Druid Elemental DR Change

[Wytchee]

What's the functional difference between a flat 10/+20 physical DR and 10/- slashing/piercing/bludgeoning? Is this a buff or a nerf?

Thanks.

[One Two Three Five]

Functionally? Nothing. (unless there's some enemies with +20 weapons somewhere)
Theoretically? 10/+20 would stack with, oh, let's say, 9/- from EDR. 10/- wont.

[yellowcateyes]

It's actually the reverse - DR in the form of X/+X soak does not stack with itself or other types of damage reduction. The new resists do stack with EDR.

[BegoneThoth]

Awesome!

[One Two Three Five]

Huh, wild! Why the change in that case?

[BegoneThoth]

So it can stack with EDR I'd assume.

[yellowcateyes]

It adds a different, viable pure druid setup.

[Wytchee]

Thanks YCE!

[MalKalz]

Just make sure you meet all requirements for the feat at all points of your characters time with said feat.

[Zavandar]

In other words, don't take totem after grabbing EDR?

[Wytchee]

Just make sure you meet all requirements for the feat at all points of your characters time with said feat.

This is new. It was commonly accepted that it was okay.

The wiki has been updated though. Perhaps it should be highlighted, 'cause lots of people are going to do this going off the old rule.

It was originally stated that it was acceptable to take a feat before taking the totem bargain and have your stats reduced beneath the prerequisites of the feat, but this is false and not allowed. While it will not bug your character, it is not allowed as it fudges requirements.

May I ask why this was deemed rule-breaking? It stood since the introduction of totem druids.

[Ork]

There was a large argument about this very issue on Discord. Suffice to say that it use to be that way, now it's not. Don't do it. It mostly comes down to an issue of balancing.

[hoshi]

Should also prevent earth/fire from being able to pierce pretty much all DR innately. Before the change my druid didn't have to worry about placing on stoneskin whenever I used either of these two forms, now I assume they will.

So buff for druids that had EDR, nerf for ones that didn't.

[BegoneThoth]

Should also prevent earth/fire from being able to pierce pretty much all DR innately. Before the change my druid didn't have to worry about placing on stoneskin whenever I used either of these two forms, now I assume they will.

So buff for druids that had EDR, nerf for ones that didn't.

Am I missing something? What's this got to do with DR?

[Zavandar]

It's a weird thing with DR and forms in that you get an equivalent amount of magic pierce. A Druid with premonition gets +5, greater stoneskin +3, etc.

By having 10/+20, that meant they could pierce up to +20. Not anymore!

[MalKalz]

Just make sure you meet all requirements for the feat at all points of your characters time with said feat.

This is new. It was commonly accepted that it was okay.

The wiki has been updated though. Perhaps it should be highlighted, 'cause lots of people are going to do this going off the old rule.

It was originally stated that it was acceptable to take a feat before taking the totem bargain and have your stats reduced beneath the prerequisites of the feat, but this is false and not allowed. While it will not bug your character, it is not allowed as it fudges requirements.

May I ask why this was deemed rule-breaking? It stood since the introduction of totem druids.

The Arelith Wiki is managed by players and some staff. And, is not actively monitored on a day-to-day basis. What slipped through was incorrect information.

A player must meet feat requirements to take said feat, and maintain the requirements to keep it on their character. You cannot suddenly not meet them, and expect to keep them.

I made it pretty and bold. We do have ways of checking this in place already. However, please do not be doing this. It is a form of exploiting - you are taking a feat you do not meet the requirements for and are keeping it. The game doesn't recognize that it should strip you of it.

[TimeAdept]

It's a weird thing with DR and forms in that you get an equivalent amount of magic pierce. A Druid with premonition gets +5, greater stoneskin +3, etc.

By having 10/+20, that meant they could pierce up to +20. Not anymore!

Yeah, it's part of a semi-obscure PnP rule that says a creature is capable of piercing any DR with its creature weapons that it has DR for - mostly to stop the idea that two dragons can't hurt each other because their normal claws aren't "magic". But they have 10/magic DR, so their claws can pierce mundane DR.

Same thing here - a creature with 5/+3 DR on its hide efectively has "+3 claws" just for piercing DR, similar to how a monk Ki Strike works. They don't actually have the +3 enhancement for whatever, they just pierce like it.

So yes, casting Stoneskin on your summons to give them 10/+5 DR also lets them pierce +5 DR with natural/creature weapons (not held/equipped) as long as the stoneskin still exists.

[Griefmaker]

Just make sure you meet all requirements for the feat at all points of your characters time with said feat.

This is new. It was commonly accepted that it was okay.

The wiki has been updated though. Perhaps it should be highlighted, 'cause lots of people are going to do this going off the old rule.

It was originally stated that it was acceptable to take a feat before taking the totem bargain and have your stats reduced beneath the prerequisites of the feat, but this is false and not allowed. While it will not bug your character, it is not allowed as it fudges requirements.

May I ask why this was deemed rule-breaking? It stood since the introduction of totem druids.

The Arelith Wiki is managed by players and some staff. And, is not actively monitored on a day-to-day basis. What slipped through was incorrect information.

A player must meet feat requirements to take said feat, and maintain the requirements to keep it on their character. You cannot suddenly not meet them, and expect to keep them.

I made it pretty and bold. We do have ways of checking this in place already. However, please do not be doing this. It is a form of exploiting - you are taking a feat you do not meet the requirements for and are keeping it. The game doesn't recognize that it should strip you of it.

I am curious when this happened? Power attack/improved power attack has always been allowed to be taken before accepting a totem. Mith/Fireboar and co were the ones who specifically said it was allowed. EDR was never something any druid ever really considered in the past, but if this is the exception...then great! But it is best to inform people! And the wiki is never an official source as we all know.

[BegoneThoth]

Apparently they have never been allowed, and if you want power attack on a totem druid you need a TON of base STR or your character is illegal I think.

This was all clarified in discord when the wiki was found to be encouraging rule breaks for the better part of a decade. It's why you never trust the wiki.

[Griefmaker]

Apparently they have never been allowed, and if you want power attack on a totem druid you need a TON of base STR or your character is illegal I think.

This was all clarified in discord when the wiki was found to be encouraging rule breaks for the better part of a decade. It's why you never trust the wiki.

Discord is not official and means nothing.

[Wytchee]

There was a large argument about this very issue on Discord. Suffice to say that it use to be that way, now it's not. Don't do it. It mostly comes down to an issue of balancing.

Can it just be said that the Arelith discord is not a reliable way of disseminating information?

Many players avoid it, and for good reason.

It's not just the wiki that permitted this type of building. There have been build threads where DMs have popped in to clarify that taking a totem pact after choosing the feat was legitimate.

I had planned on making a character that, unbeknownst to me, would have broken the rules. If it's not too much to ask, can the DMs please be more active in engaging the community about rule changes in the future? Don't rely on word of mouth via discord.

[BegoneThoth]

Apparently they have never been allowed, and if you want power attack on a totem druid you need a TON of base STR or your character is illegal I think.

This was all clarified in discord when the wiki was found to be encouraging rule breaks for the better part of a decade. It's why you never trust the wiki.

Discord is not official and means nothing.

I don't know what to tell you then when DM's talk in Discord and update policy. I feel that discord has become essentially mandatory nowadays, as you can't 'foig' such things and there's so little information about rules updates/clarifications that are made public outside of Discord.

[Wytchee]

Apparently they have never been allowed, and if you want power attack on a totem druid you need a TON of base STR or your character is illegal I think.

This was all clarified in discord when the wiki was found to be encouraging rule breaks for the better part of a decade. It's why you never trust the wiki.

Discord is not official and means nothing.

I don't know what to tell you then when DM's talk in Discord and update policy. I feel that discord has become essentially mandatory nowadays, as you can't 'foig' such things and there's so little information about rules updates/clarifications that are made public outside of Discord.

This forum serves as an adequate medium of sharing policy changes and updates.

People avoid the "official" discord channel for good reason.

[BegoneThoth]

Not really, because the rule update happened months ago.

http://wiki.arelith.com/w/index.php?tit ... ldid=12257

[Wytchee]

Not really, because the rule update happened months ago.

http://wiki.arelith.com/w/index.php?tit ... ldid=12257

Yet it was never addressed on the forums, which is my point.

What I should have said was this forum *should* serve as adequate for rule changes like this.

It shouldn't have to be necessary to sign into and constantly monitor Arelith's discord server to be privy to rule changes. They should be posted to the forums, as with any major wiki update.