D&D 5E Larger bonus to damage for weapons and damage reduction for armor instead of attack and AC bonus?

[Horwath]

There is a lot of talk about breaking bounded accuracy with +1/+2/+3 weapons and armor/shields. Especially the armor part.

So instad of +1/+2/+3 to attack and damage weapons would gain +1d6/+2d6/+3d6 on damage.

Why die/dice instead of larger flat bonus?

Dice adds to critical damage and rolling more dice on critical is more fun. And critical should be critical.

Armor whould give 2/4/6 damage reduction instead of +1/+2/+3 AC bonus.

For shields I would not add any fixed bonuses, rather shields should have special enchantments removed from attack/damage/general damage reduction like fire resistance, evasion, etc.

 

[sim-h]

This is the DnD Forum. What you're referring to is Some Other Game . (There are plenty with DR based armour).

 

[Warmaster Horus]

Unfortunately that ship has already sailed for D&D. Armor will always equal armor class which determines how hard it is to hit a target. It's been baked into the game for so long that any change from that model is practically impossible. Given the trend for simplified rules I don't see anything involving more math being applied to the game, either.

 

[Horwath]

This is the DnD Forum. What you're referring to is Some Other Game . (There are plenty with DR based armour).

Base armor would still be the same.

This way just removes tinkering with B.A.

Instead of damage reduction it can give bonuses to HP, but I think that DR is better.

 

[delericho]

There is a lot of talk about breaking bounded accuracy with +1/+2/+3 weapons and armor/shields. Especially the armor part.

So instad of +1/+2/+3 to attack and damage weapons would gain +1d6/+2d6/+3d6 on damage.

Why die/dice instead of larger flat bonus?

Dice adds to critical damage and rolling more dice on critical is more fun. And critical should be critical.

Armor whould give 2/4/6 damage reduction instead of +1/+2/+3 damage bonus.

For shields I would not add any fixed bonuses, rather shields should have special enchantments removed from attack/damage/general damage reduction like fire resistance, evasion, etc.

Yep, sounds good. I don't think there's any chance of D&D adopting this as an official rule (and hopefully we're a good long way from 6e anyway), but I like it as a house rule. (If it even counts as a house rule - all you're really doing is adding some different items and then not giving out some other ones.)

 

[5ekyu]

A hit in D&D is landing a telling blow - a combo of contact and penetration.

There are a ton of games out there that split the two and work great, horribly and everywhere in between. I recall rollmaster being incredibly detailed on the subject. fantasy HERO has a lot of different approaches possible. The D20 blue rose and their MnM variants as well.

personally i do not find those systems to work well *with* hit points as used in D&D. They typically require or benefit well from a more detailed damage system - splitting stun/body, providing damage save and conditions with damage so that its the condition not the hit points that stops you, etc.

**IF** i were inclined to go that route in D&D it would be by applying a "damage save" aspect to getting hurt. Armor would provide bonuses to that save, COn would provide bonus to that save and the hit dice would provide bonuses to that save and you would wear down and get conditions growing as you got wore down.

just don't see the DR approach and big blocks of hit points as in sync with each other.

but thats a lot of rebalancing either way.

 

[jasper]

There is a lot of talk about breaking bounded accuracy with +1/+2/+3 weapons and armor/shields. Especially the armor part.

So instad of +1/+2/+3 to attack and damage weapons would gain +1d6/+2d6/+3d6 on damage.

Why die/dice instead of larger flat bonus?

Dice adds to critical damage and rolling more dice on critical is more fun. And critical should be critical.

Armor whould give 2/4/6 damage reduction instead of +1/+2/+3 AC bonus.

For shields I would not add any fixed bonuses, rather shields should have special enchantments removed from attack/damage/general damage reduction like fire resistance, evasion, etc.

Ok, You have 2 points. Damage resistance for armour. I played with this in the 80s. Even going with light -2, med -4, heavy -6. It slows down the game. And you may or may not want to cover what natural armour reduces damage.
Second point of ydx (x being die the weapon, y is the number). Does this apply to monsters? Gee Ogre with the +3 great club (2d8 become 6d8 +4) crits you 12d8 +4. Your 7th level sorcerer takes 70 hp damage. Pretty good for CR 2 monster.
Rolling more dice is fun for some people.

 

[Olrox17]

There is a lot of talk about breaking bounded accuracy with +1/+2/+3 weapons and armor/shields. Especially the armor part.

So instad of +1/+2/+3 to attack and damage weapons would gain +1d6/+2d6/+3d6 on damage.

Why die/dice instead of larger flat bonus?

Dice adds to critical damage and rolling more dice on critical is more fun. And critical should be critical.

Armor whould give 2/4/6 damage reduction instead of +1/+2/+3 AC bonus.

For shields I would not add any fixed bonuses, rather shields should have special enchantments removed from attack/damage/general damage reduction like fire resistance, evasion, etc.

Sounds good. I, too, dislike how magic gear has the potential to break bounded accuracy, and this house run solves the problem nicely.
Plus, it's not like anything of value is lost: flat bonuses to accuracy/AC are about the most boring (but effective!) bonuses you could ever get.

Personally, though, I wouldn't use damage reduction on magic armor. High damage reduction can make low level minion monsters pointless. I'd suggest using temporary hit points instead: something like +15/+30/+45 temporary hit points, recharging on a rest. Just a thought.

 

[jgsugden]

If you find an ogre with a +3 greatclub, it isn't 5E as recommended by the books. A +3 weapon should be a high level rare spoil.

This is a step away from D&D as we know it, but it is fine to add to your game as an alternative. Just a warning on flat DR - it changes damage profiles by a lot. Under normal rules, a monster that attacks for 4d6 +8, a monster that has 4 attacks at d6+2 each, and four monsters that each attack once for d6+2 are very similar encounters (assuming equal ABs). Not identical - but similar. Adding 4 DR massively changes that balance. You need to consider a change like this across the board. Usually, doing that correctly takes more work than any benefit derived from the new system provides... and often, those very adjusment you make to account for it negate the benefits of it if you do make them.

 

[Wiseblood]

Base armor would still be the same.

This way just removes tinkering with B.A.

Instead of damage reduction it can give bonuses to HP, but I think that DR is better.

I had thought about armor as HP but hadn't figured out how to reconcile healing. Aside from having two damage tracks like in Shadowrun.