Coincidentally, recently I encountered the assertion that the axe was a poor defensive weapon.
Should that difference affect the parry bonus? Perhaps the swords get +2, axes and other hafted melee weapons (axes, maces, hammers) get +1 or even 0?
I agree with this and this was the intent - make certain weapons and items more and less defensively attuned. So a longsword vs a battleaxe might be:
Longsword 1d8, +2 Parry, slashing/piercing
Battleaxe 1d10, +1 Parry, slashing
Of course that is how I would do it if I were rewriting the weapon list. As is you just tack on a Parry score based on what I had previously provided.
Shield Parry +4
Pole weapon Parry +3
Melee weapon Parry +2
Small melee weapon Parry +1
Ranged weapon Parry +0
I see that the "easier to be hit" is reflected in your penalties to parry for medium and heavy armors, and apparently the parry penalty you give medium and heavy armor replaces the cap on dexterity modifier in the rules? (since you later state that heavy armor still gets a DEX, in contrast to the armor table (in the Basic rules) showing that heavy armor AC is not affected by dexterity modifier).
Yes I believe caps are bad. instead it should be modified in this way it does not limit the exceptions. If you have heavy armor on you should always be dragged down by it. Not only in certain instances of high DEX, or inthe case of 5e heavy armor in instances of low DEX.
I prefer that the weight and bulk of armor affects the dexterity modifier to defense (whether "Armor Class" or your "Parry") rather than caps that modifier or causes it to be ignored. Using a penalty rather than a cap will mean that every character is easier to hit when it is in heavy armor than when it is not, and that increasing dexterity will always benefit defense, regardless of armor worn. The dexterity 18 fighter in heavy chain or plate should more adroitly dodge blows than the dexterity 10 fighter in the same armor.
I do too. I would institute encumbrance as the factor for the parry penalty and the factor for the perhaps lowering movement rate. This is however a little further from where the game is currently written. You could do both and you only tae the most extreme
regarding the modification to parry bonus when it's the only item in one's hands:
I do think the X1.5, round down rule for held items looks more appropriate than doubling.
Yes if you have two items they stack. I suppose if you had more arms you could only pick your two best items though. I think if you only have one item in hand you could just give a blanket +1 too. In this way it removes the x1.5 and makes it pretty easy.
So a couple of examples:
You only have a shield out. Your parry is 15+DEX
You only have a greatsword out. Your parry is 13+DEX
You have shield and longsword out. Your parry is 16+DEX
You have a longbow out. Your parry is 11+DEX
Shield Parry +4
Pole weapon Parry +3
Melee weapon Parry +2
Small melee weapon Parry +1
Ranged weapon Parry +0
Seems reasonable that the parry modifier for weapon size could simply offset a creature size modifier to AC/parry. Except size modifiers surely are already built into the stat blocks, so adding additional parry for this proposal would be appropriate - unless one decides the current AC also accounts for that.
Some complexity is here though.
Suppose each size level adds -1 Parry, but each size level of the weapon adds +1 Parry. These would counteract each other while a weapon is being held only.
Examples:
A large sized ogre gets -1 parry for being large so his base parry would be 8 (10 -1 size -1 DEX). Then if he had a large greatclub that would grant parry +4 (+2 for base, +1 for only one item, +1 for size). So total Parry would be 12. This is 1 point higher than the 11 AC the creature normally has.
What do you think of my observation that the conventional AC may account for the wielding of a melee weapon, which can be accommodated by either:
a) the parry modifier to a weapon should be normalized to 0 for the melee weapons, while small and light weapons (e.g.: dagger) get -1, pole weapons (e.g.: spear, halberd) get +1,
or
b) the base Parry for a human becomes 6, to account for adding both Proficiency and weapon parry bonus.
So the ogre would be -1 while wielding a small weapon and -2 with a bow, +1 with a spear and +2 with a shield. This seems very reasonable. In this method you would never stack items you would only ever take the best defensive item.
For your item b. I do not know what you are referencing. Though I think the proficiency in the weapon is what should grant your parry, so 8+prof+item+size+DEX.
Regarding armor - thanks for clarifying about DR 2,3,4 relating to die size:
Perhaps magic armor bonuses should be considered deflection and therefore modify Parry rather than DR.
If you want to roll dice/have variability in DR, how about d3 for light, d4+1 for medium, d6+2 for heavy to start with?
I think it will be ok to have them add to DR but note that this gives the option for armor to give potentially to either one. So +1 armor might be + 1 DR armor or +1 Parry armor.
Dice for DR I would only use that if the damage rolls are averaged. So longsword does 4+STR, then you roll your armor's DR to reduce the damage.
As far as HP lasting too long - this is of course going to depend on the specific DR value(s) and on the nature of attacks the characters suffer in the campaign. The math has to work differently if we simply translate a fixed AC to a fixed DR.
One possible mitigation for the fact that armor-as-DR doesn't reduce hit probability, so in this system armor helps less than AC against high-damage attacks: perhaps DR can be proportional to proficiency bonus?
A possible solution is to drop all HD by one die type. so d4 for wizards, d6 for clerics and rogues, and d8 for fighters. In this way the DR is accounted without potentially lengthening an encounter.
The intent too is that this would make things easier to hit in general because AC is now based on what you are holding not what you are wearing. So many character types archers in combat, spellcasters in combat and monks trying to punch a knight will all be more easily hit because they are not afforded the same level of protection as someone with sword and shield. This means that being hit more often translates to more damage being dealt.
Agreed that "parrying" is a skill, but I think [MENTION=14506]Sadrik[/MENTION]'s "Parry" refers to defense in general rather than solely to parrying action.
I disagree that weapons do not contribute. Certainly it's harder to get a good hit on a person armed with a sword than one who is not armed, if they can block or parry with their sword or if that sword is a threat to the attacker. I suppose the effect of weapon might be insignificant, or at least smaller, in combination with a shield. Perhaps where Sadrik had +2 for a sword, +3 for sword alone, it should be +1 for sword, +2 if it's the only thing held, and shield at +3 or +4 makes for sword and shield parry at +4 or +5.
Yes, but if one is "swinging" a two hand weapon, one is not defending oneself with that weapon except for the possibly significant factor of intimidation. Keep the weapon between one and one's attacker, now it's defending one - while also threatening, if it's pointy, and such a threatening weapon's length might function to keep the opponent out of range to make an effective strike.
Conceptually nailed it.
that depends how rules heavy ones wants to get. Why can't or shouldn't one assign a static defense value to different weapons depending on any of several factors, such as speed, reach, type (polearm, sword, hafted...) and an assumption of training?
I think this does add a little bit of change but it is not that much more difficult to master at the table. Players would ask what they are wielding to determine their relative chances to hit it rather than what type of armor they are wearing. Armor would determine how easily damaged... Overall this is certainly not rules heavy inasmuch as D&D is not rules heavy already.
what about increased vulnerability to higher level high-damage attacks making DR seem pointless?
I think this is where magic items come in. They might increase the DR of the armor you are wearing. Potentially adamantine +3 Plate might give you DR10 (5+3+2).
There is one other concern. That is Parry is for melee attacks. When someone shoots a bow you do not parry the arrow with your sword (without supernatural effort). So, what should the "AC" computation be for ranged attacks? perhaps take 10 on your dex save? Perhaps simply 10+DEX+size+armor penalty?