In order to bring balance to a low magic campaign we have to introduce some alternative armor rules to make sure the melee characters can survive.
I turn to the Unearthed Arcana which has two alternative armor options. Armor as DR and Unarmored Defensive Bonus. Using these together, I think we get an effective alternative when good magic armor is unavaialbe.
The first, Armor as DR works as follows:
Padded +1 None
Leather +1 1/-
Studded Leather +2 1/-
Chain Shirt +2 2/-
Hide +2 2/-
Scale mail +3 2/-
Chainmail +3 3/-
Breastplate +3 3/-
Splint mail +4 3/-
Banded mail +4 3/-
Half-plate +4 4/-
Full plate +5 4/-
Magic enhancement bonuses do not effect DR. A +3 chain shirt is AC 5 2/-.
The DR stacks with other DR (such as the Barbarian's).
Shields function as normal and do not grant DR.
For natural armor, divide the natural armor bonus by 5 to determine the DR and then subtract the DR from the base AC. For example, a creature with a natural armor bonus of +10 would have +8 2/-.
The Class Defense Bonus works as follows:
A character’s defense bonus is derived from his character level and class, as shown on Table: Defense Bonus. For a multiclass character, use the highest defense bonus of those offered by the character’s classes. For example, a 2nd-level barbarian has a defense bonus of +5. If the character gains a level of cleric (becoming a 2nd-level barbarian/1st-level cleric), her defense bonus increases to +8, because the cleric's +8 at 3rd character level is better than the barbarian's +6 at 3rd character level.
Listed below is the defense bonus at each level for each class.
Monk/Sorcerer/Wizard (no armor):
- 1st +0
- 2nd +0
- 3rd +3
- 4th +3
- 5th +3
- 6th +4
- 7th +4
- 8th +4
- 9th +5
- 10th +5
- 11th +5
- 12th +6
- 13th +6
- 14th +6
- 15th +7
- 16th +7
- 17th +7
- 18th +8
- 19th +8
- 20th +8
Bard/Ranger/Rogue (light armor):
- 1st +4
- 2nd +4
- +2 better than M/S/W at each level
Barbarian/Druid (medium armor):
- 1st +5
- 2nd +5
- +3 better than M/S/W at each level
Cleric/Fighter/Paladin (heavy armor):
- 1st +7
- 2nd +7
- +5 better than M/S/W at each level
Gave M/S/W +0 at the first two levels because they normally wouldn't have any AC bonus at those levels anyway.
This may give multiclass light armor characters a little bit of an advantage defensively if they multiclass with a heavy armor class. Suggestions on how to mitigate that may be needed.
This shouldn't give players too much extra to keep track of since they're not keeping track of as many magic items anyway.
I can't get behind armor as damage reduction. For me, it opens up a can of worms regarding what weapons will do what to which type of armor, that really stinks.
Personally, I like to gloss over it as much as possible, giving the results of a failed roll a description based on the tastes of the defender.
These rules do not go so far as to delve into the complexity of type of weapon vs. type of armor. That adds a level of complexity that I do not want to get in to. It would be too many numbers to keep track of.
Combining these two methods allows for there to be a difference between Armored and Unarmored characters while still allowing for each to be just as viable.
For example, I'm a fan of unarmored melee characters but by Pathfinder rules, there's no way to play one without lots of magic. On the other hand, this method gives armored characters something that the unarmored ones don't have (DR/-). Easier to hit them but they'll take less damage.
I was working up a way to play characters that didn't have access to a lot of magic and the Defense Bonus seemed like a great way to go.
Another option would be to have Armor convert lethal damage to nonlethal damage. Full Plate (AC9) would convert 9 lethal damage from each attack to nonlethal damage. I also ignores the first 9 nonlethal damage from any attack.
Used in conjunction with Defense Bonus rules this again allows for unarmored characters to be viable while giving armored characters something to make them want to wear armor.
Do you have an opinion on which is more optimal? Is it situational?
I would guess that being armored would be better when facing off against a bunch of goblins and the like, as they will be really hampered by 3 or 4 points of DR. When fighting humans on the other hand, like some 6th level enlarged barbarian dealing 3d6 + 15 points of damage or something, the armor wouldn't stack up to a hill of beans.
I guess that is pretty emulative.
I think combining the two systems is pretty balanced because, as you pointed out, in some situations reducing damage is very advantageous, whereas in others it's just better to not get hit.
With the armor, you'll get hit more often, but you'll take less damage when you do.
On the other hand, with the defense bonus, you'll get hit less often but you'll take more damage when you do get hit.
If that barbarian hit the guy without the armor to reduce the blow, it's gonna hurt a lot.
I do think though that it may end up being that at higher levels it's better to be the guy using the Defense Bonus. I'm not so sure it's balanced all the way up the level chain.
I like it, but I feel compelled to remind you that Cleric is only proficient in medium armor in Pathfinder.
Yeah I didn't realize that Clerics are medium now and Rangers are also medium now when I was doing the conversion so Cleric and Ranger would get moved to the 3rd tier.