dnd 5e – Would a race with bludgeoning, piercing or slashing resistance be overpowered?

Bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing damage are the most common types of damage in the game. Nearly all monsters have at least one attack with one of those damage types. Barbarian’s are so resilient because their rage makes them resist this.

If you just replace a race’s “Resistance to Acid” by “Resistance to Bludgeoning”, it’s a decent power-up. It might not be OP, that would require a race-by-race analysis, but from my perspective, if I had to choose between resistance to one of the elemental types and one of the physical, I would ALWAYS choose one of the physical to resist to (unless I was a Barbarian). And having a choice that seems to always best another isn’t good design.

If you lessened one of the race’s other benefits, it would probably be balanced, but again, this requires a case-by-case analysis. If you intend to explore this further, I’d pose a homebrew analysis question on its own.

dnd 5e – How can I gain resistance to piercing, bludgeoning, and slashing damage while in heavy armor?

The new unearthed arcana Samurai fighter archetype can gain resistance to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing as a bonus action on their turn until the end of their next turn, three times per short rest, at level 3.

You would have to take the Martial Adept feat in order to get a superiority die to use for parry, but the emphasis on willpower, the ease of access to heavy armor mastery at level 4 might be appealing.

dnd 5e – Arcane Archer’s Piercing Arrow on Larger Enemies

In D&D 5th edition, it is lead designer Jeremy Crawford’s stated opinion that a rule says what it says and no more. Therefore, when an ability says you strike every creature a line once, you strike each once no matter how big they are.

This means that, unless the DM deploys a variant rule, a piercing arrow will hit the Tarrasque once only.

Increasing the damage for larger creatures would make the ability substantially more powerful. A gargantuan creature would take 4d6 bonus damage, equivalent to a Grasping Arrow or Shadow Arrow by an 18th level character, at which point the Piercing Arrow would itself deal 2d6 base damage rather than 1d6. In short, it’s considerably too powerful, even if it does make more sense or seem more realistic.

If you did employ such an ability, it would be more straightforward for the creature to roll a single saving throw, not one for each five-foot chunk of its body that the arrow passes through.

dnd 5e – Does immunity to piercing damage make you immune to the pull effect of the Thorn Whip spell?


The pull effect of Thorn Whip is contingent on a successful melee spell attack against a creature who is Large-sized or smaller.

If the attack hits, the creature takes 1d6 piercing damage, and if the creature is Large or smaller, you pull the creature…

If both conditions are true (the attack hits and the creature is no larger than Large-sized), then the pull effect would occur whether or not the creature takes damage.

Note that the spell doesn’t explain how or why the creature is pulled. Do the thorns grip them? Does the whip wrap around them? Is it some unseen magical force? Regardless, spells do what they say they do. A hypothetical DM could rule otherwise, but by RAW, the creature is pulled simply because the spell says so.

dnd 5e – Does immunity to piercing damage make you immune to the pull effect of the spell Thorn Whip?

If a character has gained immunity to all piercing damage, would that character also be immune to the pull effect of Thorn Whip?

Thorn Whip

Transmutation cantrip

Casting Time: 1 action

Range: 30 feet

Components: V, S, M (the stem of a plant with thorns)

Duration: Instantaneous

You create a long, vine-like whip covered in thorns that lashes out at your command toward a creature in range. Make a melee spell attack against the target. If the attack hits, the creature takes 1d6 piercing damage, and if the creature is Large or smaller, you pull the creature up to 10 feet closer to you. This spell’s damage increases by 1d6 when you reach 5th level (2d6), 11th level (3d6), and 17th level (4d6).

dnd 5e – I need help to understand +3 Piercing

So, in D&D, attacking involves two separate rolls: a "attack" roll to see if you hit, and if you do, a "damage" roll to see how much damage you do. The +5 bonus is on the attack roll: it is a way to show how accurate you are. 1d8 is the base damage for a long arc, and then you have a +3 bonus due to your other statistics.

Therefore, an attack for you involves rolling a twenty-sided die (1d20) and adding +5 to what you threw (1d20 + 5). The DM verifies the result against the Armor Class (AC) of your target, and if you reach or exceed the AC, you hit. Then you roll an eight-sided die (1d8) and add 3 to what you have thrown (1d8 + 3). The target loses many hit points (assuming it has no defenses that reduce the damage it receives).

As an example, suppose you attacked a target with 15 BC and 20 hp. You would roll the d20 and add 5, so you took a 12, you would add 5 by 17, and then "17" would be your attack roll against them. From 17 ≥ 15, you hit. Now you get 1d8 + 3 puncture damage; Let's say you get a 6 in d8. You add 3 to that for 9, and that's your damage. Now the objective has 11 CV, since they were 20 and deducted 9.

The "piercing" part does not usually matter, but some creatures may be especially vulnerable to perforation damage, or especially resistant to it. In those cases, your 9 drill damage roll can deduct more or less than 9 hp from the target.

dungeon world: add something to the label & # 39; piercing & # 39; in warhammers breaks something?

Realistically speaking, war hammers were specifically used to break the armor:

War hammers developed as a result of the prevalence of hardened steel surface on the surface of wrought iron armor of the battlefields of the late Middle Ages during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.

In Dungeon World is the Drilling weapon tag, specifically means that:

n Piercing: Go through the armor. When you deal damage with n perforations, you subtract n from the enemy's armor for that attack.

However, neither Warhammer nor Mace have Drilling . They have no difference with swords and axes, actually:

Short Sword, Ax, War Hammer, Mace; clasp, 8 coins, 1 peso

As DM, I want to add 1-2 Drilling to the war hammers in my game. My concern is that there is only one weapon that really has Drilling in the default team (a "duel rapier", whatever). In terms of game balance, do you add Drilling label for war hammers break something?

By "balance" I mean that the game should feel fair, and nobody steals the focus of attention from any PC. Sister question: add something & # 39; precise & # 39; Does the daggers break something?

dnd 5e – Flameskull resistant to magic piercing damage?

Most creatures in D & D 5e have details about what attacks or types of weapon damage are resistant. For example

Resistance to damage: Aggress, pierce and graze from non-magical attacks

However, the description of Flameskull carries resistance to drilling damange without the phrase "From Nonmagical Weapons / Attacks":

Resistance to damage: lightning, necrotic, piercing

Flameskull, Manual of Monsters, p. 134

Does not that mean that the Flameskull is resistant to magic piercing damage as well as non-magic piercing damage?