Talk:Resistance Revamped (3.5e Variant Rule)

Ratings

	Surgo favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
	This is pretty clever and neat, and not too difficult to understand. Also finally gives real rules for the "REALLY immune" wars. I like it.

	Ghostwheel opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	Way too fiddly and complicated for use at an actual table IMO.

	Luigifan18 is neutral on this article and rated it 2 of 4.
	While I like the idea of fixing energy resistance, I'm not so fond of the idea of restricting it to resisting fixed percentages. It's supposed to be a sort of magical equivalent of damage reduction, after all.

Sub then divide?

Why subtract first and then divide the balance? Why two operations rather than a single division or a division with a minimum guarantee? - Tarkisflux ^Talk 08:54, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Someone suggested to me at the time that being unable to reduce incoming damage to 0 without being immune is a bad thing, and that a creature with fire resistance would still get hurt by a very weak flame, though the damage would be halved or quartered or some such. Hence the added reduction. In retrospect, though, it's probably not necessary, and I feel it does its job well enough at higher levels without the reduction. --Sulacu (talk) 18:08, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

I could see wanting some level of immunity with basic resistance, but I think a minimum reduction works better than the previous two step math plan. I agree that it's only really a low level problem though (unless you did a scaling minimum, like CR per rank or whatever). - Tarkisflux ^Talk 07:17, 4 August 2016 (UTC)