DR for Armor: Are There Published Alternate Rules for This?

[Destil]

Although distinguishing hitability from damagability sounds simple, doing it properly ends up being far more complicated. You'd have to employ a piercing/slashing/crushing system versus different armor types for their DR values to have any real meaning. Grim & gritty isn't complete because it only addresses piercing weapons.

Which dosn't work either, since a rapier should be useless againt heay plate armor, while a war-pick should punch through it fairly well. Pierce / slash / crush is a bad way to do things. What you need is a way to define how well a certian weapon defeats armor protection. Like a sort of armor piercing value.

 

[mmu1]

...so basically, all attacks would be touch attacks, and armor would provide damage reduction? Interesting concept, although you would probably have to redo the whole BAB thing, either lowering the amount, or add a penatrating attack bonus in addition to the BAB. Hmm...

The way most systems that use DR deal with this is to give everyone a Defense bonus that increases with level.

Except that then you run into all kinds of problems, like defining what the Defense bonus represents, exactly, and whether you should elminate touch attacks altogether. (if you don't address this, you're just picking between two sets of rules that are illogical in different ways)

Think about it - if you can apply your full Defense bonus to avoiding an arrow or a crossbow bolt, there is no logical reason not to have it apply against Melf's Acid arrow... In melee, it's harder to make a good case, since the Defense bonus would probably represent parries as well as dodges - so logically, not all of it should apply against touch attacks (unless you rule that getting your hand cut into by a parrying sword is not a viable way of delivering a touch attack)...

And then there's the issue of shields, which would need to provide a separate kind of bonus, and presumably wouldn't protect against touch attacks.

Which is all why it's probably better to go directly to system that was built around DR, rather than try to adapt it to D&D, there are just too many inconsitencies...

 

[GuardianLurker]

Umm,

have you considered using/switching to Fantasy Hero? The Hero system implements the best match between what you want and simplicity, IMO.

Please note that I did *not* say the resulting system was necessarily easy-to-understand. But once you manage to wrap your mind around it, it flows pretty well.

In HERO terms, your nimble fella has a high DCV, and low PD/ED. The tank on the other hand is just the reverse, low DCV, and extermely high PD/ED.

Of course, I should warn you that most players go for the high DCV, high PD/ED fighters - but that's just life.

DCV = Defensive Combat Value
PD=Physical Defense
ED=Energy Defense

BTW, for those of you looking for a "realistic" (or at least more detailed) combat system, without stepping up to RoleMaster, I strongly recommend checking out the Hero System.

 

[Azlan]

The way most systems that use DR deal with this is to give everyone a Defense bonus that increases with level.

I don't think this is necessary. D&D already has a mechanic that reflects a character's defenses increasing with levels. That mechanic is called hit points.

...so basically, all attacks would be touch attacks, and armor would provide damage reduction? Interesting concept, although you would probably have to redo the whole BAB thing, either lowering the amount, or add a penatrating attack bonus in addition to the BAB.

Re-doing the whole BAB thing isn't necessary either. Yes, characters with heavy armor will be easier to hit -- but they'll be harder to damage. Having a high "to hit" bonus versus an opponent with a low target DC won't necessarily be a boon, if your subsequent damage roll can't get much if anything past that opponent's armor DR. In this case, having the Power Attack feat (+1 damage for every -1 "to hit" penalty taken) would be most advantageous.

Also, the alternate rules could have a combat maneuver where you can reduce the DR of an opponent's armor by 1 for every -1 "to hit" penalty you take, with the maximum armor reduction allowed for this maneuver being 50%. (You'd be aiming -- or making a "called shot" -- for a chink in your opponent's armor.) This would not be as efficient as a Power Attack, but it would not require a feat.

Which dosn't work either, since a rapier should be useless againt heay plate armor, while a war-pick should punch through it fairly well. Pierce / slash / crush is a bad way to do things. What you need is a way to define how well a certian weapon defeats armor protection. Like a sort of armor piercing value.

Agreed. Giving different DR values for armor versus pierce / slash / crush is NOT the way to do it. Example: a dagger and a pick-axe, although both are puncturing weapons, are not equal in their armor penetration values. Another example: a saber and a greataxe, although both are slashing weapons, are not equal in their armor penetration values.

Umm, have you considered using/switching to Fantasy Hero? The Hero system implements the best match between what you want and simplicity, IMO.

I've gamemastered Fantasy Hero. For that matter, I've gamemastered GURPS and I've played RoleMaster. And, yes, I've considered switching to Fantasy Hero (and to GURPS, but not to RoleMaster). But I'd rather stick with 3E D&D d20, if only for the huge number of supplements and source materials for that game system.

Which is all why it's probably better to go directly to system that was built around DR, rather than try to adapt it to D&D, there are just too many inconsitencies...

It would require a considerable amount of extra work, for sure. (Although, it won't make combat slower or that much more complex, if the alternate rules are done right.) And that's why I was wondering if there was a published supplement containing such alternate rules that were comprehensive, playtested, and balanced. That way, most of the work has already been done for you.

But even if there is such a supplement, it will still require at least some amount of extra work for the DM and his players. Some people will find this acceptable, and some will not; i.e., some people are satisfied with 3E D&D just the way it is, and some are not.

Of course, LOTS of people aren't satisfied with 3E D&D just the way it is, as the high volume of posts in this forum, "House Rules", attests.

 

[Azlan]

BTW, for those of you looking for a "realistic" (or at least more detailed) combat system, without stepping up to RoleMaster, I strongly recommend checking out the Hero System.

I don't want greater realism so much as I want greater detail.

I want situations like: a PC confronts a black knight clad in full plate armor, and the PC decides to switch from his longsword to his mace, which he carries to better deal with situations such as this.

Or situations like: the PC group confronts a lightning-fast, highly agile quickling. The group's fighter with his dwarven axe and the barbarian with his greatsword have worse chances to hit than does the rogue with her flashing rapier. The fighter or the barbarian could take out the wee quickling with one blow of their mighty weapons... but that's provided they hit in the first place!

Or situations like: no one in the PC group can get much if any damage past the dragon's natural armor. The dragon, being as big as the broadside of a barn, is extremely easy to hit -- but damaging it is another matter! So, the PCs are forced to take big "to hit" penalties in order to aim for the chink in the dragon's armor, in hopes of getting more damage through.

Or situations like: a horde of 20-30 goblins fire their relatively weak shortbows at a group of three PCs, showering the PCs with small arrows. In normal 3E D&D, all the PCs in this particular group would have an AC of 19 or 20. With the alternate rules for armor DR, only the group's rogue and monk have a target DC of 19 or 20; the group's fighter has a target DC of 14. Sure, the goblins have a better chance to hit the fighter than they do the rogue and the monk. But with so many goblins firing, it doesn't really matter -- odds are, all of the PCs are going to get hit, at least once or twice. But the fighter, clad in his full plate armor, has little to worry about in this situation, since the DR of his armor will absorb most if not all of the damage from any goblin shortbow. So, caught in the shower of arrows, while the rogue and the monk are coerced to hang back as they spend actions trying to dodge and tumble away from as many arrows as possible, the fighter brazenly charges forward, relying on his armor to deflect and absorb the many arrows that pepper him.

 

[HellHound]

Azlan - the dragon thing you want is already in the system....

Dragons can have upwards of 20 natural armor... thus most attacks will just hit their hide and deal no damage. It takes a very good hit roll to bypass the natural armor (find a chink in it) and deal damage to the dragon.

 

[Azlan]

the dragon thing you want is already in the system... Dragons can have upwards of 20 natural armor... thus most attacks will just hit their hide and deal no damage. It takes a very good hit roll to bypass the natural armor (find a chink in it) and deal damage to the dragon.

Yes, but it's backwards. The "to hit" roll against a humongous dragon should be easy; it's the damage roll that should be hard.

Besides, with 3E D&D the way it is, a fighter armed with a dagger or armed with halfling nunchakus has the same chance of "penetrating" the dragon's hide as that fighter does armed with a greatsword or a dwarven axe.