Question re:DCC 4

[mikeg]

In DCC 4 "Bloody Jack's Gold", many of the monsters are listed as having Damage Reduction 5/Magic. Is that the same as 5/+1? I ask because it seems to me I remember there being monsters in 1st ed that could only be hit by magic weapons but they didn't need to have any pluses to hit or damage to hurt them.

thanks in advance,
mikeg

[Jengenritz]

Hey mikeg, and welcome to the board!

In D&D 3.5, Damage Reduction (DR) 5/magic means that a creature struck by a non-magic weapon reduces the damage by 5 points. It doesn't matter how powerful the weapon is...for this kind of DR, a +1 dagger is as good as a holy avenger.

D&D 3.0 did things a little different...they would say DR 5/+1 or DR 10/+3, meaning the damage reduction was applied to all weapon damage unless the enhancement bonus on the weapon met or exceeded the "+" listed. For all intents and purposes, DR X/magic and DR X/+1 are more or less the same thing.

It is important to note that you can still stab a creature with DR X/magic with your normal longsword but you subtract X from the damage dealt; nothing prevents the attack itself, but it is just less-effective.

I never played 1ED, so I can't say how this relates to that version of the game.

[mikeg]

Thanks for the welcome and the info. I thought that DR/Magic and DR/+1 were the same, just wanted to be sure.

thanks again,
mikeg

[SavageRobby]

And in 1st edition, some monsters did have a Special Defense of "+1 or better weapon to hit", "+2 or better weapon to hit", etc.

[GnomeBoy]

For all intents and purposes, DR X/magic and DR X/+1 are more or less the same thing.

IIRC there are effects that make a weapon or an attack 'magical' without there being a +1, or +2 or whatever. I don't have a DMG with me at the moment, but I think for example you could have a flaming weapon that is masterwork, but not +1 magic.

I would probably rule that those would work, as if the magic presence itself was 'cutting through' the defense and allowing full damage.

But maybe I'm misremembering this....

[Jengenritz]

Absolutely.
A monk's ki strike ability is one such example. At 4th level, a monk's unarmed attacks strike as if they were magical, yet they have no inherent enhancement bonus.
A magic weapon with a special quality (such as flaming or ghost touch) must have an enhancement bonus of +1 or greater.
Spells such as magic weapon and magic fang give the required enhancement bonus. If you are using non-core/non-OGL rules, there are any number of spells that grant this-or-that quality to a weapon (such as sonic weapon, for example).
It is each individual GM's call on how to rule something like this, and each GM is the absolute authority in their own game. Respectfully, I would adjudicate it differently. Energy damage (such as inflicted by a sonic or flaming weapon) is not subject to damage reduction, but weapon damage is.
In this case, I would rule that a Medium, sonic, mundane longsword rolls damage thusly:
((1d8 slashing damage plus Strength)-DR) plus 1d6 sonic
I could be wrong about this - ask me about druids and scythes some day - but that's the call I would make.

[GnomeBoy]

.... but that's the call I would make.

Okay, sign me up. I'll play....