How I'd re-work armour in 4th Edition D&D

[ArmoredSaint]

I guess I didn't make it clear that I am already familiar with the alternate "Armour as DR" rules presented in the SRD/Unearthed Arcana. They don't satisfy me since I feel the DR numbers there are far too low.

I don't regard "this is the way D&D has always done it" as a valid defense for keeping the old Armour Class system. I think it was hinted early on that some sacred cows were going to get killed in 4th Edition, and I hope this is one of them. Armour making you harder to hit instead of reducing damage isn't "iconic," it's counterintuitive to the point of absurdity. I hope they change it.

Nor do I think the old way is somehow simpler than having armour provide DR. Subtracting damage from a blow dealt is no more difficult and takes no more time than adding up bonuses to hit.

As someone pointed out on the WotC 4th Edition board, the Armour Class system as it stands now is deeply unsatisfying for players playing a heavily-armoured character since many monsters will still hit a fighter completely decked out in the best armour he can get at his level more than 50% of the time. Armour shouldn't be an "all-or-nothing" gamble. It wouldn't feel like it was useless half the time if it actually did something each time you were hit. As it is now, it just feels like a burdensome waste of GP.

 

[Delta]

Nor do I think the old way is somehow simpler than having armour provide DR. Subtracting damage from a blow dealt is no more difficult and takes no more time than adding up bonuses to hit.

But it's undeniably in addition to adding up bonuses to hit, which also still has to be done; thus, it's more operations and at least marginally more complicated all together. Even the Unearthed Arcana design writeup admits "If you’re willing to add a layer of complexity to your combats, consider this variant."

 

[A'koss]

Personally, I'd rather they abstracted armor into different "weight classes" to reflect mixed and matched styles (eg. part leather, part chain, part plate) common in D&D art and ranges of same type of armor (light scalemail shirt to very heavy scale plate armor).

I. Very Light Armor
Protective Quality? DR? AC bonus?
Max. Dex Bonus: +8
Armor Check Penalty: None
Movement: Full
Weight: 10 lbs.
Cost: 5 gp

II. Light Armor
Protective Quality? DR? AC bonus?
Max. Dex Bonus: +6
Armor Check Penalty: -1
Movement: Full
Weight: 20 lbs.
Cost: 20 gp

III. Medium Armor
Protective Quality? DR? AC bonus?
Max. Dex Bonus: +4
Armor Check Penalty: -2
Movement: Base: 30 (25); Base: 40 (35); Base: 50 (40)
Weight: 30 lbs.
Cost: 80 gp

IV. Heavy Armor
Protective Quality? DR? AC bonus?
Max. Dex Bonus: +2
Armor Check Penalty: -4
Movement: Base: 30 (20); Base: 40 (25); Base: 50 (35)
Weight: 40 lbs.
Cost: 240 gp

V. Very Heavy Armor
Protective Quality? DR? AC bonus?
Max. Dex Bonus: +1
Armor Check Penalty: -6
Movement: Base: 30 (20); Base: 40 (25); Base: 50 (35)
Weight: 50 lbs.
Cost: 960 gp

 

[KingCrab]

Palladium has been doing things along those lines for years now.

 

[The Souljourner]

Armour making you harder to hit instead of reducing damage isn't "iconic," it's counterintuitive to the point of absurdity.

It's not counterintuitive. And it's not literally making you harder to hit. Armor doesn't affect your touch AC at all. You get hit a lot, they're just blows that hit your armor. Blows that manage to sneak in between the plates of armor actually damage you. These are the blows we call "hits" in D&D, even though a lot of blows are ringing off your armor.

Even the best full plate has weak spots in the joints - under the armors and the backs of the knees.... these are spots where there's some leather and some chain, and that's it. A spiked mace smashing into one of those spots should do pretty much full damage.

In the armor as DR camp, you start having to have special rolls to bypass armor to simulate that fact - otherwise that guy in DR 9 fullplate is 100% immune to 12 strength guards with longswords and the 12 strength swashbuckler with a +2 rapier.... and he shouldn't be.

Yes, I will totally agree there is some rebalancing that needs to go on with high level tanks. That's been the case pretty much throughout D&D's history, and yes, it is caused by the armor-as-AC mechanic. However, armor-as-AC contributes to the chaoticness of battle, and allows for lucky blows to actually do damage. I think this is essential to the heroic feel of the game... if everyone could throw on fullplate and be immune to normal swordblows, it would be a much more boring game.

-Nate

 

[Aus_Snow]

In the armor as DR camp, you start having to have special rolls to bypass armor to simulate that fact - otherwise that guy in DR 9 fullplate is 100% immune to 12 strength guards with longswords and the 12 strength swashbuckler with a +2 rapier.... and he shouldn't be.

Like critical hits?

No, I do know what you mean. And yeah, you're right of course.

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

Armour making you harder to hit instead of reducing damage isn't "iconic," it's counterintuitive to the point of absurdity. I hope they change it.

Full Plate reduces the damage you sustain by 40%

 

[Yair]

Nor do I think the old way is somehow simpler than having armour provide DR.

Armor as DR means (1) rolling to hit, adding the attack modifier, and comparing to AC, (2) rolling damage dice and adding fixed damage modifiers, (3) subtracting (opponent-dependent, so not fixed) DR from damage, (4) subtracting damage from hit points. This is more complicated than armor as AC, which doesn't include step 3. It doesn't complicate the gameplay further for characters that already have DR for some reason, however, and the complication isn't enormous (but is significant, as now the DM needs to hunt down the monster's DR and do the subtraction).

I find it easiest to add numbers and compare to a set number to see what's larger. I do find subtraction to be harder than addition (not hard, but harder), and comparing two numbers to see which is larger superior to subtraction (removing hit points) by far. Which is why I suggested my system above. In it you (1) roll to hit, adding the (fixed) attack modifier, and compare to opponent-dependent AC, (2) add fixed damage modifier to your attack result, (3) compare to opponent-depenent "Toughness" DC, (4) note down Condition. No damage roll (previous step 2, which takes a lot of time but is also fun), subtracting DR from damage is replaced by adding a fixed amount to your own roll (easier step 3, as not opponent-dependent and it is easier to add up than subtract), and subtracting damage from hit points is replaced by a simpler comparison and condition-noting. The system also allows benefit to armor even when you're hit (armor still lowers the damage you suffer).

As someone pointed out on the WotC 4th Edition board, the Armour Class system as it stands now is deeply unsatisfying for players playing a heavily-armoured character since many monsters will still hit a fighter completely decked out in the best armour he can get at his level more than 50% of the time. Armour shouldn't be an "all-or-nothing" gamble. It wouldn't feel like it was useless half the time if it actually did something each time you were hit. As it is now, it just feels like a burdensome waste of GP.

I'm not familiar with that problem. Right now I'm playing at level 6, and the dwarf tank regularly sports an AC of 30, which makes all nigh impossible to hit. But it may be that things don't scale well.

 

[ArmoredSaint]

I just read the latest Design and Development article on Wizards.com; Armour Class is staying. It looks like I lose. Alas...

 

[Stalker0]

There's another problem with Armor as DR, and that's the fact it imbalances weapons even further. In dnd, you can play a guy with a greatsword or a guy with a rapier and both can do okay. But add in more DR and suddenly the rapier guys can't do squat.

4e may do what Saga did with armors. If they include a threshold system, higher armors will add to your threshold, meaning that while you take the same amount of damage it may have less of a traumatizing effect on you.