Awfully Alarmed About Armour

Viktyr Korimir said:

D&D doesn't account for degree of precision in a strike for damage. Armor as DR effectively makes you immune to minor threats-- which is bad-- and is barely helpful against major threats. If you're trading AC for DR, you're losing.

Click to expand...

Thats if the DR was a flat amount. If the DR was a proportion of damage inflicted (say 1 point for every 10, rounded down. Or maybe good old 2e style 10% physical resistance), it works a little better.

The other issue with DR is one the additional effects associated with the hit. If, for instance, a ghoul hits you you have to make a save to avoid paralyses. AC is definitely a better option in this scenario as it reduce the chance you get paralyzed (i.e. you dont get hit as often, so you have to make the save less often = AC helps resist the paralysis effect).

These are all things I have gone through in the past when I have tried to implement DR from armor. For D&D, it aint easy.

I'd love to see DR in heavy armor

please please please Wotc let's make this the edition that gets heavy armor right. Not in an optional module, but a simple, easy, quick, rule that is balanced and fun. I agree 100% with the other posters here saying there should be mechanical advantages to each armor up the line, not just financial ones to consider. I actually quite dislike not being able to wear plate at all unless trained. If the suit fits, wear it!

One EASY way to balance heavy armor vs light, is to make it give -1 or (-2 untrained) to all attacks. You are treated as "clumsy". Then, as you progress as a fighter or with a heavy armor theme, you can overcome it. Has no one here ever played Pathfinder with Armor Training 1/2/3/etc for their fighters? Your max dex penalty in heavy armors goes away eventually.

One way to do DR is to just add HP to your guy when he wears armor. It's simple, effective, much easier to balance. This armor grants you +20 HP to your max when you wear it. Or whatever it is. It keeps combat quick, simulates DR without the extra math, and is way more granular. You still take that 1hp damage but it counts less. Granularity is good. Then your magic dragon plate can give you +50hp instead of the usual +20 for regular plate...opens up a wealth of more possibilities for magic armor.

I'd actually be OK with light armor+high dex users having close to the AC as heavy armor, if DR or extra HP as DR system were used as well. It would allow a ghoul touch to be avoided/resisted just as easily.



Fighters should get two themes, that they can use for offense or defense-oriented themes, rangers can pick two from weapon styles or rogue styles or druid styles. A defense-oriented fighter could pick the heavy armor training to either allow more of his dex bonus in heavy armor, mitigate the -1 attack penalty I just proposed. You are a tank...you're slow..at first. Later on you become a master and just as nimble as in your birthday suit. After many years....

The best way to balance plate IMO is to make it uber defense / ac / dr/+hp AND give it a penalty to hit. Maybe plate gives -2 to hit, which, as we know in this edition, means a lot. If a wizard takes a plate-wearing theme...and eventually gets a light-magicky plate armor and has high enough level in his theme...he should be able to cast wearing magic plate just as a fighter should be able to jump and climb in it, i.e. quite well. Magical plate should be, well...magical.

Why all that 'complex' stuff like adding DR, extra HP, -1 attacks etc on heavy armor?

Why not just bump the AC by +1 or +2?

I don't get it.

-YRUSirius

YRUSirius said:

Why not just bump the AC by +1 or +2?

Click to expand...

I'm with you.

I still think this is by far the best fix. I believe that the supposedly delicately-balanced math can survive a +/-5-10% bump.

Note that those monsters in the Bestiary who are described in plate armour seem to be enjoying an 18 base AC (instead of the 17 AC the "How to Play" booklet shows) from it...

Make heavy armor grant constitution to AC. Remove constitution from all hit point calculations to keep it balanced. Simple fix, and it makes it possible to play a low con character and not feel terrible about it.

Gorgoroth said:

please please please Wotc let's make this the edition that gets heavy armor right.

Click to expand...

Problem is that "right" heavy armor would simply be the best armor around and everyone would try to get it unless he has a very specific reason not to wear it.

But D&D (sadly) still seems to be all about balance so it doesn't want a single, best, armor.

Fenes said:

It comes down to those without magic weapons not being up to par. That's not a good idea if you want players to care less about magic weapons.

Click to expand...

I want players to care about magic items quite a bit. I want them to be rare, powerful, and coveted. What I don't want is a character to need one to hit reliably.

What gives you all the impression a man in heavy armor is more difficult to strike or more difficult to dodge? Neither is actually true. With room to maneuver, an unarmored man of experience can easily escape a man in full plate or keep him at bay until he grows tired. The problem arises when he tries to KILL the Knight with urgency and/or he has a lot of friends. A plate-armored man is not so slow one can easily get to a vital opening. There are ways and methods to do so, however. (Talhoffer's 87th Recto 1459 shows a good tactic.)

The answer to this problem isn't giving the fighter better AC than extremely nimble men. It's to inflate the fighter's hit points as a reflection of his superior skill to beat foes with the armor's advantages, and ability to endure the armor's disadvantages. They are taken in combination for the system, not individually, and what's more the higher AC of Full Plate comes from the Chainmail war game which rightly groups men in ranks. Unable to use their mobility on the field gives the foes of heavily armored men a decisive disadvantage. Other thoughts to consider are how many D&D battles are one on one? Shouldn't AC be divided by the amount of surrounding attackers to honestly reflect reality better? Can they come out with a good compromise that will suit us simulationists, and the Lancelot in historically wrong armor-ists?

Too complex. Just too complex. Keep it dead simple. This is D&D.

-YRUSirius

Izumi said:

What gives you all the impression a man in heavy armor is more difficult to strike or more difficult to dodge? Neither is actually true. With room to maneuver, an unarmored man of experience can easily escape a man in full plate or keep him at bay until he grows tired.

Click to expand...

Nonsense. A unarmored person is at a disadvantage when fighting someone in full plate unless he is running away. If those two are actually fighting there is hardly any advantage the unarmored man has over the armored on. Armor allows for better defense (obviosuly as harming him is very hard, especially when his opponent has no armor piercing weapon) and better offense as the armored combatant can act more aggressively as his armor protects him from many blows which are not carefully aimed, blows which would disable a unarmored opponent.