D&D 3.x - Is It Too Easy To Hit Things?

[Herremann the Wise]

Hello Everyone,

I was thinking about core D&D mechanics the other day and in particular the Attack versus Armor Class system. The advancement in the attack modifier seems to outstrip advancement in AC quite handily, particularly when a certain level is reached. If not for the buffer of the hit point system, this would almost "break" the game.

I have noticed that some DMs houserule AC advancement so that when wielding a weapon, a character will gain a small AC bonus. In other words, they buff AC to keep up with attack modifiers. However, I was wondering if this is pulling the wrong rein. Perhaps if the BAB progression was more in line with saves (thus reaching a maximum of +12 at 20th level rather than +20), then the attack modifier/AC system might be a little more balanced.

However, does this aspect of the game need to be balanced? Is it too easy to hit things? And if attack modifier/AC was balanced out how would the game as a whole change?

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[I'm A Banana]

IMHO, it's not too easy to hit things. It's much more satisfying to deal damage, whittling away at a creature's health and endurance, than it is to simply have no effect. Hit points provide enough of a measure of endurance and durability that "hitting something" doesn't even need to be a handy blow, just something that throws them off balance and winds them.

Messin' with the BAB formula is probably more effort than it's worth, because it has far-reaching implications (Prereqs for feats and PrC's, Power Attack, Expertise, the complete inability to hit a monster with a good, high AC, etc).

 

[Stalker0]

You also have to consider that not everything has a fighter's attack bonus. Sure the fighter might be hacking away like there's no tomorrow, but the rogue and monk still needs to hit as well.

 

[FireLance]

Another point to consider is that if AC tended to keep pace with attack bonus, fights will tend to last longer. If you double the level, and keep the chance of hitting the same, hit points will double, but the rate of hit point attrition may not keep pace, even after factoring in iterative attacks and weapon enhancements.

 

[Hussar]

I would also point out that the main reason for hitting things too easily isn't necessarily BAB. It's BAB plus buffs. Without the buffs, or with only a few buffs, AC works fairly well at keeping you alive. It's when you add in, say, a +7 to hit from the bard, a +3 from your weapon and +2 from flanking that you pretty much hit all the time.

Perhaps a simpler solution is to strip out a lot of the buffing in the game. I know that I wouldn't be too sad to see buff spells vanish.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Also note that HP play an important role. If you make it harder to hit things, you should also reduce HP totals. Part of why monsters have such huge hitpoints is because they have low ACs.

So the decision is really this: Low ACs and high HP - or - High Acs and low HP.

{Having both low makes for a lethal game every combat, having both high would make combat drag out}

In this respect we should learn a lesson from professional hockey. When the rules make it harder to score a goal, people complain because its less fun to watch. I.E. people on the whole are more interested in offense than defense. So for keeping the game exciting my guess is that they chose low AC high HP as the solution.

 

[MerricB]

Hello Everyone,

I was thinking about core D&D mechanics the other day and in particular the Attack versus Armor Class system. The advancement in the attack modifier seems to outstrip advancement in AC quite handily, particularly when a certain level is reached. If not for the buffer of the hit point system, this would almost "break" the game.

However, we have the Buffer.

What isn't so obvious is that the way iterative attacks work is that the first group of attacks should hit, the later attacks will generally miss.

Fighters should generally hit with everything. Clerics & Rogues need to be in the group that still can hit... which can be a problem.

Cheers!

 

[tylermalan]

I think you've got to look at the bigger, balanced picture, which happens to include equipment as well.

The game has mechanics so that your equipment scales as you level, as part of your wealth. What I mean is that someone has an Amulet of Natural armor by level 12. Because of this, your AC does scale with your level - just not directly. They left it up to you, the player!

If you house-ruled AC so that it scales as you level, you will have to house-rule wealth advancement as well, so that it doesn't scale as much as you level. Or alter the campaign so that AC increasing items aren't as prevalent or something. The point is that if you alter one thing, you will have to alter something else if you want to preserve balance.

 

[yipwyg42]

One of my friends put it this way. A high armor class is to make the attacks past the first one less likely to hit. You probably will hit with your first attack, but will miss the second/third and so on ones.

 

[Harm]

AC on monsters is all over the place, a CR 2 Azer has a 23 AC, brutal for the level, a CR 5 Troll has an 16. Often monsters with lower AC have special abilities, like DR, incorprealness, fast healing etc. Some monsters, like dragons, are simply crazy hard to hit. For players I find that AC doesn't rise as fast as the monster's to-hit unless you factor in improved expertise, in which case the meleer isn't doing any damage anyway.

Regardless, without power attack, melee are doing marginal damage, and even medium AC defeats power attack. It's hard to be a meat shield when a monster can totally ignore you because your attack of opportunity which is your only real threat either misses or does insignificant damage.