damage reduction for armor?

Unearthed Arcana - Armor as Damage Reduction

The way they do it in Unearthed Arcana is:

divide armor bonus by 2 (round down) = DR/-
subtract DR from armor bonus = new armor bonus

Shields are not modified (ie. they provide full bonus to AC). Natural armor is handled this way:

divide natural armor bonus by 5 (round down) = DR/-
subtract DR from natural armor bonus = new natural armor bonus

Add this DR to any existing DR (if the existing DR is the same type) or treat as a seperate type of DR.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

rrealm said:
There is a variant in UA but when my group tried it, it became very cumbersome. Player’s have a tendency to roll out multiple attacks and then add the values together (assuming both hit). Since DR applies to each strike, you have to get them to announce each damage separately and in doing so, results in more math for on the fly.

Personally, I like the armor DR of Alternity made by TSR. Each armor has three protection categories: low impact, high impact, and energy. Low impact is melee weapons or bows and slings. Almost anything found in D&D except catapults. High impact would be grenades, rifles, and pistols. Energy is plasma cannons and the like. Not sure how to convert this system into 3.5 but I would love to use it.

It suffers from the same issues (even more so, since it is rolled); just doesn't involve the GM. I use a static DR based on attack type for the D20 Future campaign I run.
 

Storyteller01 said:
I tend to disagree with Damage Reduction overall. From what I've seen and heard, armor was designed to deflect or stop the energy of an attack. An attack that got through was generally through a weak point in the armor (80% of all kills from an exumed Japanese battle were through the clavicle, a spot notoriously hard to armor because of the need for shoulder mobility) or by weapons designed to defeat the armor (a rapier-like blade was designed in Europe to puncture the seam in the middle of certain breastplates). Even armor used today is designed to stop, not reduce damage. Flak jackets can protect from errant debris, provided you don't get hit in the head. They are useless against an actual attack such as a knife or gun. It doesn't reduce damage: the attack just blows through the armor. Police vests have steel plates over the heart. Bullets don't nessecarily do more damage then melee weapons (a skull crushed by a war club is no longer identifiable. Someone who took a bullet in the head may still have a face intact.) but if it gets through, the officer usually dies. Regardless, if the attack got through, you took full damage based on how well it was placed (you verses him), not by how well the armor protected you (it obviously didn't).

It really depends on the armor and weapon used. A warhammer used against plate armor was certainly NOT deflected, but dampened. Same with the military pick and several polearms. For true realism, armor should be a variable DR based on a roll added to a negative number, the roll changing depending on what type of attack is being levied (similar to how Alternity does it).

This allows the armor to dampen the blow. Because it also added to a negative number, there's a chance the hit totally avoids the armor. Because different weapons work well against certain armors (plate armor was almost useless against the longbow and chain armor WAS useless against heavy mallot type weapons, like a maul), it changes based on the weapon.

For even better realism, you can use static DRs (still based on weapon type), but then do a cover-check to see if the attack hit the armor in the first place.

Nonetheless, the main point is (and most people would agree with me here, judging by how many posts I've seen on this), even if the blow was deflected, it still hit it's target. The armor just took the blow instead of the armored. That's DR, no matter how you look at it.

Usually people who have the conception that armor causes blows to miss, grew up playing RPGs based on D&D, and subconsciously, they have come to believe it.
 

reanjr said:
...

Usually people who have the conception that armor causes blows to miss, grew up playing RPGs based on D&D, and subconsciously, they have come to believe it.

oh yeah, I still find myself slipping in description sometimes.

my general rule of thumb for any new idea/house rule is: the less paperwork/complication, the better. A flat DR (of whatever) is much easier to implement than trying to use some table about what types of weapons do better against what types of armor (and vice versa)
 

What about variant combos?

I've seen this topic come up a number of times, and I have tinkered with the idea every now and again. I was just curious, since I've yet to come across this is any other related thread on any board, but has anyone considered how this variant might work with any other variants, like a Vitality and Wound Points system?

In this case, armor converts some amount of Wound (lethal) damage into Vitality (non-lethal) damage. Since none of the damage is really avoided, you can actually increase the DR values significantly, say equal to the armor's AC rating, without creating a great imbalance. If a character has 0 or less vitality points, then he is fatigued and unable to defend himself adequately. Therefore, the armor only reduces the damage by half it's DR value (rounded down) and the remainder reduces Wound Points.

A lot of the variants floating about seem to overlap ideas, and some of them tend to work well together if modified to fit. Understandably, not everyone likes both variants... I changed the Vitality/Wound system significantly because I didn't like the way it was presented in UA... but there may be some other combinations of variants that might work to suit one's own style or tastes. Just food for thought.
 

There's a lot of ways this whole thing can be improved. There are a few problems, though. For one thing, trading one point of AC for one point of DR is great at low levels, but at high level or against someone with a 2-for-1 Power Attack it stinks.

While it'd be better, for realism's sake, to have the damage depend on attack type, this is just impractical for a PnP game. But you can still make the system a bit more complex without bogging the game down in minutae.

For instance, a while back someone suggested using variable DR, and having plate-type armors have high DR and low AC, while leather was the reverse. So, for instance, Leather armor might be +2 AC but no DR, Studded would be +2 AC, 1d2 DR, and Plate armor would be +3 AC, 1d10 DR. This'd also allow you to differentiate armors better; the Breastplate would have more DR but lower AC than Chainmail.

If you wanted, the magical enhancement bonus of the armor could add to the DR, not the AC. So, +5 Plate might be 1d10+5 DR.

Then, you can tie this in to other Feats. Weapon Finesse might allow you to bypass part of the armor's DR, to compensate for your low STR.

Just a thought.
 

The problem with most of these (good) ideas is that they seriously bog the game down. At least in my games combat is not really that fast and furious to begin with. If we were to roll a variable damage reduction for each hit and simultaneously take into account the weapon used.

Well... a single combat would take ages and as a Dm it would lead to horrible amounts of bookkeeping, keeping tracks of weapons used and armor worn for each npc.

I have used the medium armor dmr 1/- and heavy armor dmr 2/- for a long time and that seems to just up the benefits to a level where those armor types are actually used.

Dmr 8/- for a full plate might be realistic by not really much fun for the dual kukri wielder extraordinaire, speedy monk or elegant duelist to face. In fact we have tried that and it lead to everyone using big twohanded weapons as it was the only fighter concept that worked. Realistic, perhaps. But boring.
 

A few interesting points presented here...

monboesen said:
The problem with most of these (good) ideas is that they seriously bog the game down.

Indeed. But it is understood that the mechanics of the Core Rules represent the simplest system of arbitration for combat. Therefore, any deviations to this system are most likely expanding the base model and thereby increasing the complexity at the cost of efficiency. In simpler terms, every variation of the existing rules are going to bog the game down. It is simply a matter of discerning how much of it you are willing to tolerate for the sake of a greater level of complexity.

monboesen said:
Dmr 8/- for a full plate might be realistic by not really much fun for the dual kukri wielder extraordinaire, speedy monk or elegant duelist to face. In fact we have tried that and it lead to everyone using big twohanded weapons as it was the only fighter concept that worked. Realistic, perhaps. But boring.

The damage resistance mechanic in itself is flawed, as it is presented in the Core Rules. By their definition, damage that is inflicted simply disappears or is entirely absorbed by the skin/armor/magic/whatever without any side effects or consequences. If damage represents physical energy created by the force of a blow, then the energy 'resisted' must be turned away or redirected in some manner. Energy is never destroyed. That is just a law of physics. It may be acceptable in game terms that energy is simply dissipated, but it's not very realistic.

Now, because I wanted to utilize a variant of the Vitality and Wound points system, I found a way to get around this in a more believable manner without sacrificing much of the efficiency in game play. First, I tweaked the current system to have Vitality represent a character's physical energy and stamina. As they lose Vitality points, the character eventually becomes more fatigued. When he loses all his Vitality points, he is too exhausted to defend himself effectively and all damage thereafter reduces Wound points unless he can recover his Vitality again. Characters could also reduce Vitality through strenuous physical exertion, such as moving in heavy armor or while encumbered, or attempting to cast spells beyond their ability or power.

Before, damage could only reduce hit points and nothing more. But with this variant in place, damage resistance now has the capability of converting that damage (energy) into a different form. So the dual-wielding kukri expert may not physically damage the armor-plated fighter right away, but his attacks will wear him down to a point when he can. And the plate-wearing warrior may exhaust himself quicker while trying to fend off the quicker and lighter assailant who will not wear himself out as fast. At least, that is what I hope this system will achieve once it is completed.

And, yes, it will add an extra layer or two of complexity to combat. But my style of play supports it. I've never agreed with the ideology of people who run about from room to room in a monster-infested subterranean complex fighting numerous times within a short period of time and never tiring. The only true 'rest' in the game was fashioned as a recharge period to regain spells and abilities otherwise limited from one sunrise to the next. A handful of threatening skirmishes in a day is far more exciting to me than a series of repetitious encounters with often predictable outcomes. Certainly more entertaining to watch players pace themselves than to try charging ahead to the next encounter before their spells wear off.

But, I digress as I have rambled on once more. Variants will add complexity to the game, and may bog it down some. Everyone simply has to decide how much it is worth to them and their fellow players.
 

Wolf72 said:
oh yeah, I still find myself slipping in description sometimes.

my general rule of thumb for any new idea/house rule is: the less paperwork/complication, the better. A flat DR (of whatever) is much easier to implement than trying to use some table about what types of weapons do better against what types of armor (and vice versa)

Well, with my system, there are three types of weapons that match up one-to-one with three types of armor. It's usually pretty easy to remember if you know how leather, chain, and plate armor work (those are the the classic examples of the three types of armor).

Leather cuts really easily, but poking through it is difficult, so slashing weapons work well. Chain is malleable and therefore lets bludgeoning weapons through. Longbow was the weapon that caused the downfall of the armored knight; piercing goes right through plate armor.

And most importantly, the player can just write down was kind of weapon gets through next to the armor's DR.
 

monboesen said:
Dmr 8/- for a full plate might be realistic by not really much fun for the dual kukri wielder extraordinaire, speedy monk or elegant duelist to face. In fact we have tried that and it lead to everyone using big twohanded weapons as it was the only fighter concept that worked. Realistic, perhaps. But boring.

While I can certainly see where you are coming from, I think it would mostly just change what types of feats people take (as well as open up a whole new realm of feats).

With the system I proposed earlier at least, a critical threat always ignore DR. Improved Critical/Keen just got useful! (I've mathematically determined that Improved Critical is worthless in all but the most specific of circumstances). In addition, the weapon type can cut the the DR in half, so while a kukri or a dagger might be extreme examples of weapons that under normal conditions cannot harm someone in plate mail, the large critical range of the kukri (18-20) coupled with Improved Critical/Keen (15-20) would cause it to ignore DR 30% of the time, probably making it more effective than a shortsword in the hands of a kukri master.

Other techniques and feat combos would do plenty to add variety to the tactics players used. It would be great to see the dagger-wielding rogue pull back and whip out his shortbow when the evil cleric appeared wearing a breastplate because the effectiveness was so much greater.

Fighters (traditionally having great strength and appropriate feats to increase damage) would often be able to keep her primary weapon if it was a weak opponent who would only take a swing or two, but against the uber villain, she'll have to think a bit about how to go about things.

Power Attack would be a must for those wanting to cause damage, while Expertise would be for those wanting to avoid it.

Flaming weapons would be great because the flames would ignore the armor.

I feel that it would lessen the tediousness of combat. It would also help the DM with descriptions, having a better idea of what exactly happened with attack.

I have also found that there is a problem with some characters having an AC 13, while others in the party have AC 25. A creature can take out the wizard or rogue in a single round, but can't seem to really touch the cleric or fighter. Any mildly intelligent enemy would immediately take them out, but as a DM you have to come up with excuses why they don't just blow by the fighter and cleric to annihilate two of the greatest damage-dealers (potentially, given sneak attack and spells) in a round or two, picking off the others in a battle of attrition.
 

Remove ads

Top