D&D 5th Edition Natural armor as DR - Page 2


What's on your mind?

+ Log in or register to post
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14
  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Li Shenron View Post
    BTW Damage Reduction for Intoxicated is because when you are drunk you can soak up a lot more damage (and pain) than when sober. IMHO it's however a bit dangerous design, because most likely the same condition will be used in other circumstances just because maybe the word "intoxicated" can refer to other cases, where the damage reduction effect would be inappropriate.
    No, you can't "soak" anymore damage when you are drunk, you simply dont feel it, so avoid "morale" issues with being hurt... besides, in a game focused on age 12+ its simply irresponsible to have such an ill conceived rule: how about a bonus for being coked up, and how about pcp or bathsalts, double hit points?

    Re DR (creatures)- in a hit point system, its better represented as AC and hit points.

    Re - Hardness - loved the concept. Maybe a simple rule should be any attack that does less than 10% of the toatl hit points is ineffective (yeah, i know, still hardness )

 

  • #12
    Registered User
    Spellbinder (Lvl 16)

    Li Shenron's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Edition-shifting
    Posts
    10,950
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews
    Forgotten RealmsPlanescapeRokuganD&D

    Ignore Li Shenron
    My communities:

    Quote Originally Posted by Warbringer View Post
    No, you can't "soak" anymore damage when you are drunk, you simply dont feel it, so avoid "morale" issues with being hurt...
    Heh... sorry if I'm not an expert Anyway even if you count it as a "morale" effect it still quite works with the current interpretation of HP in 5e.
    "There is no survival without order, there is no evolution without chaos."
    "You have to see past the RAW to understand the rules of the game."
    "And rules are OVERRATED by the way!

  • #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Li Shenron View Post
    Heh... sorry if I'm not an expert Anyway even if you count it as a "morale" effect it still quite works with the current interpretation of HP in 5e.
    A few whiskies are a very effective counter to being magic-missiled!

    Not bad against dual-shortsword-wielding attackers, either :-)
    Last edited by slobo777; Monday, 8th October, 2012 at 08:05 PM.

  • #14
    Registered User
    Minor Trickster (Lvl 4)



    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Canton, CT
    Posts
    184
    Reviews
    Read 0 Reviews

    Ignore Ilbranteloth
    I'd avoid damage reduction for armor of any type in D&D. Not because it's not a good idea or workable system, it just doesn't work well for the system as it's currently designed.

    First off, there are a lot of kinds of natural armor. For a simple example, though, let's start with bone.

    A minotaur skeleton has an AC of 12 and it's listed as natural armor. A regular skeleton is listed as AC 13 with armor scraps, so presumably it's an AC 12 with no scraps.

    Logically, piercing weapons (a rapier, arrows, etc.) would be practically useless. But against bludgeoning weapons, the natural armor is pretty useless. Instead of messing with AC, they have a damage vulnerability to bludgeoning weapons. I think they should have resistance to piercing as well, but they don't in the current system. Slashing weapons are a wash for me, because most of the slashing weapons are really wielded as chopping weapons (which doesn't exist in D&D).

    So then look at an killer whale. It also has a natural AC of 12. A baleen whale would be a better comparison, but we don't have stats for that. But, slashing and bludgeoning weapons are largely ineffective against a creature with such thick skin and a layer of protective blubber. But piercing weapons like a harpoon can take down a creature as large as the ship hunting it.

    I guess basically what I'm saying is that 'natural armor' is too broad a category. It's better to use the existing resistance and vulnerability rules to account for special considerations on a creature-by-creature basis than to try to make a blanket rule.

    As far as magic missiles taking down a wall? That's actually covered in the rules where is simply says - if you don't think the attack is strong enough to actually damage the object, then it doesn't. I do like the 3e hardness rules (and may still use those) because they simply eliminated any damage below a threshold, rather than dividing it by two. In which case you'd have to have a very powerful magic missile to damage the wall.

    Ilbranteloth

  • + Log in or register to post
    Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

    Similar Threads

    1. Natural Armor
      By thepaan in forum General D&D Discussion + Older D&D Editions, D&D Variants, and OSR Gaming
      Replies: 3
      Last Post: Monday, 23rd April, 2007, 03:23 PM
    2. Natural armor
      By JonnyFive in forum General D&D Discussion + Older D&D Editions, D&D Variants, and OSR Gaming
      Replies: 8
      Last Post: Tuesday, 2nd August, 2005, 08:09 PM
    3. Natural Armor
      By Spoof in forum General D&D Discussion + Older D&D Editions, D&D Variants, and OSR Gaming
      Replies: 10
      Last Post: Thursday, 23rd June, 2005, 05:03 AM
    4. Natural Armor
      By whatisitgoodfor in forum General D&D Discussion + Older D&D Editions, D&D Variants, and OSR Gaming
      Replies: 4
      Last Post: Tuesday, 12th February, 2002, 11:48 AM
    5. Amulet of Natural Armor + Ring of Protection + Armor... Does it stack?
      By reveal in forum General D&D Discussion + Older D&D Editions, D&D Variants, and OSR Gaming
      Replies: 3
      Last Post: Tuesday, 12th February, 2002, 05:42 AM

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •