Armour Plating the Tarrasque, or thoughts on natural armour and manufactured armour

[Gort]

I have a problem with how natural armour stacks with regular armour in D&D. Generally speaking this problem is caused by poor monster design in the standard books with regard to polymorphing or other player use. The monsters are thought out in order to be a challenge to the right level of party, and if the creature doesn't have a good enough AC, it's standard to dump an arbitrary natural armour bonus onto it. (Case in point, the Ravid. The picture of it shows it looking about as tough as a plucked chicken that's been on a month hike. I'd say maybe a +1 or +2 natural armour bonus, but noooo. +15 instead) While this solves the problem of making the creature a suitable challenge, it does not solve the problem of players changing into it, or an inexperienced GM putting armour onto it and making it unhittable.

My biggest problem with stacking armour onto an already monstrously well armoured creature is not game balance or a spell I don't allow in my game. It's the fact that if a player came to you and asked, "Can I wear a Large suit of plate mail over my medium suit of plate mail?" you'd initially laugh at him, and then tell him that such armour would make it virtually impossible to move, if not by sheer weight then by the sheer bulk and awkwardness of it. The rules outright forbid it. However, they do allow stacking of armour with natural armour that's magnitudes more protective and would be just as unlikely. (Case in point - a barbed devil in platemail)

So, my suggestion to fix such a problem would be similar to the max dex bonus that armour has. Instead, it would be a max natural armour bonus. After all, there's only so much armour a creature can have weighing on it, natural or otherwise, before adverse effects make it impractical.

It would also help balance characters with no "natural natural armour" with those who stack magical natural armour on top of their natural natural armour - I preferred that rule back in 3.0 to be honest.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Gort!

I have a problem with how natural armour stacks with regular armour in D&D. Generally speaking this problem is caused by poor monster design in the standard books with regard to polymorphing or other player use. The monsters are thought out in order to be a challenge to the right level of party, and if the creature doesn't have a good enough AC, it's standard to dump an arbitrary natural armour bonus onto it. (Case in point, the Ravid. The picture of it shows it looking about as tough as a plucked chicken that's been on a month hike. I'd say maybe a +1 or +2 natural armour bonus, but noooo. +15 instead) While this solves the problem of making the creature a suitable challenge, it does not solve the problem of players changing into it, or an inexperienced GM putting armour onto it and making it unhittable.

My biggest problem with stacking armour onto an already monstrously well armoured creature is not game balance or a spell I don't allow in my game. It's the fact that if a player came to you and asked, "Can I wear a Large suit of plate mail over my medium suit of plate mail?" you'd initially laugh at him, and then tell him that such armour would make it virtually impossible to move, if not by sheer weight then by the sheer bulk and awkwardness of it. The rules outright forbid it. However, they do allow stacking of armour with natural armour that's magnitudes more protective and would be just as unlikely. (Case in point - a barbed devil in platemail)

So, my suggestion to fix such a problem would be similar to the max dex bonus that armour has. Instead, it would be a max natural armour bonus. After all, there's only so much armour a creature can have weighing on it, natural or otherwise, before adverse effects make it impractical.

It would also help balance characters with no "natural natural armour" with those who stack magical natural armour on top of their natural natural armour - I preferred that rule back in 3.0 to be honest.

One of my pet hates (in a very similar vein) is what constitutes 'natural' armour for a lot of these monsters. Take the Solar for instance, +21 Natural Armour. What the heck is the Solars skin made of, +20 leather armour?

Surely the Solars AC should be derived from Dexterity, Deflection (and possibly Insight?), and any Natural Armour should be relatively insignificant.

One solution I thought was to limit Natural Armour by Hit Dice as follows:

'Normal' Skin (Max NA = 1/8 HD)
Tough Skin, Fur (Max NA = 1/4 HD)
Scaly Skin (Max NA = 1/2 HD)
Carapace Plate (Max NA = HD)

Therefore the Ravid, which looks scaly and has 3 HD would have a Natural Armour Bonus of +1.

The Solar which looks to have 'normal' skin would have a Natural Armour bonus of +2, but a Deflection Bonus of +7.

 

[S'mon]

I agree this is a big problem with the way monster "Natural Armour Bonuses" are arbitrarily assigned, and are clearly intended to encompass a whole range of factors that aren't really physical armour, such as a giant being too tall for a Medium creature to hit easily, or a succubus or solar's 6th-sense ability to avoid damage. Thus a GM who starts thinking logically will have the Barbed Devil load up on AC-boosting stuff - field plate & heavy shield, say - and easily make it unhittable. IMC I've allowed monsters to wear better-than-listed armour; Vrocks in studded leather or Hezrou in chain shirts, but kept it fairly restricted; assuming medium or better armour will interfere w the creature's natural abilities like flight or teleportation.

 

[TheBadElf]

Would you people please cease and desist immediately? My Druid really likes the way Barkskin stacks with his Wilding Armor, and with the Luminous Armor and inherant natural armor on his Dire Lion companion. What do you have against poor little Gnomes trying to make their way in big bad Faerun??