D&D 5E Armor house rule

[Jd Smith1]

I remember reading about "Armor as Damage Reduction" a while ago. Let me see if I can find the link.

EDIT: Here's the link. It's not my cup of tea, but it might help you find some useful info and ideas.

Reading that thread I saw an interesting idea: add the difference between the needed 'to-hit' and the actual roll as extra damage. Strength and Dex bonuses are just 'to-hit' only.

 

[Charlaquin]

l
I'm still pondering shields. Historically, a medium shield was both a parrying device and a weapon.

Make it a weapon, maybe 1d6 bludgeoning damage, with a special property that lets you use your reaction to give yourself 1/2 cover until the start of your next turn.

 

[Oofta]

Longbows and crossbows would be exempted from Heavy Armor resistance because both easily defeated heavy armor.

That's pretty debatable, depends largely on the armor and time period. There was certainly an arms race but the best armor has been shown to be effective even against muskets at fairly close range.

 

[jgsugden]

If you like armor to have meaning, the best systems separate out connecting on a blow and penerating armor. I built one for D&D back in AD&D. One roll determined if you connected a blow, the second determined if you penetrated armor. A dagger connected easiy, but didn't pierce well. A two handed sword was easier to dodge, but could crush through armor far more easily. The problem with such systems are that they're slow, and thet tend to create vulnerable PCs as a fast creature may toast a lightly armored PC, and a giant may crush a heavily armored PC that can't dodge the giant projectiles.

 

[dave2008]

Longbows and crossbows would be exempted from Heavy Armor resistance because both easily defeated heavy armor.

Historically that is not completely true. Good plate could deflect longbows, crossbows, and even bullets. There have been previous discussions about this topic on these forums with videos posted, you can find them if you search. However, long story short: typical plate could deflect longbows and crossbows, high end reinforced plate could deflect bullets (from the most powerful firearms of the time), but typical plate could not. It is mostly a myth that longbows and crossbows could pierce plate, though the could pierce mail.

 

[NotAYakk]

And mass ranges weapons already win, because that temporary HP doesn't scale with arrow fire like it does with melee.

 

[Smarmot]

Stop fudging your attack rolls or giving your monsters inflated attack bonuses. Then well armoured player characters will take less damage.

 

[Coroc]

I see. I would just make it Pierce and slash resistance, with Medium getting blunt and slash resistance.

Longbows and crossbows would be exempted from Heavy Armor resistance because both easily defeated heavy armor.

I'll have to ponder this.

Which is absolute nonsense sorry for the hard language.

A very heavy crossbow could hope to penetrate bad plate armor. A Longbow? Forget it that are urban myths. Even almost point blank a longbow with 180 pounds draw will not penetrate a breastplate. It might make a dent. Later armor even withstood pistol bullets and some even musket bullets. Those bullets have 10x-20x the kinetic energy of said longbow arrow.

Believe it or not but a 15th century knight in full plate was neigh invulnerable to most contemporary weapons. Including e.g. most swords and missile weapons.

 

[Jd Smith1]

Which is absolute nonsense sorry for the hard language.

A very heavy crossbow could hope to penetrate bad plate armor. A Longbow? Forget it that are urban myths. Even almost point blank a longbow with 180 pounds draw will not penetrate a breastplate. It might make a dent. Later armor even withstood pistol bullets and some even musket bullets. Those bullets have 10x-20x the kinetic energy of said longbow arrow.

Believe it or not but a 15th century knight in full plate was neigh invulnerable to most contemporary weapons. Including e.g. most swords and missile weapons.

Nonsense. I've shot black powder since the 70s. Even Napoleonic era breastplates couldn't withstand a direct hit; they were intended as protection from edged weapons, although curvature could deflect a glancing hit.

Longbows where known to have drilled through armor and wearer and emerge out the other side. I've a longbow, and know it's penetration (Even though I'm a poor archer).

So no, I don't believe it, because I know better. Try reading Thordeman's 'Armor of the Battle of Wisby' which is a basic primer for the interaction of armor and weapons, and then move forward.

 

[Coroc]

Nonsense. I've shot black powder since the 70s. Even Napoleonic era breastplates couldn't withstand a direct hit; they were intended as protection from edged weapons, although curvature could deflect a glancing hit.

Longbows where known to have drilled through armor and wearer and emerge out the other side. I've a longbow, and know it's penetration (Even though I'm a poor archer).

So no, I don't believe it, because I know better. Try reading Thordeman's 'Armor of the Battle of Wisby' which is a basic primer for the interaction of armor and weapons, and then move forward.

Well I got my knowledge partially from matt eastons scholagladiatora youtube channel and he did practical experiments on that.
here, he also got some more stuff on that topic and he is afaik professor for history and practices HEMA
His channel is a wellspring of info.
Of course thin steel plates of bad craftsmanship could eventually be penetrated with a lucky shot. And of course later blackpowder guns especially rifles would penetrate even well made breastplate.
But I highly doubt the claim that a knights well made armor would simply be pierced 2x by a longbow arrow. That is Hollywood where also swords just pierce armor.
You know there is one fact: It is estimated that in medieval times arrows caused most deaths amongst soldiers. But that was due to the fact that most soldiers were not armed that well, and even a scratch could mean infection and death. The purpose of armor back then was not to lessen damage in battle, it was to not get injured bleeding at all, just because of that.
Plate armor did have points where it is vulnerable, joints and helmet slits etc, and if the arrow hits there it has some good effect but other than that chances were higher to die for a knight in plate if the arrow did kill his horse and he breaks his neck in the fall than by a direct hit.