Search results

They wish :P They take half damage from a single attack per round. Useful, flavorful, but hardly anything to cry home about, especially if monsters with multiple attacks per round are in the game.

Yeah, thanks, but I find that terrible advice ( obviously, if it works for you, then more power to you, but it doesn't work for me). As you said, if I'm the DM and I want my PCs dead they're dead, kaput, a trail of smoke and a pair of charred boots. You get it. I don't need wonky math to do...

The possibility? Absolutely. It's D&D, after all. Combat is random to a degree. I just don't want it to be the norm.

Yes, and it's not just that. IIRC, proficiencies were initially added to the playtest process after the designers realized that half a dozen of ghouls could easily slaughter a high level party. Since AC and Saving throws didn't improve with level, they ended up adding a scaling bonus to saves...

It depends on how fast Merlin can run. Jokes aside, my point is that Hercules vs Merlin shouldn't end in 6 seconds.

Yeah, but the point is that you might be winning when you don't want to. Assuming a DM can "win".

Nope. I'm saying Hercules shouldn't last less than 6 seconds in a fight with Merlin. But YMMV, obviously. Edit: and, frankly, my point isn't really "who should beat whom", it's that whoever wins initiative wins, if he has a selection of save or die spells and knows ( or guesses ) his opponent's...

God, I hope not. "The wizard acts first, the BBEG dies" seems at least as unepic and unfun as "the fighter wins initiative, charges in, the BBEG dies before anyone else could act", especially if it happens on a regular basis.

Dude, if it's not a fool it's an uncharismatic dude failing a save against charisma. If it's not an uncharismatic dude it's a weak one rolling vs Strength. If it's neither of these, it might be a clumsy fighter, and so forth. The problem is that everyone fails 95% of the time against a wizard...

The problem isn't how large the gap between good and bad saves is: if you needed to roll a 4+ for a good save and 16+ for a bad one it would be totally different, since we're talking a 25% chance of success for your worst case scenario. I wouldn't appreciate the fact that DCs and saves scale...

Yeah. It's + 11 vs -1, so 12 points for anyone with a dump stat ( like, say, all the pregen characters we've seen until now and whoever uses the standard array, IIRC ), at level 20. With a -1, you need to roll a 20 to succeed against a maxed DC. That's pratically a no-save spell.

Sadly, after half an hour of googling, the only thing I found was this siberian bear-hunting armor which, while being mostly leather, was probably conceived to make you an unappealing target rather than protecting you, so yeah, not much in the way of actual damage absorption here, I doubt it...

Managed to hit "quote" rather than "edit". Sigh.

I meant "no one". Armor was never used or conceived to hunt them. If it made hunting big stuff reasonably less dangerous, rest assured it would have been conceived and used. Dude, there's no "surviving better", there's "surviving" and there's "dying". A guy in heavy armor that's sent flying...

Even if he doesn't use all 5000 kgs, he'll still send you flying. Besides, we're not talking elephants here, we're talking intelligent, sometimes armed opponents as big as elephants. If people didn't bother wearing heavy armor against elephants, that can't use all of their mass, I doubt it would...

A boar weights about 90 kg, I'd say it's a human sized threat. A bear can reach 800 kg, IIRC. An elephant, up to 5000 kg ( according to wiki, the largest elephant ever weighted like 10000 kgs). A piercing blow from something with that mass will just pierce through your armor, and if it doesn't...

Modern soldiers don't drop from exahustion, but they're not fighting in melee all the time either. Also, I've never claimed that they'd "drop from exhaustion". I merely said that carrying around 20+ kg of steel will tire you out and slow you down eventually, and this, in turn, will make dodging...

Not sure I agree. IRL, the guy in heavy armor has to keep up with its weight for the entire length of the fight. In some fights, against certain ( a large chunk of, actually ) opponents, that may prove a definite disadvantage. AC in D&D represents your average defensive capabilities against a...

Not sure I see your point. Evil humans, drow and so forth are NPCs. Since monsters in DDN don't seem to use the same creation rules PCs use, they get whatever AC is right for them while wearing whatever armor the setting considers appropriate for them. Creating a functional, balanced armor...

Can we avoid dragging realism into this argument, please? D&D isn't a pvp game, so there's no point comparing a rapierist and a fully armored, knight style guy, because ideally they're not going to face each other: they're going to face goblins, orcs and hobgoblins, against whom heavy armor...