High Strength Attacks vs High Dex Defenses...

[Rashak Mani]

Something that has been bugging me about the AC system are examples like Huge animals or Giants. Basically their very high attacks are powered by very high strength values. Meaning they can get through armor through sheer power.... now what happens when their "target" is a 22+ Dex Elf monk with loads of Dodge based AC ? Armor is non existant... so strength should be irrelevant as far as hitting the target goes ?

A good example is the Dragon Heart film... he kept dodging the dragon tail and had "lightish" armor. Since AC is rarely given thru going up to higher levels it means that PCs get into a Armor Race vs ever stronger creatures mostly thru equipment. This creates a "magic items are necessary mentality" that I feel is not good. PCs become magic item collections many times by balance necessity.

One would imagine that high level fighters would manage to stay out of harm's way better than younger ones... but apparently that is true only for those with 13+ Int and picking (Combat) Expertise.

Has anyone manaed somehow thru this Str vs AC dillema ? How to avoid "a armor race" by front line players...

 

[BryonD]

Are you looking for an honest explanation for why this makes sense?

Or do you just want a rationalization?

(Hint: pick #2)

 

[Hammerhead]

Muscle-power, or Strength, would help determine how fast you swing your weapon; the wimpy elf dodges with great speed, the half-orc is attacking with great speed and power. Seems to make sense.

However, logical considerations are often disregarded by D&D for the sake of fun and game balance. If you don't like the idea of magic item collections, you could combine Shield and Deflection bonuses, Armor and Natural Armor (to prevent Armor Classes from spiralling too high while still retaining baseline magic item wealth; if you don't give out magic item wealth close to baseline, ignore the above suggestion) and institute a class Defense bonus. However, it might be a good idea to make everyone's defense the same. While it might make sense for the Rogue to have a higher Defense than the Barbarian, but Krusk won't be too happy when Lidda becomes the Sneak Attack machine of death who's also impossible to hit.

 

[Mark]

...and institute a class Defense bonus. However, it might be a good idea to make everyone's defense the same.

I'm not so sure that keeping them the same would be so good. It might be worthwhile tinkering with a BDB that paralels the BAB, with diminishing returns as per the secondary (and other subsequent) attacks. That way it would still favor the combat oriented classes in a natural way.

 

[Katowice]

I'm hoping that the Complete Warrior book has optional rules for Defense and a progression for each class. The one thing I've always hated about D&D was that a quick, lightly armored fighter is going to get crushed by a lumbering oaf in heavy armor any day of the week. Both d20 Modern and Star Wars (and d20 Cthulu as an optional rule) have Defense, and it works quite well.

 

[Anabstercorian]

If not Complete Warrior, then Unearthed Arcana surely will.

 

[Endur]

It doesn't matter what game you play. The heavily armored knight always crushes the lightly armored rogue.

Even if you use a game where armor reduces damage and doesn't impact chance to be hit. Or play a game where the armor is force fields. Armor is always better than having none (unless you are playing a silly game like Dune where lasguns make armor worse than no armor).

The one thing I've always hated about D&D was that a quick, lightly armored fighter is going to get crushed by a lumbering oaf in heavy armor any day of the week.

 

[Dark Jezter]

Strength determines more than just how much power is behind your attack, it also determines how fast you can swing your weapon.

In another thread, someone used the example of a batter in baseball. The stronger a batter is, the harder and faster he can swing the bat, and thus can hit the ball greater distances.

Just because ogres are big and strong does not mean that their attacks are slow and easily-dodged by the nimble elven fighter.

 

[Nifft]

The one thing I've always hated about D&D was that a quick, lightly armored fighter is going to get crushed by a lumbering oaf in heavy armor any day of the week.

Simply not true!

• The lightly armored guy can run away (and fire some arrows once he's far enough away). Heavy Armor = slow!
• "I bullrush the tin can into the canal!"
• Climb up a rope & fire arrows at the tin can.
• Improved Invisibility + Rogue + Move Silently = dead tin can.

-- N

 

[mmu1]

Simply not true!

• The lightly armored guy can run away (and fire some arrows once he's far enough away). Heavy Armor = slow!
• "I bullrush the tin can into the canal!"
• Climb up a rope & fire arrows at the tin can.
• Improved Invisibility + Rogue + Move Silently = dead tin can.

-- N

Definitely true. Presumably, the "lumbering oaf" is that way because he trades Strength for Dex. Which means that he's in no danger of being bullrushed (I'm sure he'd love to have the dex-monkey try and take an AAO, though.), can probably climb ropes just fine (unless he spent all his skill points on cross-class skills), and Improved Invisibility is not an inherent ability of high-Dex characters. (and we're not necessarily comparing fighters and rogue, but strong vs. dextrous fighters)

Running away and shooting a bow might work, but he just might get shot back at with a mighty one doing twice the average damage, or the tin-can might take a move action and get into cover. (unless they're in an empty field, which makes things like rope-climbing or bull-rushing people off of heights problematic...)

Pretty much the only time the tin-can is at a serious disadvantage is on a small boat where he's at risk of falling off due to environmental factors (because he's not at much risk of getting pushed off) and at a huge advantage in every situation in which you're actually required to fight and deal damage instead of flitting about the battlefield being ineffectual.