D&D 5E Why AD&D Rocks and 3e - 5e Mocks all over AC...

[Mannahnin]

I agree the weapon-vs-armour-type business is overly complicated for most purposes, and have thus never used it myself; but I can't see a way of differentiating different weapons' effects on different armours that doesn't end up looking pretty much like those tables.

Well, you could use simpler versions like the 2E optional rule which just gave bonuses or penalties for slashing/piercing/bludgeoning as broad categories against each armor type, rather than for each weapon.

Or one of the proposed similar systems discussed here:

Proposal: Weapons vs. AC

Math, history, and design of old-school D&D.

deltasdnd.blogspot.com

 

[Oofta]

Does it, though?

Curious for anyone reading: do any of you have long-term stats for your games around survivability or death frequency by class? I do, for my/our games, and they show that absent a few rarely-played outliers survivability doesnt really depend on class much if at all; but I'd be interested in seeing stats from different versions/editions of the game to see if this finding holds up there.

In my experience the PCs with the best AC tend to get targeted the most often. Unless of course you're a mean DM that likes to have feints and flank attacks at the PCs that always want to be two football fields away from the rest of the party.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Or one of the proposed similar systems discussed here:

The problem with most systems like these is they try to strike a balance when frankly there shouldn't be any:

Chain was Excellent against slashing attacks, not just "Good". It was certainly better than Leather.

And Plate was not "Poor" against crushing attacks, it was still better than Leather or Chain. The arming doublet worn beneath Plate provided very good protection from crushing attacks. Now, was it's crushing protection as good as piercing? Maybe better, actually, because the rigid plates would disperse the energy over a greater area, as were a piercing weapon's point could have enough energy to penetrate the metal, but then the padding beneath would protect the wearer from most serious injury.

In short, heavier armor was generally simply "better", but according to the table above Leather is the best overall with two Goods and an Excellent. That alone tells me this is not a realistic system at all. There might be more to it I am missing, but those are my first thoughts anyway.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'm this close to just making armor a thing that holds magic enhancements and just doing AC by level +DEX/INT.

 

[James Gasik]

I'm this close to just making armor a thing that holds magic enhancements and just doing AC by level +DEX/INT.

Welcome to Star Wars, where most of the heroes don't wear armor anyways!

 

[GreyLord]

So uh...

All the Dex in the world will let you dodge some attacks in light armor to minimize the damage you take. In heavy armor, the same amount of dodging makes no difference 'cause they'll hit metal instead of you.

Not getting Dex to AC in full plate has nothing to do with being -unable- to dodge. It's being unable to dodge more effectively than the armor already is at stopping you from taking damage.

You ever tried dodging in FULL EFFECTIVE (not the wimpy stuff some call leather, because that stuff wouldn't stop a dull kitchen knife, we aren't talking the leather you use for clothes which aren't armor at all, except in someone's dreams) Leather armor. That stuff isn't so easy to dodge in as many think.

Having actually worn the type of leather and plate as well, it's not that much easier to "dodge" in the leather than the plate, and if the plate has no leather under it, may actually be easier in the plate then the leather.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Welcome to Star Wars, where most of the heroes don't wear armor anyways!

Best d20 system in existence IMO.

 

[Steampunkette]

You ever tried dodging in FULL EFFECTIVE (not the wimpy stuff some call leather, because that stuff wouldn't stop a dull kitchen knife, we aren't talking the leather you use for clothes which aren't armor at all, except in someone's dreams) Leather armor. That stuff isn't so easy to dodge in as many think.

Having actually worn the type of leather and plate as well, it's not that much easier to "dodge" in the leather than the plate, and if the plate has no leather under it, may actually be easier in the plate then the leather.

Really depends on how the cuirass is formed. If it's boiled plates strung or fastened together, it's much easier than a more solid one-piece cuirass.

For example, a leather version of the lorica segmentata.

Overlaying segments of leather protection arranged in such a way as to provide flexibility. Yes, each ring is boiled and hardened making it a pain in the behind to don, but it's far less difficult to move in than, say, linothorax.

Because while the Linothorax was made of layered and glued linen, it became about as hard as bone or plaster. Highly inflexible and you had to be stitched into it. Also it smelled like rotting meat which sucked.

Brigandine (Studded Leather for most people) with it's interlocking metal plates to give increased flexibility and mobility.


I'm not saying it's -flawless- or anything. But the design of a given suit of leather armor, or linothorax, or brigandine, is going to make a big impact on how easy or difficult it's going to be, regardless of the material it is made of.

 

[James Gasik]

D&D is weird in that respect that you have different levels of technology present with armor that in our world, at least, didn't coexist at the same time. Like articulated plate mail was invented in what, the 14th century?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I really think that, if you have an issue with plate armors just being better in most circumstances (as research would seem to suggest), just ban it in your games. That would help with the anachronism issue too.