3.0 to 3.5, why the change in Damage Reduction?

[Tvtyrant]

3.0 had much higher damage reduction levels than 3.5, with the easiest examples being gods and golems. An Iron Golem had a damage reduction of 50, and a 0 rank godling had a base DR of 35. Is there a reason they dropped the damage reduction so much, and from players who used to play 3.0 was DR 50 impassable?

[DeltaEmil]

3.0 had much higher damage reduction levels than 3.5, with the easiest examples being gods and golems. An Iron Golem had a damage reduction of 50, and a 0 rank godling had a base DR of 35. Is there a reason they dropped the damage reduction so much, and from players who used to play 3.0 was DR 50 impassable?Here's the reason why Wizards of the Coast changed Damage Reduction in 3.5.

Behind the Curtain: Damage Reduction
The damage reduction system changed significantly in the revised core rulebooks. The obvious change is in the new variety of methods to bypass a creature’s damage reduction: special materials, magic or aligned weapons, and types of weapons (slashing or bludgeoning) can all be the key to successfully getting past damage reduction. The less obvious change is that it’s generally easier to break through a creature’s damage reduction even without the proper key. Most monsters subtract 5, 10, or 15 points of damage from most attacks, where prior to the revision this number might be as high as 40. A number like 40 tells players, “don’t even try it if you don’t have the right weapon.” A number like 15 sends the message, “You can try, but it’s going to be a lot harder.”

[VariSami]

Here is a guess: it hurt the wrong characters. DR only tends to affect martial characters, and while overcoming it might have been slightly easier in 3.0 because everything was tied to the enhancement bonus of one's weapon, having one's only potential contribution to a fight be utterly curbed must have been too much. Of course optimization results in amounts of damage which simply do not care about DR but the designers' intent must have been building this game for the level of optimization their example builds exemplify. (Which is sort of sad when you think about it for a while.)

Basically, martial characters need all the loving they can get because they only contribute in a very linear way and blocking that path makes them feel inadequate.

[Flickerdart]

I imagine that part of it is that it's really annoying to keep track of who has a +2 weapon and who has a +3 weapon and so on (that, and players might complain that it's about time the DM dropped some level-appropriate swords for the monsters they fight). The blanket change to "/magic" made DR a lot weaker, but let's face it - if you're a damage dealer, you're going to punch through that DR 40/+5 whether or not you actually have a powerful enough magic weapon.

[KillianHawkeye]

Basically, they changed DR from "You must be this tall to ride" into "You must have this weapon to deal full damage." Having an inadequate weapon is no longer a "damage = 0" situation, it just means it will take a lot longer to kill the monster. This raises 0% chances of victory to "try really hard"% chances of victory, which is a general improvement in almost every case.

[sleepyphoenixx]

From a storytelling perspective needing a special weapon to do damage to a special monster was great. From a gameplay perspective it just meant you either had such a weapon or you were useless (or a caster).

The change brings DR more in line with minor elemental resistances - annoying if you can't bypass it but usually not a dealbreaker for anyone specialized in physical damage.
Since martial classes can't really do anything else or switch to a different element, (effective) immunity to physical damage is a much bigger deal and should be used sparingly, if at all.

It still screws TWF and archery a lot more than THF, but that's a much discussed topic that's a little beyond the scope of this thread.

[Brookshw]

From a storytelling perspective needing a special weapon to do damage to a special monster was great. From a gameplay perspective it just meant you either had such a weapon or you were useless (or a caster).

The change brings DR more in line with minor elemental resistances - annoying if you can't bypass it but usually not a dealbreaker for anyone specialized in physical damage.
Since martial classes can't really do anything else or switch to a different element, (effective) immunity to physical damage is a much bigger deal and should be used sparingly, if at all.

It still screws TWF and archery a lot more than THF, but that's a much discussed topic that's a little beyond the scope of this thread.

Personally I rather liked the old system though many felt the various level of "magic weapon" levels to be odd. At least they weren't using the 2e system where its bonus relied on plane of origination and the plane it was used on.

[Eldan]

Planar magic weapons were always terrible, agreed. And I love Planescape. Far too complicated.

I like special materials DR especially. It's nice and fluffy and I like fluffy rules.

[Dr. Cliché]

My one problem with the new system is that DR#/Magic doesn't scale well.

e.g. it's quite possible that not every member of the party will be carrying around a mix of Lawful, Good, Chaotic, Evil, Cold Iron, Silver and Adamantium weapons - so at least some enemies with DR based around those should get their defense.

However, it usually doesn't take long for all the melee classes to acquire magic weapons - which then bypass all DR#/Magic for the rest of the game.

It's not so bad with low-CR monsters, but it does seem a bit pointless on higher CR ones.


Also, DR should negate physical damage from spells, but that's a topic for a different thread.

[Diachronos]

Think of it this way: How many characters can deal 50 points of damage on a single melee attack before counting "+dX elemental damage" weapon enchants?
Then consider the fact that against a golem, magic is effectively useless.

Congratulations, you're now fighting a monster that is virtually impossible to kill.

[Zombimode]

My one problem with the new system is that DR#/Magic doesn't scale well.

e.g. it's quite possible that not every member of the party will be carrying around a mix of Lawful, Good, Chaotic, Evil, Cold Iron, Silver and Adamantium weapons - so at least some enemies with DR based around those should get their defense.

However, it usually doesn't take long for all the melee classes to acquire magic weapons - which then bypass all DR#/Magic for the rest of the game.

It's not so bad with low-CR monsters, but it does seem a bit pointless on higher CR ones.

DR/magic is quite usefull, but not in the same manner as DR/special material is. There are three aspects:
1) DR/magic can tell us something about the creature in question in the world. Sure, the PCs might all have magic weapons. But most other creature don't.
2) There are a few ways for the players to get DR/magic themselves. Now, DR/magic on enemies serves them to ignore the DR/magic of the players.
3) DR/magic is relevant against many summoned creatures.



Also, DR should negate physical damage from spells, but that's a topic for a different thread.

It actually does. There are not that many damage spells that don't deal energy damage, but those that do physical damage will usually tell what type of damage they deal and how it interacts with DR.

[Dr. Cliché]

DR/magic is quite usefull, but not in the same manner as DR/special material is. There are three aspects:
1) DR/magic can tell us something about the creature in question in the world. Sure, the PCs might all have magic weapons. But most other creature don't.

Granted, but that rarely seems relevant. I doubt many CR15 monsters are going to be worried about some peasants with pitchforks, even without DR. ;)



2) There are a few ways for the players to get DR/magic themselves. Now, DR/magic on enemies serves them to ignore the DR/magic of the players.

Indeed, but I was referring only to DR/Magic on high-CR monsters.



3) DR/magic is relevant against many summoned creatures.

True.



It actually does. There are not that many damage spells that don't deal energy damage, but those that do physical damage will usually tell what type of damage they deal and how it interacts with DR.

Except that damage from spells never interacts with DR, save to bypass it entirely:


The creature takes normal damage from energy attacks (even nonmagical ones), spells, spell-like abilities, and supernatural abilities.

Emphasis mine.

[Zombimode]

Granted, but that rarely seems relevant. I doubt many CR15 monsters are going to be worried about some peasants with pitchforks, even without DR. ;)

Then you are not thinking hard enough about situation when and how lower level NPCs can be a threat to higher level creatures. Level 1 Commoners with improvised weapons? Sure. But how about a unit of cavalry, 3rd level fighters led by a Marshal 2 / Bard 1 / Warblade 2 Captain? Entirely different matter. And in this situation DR/magic makes all the difference.



Indeed, but I was referring only to DR/Magic on high-CR monsters.

Hm, a Divine Crusader 10 will be interested if the high level creature he is fighting has DR/magic or not. DR 10 makes quite a difference.


Except that damage from spells never interacts with DR, save to bypass it entirely:

Specific trumps general. So if a spell description says the damage is subject to DR, then it is. Take Splinterbolt for instance (Spell Compendium p. 203)

[Eldan]

e.g. it's quite possible that not every member of the party will be carrying around a mix of Lawful, Good, Chaotic, Evil, Cold Iron, Silver and Adamantium weapons - so at least some enemies with DR based around those should get their defense.


Good? I mean, it means that the PCs have to plan ahead a bit. I'm all for any rules that force that.

[Dr. Cliché]

Good? I mean, it means that the PCs have to plan ahead a bit. I'm all for any rules that force that.

I know - that was my point.

[Blink Knight]

3.0 damage reduction: If your magic weapon is not arbitrarily strong, don't bother.
3.5 damage reduction: If you are a TWFer don't bother.

3.0 DR was just a translation of 1st and 2nd edition damage reduction where enemies flat out could not be hit by magic weapons below a certain number. It has the same end effect though as all that stuff relating to Power Attack charges only works in 3.5, so there is no practical difference between reducing damage by 40 or 50 and setting it to 0.

3.5 damage reduction is something you entirely ignore, because if your damage output is low enough that losing 5 or 10 points of it per attack is a serious problem it's low enough that you would not kill the target before it kills you even if said target lacked damage reduction entirely. If you do have the damage output to kill things quickly it doesn't much matter what weapon you're using.

Damage reduction isn't an inherently flawed concept. It just needs to be done in such a way that it doesn't single out weak archetypes. That means it needs to be more than anti TWF, while at the same time you need to be able to access the means of bypassing it. Much like how a Wizard can not just spam a single save or lose because some enemies are naturally immune, others could acquire immunity. Or just be so resistant you'd still be better off trying something else.

Only problem with this is even if you do end up doing the logical thing and making damage reduction percentage + flat, you end up needing to adjust other things which makes you need to adjust other things and so on. Now that works. But I doubt you're actually wanting to practically change system fundamentals just so werewolves and vampires work more fairly.

[Tvtyrant]

I would not mind if they made the bludgeoning, piercing, slashing types more relevant. Like a living fossil with DR 40/Bludgeoning and DR 20/good. Party members would have to focus on a particular type of weapon each, because the magic items would be too expensive to just pass out clubs/swords/spears.