If hit points don't represent damage (which I don't believe for a moment) but are just the ability to avoid damage, then why doesn't armor add to the hit point total? I mean, aren't we just using two systems to do the same thing? For that matter, why bother with an attack roll since it really doesn't indicate whether the attack actually hit or not? I've tried to buy the line that hit points aren't damage for years, and I just can't do it anymore. It may not be realistic, but at least it's consistant.
AC per level
- Thread starter Datt
- Start date
Aitch Eye said:
Dear Aitch Eye,
Welcome to the 21st century.
In other breaking news, we won the Cold War, Michael Jordan has retired, and Princess Diana is dead.
Elvis, however, is still alive. He just went home.
It's possible for the one mechanic to be flexible enough to accommodate multiple justifications.
Valiantheart
First Post
Well since all of my other posts seems to be completely ignored *grumble grumble* here is my chart:
Level Mnk/Ftr/Rog/Rgr Pal/Barb/Brd/Drd Sorc/Wiz/Clr
1 2 2 1
2 3 2 1
3 3 3 1
4 4 3 1
5 4 3 2
6 5 4 2
7 5 4 2
8 6 4 2
9 6 5 2
10 7 5 3
11 7 5 3
12 8 6 3
13 8 6 3
14 9 6 3
15 9 7 4
16 10 7 4
17 10 7 4
18 11 8 4
19 11 8 4
20 12 8 5
I. Armor, Shield, Protection and Natural armor bonuses are all rolled into a singular protection bonus. A character can have a maximum protection bonus of +10 regardless of the number of AC modifying items he wears.
II. Subtract -2 from the defensive bonus of any characer who multiclasses with any class except wiz/sorc/clrc. Subtract 1 from the defensive bonus if they multiclass as a wiz/sorc/clrc.
Level Mnk/Ftr/Rog/Rgr Pal/Barb/Brd/Drd Sorc/Wiz/Clr
1 2 2 1
2 3 2 1
3 3 3 1
4 4 3 1
5 4 3 2
6 5 4 2
7 5 4 2
8 6 4 2
9 6 5 2
10 7 5 3
11 7 5 3
12 8 6 3
13 8 6 3
14 9 6 3
15 9 7 4
16 10 7 4
17 10 7 4
18 11 8 4
19 11 8 4
20 12 8 5
I. Armor, Shield, Protection and Natural armor bonuses are all rolled into a singular protection bonus. A character can have a maximum protection bonus of +10 regardless of the number of AC modifying items he wears.
II. Subtract -2 from the defensive bonus of any characer who multiclasses with any class except wiz/sorc/clrc. Subtract 1 from the defensive bonus if they multiclass as a wiz/sorc/clrc.
Last edited:
Angcuru
First Post
I use a system wherein:
Basically there's three levels of defense bonus you get, and what level you get depends on your class. At 20th level, characters with the good bonus can protect themselves as well as if they were wearing +1 full plate. Characters with the medium can protect themselves as well as if they were wearing a breastplate. Characters with the poor bonus can protect themselves as well as if they were wearing studded leather.
After 20th, it increases by 1 for every 3 levels. Nice and simple, not too powerful.
Good : 1,2,2,2,3,3,4,4,4,5,5,6,6,6,7,7,8,8,8,9
Medium: 0,0,1,1,1,2,2,2,3,3,3,4,4,4,5,5,6,6,6
Poor: 0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,3,3,3,3,3
And you take it from there.
Basically there's three levels of defense bonus you get, and what level you get depends on your class. At 20th level, characters with the good bonus can protect themselves as well as if they were wearing +1 full plate. Characters with the medium can protect themselves as well as if they were wearing a breastplate. Characters with the poor bonus can protect themselves as well as if they were wearing studded leather.
After 20th, it increases by 1 for every 3 levels. Nice and simple, not too powerful.
Good : 1,2,2,2,3,3,4,4,4,5,5,6,6,6,7,7,8,8,8,9
Medium: 0,0,1,1,1,2,2,2,3,3,3,4,4,4,5,5,6,6,6
Poor: 0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,3,3,3,3,3
And you take it from there.
Aitch Eye
First Post
hong said:
I agree, and if they directly addressed why it is a character can take more and more damage as they go up in levels, I wouldn't argue the point, even if I didn't particularly like their explanation. Can you point me to where they've done so? Without that, I don't see any justification for the mechanic, so I'll consider the old explanation more valid, because at least it tries to address the issue, though not entirely successfully.
Herremann the Wise
First Post
I thought I might weigh in to this debate.
There are many anomalies in regards to the HP/AC system.
For example, using the previous example of a high level fighter and a low level fighter, one with 100HP's and the other with 10HP's:
Both are reduced to 10% of their maximum HPs: 10 and 1 respectively.
Mr Cleric comes up and does a cure light wounds on both of them. The Hero looks up in dismay wondering why he is not worthy for Mr Cleric's Deity's healing while our young novice has been blessed with almost full health.
- On a side note, I always like to differentiate between Divine Healing - fixes it up without a scratch - and Accelerated Natural Healing from a Druid - don't worry lad, the scars give you character. However, I have ran into a problem with the Bard's healing - which personally I think does not feel right anyway. What should the Bard's healing do?
However, when it comes to resting, characters get their level back in HP's. However, this means that wizards and sorcerers are much quicker healers than Fighters and believe it or not Barabarians! Not realistic but perhaps slightly more balanced than the previous Cure Light Wounds example. So, should Cure Light Wounds increase HP's by a stock percentage instead lets say 30% of your Max HP's. A little too much calculation for some but at least somewhat balanced.
In terms of describing damage, the DM is confronted with further problems as highlighted in previous discussion. One solution by those exasperated with the system is simply to describe a critical hit as "you smash your weapon across his face in a shower of blood" regardless of whether the blow has killed, maimed or barely affected the now faceless opponent. If they come back at you well then they must be able to "play with pain". However, for those of us who like to adhere to a completely logical system, this further corrupts what is described to have happened and the actual statistical result of what has happened.
Personally, I like to make out divisions for providing decent explanations.
Providing description for damage resulting in a percentage of Max HP's left:
50-100% - scratches, flesh wounds, bruises and corks.
25-50% - more serious wounds such as meaty slashes to the appendages and even the body.
0-25% - the nasty stuff, depending upon whether they can still take a mediocre hit or whether they are just about to drop. I like to save my worst descriptive violence to the head for these situations.
However, again the same problems arise when people heal.
So perhaps the thing to do is just accept the anomalies and just enjoy the game and the DM's vivid descriptions. Should the DM house rule AC changes to narrow the range of anomalies? Personally I think not. WotC have given us a game with a reasonable balance to it. I would look at fixing other issues- well maybe my bad guy does not need to have a +5 weapon - before I mucked around with ACs. Sometimes, you introduce something into the game which forces you to make these changes though.
Does anyone out there have a way or explanation of getting around the healing situations I mentioned?
Best Regards
Herremann the Wise
There are many anomalies in regards to the HP/AC system.
For example, using the previous example of a high level fighter and a low level fighter, one with 100HP's and the other with 10HP's:
Both are reduced to 10% of their maximum HPs: 10 and 1 respectively.
Mr Cleric comes up and does a cure light wounds on both of them. The Hero looks up in dismay wondering why he is not worthy for Mr Cleric's Deity's healing while our young novice has been blessed with almost full health.
- On a side note, I always like to differentiate between Divine Healing - fixes it up without a scratch - and Accelerated Natural Healing from a Druid - don't worry lad, the scars give you character. However, I have ran into a problem with the Bard's healing - which personally I think does not feel right anyway. What should the Bard's healing do?
However, when it comes to resting, characters get their level back in HP's. However, this means that wizards and sorcerers are much quicker healers than Fighters and believe it or not Barabarians! Not realistic but perhaps slightly more balanced than the previous Cure Light Wounds example. So, should Cure Light Wounds increase HP's by a stock percentage instead lets say 30% of your Max HP's. A little too much calculation for some but at least somewhat balanced.
In terms of describing damage, the DM is confronted with further problems as highlighted in previous discussion. One solution by those exasperated with the system is simply to describe a critical hit as "you smash your weapon across his face in a shower of blood" regardless of whether the blow has killed, maimed or barely affected the now faceless opponent. If they come back at you well then they must be able to "play with pain". However, for those of us who like to adhere to a completely logical system, this further corrupts what is described to have happened and the actual statistical result of what has happened.
Personally, I like to make out divisions for providing decent explanations.
Providing description for damage resulting in a percentage of Max HP's left:
50-100% - scratches, flesh wounds, bruises and corks.
25-50% - more serious wounds such as meaty slashes to the appendages and even the body.
0-25% - the nasty stuff, depending upon whether they can still take a mediocre hit or whether they are just about to drop. I like to save my worst descriptive violence to the head for these situations.
However, again the same problems arise when people heal.
So perhaps the thing to do is just accept the anomalies and just enjoy the game and the DM's vivid descriptions. Should the DM house rule AC changes to narrow the range of anomalies? Personally I think not. WotC have given us a game with a reasonable balance to it. I would look at fixing other issues- well maybe my bad guy does not need to have a +5 weapon - before I mucked around with ACs. Sometimes, you introduce something into the game which forces you to make these changes though.
Does anyone out there have a way or explanation of getting around the healing situations I mentioned?
Best Regards
Herremann the Wise
re
I personally think they should have addressed this issue in the fighting defensive option in D&D. A fighter should be able to fight defensively or go full defensive with greater effect than the other classes. I feel fighting defensively is supposed to be the equivalent of parrying and such.
One could also argue that hit points is indicator or greater fighting ability.
I personally think they should have addressed this issue in the fighting defensive option in D&D. A fighter should be able to fight defensively or go full defensive with greater effect than the other classes. I feel fighting defensively is supposed to be the equivalent of parrying and such.
One could also argue that hit points is indicator or greater fighting ability.
