Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Diplomatic Inspiration / Leadership
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 7632826" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>I really have no idea. There was no specific reason why AC was 2 higher than NADs either. In HoML I simply did away with AC (armor provides a small amount of DR) and then simply put out a blanket proficiency bonus rule which applies to weapons training, skill training, and 'tool' training (anything else which might fit the same pattern, technically weapons basically ARE 'tools' in this system). </p><p></p><p>The result is, things 'just work'. The only exception being you would need to use the 'take 10' value for something like a skill if you wanted to have it function like a defense. In practice I feel that its better to have 3 defenses and I haven't really delved into that as a concept, but it could work and I could see it as something perhaps used in some specific situations. As people have long pointed out 4e really has at least a couple other 'defenses' anyway, passive Perception and Insight. In 4e this doesn't work super well (and we saw how the 'defense against grappling' kind of failed) but in HoML it would. The only negative IMHO is it tends to create a lot of holes in PC's defenses (much like the ability scores as defenses design of 5e, which I don't much care for). </p><p></p><p>Anyway, this was, IMHO, one of the greatest failings of 4e - mechanically. I suppose there was some sort of historical reasoning behind it, they tweaked this and that number and it just ended up that way. Maybe nobody quite thought it through and they left it without realizing how it was a big impediment to the ease of designing game material later on. Who knows? MM or someone might be able to answer...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 7632826, member: 82106"] I really have no idea. There was no specific reason why AC was 2 higher than NADs either. In HoML I simply did away with AC (armor provides a small amount of DR) and then simply put out a blanket proficiency bonus rule which applies to weapons training, skill training, and 'tool' training (anything else which might fit the same pattern, technically weapons basically ARE 'tools' in this system). The result is, things 'just work'. The only exception being you would need to use the 'take 10' value for something like a skill if you wanted to have it function like a defense. In practice I feel that its better to have 3 defenses and I haven't really delved into that as a concept, but it could work and I could see it as something perhaps used in some specific situations. As people have long pointed out 4e really has at least a couple other 'defenses' anyway, passive Perception and Insight. In 4e this doesn't work super well (and we saw how the 'defense against grappling' kind of failed) but in HoML it would. The only negative IMHO is it tends to create a lot of holes in PC's defenses (much like the ability scores as defenses design of 5e, which I don't much care for). Anyway, this was, IMHO, one of the greatest failings of 4e - mechanically. I suppose there was some sort of historical reasoning behind it, they tweaked this and that number and it just ended up that way. Maybe nobody quite thought it through and they left it without realizing how it was a big impediment to the ease of designing game material later on. Who knows? MM or someone might be able to answer... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Diplomatic Inspiration / Leadership
Top