy in order to be used effectively and it's not an impossible number to pass (and it can't be boosted, as it's not a DC). Furthermore, both can be overcome by creatures with flight, burrow, climb, etc. Sleet Storm's vision-hampering effects can be overcome by Blindsense, Tremorsense and the like.

Furthermore, you said it yourself. Forcing passing foes to lose their Dex bonus to AC helps classes such as ninja and rogue. That's a good outcome.


Web is another example. While the Reflex save might seem like the main treat, the real treat is that it creates difficult terrain, so the enemy will have difficulties moving around without a Strength check, and the Strength check is pretty high. Since it can't move, you can attack it from a distance, hence invoking the same trait.

Again, you said it yourself. Reflex save. Boosted by the DR. Difficult terrain? Perfectly acceptable.

What you don't mention, though, is that all the effects you've mentioned cut both ways. Grease, Web and Sleet Storm affect allies and foes alike. The wizard drops a Web and the enemies take out their bows and let lose on the party, who better be prepared to respond in kind, because the difficult terrain affects them as well.


Notice that in no moment the spells deal damage or depend exclusively on dealing status effects; they work by forcing the creature into a specific spot where the enemy can't move, or can't attack, or can't act at all, thus aiding those who DO the actual work of dealing damage (the melee characters) by lessening the risk of taking actual damage and setting their enemies in an excellent position. It doesn't matter how many defenses the enemy has, if you lock it into a single position in which it cannot make its attacks or deny their chance of actually pulling their moves, they're effectively stuck and you can chip away bit by bit until they perish.

Also, notice none of them are calling, summoning or polymorph spells, and removing them from your game seems silly because their effect requires your players to think.

Aiding those who do the actual work of dealing damage? That's a good thing, actually, because the caster can no longer solo the encounter.


By now, no respectable DM (unless it's an awesome, genius DM that has no need for it) lacks a calculator (or a computer). Someone who deals 300 points of damage against an enemy with DR 2/- would actually deal 270 points of damage (DR 2/- would imply a 10% reduction [amount of DR x 5%], 10% of 300 is 30, so 300-30=270). It might seem like lots of work, but you're dealing with multiple additions at once if your players don't sum up their rolls beforehand (and adding extra bonuses adds even more calculations to the action), so it's not really that difficult. But, it makes damage reduction more effective because it loses its worth slower than the current version (because the developers thought that dealing many points of damage was the realm of spellcasters, not of melee characters) and it's fair to both those who deal lots of damage in a single blow and those who deal less damage but multiple times.

Of course, not everyone will feel comfortable (as you mentioned), but consider that perhaps it's much simpler and much more elegant that way. It works like a patch, not a full tweaking, and it also implies a natural limit (if each point of DR equals a reduction of 5% in damage, then you have to consider what happens when DR exceeds 20, since that's basically invulnerability to damage).

I do agree with your reasoning that it "ages" better, but that still ends up harming melee more than anything. It's an attractive idea, I suppose, but that undercuts the bonuses vs. magic I am intending to give out. Unless I divorce that idea from DR. I will definitely give it some thought, though. It might be simpler to do that.


Also: do you roll for treasure? That's an awful lot of percentages, actually, and you have to roll those, not simply have a cheat sheet nearby and do a much simpler multiplication.

I don't roll for treasure. I don't actually have "dungeons" with "treasure." About 50% to 90% of a PC's XP comes from non-combat sources. I use the WBL rules to calculate how much gold the PCs are expected to gain every level and then dole it out as I see fit.


Not a very expensive enhancement, but the fact is that it'll probably be less expensive than fine-tuning the weapon to a specific enemy. Having ONE weapon that might be sorta weaker but can punch through four or five types of DR will be MUCH, MUCH more valuable than 5 different weapons that punch only one type of DR, or worse, work on ONE type of monster exclusively. You'll drain your player's wealth so badly, they'll eventually feel frustrated because they won't have the right tool for the battle, which hurts melee characters more than it hurts spellcasters (which don't deal with weapons in the first place).

Why would it be less expensive? You have oils and spells that temporarily grant many different ways to bypass DR. The alignment ones are all granted by spells. Metalline grants you all the possible metals and several weapons have more than one damage type. Furthermore, if you don't want to go for Metalline, you have silversheen oil and I'm quite sure that there are spells out there that make the weapon "count" as a certain type of metal for a certain period of time.


Simplicity is not the only type of solution. At first it seems simple, but your solution is actually pretty complex, because it involves more than one houserule applying at once, and it's not really easy to swallow (HD applying to BAB, DR, saves [twice!], AC, skills...just about everything, scaling by level...you'll have to add that manually, and that'll lead to very big numbers; then add energy resistance on top of DR and...you get the idea).

I don't really see the complexity. You advance a monster normally, or give it class levels, or what have you, then give it a DR that equals its HD. That's all you have to do before combat. When combat starts, you might not have to do anything at all unless the monster encounters a magical effect. If it does, you simply add its DR to the relevant stat (AC, SR and/or saves). Then you carry on combat as normal.


However, what worries me isn't really simplicity but elegance. Hence, why I refer this as a "brute force" solution: you simply increase the target numbers in several ways in hope that you can cover AC, damage and saves to target spellcasters, but those affect martial characters in the process, and you work an impressively hard method to allow the martial characters to bypass that, but they'll be absolutely creamed with any type of random encounter (which is a handy DM trick), and they'll still be creamed by non-AC, non-DR defenses (concealment is much, much better than AC or DR because it negates damage entirely; so does blindness). Since it implies pretty much rewriting ALL monster stats you want to use each time you use them or alter them, the end result is not pretty. DR and energy resistance as means of percentages is a much more elegant solution because you can simply have a sheet nearby detailing the changes, but it doesn't force you to rewrite the monster stats because you're using the same stats, just improving one or two things. It's both simple and elegant since it involves very little alterations, in comparison to your idea which seems quite complex.

And I'm not worried about elegance at all. What matters is that it works, and in the simplest possible way.

I don't do random encounters either. Every encounter is plot-relevant and the players have a chance to prepare for it if they follow leads, use divinations, research, seek out NPCs, etc.

The problem with concealment is that it screws over melee more than it affects spellcasters. A spellcaster uses a save or die that does not have an attack roll and the miss chance never comes into effect.

You don't have to rewrite any stats at all, except for DR. See my explanation in my previous point.

I do agree that it's more elegant, but like I said, it doesn't actually affect spellcasters at all, since we've established spellcasters rarely blast. However, I said I would think about splitting the two concepts (DR and boosts vs. magic), since I do agree that percentages age far better.


Blanket fixes to things are rarely elegant, and IMO deceptively simple. Eventually you'll find something that doesn't fit, and you'll have to make an exception for it OR eventually tone down, and probably it'll cause enough problems that you'll be forced to take it away or run with it even if you don't like it. A blanket increase in the target numbers is also rarely elegant, if actually rather simple. It also involves whether the players get the same benefit or not (I'm thinking not, which implies a big problem), since it rapidly approaches a binary solution; either the player has little problem because it has DR and saves that allow it to bypass just about everything, or it has none and it has to face enemies that are insanely hard to hit AND can beat you with little problem.

Yes, I'm aware of that, which is why I posted here, to try and weed out the possible problems that might arise before they do.

What you state about the binary situation merits further investigation, I think, since the idea is for the players NOT to get these same advantages (or at least, not in the same degree. I'm fine with classes such as the barbarian to have a limited version of what I'm suggesting). And if they want to have the advantages, they ought to play a monster, with all the consequences it implies. I don't really think it's that terrible to have an enemy that takes actual effort and considerable expenditure of resources to defeat. I understand that's not what most games are about, but I adapt to what my players want to see in a game, and this seemed like a good way to combine one of my own pet peeves (how poorly used DR is as a system) with a way to solve most of my players' gripes with combat ("toning down casters, making melee more relevant without resorting to ToB, making combat less trivial, making monsters fearsome and difficult to bring down" and so forth) in the simplest possible way.

[ILM]

I think I've found why I dislike your houserule. It's a thinly-veiled form of railroading. Not in the plot sense of course, but in how fights are fought. Lemme explain.

3.5 is flawed in that at higher levels, magic dominates. Okay. Maybe that needs to be fixed (who am I kidding, it definitely should, within reason). Your idea basically splits the game in two games.
Game A: it's 3.5. If you're fighting humanoids, nothing changes.
Game B: you're not fighting humanoids. Suddenly everything has sky-high saves and SR that you honestly can't hope to overcome without serious optimization which - going out on a limb here - I'm betting you won't allow. Presto, the list of spells available to casters is now about 80% shorter and consists essentially of buffs. There's still a few spells like orbs but oh wait! Let's houserule them so they don't work. There. All taken care of.

Now how about melee characters? Well, TWF and archers are out already, because they tend to have many, comparatively low damage attacks, and we know what DR does to that. But wait, you're not done: character can dish out tons of damage in one hit? No worries, let's tack on more hit die on the monsters! There's a way to bypass DR altogether as a weapon enchantment? Oh no, not in my game: let's make it prohibitively expensive.

So basically, you're telling the players "Here's a monster: fight him this way, with that weapon. Why no, anything else doesn't work, but thanks for asking. Now go whittle down each other's HP for a while."

If you really want to keep it simple rather than elegant, just say it to your players. That monster can only be harmed by X. Nothing else works. Go spend your WBL on a hundred weapons of all metal combinations imaginable, and make sure they're properly sorted for easy access in your bags of holding. Simple and honest.

If, however, you're only worried about the caster's dominance in mid- and late- game, then join the club; there's a million threads out there with possible fixes. Take a look at the revised spell lists from Doc Roc's Legend. I actually think he took out most of the abuse from Core (which was where most of it came from anyway). If you must, boost monsters' saves a bit. Maybe +2, +3? If that doesn't work out, try a little more. Don't drop a +HD on top of them, that's just arbitrary.

[Zale]

Or get a Transmuting Weapon.


Changes to overcome any DR.

[Shadowknight12]

Or get a Transmuting Weapon.


Changes to overcome any DR.

Sigh. Another one of those. Also +5.


I think I've found why I dislike your houserule. It's a thinly-veiled form of railroading. Not in the plot sense of course, but in how fights are fought. Lemme explain.

That's a very interesting assertion. Considering I am practically the opposite of a railroading DM and I loathe that practice with a passion, I'm definitely hoping to avoid doing just that.


3.5 is flawed in that at higher levels, magic dominates. Okay. Maybe that needs to be fixed (who am I kidding, it definitely should, within reason). Your idea basically splits the game in two games.
Game A: it's 3.5. If you're fighting humanoids, nothing changes.
Game B: you're not fighting humanoids. Suddenly everything has sky-high saves and SR that you honestly can't hope to overcome without serious optimization which - going out on a limb here - I'm betting you won't allow. Presto, the list of spells available to casters is now about 80% shorter and consists essentially of buffs. There's still a few spells like orbs but oh wait! Let's houserule them so they don't work. There. All taken care of.

Yes, that's exactly what I was looking for. Why is this a bad thing? If you say "Oh but now the CR system doesn't work!", well, that's not much of a problem, since the CR system never worked. It was a very useful guideline of suggestions, but the final arbiter of what a given group might find appropriately challenging was the DM. If the monsters are now tougher to kill, you just use weaker monsters. Suddenly, what used to be a cakewalk now becomes a challenging fight.


Now how about melee characters? Well, TWF and archers are out already, because they tend to have many, comparatively low damage attacks, and we know what DR does to that. But wait, you're not done: character can dish out tons of damage in one hit? No worries, let's tack on more hit die on the monsters! There's a way to bypass DR altogether as a weapon enchantment? Oh no, not in my game: let's make it prohibitively expensive.

Yes. Exactly. And now no PC can hit the easy button to single-handedly dominate an encounter. There's no "this spell solves everything" or "I launch seven attacks per round and down the creature" or a "I stack up a truckload of damage in one hit and end the creature by myself." If a character wants the easy way out of an encounter, he has to work (or pay) for it.


So basically, you're telling the players "Here's a monster: fight him this way, with that weapon. Why no, anything else doesn't work, but thanks for asking. Now go whittle down each other's HP for a while."

Replace "fight him" with "if you want to crush him without breaking a sweat, then do it" and you've got it.


If you really want to keep it simple rather than elegant, just say it to your players. That monster can only be harmed by X. Nothing else works. Go spend your WBL on a hundred weapons of all metal combinations imaginable, and make sure they're properly sorted for easy access in your bags of holding. Simple and honest.

Because that's not the point. I don't want them to be invulnerable, I want the "easy ways out" to be extremely hard to find. The principle behind DR and resistances with one crippling weakness is that you reward the players who investigate and prepare, and those who do the exact same thing over and over again will have a harder time getting through the encounter. DR as is is just silly. DR 5 to 15 is easy to ignore, and even DR 20+ is no match for proper builds. The idea given above about DR working as a percentage, however, merits thought and I'm liking it better and better the more I think about it.


If, however, you're only worried about the caster's dominance in mid- and late- game, then join the club; there's a million threads out there with possible fixes. Take a look at the revised spell lists from Doc Roc's Legend. I actually think he took out most of the abuse from Core (which was where most of it came from anyway). If you must, boost monsters' saves a bit. Maybe +2, +3? If that doesn't work out, try a little more. Don't drop a +HD on top of them, that's just arbitrary.

Exactly, you've said it perfectly. I don't want to join the club. I'm not interested in joining the list of people who come up with complex fixes just so that I can tell my players "Here, this is the solution you've been asking for" when I can do the same with a few simple fixes. A player and I are talking about remaking the entire magic system from scratch. I don't want a fix that will take me as much time and effort to implement as a complete remake. I'll take the remake instead.

I'm going to search for what you've mentioned, however, since I figure that I might stumble upon an easy fix in the meantime, or it might be exactly what my players are looking for. However, knowing them, the odds of that happening are are slim.

[ILM]

But there is no easy fix.

For one, if there was, in all the years of 3.5, you'd think people would have it already. Instead of spending hours debating what tier is which class, they'd just have evened down everything and called it a day. There is no simple fix. Yours is no simple fix. Look at it: the basic description takes a page, and then you're houseruling everything to accomodate your rules.

I had a DM who had a beef with the system too, and who started using simple fixes. He now has a completely different ruleset - I mean literally, it's not d20 anymore, he just rewrote everything.

The 3.5e ruleset is huge. The problem with huge is that whenever you change something it affects something else, which affects something else, etc. By your rules, casters are jacked against any higher level monster. You're houseruling out anything that would have had a chance of going through SR and saves. You want them to be that way because you have that ideal of melee guys being the big damn heroes. Fine; it's your game.

I don't disagree with your willingness to ensure that no player can just one-shot your encounters. The problem is that now, they can't even participate if they don't have that one weapon you want them to have. Any non-martial character will be either a buff-bot, or standing uselessly on the sidelines (like "I don't take any action because there's literally nothing I can do" kind of useless). Fun. See how many ineffective fireballs it takes before your sorcerer-playing character starts wondering what the hell he's even doing at this table, since he has zero chance of ever damaging a monster.

And yet while you're fixing some stuff, you're leaving other things wide open. For instance, you completely fail to address how casters can also be the best at melee, with the right builds and the right spells. So, are you also going to houserule that out? How much "sigh, another one of those, houserule!" are you going to do before you realize that you're out to rewrite half the game?

[Glimbur]

What happens when the PC's get DR from sources besides class levels? There are a number of spells (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/stoneskin.htm) which grant DR, some vests in MiC give DR, some templates (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20031003e) give DR, and so on.

It's possible that something silly like a Totemist/Reaping Mauler would be useful in this setting due to their ability to kill without doing damage. As mentioned earlier, blasting spells are out for fighting things with DR and save DC's would need to be incredibly high for debuffs to stick. Buffs would still work, but melee has problems with this too because without a golf bag of weapons DR is suddenly a big deal. Battlefield control is still possible, summons also benefit from the improved DR so they might help... except they are heavily restricted. PC's are going to have serious problems killing things unless they game the system to also benefit from all of this DR.

As a final note, SR = HD is useful only if the hit dice are ten or more higher than the CL of the casters, which happens at mid to high levels depending on what sort of creature it is.

[T.G. Oskar]

I don't disagree with your willingness to ensure that no player can just one-shot your encounters. The problem is that now, they can't even participate if they don't have that one weapon you want them to have. Any non-martial character will be either a buff-bot, or standing uselessly on the sidelines (like "I don't take any action because there's literally nothing I can do" kind of useless). Fun. See how many ineffective fireballs it takes before your sorcerer-playing character starts wondering what the hell he's even doing at this table, since he has zero chance of ever damaging a monster.

100% agree with that. As most people would say here, QFT, or "quoted for truth".

Thing is, it's extremely boring being unable to participate in a combat just because you can't do anything unless you have the right weapon. It's a personal example, but just take any base group (without a Batman Wizard, just your typical Fighter McWarrior, Black Mage Evilwizardington, Ms. White Mage and Prince Thief) and put them against a stone golem. Go ahead. In a campaign I played (having a Sorcerer/Swordsage going for JPM, a Rogue going for Exemplar, a Warblade and me as a Paladin/Cleric), the only two people that could do ANYTHING were the Warblade and me. The Warblade was the ONLY one who could do any damage to it, and the only reason I could provide some aid was because I had a weapon made of Adamantine and I was the ONLY one who could withstand a hit from that thing (as in, having the highest AC to actually NOT be hit). The Rogue automatically got out of the game, and the Sorcerer basically spent its time turning his highest-level spells into raw damage before he also got out of the game. So, of a 5-people group (I recall there was a Conjurer as well, but his summon spells weren't up to par to the golem), only TWO ended up facing it in a battle of attrition. Eventually, we won, but that was because the Warblade was the only one dealing any meaningful damage.

Why do I mention this? Basically, the "fix" turns ALL non-humanoid monsters into golem wannabes, if only because they get DR and SR and whatnot up the wazoo. Casters will feel worthless, which is a noble idea but not a good idea (because casters still should contribute, and because Evocation spells need more love than Conjuration anyways), and eventually you might feel Rogues being kinda cheap so you'll have all creatures hold an item of Fortification or something, or otherwise become specifically immune to Sneak Attacks, or just flat deny the Rogue their SA because a well-timed SA might one-shot the monster.

It's not a concern out of spite or anything, but a fix that consists only of high numbers doesn't seem like the best idea. And, as ILM said, there's no easy fix that will beat all.

[Shadowknight12]

But there is no easy fix.

For one, if there was, in all the years of 3.5, you'd think people would have it already. Instead of spending hours debating what tier is which class, they'd just have evened down everything and called it a day. There is no simple fix. Yours is no simple fix. Look at it: the basic description takes a page, and then you're houseruling everything to accomodate your rules.

Actually, I've encountered time and time again two simple fixes: E6 and "ban Tier 1, replace with their spontaneous counterparts, then tell everyone who wants to play melee to play a ToB class." Surely there are more. Perhaps they won't be perfect, and perhaps they won't be to everyone's liking, but what's the problem with trying out new options to see if they're valid?


I had a DM who had a beef with the system too, and who started using simple fixes. He now has a completely different ruleset - I mean literally, it's not d20 anymore, he just rewrote everything.

And that's precisely why I don't want complicated fixes. I don't want to overreach and end up having to remake the entire ruleset.


The 3.5e ruleset is huge. The problem with huge is that whenever you change something it affects something else, which affects something else, etc. By your rules, casters are jacked against any higher level monster. You're houseruling out anything that would have had a chance of going through SR and saves. You want them to be that way because you have that ideal of melee guys being the big damn heroes. Fine; it's your game.

No, that's not what I want. That's what I interpret my players want, and I'm trying to find a way to deliver it to them. My first few groups played solely classes out of ToB. Then I had a couple of teams made entirely of casters and their permutations. Now I have a new player I'm introducing to D&D. I have never stopped hearing complaints about the same repeated issues. My job as a DM is to ensure my players have fun and find new ways to improve their experience. Telling them "Suck it up and deal with it" will not do.


I don't disagree with your willingness to ensure that no player can just one-shot your encounters. The problem is that now, they can't even participate if they don't have that one weapon you want them to have. Any non-martial character will be either a buff-bot, or standing uselessly on the sidelines (like "I don't take any action because there's literally nothing I can do" kind of useless). Fun. See how many ineffective fireballs it takes before your sorcerer-playing character starts wondering what the hell he's even doing at this table, since he has zero chance of ever damaging a monster.

You are assuming here that I will be throwing impossible challenges. That's not my intention. Ideally, I would prepare the encounter so that the foes are weaker than standard (or, depending on player optimisation, just about standard) and therefore don't present a terrible threat to the players. Simultaneously, those monsters will have the same HP they had and the only difference will be that yes, they will be harder to bring down, but not impossible. A standard barghest has 33 HP and 6 HD. With this system, it has DR 6/Chaotic and Good, no SR, a touch AC of 18 versus spells (since most spells are touch attacks) and +12/+13/+13 saves versus spells. It's annoying, yes, but not terrible. And it's most certainly not impossible for melee to take down.


And yet while you're fixing some stuff, you're leaving other things wide open. For instance, you completely fail to address how casters can also be the best at melee, with the right builds and the right spells. So, are you also going to houserule that out? How much "sigh, another one of those, houserule!" are you going to do before you realize that you're out to rewrite half the game?

Yes, casters can be great at melee too. That's not necessarily a bad thing, since the caster has to actually work for it in order to be good at that. It's no longer a matter of preparing save-or-dies (or no-save-just-dies) and casting them from afar. There would only be a problem if they overshadowed the non-casters.


What happens when the PC's get DR from sources besides class levels? There are a number of spells (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/stoneskin.htm) which grant DR, some vests in MiC give DR, some templates (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20031003e) give DR, and so on.

Spells and the like remain what they are (meaning, they follow the same rules as classes). Templates follow the "Equals HD" rules. Templates like Mineral Warrior might need an increase in LA. It depends. I'm still undecided as to how I'm going to handle LA in my upcoming campaign.


It's possible that something silly like a Totemist/Reaping Mauler would be useful in this setting due to their ability to kill without doing damage. As mentioned earlier, blasting spells are out for fighting things with DR and save DC's would need to be incredibly high for debuffs to stick. Buffs would still work, but melee has problems with this too because without a golf bag of weapons DR is suddenly a big deal. Battlefield control is still possible, summons also benefit from the improved DR so they might help... except they are heavily restricted. PC's are going to have serious problems killing things unless they game the system to also benefit from all of this DR.

I looked up Reaping Mauler. I am swiftly beginning to realise that there might always be a loophole I have to patch with a houserule.

As an aside, I know I used a very elaborate example, but seriously, it's not going to be THAT bad. Most creatures are going to have one or two types of DR. It's not going to need a whole golf bag of weaponry. I figure that humanoids and constructs will need to be taken care of with adamantine, fey and demons with cold iron, devils, vampires and lycanthropes (and a couple stray others) with silver and the rest can be handled with a spell of Align Weapon. And those who get DR/Magic (which will be most of the enemies a party might face) are not benefiting from the bonuses versus magic.


As a final note, SR = HD is useful only if the hit dice are ten or more higher than the CL of the casters, which happens at mid to high levels depending on what sort of creature it is.

And if it's 10 or 15 + HD? I'm asking this mainly for humanoids and the more numerous/prevalent races and creatures.



100% agree with that. As most people would say here, QFT, or "quoted for truth".

Thing is, it's extremely boring being unable to participate in a combat just because you can't do anything unless you have the right weapon. It's a personal example, but just take any base group (without a Batman Wizard, just your typical Fighter McWarrior, Black Mage Evilwizardington, Ms. White Mage and Prince Thief) and put them against a stone golem. Go ahead. In a campaign I played (having a Sorcerer/Swordsage going for JPM, a Rogue going for Exemplar, a Warblade and me as a Paladin/Cleric), the only two people that could do ANYTHING were the Warblade and me. The Warblade was the ONLY one who could do any damage to it, and the only reason I could provide some aid was because I had a weapon made of Adamantine and I was the ONLY one who could withstand a hit from that thing (as in, having the highest AC to actually NOT be hit). The Rogue automatically got out of the game, and the Sorcerer basically spent its time turning his highest-level spells into raw damage before he also got out of the game. So, of a 5-people group (I recall there was a Conjurer as well, but his summon spells weren't up to par to the golem), only TWO ended up facing it in a battle of attrition. Eventually, we won, but that was because the Warblade was the only one dealing any meaningful damage.

Okay, I do agree with you on the sorcerer, the conjurer and the rogue, it's not good when players aren't able to participate. But why are tough battles a bad thing? Sure, not saying that battles of attrition where three out of five players can't do a thing are the best definition of "tough," but can't that just be tweaked a bit to balance it?


Why do I mention this? Basically, the "fix" turns ALL non-humanoid monsters into golem wannabes, if only because they get DR and SR and whatnot up the wazoo. Casters will feel worthless, which is a noble idea but not a good idea (because casters still should contribute, and because Evocation spells need more love than Conjuration anyways), and eventually you might feel Rogues being kinda cheap so you'll have all creatures hold an item of Fortification or something, or otherwise become specifically immune to Sneak Attacks, or just flat deny the Rogue their SA because a well-timed SA might one-shot the monster.

Actually, no, I do like the idea that the rogue can provide a high damage spike when the conditions are met. That's what the rogue should do. The rogue isn't just a glorified skillmonkey. He's supposed to be able to deliver huge amounts of damage if he sets up the fight properly, and the current system does not really deliver it. What you said is actually a good thing for rogues.

However, I do agree that making casters useless is a bad thing, and I do agree that evocation needs more love. I simply don't know a simple, easy way to fix that without changing the way magic works.


It's not a concern out of spite or anything, but a fix that consists only of high numbers doesn't seem like the best idea. And, as ILM said, there's no easy fix that will beat all.

So it seems. According to the feedback I'm getting, it seems that the best idea is to make DR percentage-based, as you suggested, and then simply pitch the magic system remake instead.

[Thrice Dead Cat]

* DR no longer exists on fixed amounts (such as 5/Silver or 15/Adamantine), it now equals the creature's HD. Example: A creature with 18 HD has a DR of 18.

This is rather obnoxious, since you make it sound like it is just "I'm taking X less damage." That hurts for all melee involved, which is really unnecessary.


* DR affects damage from ALL sources (this includes spells, manoeuvres, the environment and abilities as well).

Okay, so that slaps maneuvers overly harshly, simply because they tend to be a one shot a round type of thing. Mountain Hammer becomes amazingly better though.


* All types of DR except for DR/Magic give a bonus to saves, SR and AC vs. spells, SLAs and supernatural abilities equal to the amount of DR they provide.

This is overkill. Suddenly a 12 HD monster autosaves against breath weapons from a DFA. Binders can't do squat, nor can Incarnates. Same goes for all (Su) users. Gods help them if those monsters have evasion or mettle. This just says "no."


* DR/- is extremely rare. Class or racial features that provide DR/- are replaced with DR/Adamantine. Exceptions at DM discretion.

Okay? This helps... marginally. I mean, this is still rough.


* Class features that grant DR override the DR = HD rule. A creature does not gain DR/Adamantine equal to their HD if they take barbarian levels. In the case that the creature acquires another type of DR, the different types of DR are combined as per the rules below. In the case of different kinds of DR (such as the case of a werewolf with barbarian levels) the highest DR is the one that remains. All other types of DR are combined with that one.

Similarly unnecessary. Stacking DR is bad for most people.


* DR/Magic only applies to Aberrations and other creatures deemed to be especially vulnerable to magic (it's a setting thing).

Okay...? I dislike things that are "a setting thing" just because.


* Doing away with individual DR (except for a few iconic cases) and instead apply "blanket DR" by more general criteria, such as Type, Subtype, Template and the like. If a creature meets more than one criteria, their DRs are combined and joined by an "and." Example: Fey have DR/Cold Iron. Creatures of the Chaotic subtype have DR/Lawful. Creatures with the Lycanthrope template have DR/Silver. Liches and skeletons have DR/Bludgeoning. A satyr with the Chaotic subtype has DR/Cold Iron and Lawful. A werewolf with the Chaotic subtype has DR/Silver and Lawful.

Another overkill. Now instead of having to deal with good or X, now it's good and X. This leads to a pile of weapons so people can hope to bypass most DRs... hope.


* If a creature possessed a type of DR before receiving a template or class ability that gives it another type of DR (regardless of whether the template makes the creature ineligible for its previous DR), their DR stack as per the previous point. Example: A satyr barbarian with the Chaotic subtype receives the Lich template. He has DR/Cold Iron and Lawful and Bludgeoning and Adamantine*.

Sooooooo DR/- unless they have a transmuting weapon. Yeah, no. This is not a good rule. With everything else, it basically boils down to "you don't do damage."


In case this is of relevance, summoning and calling magic (as well as shapeshifting into monsters) is extremely restricted. Likewise, immunity to mind-affecting effects has been lifted from anything that is not mindless (Int = 0) or has a special exception. Also, since it was pointed out to me, the Orb spells have been changed to be Evocation and have SR: Yes.

K? Summoning tends to be an "all in" type of thing, requiring quite a bit of investment to stay relevant, although, still a full caster. The mind-affecting thing helps enchantment, though, but that's still will save or X.


So, dear forumites, what am I missing? Any glaring problems? Does this affect the magic users in any way, or are they still going to auto-win any fight against any monster ever?

Yeah, this hurts everyone. You are seriously better off talking to your players or, I don't know, maybe actually stating out specific monsters with class levels or a personal touch of some kind.

[Shadowknight12]

This is rather obnoxious, since you make it sound like it is just "I'm taking X less damage." That hurts for all melee involved, which is really unnecessary.

Isn't that the exact point of DR? Damage Resistance? I'm taking less damage? Only applied more equally for all attackers?


Okay, so that slaps maneuvers overly harshly, simply because they tend to be a one shot a round type of thing. Mountain Hammer becomes amazingly better though.

And if I don't include manoeuvres, it's unbalanced. I understand that manoeuvres are not spells, but they're still powerful on their own.


This is overkill. Suddenly a 12 HD monster autosaves against breath weapons from a DFA. Binders can't do squat, nor can Incarnates. Same goes for all (Su) users. Gods help them if those monsters have evasion or mettle. This just says "no."

Depends on the DFA in question and his level, and his build. Same for all the above. If the 12 HD monster is facing a level 18 DFA, his save DC is around 24 (at the very least, without any real attempts to pump it up). A 12 HD creature with a poor Reflex save and 10 Dexterity would have a +18 bonus to it. It's good, yes, but that's merely baseline. With all the spells, items and buffs available, the DC of that breath weapon would easily be at least 10 points higher. And unless they have evasion, the breath weapon still does an average of 12 damage on a failed save and exactly 0 on a successful save. On a maximum roll of the dice, the DFA deals 12 damage even on a failed save. This is, of course, assuming that the DFA doesn't choose to apply a debuff instead, which would be far more appropriate than raw damage.


Okay...? I dislike things that are "a setting thing" just because.

They are not "just because," they have a fully fleshed out story reason that I didn't think merited to be mentioned, since I assumed nobody would be interested in that.


Another overkill. Now instead of having to deal with good or X, now it's good and X. This leads to a pile of weapons so people can hope to bypass most DRs... hope.

In the rare cases where they stack, yes, that happens. Stacking DR is rare. I put it there as an example to cover my bases, but that is not an expected or common occurrence.


Sooooooo DR/- unless they have a transmuting weapon. Yeah, no. This is not a good rule. With everything else, it basically boils down to "you don't do damage."

Again, assuming one pits a creature with a truckload of HD against the players. Seriously, what is it with everyone and worst case scenarios? I mean, I get it, I'm a big fan of them myself, but at some point, you have to step back and say "Okay, worst case scenario: Players can't do damage. What else can happen?" and work from there. Yes, I get it, if I miscalculate the HD any given monster has, my players are screwed.

What if I don't miscalculate the HD? What if after careful thought and lots of practice, I calculate it just right? What if they CAN do damage without the right weapon, if perhaps only a percentage of their normal capabilities, and the monster merely has a greater chance of saving or being unaffected by magic and the like? Is there a problem with that? If it is, I'll scrap the idea out of being infeasible. If there isn't, I'll just have to be careful with encounter planning.


K? Summoning tends to be an "all in" type of thing, requiring quite a bit of investment to stay relevant, although, still a full caster. The mind-affecting thing helps enchantment, though, but that's still will save or X.

A neglected will save or X, but yes, you're quite right.


Yeah, this hurts everyone. You are seriously better off talking to your players or, I don't know, maybe actually stating out specific monsters with class levels or a personal touch of some kind.

My players don't know about this yet, I was planning to have everything hashed out before proposing it. If I were to ask them "what do you propose we do to fix the Tiers problem? Oh, and make DR relevant while we're at it," I would get the mother of all arguments. I would much, much rather show up and say "Hey, guys, look at what I came up with. This solves all the stuff you complain about."

[Thrice Dead Cat]

Isn't that the exact point of DR? Damage Resistance? I'm taking less damage? Only applied more equally for all attackers?

The issue here is that it's not "I'm taking less damage if I'm lucky," but rather "Nope, good luck getting 3-4 qualities on that weapon. I'm just going to ignore it no matter what." Which is a big difference.




And if I don't include manoeuvres, it's unbalanced. I understand that manoeuvres are not spells, but they're still powerful on their own.

Maneuvers are attacks, mostly, so they're automatically included. Your system just makes it much worse for them.


Depends on the DFA in question and his level, and his build. Same for all the above. If the 12 HD monster is facing a level 18 DFA, his save DC is around 24 (at the very least, without any real attempts to pump it up). A 12 HD creature with a poor Reflex save and 10 Dexterity would have a +18 bonus to it. It's good, yes, but that's merely baseline. With all the spells, items and buffs available, the DC of that breath weapon would easily be at least 10 points higher. And unless they have evasion, the breath weapon still does an average of 12 damage on a failed save and exactly 0 on a successful save. On a maximum roll of the dice, the DFA deals 12 damage even on a failed save. This is, of course, assuming that the DFA doesn't choose to apply a debuff instead, which would be far more appropriate than raw damage.

Well, yeah, but facing say a CR 12 monster, which will generally range from about 11 to up to 24 HD, if it's undead, that means the thing will basically autosave against it. If it blows two feats, it can gain evasion, easy and just be a pain to fight. Also, the DFA will have an equally if not harder time with the debuff, because, well, +HD to saves. That's pants on head stupid good.




They are not "just because," they have a fully fleshed out story reason that I didn't think merited to be mentioned, since I assumed nobody would be interested in that.

It may as well be. To me this reads as a DM saying "You can't take a level in Warblade because you didn't go to warblade school" even though I started as a fighter. It's a poor answer to me and needs some serious justification, which I'd probably still be able to argue against, because, well, I have a say in this game world, too!




In the rare cases where they stack, yes, that happens. Stacking DR is rare. I put it there as an example to cover my bases, but that is not an expected or common occurrence.

Rare means nothing. We have no base to compare it to. We don't have monsters to see how common it really is. It's an assurance like "Yeah, of course you won't see many hydras here: they're rare" before running into one. It's all under the DM's purview. The fact that PCs are of rare quality themselves says something, too.


Again, assuming one pits a creature with a truckload of HD against the players. Seriously, what is it with everyone and worst case scenarios? I mean, I get it, I'm a big fan of them myself, but at some point, you have to step back and say "Okay, worst case scenario: Players can't do damage. What else can happen?" and work from there. Yes, I get it, if I miscalculate the HD any given monster has, my players are screwed.

Still, even if they face equal level threats, they still may be boned. Most undead monsters tend to stack on HD like they're candy, so you get things like the Bonesplitter: a CR 11-12 monster with twice that many HD. TWFers cry. Things that rely on a ton of attacks flail around and ping for 1 damage a pop. Dedicated chargers still hit, but less so. It'd honestly just be easier to stack on more feats or HD or something under the default rules rather than creating this monstrosity of a houserule.


What if I don't miscalculate the HD? What if after careful thought and lots of practice, I calculate it just right? What if they CAN do damage without the right weapon, if perhaps only a percentage of their normal capabilities, and the monster merely has a greater chance of saving or being unaffected by magic and the like? Is there a problem withthat? If it is, I'll scrap the idea out of being infeasible. If there isn't, I'll just have to be careful with encounter planning.

That's possible. But it's also easily possible to toy with monsters by RAW without these sort of screwball rules that can seriously detract from the group's fun.




My players don't know about this yet, I was planning to have everything hashed out before proposing it. If I were to ask them "what do you propose we do to fix the Tiers problem? Oh, and make DR relevant while we're at it," I would get the mother of all arguments. I would much, much rather show up and say "Hey, guys, look at what I came up with. This solves all the stuff you complain about."

Yeah, no. That could still bring up a ton of arguments. If you have a TWFing rogue, he may cry foul when he realizes how much more cash needs to be blown on daggers of numerous types. You may as well just ask the players not to go too crazy and talk with them again if something is amiss.

[Shadowknight12]

The issue here is that it's not "I'm taking less damage if I'm lucky," but rather "Nope, good luck getting 3-4 qualities on that weapon. I'm just going to ignore it no matter what." Which is a big difference.

Again. 3-4 qualities in a single weapon is an extreme. Look at the far-fetched example I had to pull. A satyr, with the Chaotic subtype, levels in barbarian and the lich template. The only "easy" way to add another type of material to DR is to take a caster with pre-existent DR (such as a Fey) and get them to cast Stoneskin to add the "and Adamantine" property to their DR. That's it. And maybe there's a spell that grants you a temporary subtype as well. Which can be countered by the Align Weapon spell, so that's one less quality to worry about. Seriously, it's not worst case scenario here. Normal enemies typically have only ONE type of DR. Two at the most. Which is standard for typical D&D.


Maneuvers are attacks, mostly, so they're automatically included. Your system just makes it much worse for them.

So? A great deal of spells (those that require touch attacks) are also attacks.


Well, yeah, but facing say a CR 12 monster, which will generally range from about 11 to up to 24 HD, if it's undead, that means the thing will basically autosave against it. If it blows two feats, it can gain evasion, easy and just be a pain to fight. Also, the DFA will have an equally if not harder time with the debuff, because, well, +HD to saves. That's pants on head stupid good.

The CR system is a suggestion and a general guideline. It's useful, don't get me wrong, but I'd have to be clinically insane to assume that the stated CRs have any validity left after this change. It would be plain ridiculous to throw a CR 12 monster to a typical level 12 party and expect them to overcome it without difficulty.


It may as well be. To me this reads as a DM saying "You can't take a level in Warblade because you didn't go to warblade school" even though I started as a fighter. It's a poor answer to me and needs some serious justification, which I'd probably still be able to argue against, because, well, I have a say in this game world, too!

Wait what? What are you talking about? What's the problem here? I'm not denying my players anything. The setting has been almost wiped out by aberrations. They are encountered in hordes in the air, land and sea. The in-universe reason for the fact that they haven't completely wiped out the planes is that they have a crippling weakness to magic. Giving the most common enemy a character can encounter an exception to all this strikes me as the opposite of "denying a player something." I'm actually saying "The vast majority of the world is out to kill you and is not, in fact, resistant to magic. Go nuts."


Rare means nothing. We have no base to compare it to. We don't have monsters to see how common it really is. It's an assurance like "Yeah, of course you won't see many hydras here: they're rare" before running into one. It's all under the DM's purview. The fact that PCs are of rare quality themselves says something, too.

Yes, you HAVE examples to compare it to. Open the monster manuals. How many creatures with multiple types of DR do you see? Sure, if you go class and template stacking, you can have some pretty crazy results, but if you go that way, I can also throw my party a half-troll half-construct thing that is basically indestructible. You can't say "Rare means nothing," because it actually does.


Still, even if they face equal level threats, they still may be boned. Most undead monsters tend to stack on HD like they're candy, so you get things like the Bonesplitter: a CR 11-12 monster with twice that many HD. TWFers cry. Things that rely on a ton of attacks flail around and ping for 1 damage a pop. Dedicated chargers still hit, but less so. It'd honestly just be easier to stack on more feats or HD or something under the default rules rather than creating this monstrosity of a houserule.

Again, with this fix, nobody could possibly assume that stated CR still have the same validity. For the exact issues you've just described. The new method of guesstimating is precisely based on HD. You write down each player's damage output per round (and per attack) and you pick something with enough HD to give them a challenge but not outright negate their damage output, and then you check your casters' DCs to see what the odds of their success are when casting any given spell. With the CR level, you had to take a closer look at every monster to make sure that your group didn't have a tactic or trick that could trivialise the encounter regardless of its reported CR.

The problem here is that merely "more HD and feats" don't solve the problem. They won't faze casters and they will end up hurting melee. Yes, this new fix also hurts melee, but it hurts casters even worse.


That's possible. But it's also easily possible to toy with monsters by RAW without these sort of screwball rules that can seriously detract from the group's fun.

How? By combing each and every encounter you think of and finding out every possible way of exploiting weaknesses AND going over your players' sheets with a magnifying glass to make sure they can't one-shot the encounter? Over and over and over and over again? And watch as it only gets harder and more time-consuming as they gain levels? Forgive me for wanting a blanket fix that saves me all that hassle.


Yeah, no. That could still bring up a ton of arguments. If you have a TWFing rogue, he may cry foul when he realizes how much more cash needs to be blown on daggers of numerous types. You may as well just ask the players not to go too crazy and talk with them again if something is amiss.

True, I will concede the point of multi-weapon users, as I conceded near the beginning of the thread. That's... yeah, definitely not something that can just be sprung on a group.

I suppose I'll have to get started on remaking the entire magic system, then. Seems like a better way to spend my time and effort than to keep working on this fix. The idea of basing DR on percentages is definitely something I might incorporate into my next campaign's houserules if this doesn't take off (as I doubt it will).

----

One final question before I pull the plug on this project: What would be the consequences of taking all the creatures with DR/Magic (except for those of the Aberration type) and replacing their type of DR for the following:

Fey, elementals, magical beasts and those with the Chaotic subtype (or with preference for any Chaotic alignment, regardless of Type) get DR/Cold Iron.
Constructs and corporeal undead get DR/Adamantine.
Everyone else gets DR/Silver.

?

[Thrice Dead Cat]

Again. 3-4 qualities in a single weapon is an extreme. Look at the far-fetched example I had to pull. A satyr, with the Chaotic subtype, levels in barbarian and the lich template. The only "easy" way to add another type of material to DR is to take a caster with pre-existent DR (such as a Fey) and get them to cast Stoneskin to add the "and Adamantine" property to their DR. That's it. And maybe there's a spell that grants you a temporary subtype as well. Which can be countered by the Align Weapon spell, so that's one less quality to worry about. Seriously, it's not worst case scenario here. Normal enemies typically have only ONE type of DR. Two at the most. Which is standard for typical D&D.

Yeah, but it's worse in the case that if you don't bypass it, you may not at all with the massive increase to DR. That is a big problem and can take away from everyone's fun (since it now worries EVERYONE).




So? A great deal of spells (those that require touch attacks) are also attacks.

Your point? Some spells are attacks, but they're attacks for a plus blah bonus or attacks instead of a saving throw. Are there still spells that are attacks for damage? Yeah, but that's why there's energy resistance! Does it suck that most casters can swap out their energy types at the drop of a hat? Yeah, but outside of archmage that is generally limited to 1-2 energies per spell.




The CR system is a suggestion and a general guideline. It's useful, don't get me wrong, but I'd have to be clinically insane to assume that the stated CRs have any validity left after this change. It would be plain ridiculous to throw a CR 12 monster to a typical level 12 party and expect them to overcome it without difficulty.

While the CR system has issues, your system of DR does NOT help. You yourself say so right here, I mean!:smalltongue: As is, I have used the CR system to great effect in the past, ballparking somethings, winging others, lowering and raising things based on party composition and the like. But that's what a good DM should do. Not adhoc a large, large set of game-changing houserules instead. Not that that can't be done, just that it isn't my go-to answer.




Wait what? What are you talking about? What's the problem here? I'm not denying my players anything. The setting has been almost wiped out by aberrations. They are encountered in hordes in the air, land and sea. The in-universe reason for the fact that they haven't completely wiped out the planes is that they have a crippling weakness to magic. Giving the most common enemy a character can encounter an exception to all this strikes me as the opposite of "denying a player something." I'm actually saying "The vast majority of the world is out to kill you and is not, in fact, resistant to magic. Go nuts."

No, but you said it it wasn't "just because" but rather due to setting. Not knowing your setting, it looked pretty much like a "just because" to me, and, as a player, that irks me. Certainly each setting has its own little quirks and supplemental rules, and that is fine, but the vast majority of the groundwork is the same.




Yes, you HAVE examples to compare it to. Open the monster manuals. How many creatures with multiple types of DR do you see? Sure, if you go class and template stacking, you can have some pretty crazy results, but if you go that way, I can also throw my party a half-troll half-construct thing that is basically indestructible. You can't say "Rare means nothing," because it actually does.

Yeah, no, because you're changing the rules of the game. I'd wager to guess most monster have some form of DR X/magic, constructs with DR X/adamantine, and so on. By throwing that all out the window and then winging what type of DR they have instead (you yourself said DR X/magic is out, save for aberrations) and not saying HOW you are altering that and what to, well, there's a hard baseline to find. It's also annoying, in that you're changing a formerly "and/or" style DR to strictly "and" when it does come up. That is always bothersome. I mean, something with DR X/magic or cold iron is weaker than something with DR X/magic and cold iron, yes, but there are also cases with critters having DR X/magic and DR Y/cold iron, allowing for partial bypasses.




Again, with this fix, nobody could possibly assume that stated CR still have the same validity. For the exact issues you've just described. The new method of guesstimating is precisely based on HD. You write down each player's damage output per round (and per attack) and you pick something with enough HD to give them a challenge but not outright negate their damage output, and then you check your casters' DCs to see what the odds of their success are when casting any given spell. With the CR level, you had to take a closer look at every monster to make sure that your group didn't have a tactic or trick that could trivialise the encounter regardless of its reported CR.


And that's more work than what was there before: this is not good homebrew design, especially for ALL things with racial HD.:smallsigh:


The problem here is that merely "more HD and feats" don't solve the problem. They won't faze casters and they will end up hurting melee. Yes, this new fix also hurts melee, but it hurts casters even worse.

Exempt for, you know, things with all good saves, access to feats like Steadfast Determination and others to buffer saves, and anything else out there that will help to prevent any given Bad save Vs X into an automatic victory. Do meleers have to deal with more HP and maybe damage against them? Yeah, but it is a lot easier to cut through HP in a given round than it is to cut through DR=HD X/Y per round.




How? By combing each and every encounter you think of and finding out every possible way of exploiting weaknesses AND going over your players' sheets with a magnifying glass to make sure they can't one-shot the encounter? Over and over and over and over again? And watch as it only gets harder and more time-consuming as they gain levels? Forgive me for wanting a blanket fix that saves me all that hassle.

That level of detail is excessive and actually not needed. Assuming you have a four man team roughly of "hitty guy," "sneaky guy," "divine magicy guy who likes doing blah," and "arcane magicy guy who likes doing durh," you should be able to find something in one of the monster manuals that deals with most of these cases. Heck, find some solid stuff and just reuse it. Odds are the PCs won't catch on. If they do, find something new. Toy with the system: have fun making your monsters.




True, I will concede the point of multi-weapon users, as I conceded near the beginning of the thread. That's... yeah, definitely not something that can just be sprung on a group.

Then don't. Multiweapon fighters already are on the short end of the stick, so don't make their day any worse:smallwink:


I suppose I'll have to get started on remaking the entire magic system, then. Seems like a better way to spend my time and effort than to keep working on this fix. The idea of basing DR on percentages is definitely something I might incorporate into my next campaign's houserules if this doesn't take off (as I doubt it will).

Remaking the entire magic system is a pain: either use someone else's work or simply say "there is no arcane/divine magic, please use psionics or incarnum or binding instead." Heck, even that isn't a must if you simply ask your players to limit their spell options or be gentlemen about it.



One final question before I pull the plug on this project: What would be the consequences of taking all the creatures with DR/Magic (except for those of the Aberration type) and replacing their type of DR for the following:

Fey, elementals, magical beasts and those with the Chaotic subtype (or with preference for any Chaotic alignment, regardless of Type) get DR/Cold Iron.
Constructs and corporeal undead get DR/Adamantine.
Everyone else gets DR/Silver.

?

Depending on the campaign, it could turn into everyone having three different weapons, which is a pain as that eats away at wealth. It's one thing to have a back up magical silver weapon and just dealing with things with two other types in the standard system largely due to how much smaller the DR numbers are there. This large change is brutal, even at lower levels, as it amounts to an extra X HP per hit then when players can't afford the good stuff or any non-standard steel stuff, really. Later, it becomes an issue of being smart enough to grab the right weapon for the right monster.

[Shadowknight12]

Yeah, but it's worse in the case that if you don't bypass it, you may not at all with the massive increase to DR. That is a big problem and can take away from everyone's fun (since it now worries EVERYONE).

And it used to worry melee before. I may have gone overboard, but I've at least made an attempt to equalise the field.


Your point? Some spells are attacks, but they're attacks for a plus blah bonus or attacks instead of a saving throw. Are there still spells that are attacks for damage? Yeah, but that's why there's energy resistance! Does it suck that most casters can swap out their energy types at the drop of a hat? Yeah, but outside of archmage that is generally limited to 1-2 energies per spell.

My point is that you talked about manoeuvres and I cited spells as an example. I just don't think it's fair to leave manoeuvres out of it.


While the CR system has issues, your system of DR does NOT help. You yourself say so right here, I mean!:smalltongue: As is, I have used the CR system to great effect in the past, ballparking somethings, winging others, lowering and raising things based on party composition and the like. But that's what a good DM should do. Not adhoc a large, large set of game-changing houserules instead. Not that that can't be done, just that it isn't my go-to answer.

Hah, true, I'll give you that. It does makes the CR system less accurate rather than the opposite. I do admit that it's not a huge hassle to me, particularly, because I never actually look at a monster's CR. I use other stats as a guideline, which is why the DR system wouldn't be such a huge change to the way I design encounters.


No, but you said it it wasn't "just because" but rather due to setting. Not knowing your setting, it looked pretty much like a "just because" to me, and, as a player, that irks me. Certainly each setting has its own little quirks and supplemental rules, and that is fine, but the vast majority of the groundwork is the same.

I agree, but like I said before, I didn't think it'd be relevant to the mechanics I was proposing.


Yeah, no, because you're changing the rules of the game. I'd wager to guess most monster have some form of DR X/magic, constructs with DR X/adamantine, and so on. By throwing that all out the window and then winging what type of DR they have instead (you yourself said DR X/magic is out, save for aberrations) and not saying HOW you are altering that and what to, well, there's a hard baseline to find. It's also annoying, in that you're changing a formerly "and/or" style DR to strictly "and" when it does come up. That is always bothersome. I mean, something with DR X/magic or cold iron is weaker than something with DR X/magic and cold iron, yes, but there are also cases with critters having DR X/magic and DR Y/cold iron, allowing for partial bypasses.

Good point. Would it make much of a difference if the rule for DR stacking because "or" instead of "and"? So that creatures that "stack" DR become actually weaker instead of stronger?


And that's more work than what was there before: this is not good homebrew design, especially for ALL things with racial HD.:smallsigh:

Racial HD. Why would that be different from normal HD?


Exempt for, you know, things with all good saves, access to feats like Steadfast Determination and others to buffer saves, and anything else out there that will help to prevent any given Bad save Vs X into an automatic victory. Do meleers have to deal with more HP and maybe damage against them? Yeah, but it is a lot easier to cut through HP in a given round than it is to cut through DR=HD X/Y per round.

All good saves? Only Dragon and Outsider. And sometimes Animal.

And yes, what you're saying is basically "find monster's weak points, go over sourcebooks looking for ways of fixing it, check for any easy ways to defeat it, then go over sourcebooks to fix that, too."


That level of detail is excessive and actually not needed. Assuming you have a four man team roughly of "hitty guy," "sneaky guy," "divine magicy guy who likes doing blah," and "arcane magicy guy who likes doing durh," you should be able to find something in one of the monster manuals that deals with most of these cases. Heck, find some solid stuff and just reuse it. Odds are the PCs won't catch on. If they do, find something new. Toy with the system: have fun making your monsters.

I don't think I'll get a party like that, but I suppose that's solid advice. It's still not as simple as you suggest. :smalltongue:


Then don't. Multiweapon fighters already are on the short end of the stick, so don't make their day any worse:smallwink:

Hah! Yeah, I suppose I would agree. Might as well just make DR percentage-based and stick with what's already on the table.


Remaking the entire magic system is a pain: either use someone else's work or simply say "there is no arcane/divine magic, please use psionics or incarnum or binding instead." Heck, even that isn't a must if you simply ask your players to limit their spell options or be gentlemen about it.

Well, the problem is that there's a good chunk already thought out, all that needs to be done is sit down and remake the actual (simplified and generic) spells and playtest them. And the problem with ALL magic systems (with perhaps ToB as an exception, and only because it's the one I'm the least familiar with) is that they are ALL based on vancian magic. Binders, vestiges and truenamers often duplicate preexistent spells. Incarnates are different enough, true, but they have their own issues. Psionics. Hard sale on a surprising amount of groups I've been in.

Eh, if the remake ends up coalescing into something tangible, I'm almost certain you'll see it in the Homebrew area for PEACHing.


Depending on the campaign, it could turn into everyone having three different weapons, which is a pain as that eats away at wealth. It's one thing to have a back up magical silver weapon and just dealing with things with two other types in the standard system largely due to how much smaller the DR numbers are there. This large change is brutal, even at lower levels, as it amounts to an extra X HP per hit then when players can't afford the good stuff or any non-standard steel stuff, really. Later, it becomes an issue of being smart enough to grab the right weapon for the right monster.

No, no, forget about this proposed fix. I'm asking a separate question. Imagine standard DR, perhaps percentage based as T. G. Oskar suggested. Is there a problem with the replacement I mentioned in ordinary D&D?

[ILM]

You are assuming here that I will be throwing impossible challenges. That's not my intention. Ideally, I would prepare the encounter so that the foes are weaker than standard (or, depending on player optimisation, just about standard) and therefore don't present a terrible threat to the players. Simultaneously, those monsters will have the same HP they had and the only difference will be that yes, they will be harder to bring down, but not impossible. A standard barghest has 33 HP and 6 HD. With this system, it has DR 6/Chaotic and Good, no SR, a touch AC of 18 versus spells (since most spells are touch attacks) and +12/+13/+13 saves versus spells. It's annoying, yes, but not terrible. And it's most certainly not impossible for melee to take down.
Dude, a barghest is CR 4. Party of four level 4 characters.

A level 4 wizard has 2 level 2 spells per day. Assuming 18 starting Int, +2 from whatever race, +2 from a headband and +1 from levels, that's a maximum of 23 Int, for a +6 modifier. His level 2 spells are DC 18, 19 with the right spell focus feat. That same wizard has like a +5 to his ranged touch attacks.

The Barghest has 75% chance to save against his spells, and the mage has something like one chance out of three to hit him with touch attacks. And unlike melee, casters have no way of overcoming DR, unless you also homebrew some items that turn their spells to Cold Iron or whatever.

Also, the same barghest has AC 24 now. A two-weapon fighter would have like +8/+8 (BAB 4, 18 Str, -2 TWF, +1 WF, +1 weapon). Needs a 16+, nice. It'a a barghest for god's sake, it's not supposed to TPK your party. Watch what happens to the above numbers if the barghest opens up with a crushing despair. Now look at the greater barghest: CR 5, 9 HD: saves would be in the +18 range, how's a caster supposed to deal with that? AC's now 29, how is a level 5 guy going to hit that? Say goodbye to Power Attack, they really can't afford to decrease their attack bonus even more - oh wait, what's the usual way of punching through DR for melee characters again? Right, Power Attack.

Take it further. At the high-end, a Pit Fiend has like +40 to all his saves, SR 50, and AC 58 (touch 35). Good luck with that.

The numbers say your system is one big f*ck you to casters, and I really don't think your melee guys are going to like it for very long. But what I really don't understand is that you keep saying that you don't pay attention to CR and just use the monsters with the right stats, then go on giving monsters a humongous buff only to fall back on "I'll use weaker base monsters then". Why not just use monsters with higher CRs in the first place if your players are strong enough to keep up, instead of houseruling everything?

[Shadowknight12]

Dude, a barghest is CR 4. Party of four level 4 characters.

A level 4 wizard has 2 level 2 spells per day. Assuming 18 starting Int, +2 from whatever race, +2 from a headband and +1 from levels, that's a maximum of 23 Int, for a +6 modifier. His level 2 spells are DC 18, 19 with the right spell focus feat. That same wizard has like a +5 to his ranged touch attacks.

The Barghest has 75% chance to save against his spells, and the mage has something like one chance out of three to hit him with touch attacks. And unlike melee, casters have no way of overcoming DR, unless you also homebrew some items that turn their spells to Cold Iron or whatever.

I keep repeating myself: I. Don't. Consider. The CR system. To be. Sacred. I wouldn't toss a barghest to a party of level 4 characters. I would use it against higher level characters. Like I said before, I would have to be insane to think that the CR system would still be valid after this change.


Also, the same barghest has AC 24 now. A two-weapon fighter would have like +8/+8 (BAB 4, 18 Str, -2 TWF, +1 WF, +1 weapon). Needs a 16+, nice. It'a a barghest for god's sake, it's not supposed to TPK your party. Watch what happens to the above numbers if the barghest opens up with a crushing despair. Now look at the greater barghest: CR 5, 9 HD: saves would be in the +18 range, how's a caster supposed to deal with that? AC's now 29, how is a level 5 guy going to hit that? Say goodbye to Power Attack, they really can't afford to decrease their attack bonus even more - oh wait, what's the usual way of punching through DR for melee characters again? Right, Power Attack.

No. That AC is against spells. The only thing that affects melee is the actual reduction to damage, not the bonuses to saves, SR and AC. Those bonuses only apply to spells, SLAs and (Su) abilities.


Take it further. At the high-end, a Pit Fiend has like +40 to all his saves, SR 50, and AC 58 (touch 35). Good luck with that.

The numbers say your system is one big f*ck you to casters, and I really don't think your melee guys are going to like it for very long. But what I really don't understand is that you keep saying that you don't pay attention to CR and just use the monsters with the right stats, then go on giving monsters a humongous buff only to fall back on "I'll use weaker base monsters then". Why not just use monsters with higher CRs in the first place if your players are strong enough to keep up, instead of houseruling everything?

Because high CR monsters are still easily destroyed by low-level parties. Casters will exploit weak points and will be able to take creatures several times higher than what their CR would indicate. The idea here is to prevent one-shot defeats, not to "make monsters tougher." Throwing higher-CR monsters to my characters is my standard procedure. That's what I'm already doing.

[ILM]

Because high CR monsters are still easily destroyed by low-level parties. Casters will exploit weak points and will be able to take creatures several times higher than what their CR would indicate. [...] Throwing higher-CR monsters to my characters is my standard procedure. That's what I'm already doing.
Take an example: a Babau. CR 6 demon, 7 HD. His base relevant stats are:
AC: 19 (touch 11)
Saves: 10/6/6
SR 14

Your rules turn it into this:
AC: 26 (18)
Saves: 17/13/13
SR: 21

Consider the following:
AC: 27 (9)
Saves: 17/10/15
SR: 22

That's a CR 14 Nalfeshnee. That's what your rules turns a Babau into (admittedly less, since BAB and feats don't change, and a Babau lacks true seeing). Point is, if your casters can one-shot a creature 8 CRs above their expected level, then your fix won't change anything. If they can't, then your change is unnecessary because all you're doing is jacking up the power of your monsters, only to take it back down by taking creatures with a lower CR. In fact it's even worse because those lower-CR creatures will have high saves and what-not, but less special qualities, making them ultimately fat, resistant tanks instead of actual challenging creatures.

Consider again the CR 20 Pit Fiend - yes I know, not all games take place at ECL 20, it's just clearer that way. Say your players are good and all, and can take him at whatever ECL. Good for them. Using your rules would make it much too powerful, so you'll throw them some lesser devil: perhaps an originally-CR 13 Ice Devil? That 14 HD bump to saves, SR and AC should bring him up to the wanted power level, give or take. But aside from taking hits, what is it going to do? The save DCs of its abilities are still keyed to level 13 characters. Its attack bonuses are still designed to challenge level 13 characters. Its damage output is still one that would hurt level 13 characters. Its skill points are still the same. It's still got the same feats. It's still got 4th level spells.

Now if your characters can take on a Pit Fiend, that has attack bonuses around 30, deals 2d8+13 on each claw (plus the rest), has a dozen spell-likes at caster level 18 with DCs above 25 (or Wish 1/year, btw), and can summon other devils, how exactly is a more resistant Ice Devil going to challenge them - with all its +20/+14 attack bonuses, 1d10+6 claws, and DC 20 lesser spell-likes?

It's going to be a really interesting staring contest, with your casters weaving baskets in their rope tricks, your meleers whiffing 75% of the time on their highest attack bonus, and an enemy with offensive capabilities designed for 4 or 5 levels lower chipping at their health harmlessly.


The idea here is to prevent one-shot defeats, not to "make monsters tougher."
By and large the one-shot defeats are events based on the spells that have a binary outcome. Any save-or-suck is a one-shot defeat on a failed save. You don't prevent those by pushing saves and SR so high that those spells and all the other perfectly balanced ones have zero chance of working. You prevent those by telling your players before the start of the game that any spell that works as a save or die/paralyzed/charmed/otherwise debilitated are out. That still leaves them like 70-80% of their spell list, veers them towards debuffs, support, control and direct damage, and takes care of the worst offenders. It's a harsh fix, but at least it lessens the collateral damage to the rest of the game.

Speaking of which, god help you when a caster learns Polymorph with your rules. You just buffed the most broken spell line in the game.