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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Divorcing AC from armour bonuses
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="Kzach" data-source="post: 5902779" data-attributes="member: 56189"><p>One of the difficulties of making a variety of effective classes is the balancing act that is AC. Part of this difficulty is that there are so many concepts, each with their own merits, that share one basic need: high AC.</p><p></p><p>Whilst thinking on a solution it occurred to me that part of the problem is static AC bonuses from items. But what if, instead of basing a character's AC on the item itself, it's based on how the class utilises the item?</p><p></p><p>For instance, you could have three classes of armours: light, medium & heavy. Within those you could have minor variances through keywords, much like weapons did in 4e and that they tried to do with armours later on. This could give you a bevy of armours to choose from to suit your particular character. The bonus to AC, however, would be relatively minor such as +1, +2 and +3.</p><p></p><p>This gives you the ability to have a wizard in platemail, if that's what you really want, and they still get a benefit out of it (ie. +3 to AC). But when the fighter wears platemail, he gets a +8. This then also allows for a lightly armoured fighter variant who can wear light armour but still get a +8 bonus from it. So it's the class that dictates the AC benefit, not the item itself.</p><p></p><p>In this way, we don't have messy 'filler' bonuses like the ones we saw rampant throughout 4e. If a tank is expected to have an AC of X, then whatever variants there are within the class, all have the same AC bonus from whatever armours they wear and varying benefits from wearing lighter or heavier armours for balance.</p><p></p><p>Obviously there would have to be balancing factors to make heavy armour worthwhile even when there are lightly armoured variants. My personal preference would be damage reduction but that's probably an argument for another thread <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Kzach, post: 5902779, member: 56189"] One of the difficulties of making a variety of effective classes is the balancing act that is AC. Part of this difficulty is that there are so many concepts, each with their own merits, that share one basic need: high AC. Whilst thinking on a solution it occurred to me that part of the problem is static AC bonuses from items. But what if, instead of basing a character's AC on the item itself, it's based on how the class utilises the item? For instance, you could have three classes of armours: light, medium & heavy. Within those you could have minor variances through keywords, much like weapons did in 4e and that they tried to do with armours later on. This could give you a bevy of armours to choose from to suit your particular character. The bonus to AC, however, would be relatively minor such as +1, +2 and +3. This gives you the ability to have a wizard in platemail, if that's what you really want, and they still get a benefit out of it (ie. +3 to AC). But when the fighter wears platemail, he gets a +8. This then also allows for a lightly armoured fighter variant who can wear light armour but still get a +8 bonus from it. So it's the class that dictates the AC benefit, not the item itself. In this way, we don't have messy 'filler' bonuses like the ones we saw rampant throughout 4e. If a tank is expected to have an AC of X, then whatever variants there are within the class, all have the same AC bonus from whatever armours they wear and varying benefits from wearing lighter or heavier armours for balance. Obviously there would have to be balancing factors to make heavy armour worthwhile even when there are lightly armoured variants. My personal preference would be damage reduction but that's probably an argument for another thread :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Divorcing AC from armour bonuses
Top