Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Beedo" data-source="post: 6545643" data-attributes="member: 6791097">I have a campaign I'm running set in Mythic Greece.  We just have a few sessions under our belt.  I saw a thread looking at the DPR of the various classes and it raised an interesting question:  will it cause unnecessary problems for the fighting classes (in terms of bounded accuracy) to remove heavy armors from the game, or should we assume that at least some portion of fighters (like the defense-minded) should have access to the higher AC's.For instance, in the ancient world, there is nothing as protective as full Renaissance plate mail (AC 18).  You could argue that AC 18 is absolute - the only way people in your game world can achieve base AC 18 is if the world has a late Medieval \ early Renaissance technology and developed head-to-toe plate mail.Alternatively, AC 18 is relative to the other AC's available in the setting, and characters wearing the heaviest armor of the time can still achieve AC 18 - in the mythic world, that might be a fighter with bronze plate, arm and leg greaves, and a full Corinthian helmet.You could make a similar argument for weapon damage and how it affects DPR - in a world without the European steel long or broadsword, the default "fantasy" hand weapon for fighters, should the most common weapon of the fighting man deal 1d8 for DPR purposes.  In the mythic world, perhaps that's the spear.Anyway - it's an interesting question to me - this idea of whether class balance is important (so armor and weapon values should flex to maintain fighter integrity) or whether AC and damage values are fixed, and fighters get weakened in non-Medieval settings.</blockquote>

Verification