I believe everyone has at least once in their D&D lifetime come up with this issue. We all know that missing an attack does not mean it missed the target entirely, it might have hit him but without enough strength; but it still doesn´t feel right to me. I am sure there are many people who also would like to see armor as Damage Reduction rather than increasing the AC.
The biggest problem with simply giving every armor a fixed DR and removing its AC bonus are the characters who makes many low-damaging attacks (archers for example); they end up dealing almost no damage and are penalized too much by this rule, which is unrealistic too, not every attack will hit right where the armor better protects. Except for a full plate, no armor covers the entire body, and even then it has weak spots.
The Iron Heroes game came up with a nice idea of rolling the DR, that is; it´s not a fixed amount, each armor has its DR measured as a die (d2, d3, d6, etc...), so that takes into consideration that not every attack will hit the armor in its toughest spot. Altough it solves the problem in a clever and realistic (pretty much) way, it increases too much the rolling of dice and slows down combat (which is someting no one wants, I am sure. It ends up taking way the climax).
Other rules I´ve seen, states that people could "aim" for those softer spots, thus taking a penalty to attack in exchange for a better damage - which in essence is the power attack feat, so the "problem" comes in letting everyone use it for free. One might say to just give them a "trade-off penalty", but again, we are taking the original-rules archer and penalizing him by giving him less chance to hit or less damage than originally... so.. no good also. An option would be to give arrows and crossbow bolts a bonus to bypass some DR, since it has been shown historically that crossbows were great for piercing through armor.
Armor as DR is something I would really really like to see, I already use it in my game and will continue to use it; and with everyone working together I´m sure we could come up with a very interesting, well-balanced rule.
Any thoughts?
|
This would be a big problem with the backwards compatibility issues though. Very few other classes and PrCs are built with class defense scores in mind, and in fact many are built with the idea of increasing Armor-based AC bonuses.
While I'm not particularly against the idea in general, it'd be too much work to incorporate I think in the books.
give armor set HP dependent on weight and quality. Allow players to choose before damage is rolled where the damage goes. This brings back the evocative imagery of the fighter sacrificing his shield to a mightly blow in order to run his overconfident enemy through.
We used to housserule that you could sacrifice a shield to prevent a crit...destroying the shield.
I like the ideal of armor DR. I don't think it should be limited to just fighters who should gain the best results from it. IMO other classes like Rogues and Clerics should be able to acquire a lesser variant.
While I agree that Armor should be DR, it would seriously change the game and make backward compatability a problem. But, it could be done.
NO this will totally screw backward compatibility and its just to big a change.
Any good 3.5 source (including the SRD and Monster Manuals) break out all the contributions to AC. Backwards compatability is easy. Just remove the contribution from AC. I'd add up all naural armor and armor points ad divide by 2 to get the DR (X/-).
This is more backwards compatable than CMB.
I'd like to give every class and monster an Avoidance modifier to AC equal half their base attack bonus so that the percentage of attacks that hit do not increase too rapidly with level when fighting appropriate opponents.
Mike
|
While I agree that Armor should be DR, it would seriously change the game and make backward compatability a problem. But, it could be done.
I agree. I like armor as DR and sometimes play that way, but I do not think it would make a very good core rule. I would like to see a nice, official sidebar option, though. Or at least continued compatibility Unearth Arcana.
Here's my take on armor as AC. It's too all or nothing. That's where the wonk comes from. If you do get hit, even in your big suit of plate mail, the RAW makes it so you take damage as if you were naked. That's where it just doesn't work for me.
I've always been a big fan of trying to have the rules represent what they're trying to represent. I totally understand that Pathfinder wants to be respectful to the idea of 3.5 and they don't want to make sweeping changes that are going to mess with what they've done so far. That said, there's an opportunity here to put in a few simple fixes that will make things play much more smoothly--and remove some of the strange arcane rules that don't add anything to the game.
I'm totally for it. At least as an optional rule, but ideally as the new RAW. It does a lot of nice things for the game.
|
I'd like to vote for the "armor as DR" rule. I do use the UA variant in my games since a long time, and it did wonders to the overall atmosphere of the adventures and combat scens, both the easy and the difficult ones (I must stress that I run a gritty, more sword than sorcery kind of games).
Also, having the optional dodge and parry maneuvres (pilfered from the Conan RPG), helped some more to differentiate classes - and in some classes to differentiate individual styles - and did a great job to give a more logical feeling to the defense concept and to keep in order all those bonuses to a single value.
While at first there's a more steep curve to learn (or just to handle with ease) as a character/player can choose between more options for his personal defense, in the short-medium run all things go very smoothly, and the game improves as a whole.
The backwards compatibility is almost guaranteed as each value is covered as an option in the UA rules, which are in the SRD - the conversion for armor to DR, and the basic dodge-parry bonuses, which are themselves a simple translation of the base defense bonus concept.
I would definatly like to see Armour as DR. I was disappoited when I saw it wasn't in 4E . And anybody thats played conanOGL knows it works.
Instead of Armor as DR for backward compatibility if that is really an issue just make it an Extraordinary special class ability of the Fighter and not his armor but I'd suggest staggering say DR 3/- around level 7 and DR 6/- around level 13 with DR 10/- at level 19.
|
Here's the DR system I came up with, it has not been fully playtested.
LIGHT Type AB DR Max Dex
Padded Full +2 1/- +8
Leather Full +2 2/- +6
Studded Full +3 3/- +5
Chain Shirt Half +2 4/- +4
Medium Type AB DR Max Dex
Hide Full +3 3/- +4
Scale Full +4 4/- +3
Chain mail Full +5 5/- +2
Breastplate Half +4 7/- +3
HEAVY Type AB DR Max Dex
Splint Full +6 6/- +0
Banded Full +6 6/- +1
Half Plate Half +6 7/- +0
Full Plate Full +8 8/- +1
A hit on armor is determined thusly:
BCV = BAB
Base Combat Value is applied to both AC and to Attacks.
Any hit over the Touch AC will hit, but will be reduced by DR.
Any hit over Ready AC bypasses DR.
These are values for Medium size creatures.
Diminutive creatures have DR reduced 3/4 (full plate DR 2)
Tiny creatures have DR reduced by 1/2 (full plate DR 4)
Small creatures have DR reduced by 2/3 (minimum 1) (full plate DR 6)
Large Creatures increase DR +50% (full plate DR 12)
Huge creatures double DR (Full plate DR 16)
Gargantuan DRx3 (full plate DR 24)
Colossal DRx4 (full plate DR 32)
these numbers basically take into effect the thickness of the material.
Mithral and Adamantium materials add to the DR of the armor.
Substitute the BCV for the Pathfinder Combat Maneuver Bonus.
It's actually slightly more complicated, but it should work.
|
|
Who really cares about a DR or 10 at 19th level when guys are doing 100 points of damage a hit? The problem with DR at a set point reduction is that people doing little damage are made completely ineffective yet when you get into big numbers the reduction is so trivial that there is no reason to really care. A percentage based system has the advantage that it does not mean a hit by a low STR character will be made completely irrelevant buy a guy wearing plate armor and it also means that when it comes to massive damage it actually matters
guy weres 50% DR plate against DR8 plate
halfling with a shortsword rolls 4 damage
DR50% takes 2 points; DR8 takes zero.Attacked by a storm giant doing 63 points of damage (avg 4d6=14+21+28 from power attack)
DR50% takes 32 damage; DR8 takes 55My percentage base allows a hit to always mean something while being much more effective for players throughout the game.
you care if you're at -6HP instead of -14HP...
A percentage based DR system is completely unrealistic and just metagaming, sorry.
Armor as DR is something I would really really like to see, I already use it in my game and will continue to use it;
What's wrong with using this? Its from Unearth Arcana. Its OGL. And thus far it is completely compatable with the Alpha release.
|
|
Armor as DR is something I would really really like to see, I already use it in my game and will continue to use it;What's wrong with using this? Its from Unearth Arcana. Its OGL. And thus far it is completely compatable with the Alpha release.
The UA system is not effective at all, it lowers AC and provides minimal DR...Creating dead characters much more quickly. and it's an abstract.
Basically it just splits the AC of armor into half AC and half DR...so Full plate can barely stop a dagger? That system is beyond broken...sorry.
|
|
How about the Damage Conversion (DC) option instead? Loosely based around the UA variant on pg 112. If, that is, the choice is made to tinker with the armor system, which I think we dont 'need', but as ledgabriel said, everyone must have come up with this issue at some time, so it obviously has a certain amount of support. I offer this as another option, something along the lines of:
Common armour and shields of all types effect AC only,
Masterwork and Enchanted armour converts damage up to half its AC mod (rounded down) to non-lethal damage; except for Energy based damage, Sneak attack and Critical Hit damage,the assumption is these last two are achieved by getting through the Armours weakpoints.
eg +2 Chainmail or MW Full Plate converts 4Hp of every hit into non lethal damage.
This would be the absolute furtherest extent I would personally go towards allowing any kind of Armour DR/DC. If you did apply something like this there are further ramifications...what about natural armour? AC only for natural creatures and DC for Dire animals/Magical creatures? Why not Dex mods? Mage Armour? Dodge and Combat Expertise? Can O Worms time...
Great concept, but it would be tough to keep track of lethal and non-lethal damage...
I would have to agree that armor as DR is nice, and BESM d20 has shown me that halving armor bonus and making it DR works, if this is used, however, power attack needs to be a non-feat option.
it really is a simple conversion and math inept like myself can still do the easy conversion in my head.
NOW the question really is "IS ARMOR NOT BEING DR A PROBLEM." This game is being made to shore up the flaws of 3.5 and make all your hundreds and hundreds of dollars worth of splat books worthwhile. I would generally have to say that Armor as DR makes more sense but nothing is really wrong with the mechanics of armor as deflection.
I would place my vote with Armor as DR if put to it, but I will not be disgruntled if armor stays the same way
Though I like Armor as DR rules in a general sort of way, I think they make the game more complex than necessary, so I'm kind of against including those rules in the final copy, except as an optional houserule.
Here's how I'd do a house rule like that:
Damage from Bludgeoning, Slashing and Piercing weapons would be treated differently.
Bludgeoning - Armor counts as DR only, so a Breastplate would give no armor bonus against it, but give DR 5.
Slashing - Armor splits the bonus between AC and DR like in the Unearthed Arcana.
Piercing - Armor bonus is entirely AC. Either you hit a soft spot, or you miss.
I don't think making all armor DR in the core rules is a good idea. DR is available from other sources and making all armor have it probably breaks a core mechanic and backwards compatibiltiy.
I agree that armor as DR makes a certain amount of sense. But I also agree with the earlier posters who pointed out it doesn't really help much at high levels.
Really, at higher levels, D&D combat gets pretty abstract, with high level fighters doing vast amounts of damage and going toe-to-toe gargantuan giants and such.
Rolemaster did a good job of realistically simulating the impact of hits of varrying strength from different weapon types versus various levels of armored protection.
But it was very complex.
There were 20 types of armor. Every single weapon (and natural attack) had a 20 column to hit chart. Figuring a hit went like this:
1. roll d% to hit and add your attack bonus (based on skill & strength / agility).
2. subtract the opponents defense bonus (their dodge-i-ness). This number was generally a lot lower than attack bonuses, as dodging ain't easy.
3. Cross reference your net attack roll on your weapon's chart against the armor type of your opponent.
4. The result will tell you if you made any contact and caused concussion points, which are more like subdual damage than hit points in D&D. Losing all your concussion hits would knock you out, but wouldn't necessarily kill you.
5. If you really smacked them good, you would do a critical, or even multiple crits. The crits came in several types (slash, pierce, crush, etc.) and 5 levels of severity, A through E.
(The interesting thing is that it's easier to score concussion hits on someone in heavy armor, but harder to get criticals.)
6. If you did get a critical, you had to roll d% again and consult another chart depending on the critical type, cross-refrencing the correct severity column A thru E.
The criticals were fun, and there were hundreds of them. They caused all sorts of different kinds of pain / disability across an extremely wide range of severity. There were bleeds, stuns, minor wounding effects to muscles and tendons and ligaments, splatted organs or lopped off limbs. There were no save death effects. It was glorious and bloody and grim.
But like I said, complex. There's a reason that Rolemaster is nicknamed "Rollmaster" and "Chartmaster"
I really dont like this rule it just is a huge change in the game and I want it very much like 3.5
I absolutely favored this idea for many, many years now.
Armor doesn't prevent you from being hit, it protects you from the result of being hit. Period.
I highly advocate stealing from the Conan RPG & from IRON HEROES, which rules all!
However, I do recognize that backwards compatibility is an issue, so that any DR rules should be a design option in core rules (note that it is evident, that 3rd edition to 3.5 has had some momentum in this direction).
|
I have long been a fan of armor as damage reduction. I actually stole the idea from the late Elric! RPG aeons ago. Here is what I have done for the d20 system:
Defense Bonus: Add your BAB and base Reflex score together and then halve it, rounding down. This gives you a bonus if your class is highly combative and thus trained to avoid blows, or highly reflexive and thus able to dodge effectively or instinctively. Note this bonus is only derived from your base Reflex bonus.
Protection: This is the value of damage reduction you gain from wearing armor. It is calculated as a die roll equal to the total armor bonus that you have accrued. A flat DR is too game breaking, but the die roll allows for some randomness and fun, surprisingly. Armor bonuses, including natural armor go into this pool. Shields deflect, and thus become Defense.
Cons: This is a bit of mechanics, but really isn't too challenging of math. It also will slow your game down a tad, until your players get used to it. Mine roll protection as they are being attacked. Your players and adversaries will get hit more often, but take slightly less damage.
Pros: More realistic by far, and pretty simple to implement. While the cons may make some sneer, I haven't had anyone who has actually tried this not like it. I run a lot of sci-fi, and to have bullets bounce off your plate armor or the dragons flesh is really a great cinematic. The players get into it and love the rolling and excitement it brings to combat.
Try it and tell me what you think, we love it!
I absolutely favored this idea for many, many years now.
Armor doesn't prevent you from being hit, it protects you from the result of being hit. Period.
I highly advocate stealing from the Conan RPG & from IRON HEROES, which rules all!
However, I do recognize that backwards compatibility is an issue, so that any DR rules should be a design option in core rules (note that it is evident, that 3rd edition to 3.5 has had some momentum in this direction).
Forget it Dwayne! I'm already having enough trouble killing your character now. Don't even talk to me about Pete & Mike. No way I'm going to give you DR and go through what you guys are dealing with (heh heh).
And I'm still pissed that f#cking Dave pulled off a lucky one-shot kill on a CR 4 encounter while most of the party was still in their Lamashtu-cursed PAJAMAS! Dave! Pajamas!
;^)
I have long been a fan of armor as damage reduction. ...
Hi Necro,
I fully agree here. I'm also using a rule of that kind but my inspiration came from the Runequest oldies !Anyway, I have a Combat Defense (CDEF) score which is quite the same of yours.
I've just push a little bit the borders so that armors have negative impact on the CDEF score - Have you ever seen two guys boxing with the same dodging efficiency when wearing a plate armor ???
I have tuned that and run D&D 3.5 (almost 100 play tests sessions or more) with it. My players never complained and the game is not slow down at the end of the day. For sure I had a bit of conversion to do with monsters, armors and few feats but it's not too hard.
Cons: The one you mention mainly. I will also emphasize the need of well preparing all the modifications for armors, shields, spells and magic items dealing with CA.You have also to take care that the curves of balance for the combat in the game are not crashed (it's a little bit of maths here but only for game designers and it has proven to be not so difficult).
pros: Again you're right with realism. I will add also a very good flavor in having different approach of fighters (not only the tank one is appealing thanks to this rule but also the swift one). The rule makes it VERY different to wear or not to wear an armor. Also the "Touch AC" is by far more realistic and appealing (a monk can be a very challenge, even for a ray).
If some guys are interested in that type of rules I have a fully ready for use set for 3.5 which has been in used for years with my players (25 or so in total).
A last one to convert you ?: my numerous gamerss (with old fans of D&D within) are now using the "CDEF" expression rather than AC, even when playing with other "by the book" DM ...
I'm not sure Jason Bulhman has dig this thread and if his compatibility codex will allow a so - how to say that - revolutionary change ?
But think it twice my friends: Who is still taking care of most of the ODD and AD&D older rules erased by the time ?
In ten years - which is nota so long period for me in my already thirty years life with D&D - the majority of us will just use the best system available.It will for sure not be the current 3.5 stuff but the most brilliant of its surgeon (I believe). I will be very pleased if you all on that forum, and the paizo staff also, are able to lead that ... what to say ... cool revolution ?
Be creative
|
|
I do like tosee armor ass DR, because it makes more sense, so ass many others say it is in UA an OLG,ass a way to solve the problem about nothing do damge to an enemy in full plate, is easy remenber any armor had a weak spot, or a weakness, and is easy to see, for example, full plate may protec from slashing & piercing damage but as in the real world be sure it will not save you from bludgeonig, same whit the chain shirt, or the chain mail, they will save from, slashing bludgeonig but not piercing, an so on it is pretty simple. tahs the way I see it in that way you can aply the UA sistem of DR and find a way to do damage over the DR.
again from VENEZUELA, team paizo thankyou soo much
I agree that having Armor provide a bit of DR makes sense from a "Simulationist" point of view. Armor in the realy world doesn't prevent blows from connecting, it prevents them from hurting you.
You could use the UA / OGL rules, but this involves updating every single stat block of any creature wearing armor or with a natural armor bonus. Not what I would call backwards compatible friendly. Therefore, I strongly doubt it has a chance to make it into the Core PPRG rules.
Sorry. However, you can still use those rules if you want to do conversions. It's not that hard of a conversion.
Oops. Mispelled the abbreviation "PRPG" in my last post, too late to edit.
I don't know if the Iron Heroes stuff counts as OGL, but I think I like the die roll idea better than flat DR, because low damage attacks still have a chance to do damage because the hit found a weak spot. You shouldn't always need a crit, sneak attack or big damage dice to occasionally at least scratch someone in armor.
The Iron Heroes system screws over monsters with natural armor by keeping the bonus as deflection. They explain it by saying that since the armor is part of the creature's body, it's all or nothing. It either deflects the attack so that it does no damage, or the attack "breaks the skin" and does damage normally. A bit of a hand wave, but whatever.
So overall, the Iron Heroes method is a bit more backwards compatible.
Forget it Dwayne! I'm already having enough trouble killing your character now. Don't even talk to me about Pete & Mike. No way I'm going to give you DR and go through what you guys are dealing with (heh heh).
And I'm still pissed that f#cking Dave pulled off a lucky one-shot kill on a CR 4 encounter while most of the party was still in their Lamashtu-cursed PAJAMAS! Dave! Pajamas!
;^)
Hey, Mike! I'm not talking about *your* game, ya duchebag! I'm talking about the *future* of D&D / Pathfinder RPG / 3.75+ Edition! ;^b
Besides, my little knight, Conn, is by far the most vulnerable, and he'll bravely stick his little neck out from time to time too . . . unlike MJ, who can't seem to play anything other than a coward. ;^)
|
Forget it Dwayne! I'm already having enough trouble killing your character now. Don't even talk to me about Pete & Mike. No way I'm going to give you DR and go through what you guys are dealing with (heh heh).
And I'm still pissed that f#cking Dave pulled off a lucky one-shot kill on a CR 4 encounter while most of the party was still in their Lamashtu-cursed PAJAMAS! Dave! Pajamas!
;^)
Hey, Mike! I'm not talking about *your* game, ya duchebag! I'm talking about the *future* of D&D / Pathfinder RPG / 3.75+ Edition! ;^b
Besides, my little knight, Conn, is by far the most vulnerable, and he'll bravely stick his little neck out from time to time too . . . unlike MJ, who can't seem to play anything other than a coward. ;^)
Let him have DR....THen let a Third Level Druid with a Steam Rifle and a HEAT METAL spell punch a hole through his tinfoil suit with the equivelent of a fifty caliber rifle doing 8d6 from a 1/2 mile range.
unlike MJ, who can't seem to play anything other than a coward. ;^)
O_o
MJ? You mean Mark? Who likes to charge ahead alone if he still has rounds left on a buff spell? You do realize that the only reason his character ran away from the quasit is that Mark left for home and someone else noticed he was down to 3 hp and moved him away.
It's going to be fun when Mark gets to make his saves for secondary poison damage.
For me.
Mwahahaha!
|
|
Armor as DR is something I would really really like to see, I already use it in my game and will continue to use it; and with everyone...
Why not rely on the Hardness and HP of the armor in question. it can only absorb so much damage before it is no longer functional, and requires repair. It seems easy enough to determine if a hit was scored on the armor. We need, only, to determine armor type vs. weapon type, bonuses and penalties. I have found that damaging armor leads to MANY story hooks, since PCs need to find; someone that can fix their armor, or someone that will let them use their shop to fix their own. In the mean time, their armor is useless weight; and then their unarmored until repairs are finished.
Director of Brand Strategy
|
I'm playing Savage Tide right now and we're doing a variant armor DR rule that has so far worked out fairly well. The armor bonus is converted from lethal to non-lethal damage, so it's the same amount of damage, but a character is knocked out rather than bleeding out. We've gone 6 levels and no deaths yet, though lots of unconsciousness. It allows the DM to throw much harder stuff at us without risking a TPK and also allows valuable NPCs to still be around for questioning and turning over to the authorities. As we get higher and higher level, though, having 4 or 5 non-lethal conversion is becoming less and less helpful, but it was great at low levels.
I'm toying with leaving full AC in place and using the 1/2 AC bonus rounded down not as DR, but as DC (damage conversion--DR for regenerating creatures). A little more survivable at lower levels, and more opertunities to capture/interogate/spare foes.
Mike
We used to houserule that you could sacrifice a shield to prevent a crit...destroying the shield.
That's a GREAT idea! Consider it swiped -- with your permission, of course.
Regarding armor as DR being more "realistic": maybe, but it's still totally absurd for a person to have enough "hit points" to withstand several sword thrusts through the heart. Hit points HAVE to represent dodging, etc. Which means that there's already no simulation of "actual" hits, which means that approaching armor as the "unrealistic" component is starting from the back end.
If you want a realistic simulation, give everyone 1d4 + Con bonus hp only, regardless of class and level. Then apply all kinds of level-based parrying and dodging options, and allow armor to count as DR. Then apply fatigue considerations, so that your dodging abilities decrease throughout the fight, and throughout the day. The current system simulates all of that with a simple hit/miss mechanic and loads of "hp," which is far less realistic but far more playable.
Here's a crazy idea- what about both?
Armor should both deflect as well as absorb damage, and I've been playing with the idea of doing both for years, provided I find players brave enough to do this.
|
|
In the Unearthed Arcana book, they allowed the variant that gave armor both DR and deflection. You took the armor bonus, halved it and granted the larger portion as deflect (armor bonus) and the lower half as straight DR.
I'm a pretty big fan of this method too, as it makes armor a lot more valuable to your players, and keeps combat exciting as people hit more often, but do less damage.
DR is something that a fellow DM and I have gone rounds about for years. He is a firm advocate of damage reduction and this is a reoccurring point of contention between our DMing styles. Personally I see what the perceived value of DR is but in practice it causes more problems than I am willing to deal with.
My biggest problem with DR is that it is really redundant when you consider that AC is really dealing with this issue already. I explain it to my players like this... a fighter with a Dex score of 10 wearing chain mail and carrying a large shield has a AC of 17. Now just because an attack roll against this character resulting in 16 or less is a "miss" that doesn’t mean that the attack literally missed the character it just failed to result in any significant damage. It may be a bit more complicated for the DM but you can describe a result of less than 10 as a miss, 10-12 as striking the shield, and 13-16 as striking the armor but being absorbed...
Anyway this solves the pesky DR problem and I agree with previous posts that DR is too complicated, system wise, and compromises the backwards compatibility of Pathfinder.
This is not to say that if you like DR you should not use it... Just that by making it a core rule it has the potential to create issues with previous material.
Just my 2 cents.