Breakstone
First Post
I'm thinking of adapting the Armor = Damage Reduction house rule to my campaign...
Does anyone know of any good house rules that cover this?
Does anyone know of any good house rules that cover this?
A good Armor Class Bonus to Damage Reduction house rule?
Galethorn
First Post
There's a rule in UA (Unearthed Arcana; not to be confused with Arcana Unearthed) that lets you do exactly that. You halve the AC bonus, and the larger half (if it's an odd bonus) stays as an armor bonus to AC, and the smaller half becomes an x/- DR. I've been using it in my campaign for about two months now, and it works pretty well.
SableWyvern
Adventurer
I find that Medium Armour = DR 1/- and Heavy Armour = DR 2/- works well. All other qualities of the armour remain unchanged (this also stacks with Barbarian DR and the like).
Plane Sailing
Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
More extreme, but you can check out my houserules on this matter here
http://www.starguild.freeserve.co.uk/frp/3ednd_combat.htm
Cheers
http://www.starguild.freeserve.co.uk/frp/3ednd_combat.htm
Cheers
skippy_the_witch
First Post
I use a combination of the rules from the ARSENAL book and regular 3.5 ed AC rules. Mine is a technomagical semi-post apocalyptic campaign, which means you have blasters and like along with swords and bows. Doing a straight DR, especially with technomagical armors, leads to players walking around who are basically immune to arrows and all but the luckiest swords strokes. But, as one of my players put it, "we are all just one blast grenade away from dying." Thus, I created a hodge podge of the two.
First, all characters and monsters get an AC "class" bonus, because critters and people of the Cursed Earth are tougher then the average bears (see ARSENAL ).
Second, regular armor from the Wild (i.e. standard 3.5 DND armor) is treated like normal, just giving AC bonus to all attacks.
Technomagical Armor gives an AC bonus against regular weapon attacks, OR gives DR against magical and technomagical attacks. While this sounds like a lot of book keeping, it really isn't, since when Technomagical Armor is being used for DR, the attack is effectively a "touch" attack, a number that is already noted. The ARSENAL book lists different AC and DR values for technomagical armors.
Creatures with Natural Armor are either treated like regular armor (if it is a natural animal like a rhino) or technomagical armor (if it is a magical beast). Natural armor (like stone skin) and armor bonuses (like Mage Armor) given by spells are treated as technomagical armor.
Lastly, the beings of the Wild (especially the halflings and druids) have developed special forms of archaic armor that mimic the DR capability of technomagical armors against magic. This is due to special alchemical processing of materials and hides harvested from magical plants and beasts, i.e. a suit of leather armor made from Wyvern hide. These archaic armors are treated as technomagical armors against magic attacks, with their AC armor bonus being instead considered DR.
Like I said, it sounds much more complex then it is actually working out to be. It has already saved the life of one of the players, when he got hit with blaster fire, and would have died without the DR. Remember, a heavy blast pistol can be set to do up to 5d6 with each shot and a few of the swamp goblins they have been fighting are also armed with such.
skippy
GM of The Cursed Earth Campaign
First, all characters and monsters get an AC "class" bonus, because critters and people of the Cursed Earth are tougher then the average bears (see ARSENAL ).
Second, regular armor from the Wild (i.e. standard 3.5 DND armor) is treated like normal, just giving AC bonus to all attacks.
Technomagical Armor gives an AC bonus against regular weapon attacks, OR gives DR against magical and technomagical attacks. While this sounds like a lot of book keeping, it really isn't, since when Technomagical Armor is being used for DR, the attack is effectively a "touch" attack, a number that is already noted. The ARSENAL book lists different AC and DR values for technomagical armors.
Creatures with Natural Armor are either treated like regular armor (if it is a natural animal like a rhino) or technomagical armor (if it is a magical beast). Natural armor (like stone skin) and armor bonuses (like Mage Armor) given by spells are treated as technomagical armor.
Lastly, the beings of the Wild (especially the halflings and druids) have developed special forms of archaic armor that mimic the DR capability of technomagical armors against magic. This is due to special alchemical processing of materials and hides harvested from magical plants and beasts, i.e. a suit of leather armor made from Wyvern hide. These archaic armors are treated as technomagical armors against magic attacks, with their AC armor bonus being instead considered DR.
Like I said, it sounds much more complex then it is actually working out to be. It has already saved the life of one of the players, when he got hit with blaster fire, and would have died without the DR. Remember, a heavy blast pistol can be set to do up to 5d6 with each shot and a few of the swamp goblins they have been fighting are also armed with such.
skippy
GM of The Cursed Earth Campaign
Plane Sailing
Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
Thread Necromancy to answer a question from El Mahdi
My old website is dead, so I'm posting the details in this thread
Optional Rule: Armour Providing Damage Reduction
(from 2003)
I like the idea of armour reducing damage rather than making you harder to hit. D&D has always had the abstraction of hit points, but now there is less reason than ever to stick with the old ways.
We already have damage resistance for high level barbarians as a result of their increasing toughness. We also have damage resistance for natural objects. And damage reduction that can be bypassed by magical weapons. It seems like a natural step to extend that to armour, and differentiate between "being hit" and "being hurt".
Roll to Hit
The roll to hit AC is a base of 10 modified by size, DEX bonus and any similar bonuses such as dodge, deflection and luck, as well as cover. The expertise feat still affects AC.
Shields give cover rather than armour, and magic shields give their bonus to the cover value (they are good at moving just at the right time). The cover value is higher than the physical size of the shield because of the ability for the character to move it slightly to cover the vital locations better.
Roll to Hurt
Armour worn (and natural armour) provides damage reduction rather than an increase in AC. Standard armour provides damage resistance equal to it's bonus. This will stack with natural armour such as monsters have, and high level barbarians gain. This is a practical solution since there are so many ways that damage from weapons can be increased now (crits, feats, magic etc).
Critical threats (on creatures which are subject to critical hits) have found a vital location in their armour - an eye, a joint, a hollow over the heart or whatever - and ignore the armour when assessing damage whether or not a critical hit is confirmed. This is in addition to the weapon damage multiplier.
Magic armour adds its bonus to the damage reduction, so +4 Full Plate would give damage resistance 12/-- instead of 8/--. Creatures that have natural armour and damage reduction get the natural armour against all attacks, and add on the damage resistance to attacks which don't meet the threshold value. E.g. +1 or better weapons attacking the great red worm face natural armour 24 (it gets past the 10/+1). Non magic weapons face an additional 10 points, making it 34 points armour - pretty difficult to get through!
One effect of this is that colossal creatures such as Dragons become much harder to hurt without critical hits and power attacks (The great red dragon has +24 natural armour, but it's AC is now down to 8 (10, -2 size). Let's face it, it's easy to hit, but hard to get through all that scale and bone!
On the other hand, heavy armour is very nice to have if you are getting into a big battle - cutting down on the amount of damage from each hit is very helpful, especially if you are wearing magic armour with a magic shield!
I have done some basic playtesting of this effect with characters of 1st-4th level, and in general it seems to work out that the characters last slightly longer in combat. One of the main implications is that weapons which do smaller amounts of damage find it much harder to hurt someone who is wearing armour, unless they get a critical hit or the attacker is strong, or perhaps using "power attack".
Additional Rules
Armour only protects against blows in combat. It provides no special damage reduction against energy attacks, magic damage, drowning or falling etc. It provides no protection against touch spell damage.
Spell notes
Shield spell still provides cover, like a large shield, as before.
Mage Armour gives 4/-- armour (doesn't stack with other worn armour)
Stoneskin still gives 10/adamantine damage resistance, that will stack with natural or worn armour.
Barkskin gives natural armour (that will stack with worn armour)
My old website is dead, so I'm posting the details in this thread
Optional Rule: Armour Providing Damage Reduction
(from 2003)
I like the idea of armour reducing damage rather than making you harder to hit. D&D has always had the abstraction of hit points, but now there is less reason than ever to stick with the old ways.
We already have damage resistance for high level barbarians as a result of their increasing toughness. We also have damage resistance for natural objects. And damage reduction that can be bypassed by magical weapons. It seems like a natural step to extend that to armour, and differentiate between "being hit" and "being hurt".
Roll to Hit
The roll to hit AC is a base of 10 modified by size, DEX bonus and any similar bonuses such as dodge, deflection and luck, as well as cover. The expertise feat still affects AC.
Shields give cover rather than armour, and magic shields give their bonus to the cover value (they are good at moving just at the right time). The cover value is higher than the physical size of the shield because of the ability for the character to move it slightly to cover the vital locations better.
Code:
[b]Shield bonus Cover for M size Armour check Weight[/b]
Tiny/Buckler +1 None -1 5lb
Small +2 Quarter -1 5lb
Medium +4 Half -2 10lb
Large/Tower +7 Three quarters -3 20lbRoll to Hurt
Armour worn (and natural armour) provides damage reduction rather than an increase in AC. Standard armour provides damage resistance equal to it's bonus. This will stack with natural armour such as monsters have, and high level barbarians gain. This is a practical solution since there are so many ways that damage from weapons can be increased now (crits, feats, magic etc).
Critical threats (on creatures which are subject to critical hits) have found a vital location in their armour - an eye, a joint, a hollow over the heart or whatever - and ignore the armour when assessing damage whether or not a critical hit is confirmed. This is in addition to the weapon damage multiplier.
Code:
[b]Armour bonus Maximum DEX Armour check Weight[/b]
Padded +1 +8 0 10lb
Leather +2 +6 0 15lb
Studded Leather +3 +5 -1 20lb
Chain Shirt +4 +4 -2 25lb
Hide +3 +4 -3 25lb
Scale Mail +4 +3 -4 30lb
Chainmail +5 +2 -3 40lb
Breastplate +5 +3 -4 30lb
Splint Mail +6 0 -7 45lb
Banded Mail +6 +1 -6 35lb
Half-Plate +7 0 -7 50lb
Full Plate +8 +1 -6 50lbMagic armour adds its bonus to the damage reduction, so +4 Full Plate would give damage resistance 12/-- instead of 8/--. Creatures that have natural armour and damage reduction get the natural armour against all attacks, and add on the damage resistance to attacks which don't meet the threshold value. E.g. +1 or better weapons attacking the great red worm face natural armour 24 (it gets past the 10/+1). Non magic weapons face an additional 10 points, making it 34 points armour - pretty difficult to get through!
One effect of this is that colossal creatures such as Dragons become much harder to hurt without critical hits and power attacks (The great red dragon has +24 natural armour, but it's AC is now down to 8 (10, -2 size). Let's face it, it's easy to hit, but hard to get through all that scale and bone!
On the other hand, heavy armour is very nice to have if you are getting into a big battle - cutting down on the amount of damage from each hit is very helpful, especially if you are wearing magic armour with a magic shield!
I have done some basic playtesting of this effect with characters of 1st-4th level, and in general it seems to work out that the characters last slightly longer in combat. One of the main implications is that weapons which do smaller amounts of damage find it much harder to hurt someone who is wearing armour, unless they get a critical hit or the attacker is strong, or perhaps using "power attack".
Additional Rules
Armour only protects against blows in combat. It provides no special damage reduction against energy attacks, magic damage, drowning or falling etc. It provides no protection against touch spell damage.
Spell notes
Shield spell still provides cover, like a large shield, as before.
Mage Armour gives 4/-- armour (doesn't stack with other worn armour)
Stoneskin still gives 10/adamantine damage resistance, that will stack with natural or worn armour.
Barkskin gives natural armour (that will stack with worn armour)
[MENTION=70133]planes[/MENTION]ailing
I don't know.
Your DR system severely nerfs DEX based characters (except they often critical more). Monks (especially) and Rogues become even weaker. For example, I have a PC whose AC is 31. Under your system (ignoring crits) I would have 7 pts. DR and an AC of 24. A FTR with +2 Full Plate and a non-magical shield (AC 15; D&D AC 22) will take roughly the same damage as my PC or even less.
Likewise, DEX based fighters would be toast against anything that had decent nat armor. A PC in my group is also DEX based and attacks 6 times a round, yet against anything with 12 nat armor, I'm not sure he ever gets a hit (except on crits).
Now, of course, against incorporeal (which I assume goes through damage reduction) a DEX is much better.
Also why do magical attacks automatically go through? It doesn't seem to make sense to me that a fireball would ignore damage reduction. Likewise, if I were falling 40 feet, I would think having plate mail would reduce the damage.
Finally, the chief problem in creating a damage reduction system is the power of magic items. In most DR systems I've seen (where magic increases the AC, not the DR) there is a significant power curve that favors heavily armored PCs when the strength of magic increases. You have somewhat mitigated that effect by putting magic on DR. I'll probably steal that idea.
Yet, consider a PC with a chain shirt, shield and a 18 DEX vs. a Full Plate + shield and 10 DEX. In D&D they have the same AC.
In your system, the CS PC has 18 AC and 4 DR. The other has 10 AC and 8 DR. Against smaller damage creatures, the more heavily armored PC takes significantly less damage. Even against creatures that do 20 pts a hit, the two take similar damage.
Yet, as magic increases the more heavily armored begins to be heavily favored. Especially against things that do not do much damage per hit.
I don't know.
Your DR system severely nerfs DEX based characters (except they often critical more). Monks (especially) and Rogues become even weaker. For example, I have a PC whose AC is 31. Under your system (ignoring crits) I would have 7 pts. DR and an AC of 24. A FTR with +2 Full Plate and a non-magical shield (AC 15; D&D AC 22) will take roughly the same damage as my PC or even less.
Likewise, DEX based fighters would be toast against anything that had decent nat armor. A PC in my group is also DEX based and attacks 6 times a round, yet against anything with 12 nat armor, I'm not sure he ever gets a hit (except on crits).
Now, of course, against incorporeal (which I assume goes through damage reduction) a DEX is much better.
Also why do magical attacks automatically go through? It doesn't seem to make sense to me that a fireball would ignore damage reduction. Likewise, if I were falling 40 feet, I would think having plate mail would reduce the damage.
Finally, the chief problem in creating a damage reduction system is the power of magic items. In most DR systems I've seen (where magic increases the AC, not the DR) there is a significant power curve that favors heavily armored PCs when the strength of magic increases. You have somewhat mitigated that effect by putting magic on DR. I'll probably steal that idea.
Yet, consider a PC with a chain shirt, shield and a 18 DEX vs. a Full Plate + shield and 10 DEX. In D&D they have the same AC.
In your system, the CS PC has 18 AC and 4 DR. The other has 10 AC and 8 DR. Against smaller damage creatures, the more heavily armored PC takes significantly less damage. Even against creatures that do 20 pts a hit, the two take similar damage.
Yet, as magic increases the more heavily armored begins to be heavily favored. Especially against things that do not do much damage per hit.
Aus_Snow
First Post
Hm. Well, as I've already mentioned it recently in another thread here, may as well give Mongoose's Conan RPG another pimping (fwiw, given that - if I'm not mistaken - it's OoP now. . .) - in that game, finesse fighters*, and ranged combatants with the Ranged Finesse feat, do their best to overcome armour entirely, rather than bashing through DR, which is the standard system there too. Quite a neat arrangement, IMO, and solves such (possible, debatable. . .) dilemmas as noted above.
* A slightly wider range of weapons covered for this, too (for instance, Spear and Staff).
* A slightly wider range of weapons covered for this, too (for instance, Spear and Staff).
ValhallaGH
Explorer
Huh!?
1) Rogues aren't weak. Just because they aren't the "I win" of wizards or CoDzilla, doesn't make them weak. Sneak attack, alone, allows them to get through DR as (or more) reliably than most Fighter builds.
2) Monks really aren't affected much. They are still pure AC and rather squishy when they get hit. Their only loss is that they have an even harder time hurting stuff, since their damage won't get through as often (before around level 10). They'll hit a heck of a lot more often, since Defense is much lower, but they should be about as effective as they were before.
3) DR is weaker than AC. Not getting hit ignores infinite damage. DR only reduces by X per hit. The only nice thing about DR is when you can use it to supplement a ludicrous AC. At low levels (less than 5) PC AC is low enough that having DR instead increases character longevity; once you get into the medium levels, damage potential outstrips available DR sources, and PCs will only be auto-missed, so damage taken will go up a lot.
4) The only time DR is good is when you're up against piddly amounts of damage (average 6 or less), where you get to ignore it no matter what. Attacks that miss AC do zero damage. DR that completely reduces the attack to zero do zero damage. So, the only way DR is as good as AC is when it reduces the damage to zero.
A) Damage Reduction only applies to physical damage. It does not apply to energy damage. Fire is a type of energy, so it ignores Damage Reduction. This is a core rule and this house rule merely repeats it, it doesn't change it.
B) It doesn't apply to falling damage because the House Rule says it doesn't. Which makes a great deal of sense, since strapping 50 lbs of steel plates onto your body doesn't make a fall hurt less. (In real life, it would make the fall hurt more, which doesn't matter for game rules but does matter for player immersion.)
Huh? No, the guy that gets missed more is the clear winner.
Consider a Dragon with a +20 bite attack (2d6+4) and Power Attack (16 or less). He attacks the shirt, and needs a 14. He attacks the Plate and needs a 10. So, PA for 16, dealing 2d6+20 with a +4 attack. He needs a 6+ to hit plate (75% hit chance) and will deal ~27 damage (19 after DR); average 14.65 damage per round (including critical threats). He needs a 10+ to hit shirt (55% chance) and will deal ~27 damage (23 after DR); average 12.85 damage per round (including critical threats).
Chain Shirt lives longer, assuming same HP. Yes, this ignores the claws, wings, and tail, but those follow the same pattern, leaving shirt the leading survivor. The only way plate can beat shirt is if he can get his DR up to 11 (75%, ~16 after DR; average 12.55 per round) without changing shirt at all.
Even an can't-miss Power Attack (12, 2d6+16 for plate; 8, 2d6+12 for shirt) will work out for shirt. Plate gets hit 95%, average 14.65 per round. Shirt gets hit 95%, average 14.45 per round. It's a lot closer, but that miss chance still favors Shirt.
Shifting the Power Attack for optimal attack bonus against both (85% hit chance, 4+ to hit) comes out to plate: 14.85 per round, shirt: 14.65 per round. Shirt keeps winning, because that difference in Defense means that fewer blows land, and less pain is taken.
That the numbers are so close actually says great things about Plane Sailing's balance skills. This is one of the more effective variants I've seen.
The real failure of this rule set is that it invalidates every martial build that is not a sneak attack / TH-power attack build. Any PC relying upon regular damage will fail to hurt the big monsters (Bard, +5 longsword, 18 STR [including magic], will deal 1d8+9 for an average ~13, and is ignored by natural armor 17+), reducing their ability to participate. Bards, non-TH Fighters, Monks, non-PA Paladins, and Rangers all get weaker under this house rule. The only ways to overcome natural armor are Sneak Attack, Power Attack, and Critical Threats; Drizz't has to be a crit monkey, because there is no other way for him to hurt an umber hulk.
El Mahdi
Muad'Dib of the Anauroch
Guys! Do you all realize that this is a thread from 2004!?
Not only are you guys having a silly argument, you're having a silly argument about something that was resolved or made moot years ago!
I was simply running a search for threads with info or houserules about using armor as DR. All of the threads that came up were pre-UA or just after. I was merely curious as to what Plane Sailing's houserules were back then and pm'd him asking for them. He simply posted his 6 year old houserules for those interested in them since the links are long dead. I don't know for sure, but I doubt that Plane Sailing even uses these houserules anymore. But even if he does, they don't seem that bad to me. In fact, to me they seem very similar to the variant in UA.
I find it very interesting how there was a lot of commonality in peoples houserules on using Armor as DR, prior to UA coming out. I've found this thread very enjoyable and informative as to the evolution of this concept and related mechanics.
Put in context (2004) I think these were some pretty damn good houserules.
Not only are you guys having a silly argument, you're having a silly argument about something that was resolved or made moot years ago!
I was simply running a search for threads with info or houserules about using armor as DR. All of the threads that came up were pre-UA or just after. I was merely curious as to what Plane Sailing's houserules were back then and pm'd him asking for them. He simply posted his 6 year old houserules for those interested in them since the links are long dead. I don't know for sure, but I doubt that Plane Sailing even uses these houserules anymore. But even if he does, they don't seem that bad to me. In fact, to me they seem very similar to the variant in UA.
I find it very interesting how there was a lot of commonality in peoples houserules on using Armor as DR, prior to UA coming out. I've found this thread very enjoyable and informative as to the evolution of this concept and related mechanics.
Put in context (2004) I think these were some pretty damn good houserules.
Similar Threads
