Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Azlan" data-source="post: 872981" data-attributes="member: 2340">Or, you can do as we've done: revise the Dodge feat, and implement some new feats, such as Parry and Block. That way, you're not messing with any more core rules and concepts than you have to.You can see some of the ways I've addressed the issue of "high BABs versus low ACs", <a href="http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=49549" target="_blank">here</a>, with my own house rules for armor DR.I don't see why this added detail and complexity is necessary. You can still implement armor DR rules and maintain a certain abstraction in combat. If breastplate gives you an overall +4 armor bonus in D&D by-the-book, why shouldn't it give you an overall DR 4 (or DR 2, or whatever) if you're using armor DR instead?Again, you don't have to go this far. I mean, you can, if you want to. But you don't have to, just because you've decided to implement rules for armor DR. Besides, if you're going to keep track of armor wear and tear, you might as well do the same with melee weapons.I would agree with you there... if there were no proviso for using Dex with certain melee weapons. But, of course, you can do that via the Weapon Finesse feat. However, with armor DR rules, I'd expand the list of weapons applicable with Weapon Finesse to include shortswords, longswords, ninjatos, and katanas (and perhaps a few other weapons as well).</blockquote>