Armor & DR... once again. Weapon types

[ConcreteBuddha]

I would say no. IMO a shield is truely a device to make it more difficult to be hit. I think the AC bonus is enough. It could be argued that a shield would make it harder to land a good solid blow, though. So I could see it either way. Trying to avoid too much DR though, and making some weapons obsolete.

I don't know about that. I think it would mean that a lot more people would disarm/sunder an opponent's shield. Besides, shield users are generally underpowered compared to their TWF/THW brethren. (Which is the opposite case in RL, if we care about that at all. *grin*)

And as for making some weapons obsolete, I can see your point. A tank in full plate and a large shield would have a 5/- DR. That may be too much. Most low level creatures would be completely ineffective against that. (Athough I don't really mind. I like having people use shields in my games. Shields have always been too weak in DnD, IMO.)
.
.
.
Maybe a solution is to make the DR only effective against weapons lower than its enhancement bonus. Example: Full Plate +1 would provide DR 3/+1. A Large Shield +3 would provide DR 2/+3. This bonus would stack only if both enhancement bonuses are higher than the weapon's enhancement bonus. A tank equipped with both the full plate and shield described above would have DR 5/+1 and DR 2/+3.

This means that normal non-magical armor doesn't provide DR. (Which may or may not be a good thing.)

Now, my other concern...

Assuming I'm going with the streamlined rules (Light Armor = DR1, Med. Armor = DR2, etc.) Armor wearers are now getting "something for nothing". They already get the high AC, which presumably is an abstract attempt to factor in the protection the armor provides. To leave that alone AND add in DR on top of it, might be too much.

I don't think this is necessary. Tanks get the shaft at higher levels. It is a thankless task, besides the fact that AC is generally worthless after a certain level, as the BAB and Strength of the BBEGs increase faster than AC.

Getting something for nothing is a good thing. Full plate has all but disappeared in our games, due to the ever present mithral chain shirt and/or mithral breastplate.

 

[Maximillian]

Not a fan of the fact that light armor outdoes heavy armor in so many ways (especially at low levels). At higher levels, the problems aren't as serious, because magical full plate and shield outshines any unarmored monk. The only thing I've done is remove the lessened speed of highly armored individuals. Anyone playing a dwarven fighter can empathise.

As for damage reduction... If you're doing one, don't do both. It has to be either DR or AC from armor. I can see shields being AC and armor being DR, but I can't see either of them doing both. It's easier to figure out that way, balance wise.

Now, a few ideas:

Bludgeoning and Piercing weapons deal better with armor than slashing weapons, most of the time. (I know this is a generalization, and in certain circumstances, not true) Arrows and certain polearms were perfected to cut through heavy armor. Think about that before you commit to anything, however, because if you let them take out armor more easily, you'll need to go back and re-balance the weapons, because suddenly you've made them more powerful. I don't have a suggestion, and the more I think about it the more I'm sure I wouldn't use this system, but you should be careful about that sort of thing.

 

[BlackRazor]

Copycatworld

Your suggestion for armor DR against various weapon type is well tough and quite realistic (as realistic abstract battle system go) however you forgot one simple variable.

Left to themselves, People are simple.

If you apply the system to any game, i can guess every player in it will fight with a light or heavy mace. You will be petionned for the creation of a 2-handed mace and everybody will want to wear st. leather, splint or plate. Orcish shotput will shine and you can bet your DM ears somebody will try to make "blunt" arrow.

The original idea of creating a more realistic system will kill its diversity.

If you want a simple solution, try this :

light armor : AS IS
medium armor : DR 1/- + 5 ft move if masterwork
Heavy armor : DR 2/- + 5 ft move if masterwork

- Welcome to MACEWORLD !

 

[jodyjohnson]

Armor Reduction

We're going to try a variant of this in our new campaign. Instead of DR we'll call it AR and let it stack with DR.

Only the full suits get it giving a boost to Scale and Chainmail vs. the Breastplate in Medium.

AR 1: Chainmail, Scalemail
AR 2: Banded mail, Splintmail, Halfplate, Full Plate

Applies only to physical melee or missile damage.

Not very realistic and not a huge boost.

 

[WastedTime]

After thinking about this further, I was tempted to go with a Attack Bonus (read as BAB), Defense Bonus (based on class and level), and DR for armor. However, after thinking even further, I decided I do not like this idea. What I don’t like about it is that when someone hits (AB vs. DB), it can only be inferred as an actual hit. For example, if an Ogre attacks Gord the thief by rolling a 16 thereby successfully hitting Gord (based on Gord's AB vs. the Ogres DB), a DM can only describe this as Gord being hit with the armor absorbing some of the impact. However, with the current BAB vs. AC abstraction, a DM can describe it as Gord parrying the Ogre's blow or ducking the Ogre's swing just in time (and, of course, taking X amount of damage in the process). I like having this ability as a DM. In effect, it seems the AB vs. DB and then DR takes the DM farther out of the equation, which IMO is a bad thing. All that said, I still like the idea of applying DR to some armor types. It allows me to differentiate the different armors more so.

Thanks all.

 

[Thorvald Kviksverd]

Since the attack or "to hit" roll in D&D has always been more of a "to hurt" roll, perhaps it would be better to have the "DR" instead reduce the size of the die rolled--that way, at least 1 point of damage will be done on a successful hit (excepting the Barbarian's special ability, etc.).

For example, a d8 sword might be reduced to d6 versus medium armour, and d4 versus heavy armour--while light armour would merely make one more difficult to strike for damage.

This saves calculation--you just roll a die as normal.

It also serves to keep the Barbarian's special DR ability special.

Here's a brief example of how I worked this in my Basic D&D campaign...

WEAPON: NONE / LT / MD / HVY

Sword: d8 / d8 / d6 / d4

Mace: d6 / d6 / d6 / d6

 

[Knight-of-Roses]

In my current campaign, I am keeping the AC bonuses the same but giving all Medium Armor, Armor Damage Reduction 1/- and all Heavy Armor, ADR 2/-.

ADR works just like DR except that it cannot reduce damage suffered below 1 point of damage.

So far, it has worked quite well but we are still playtesting it. Bookkeeping has not proven to be a problem as the player's are happy to keep track of the ADR for their character (well, the one character who is wearing heavy armor is anyway).