How well does Armor as Damage Reduction work?

[Krafen]

Good point - UA doesn't mention that (unless I missed it).

I'm playing Iron Heroes currently and it's got a very interesting system, although rolling DR for each hit gets a little annoying (and hard for some players to remember a little later in the gaming evening). On the positive side, it give players something to do rather than just record damage: a negative is that it slows things down a bit as the DM has to do the same when the bad guys are hit.

I've decided on using the UA system for AC/DR and am thinking whether I should add a way for a character to increase his/her AC beyond the standard PHB rules of fighting defensively. I'm not opposed to a class defense bonus, but I'd like to do something else than just a flat AC bonus.

What do folks think of adding a move action called "Actively Defending" that grants a bonus to the character's AC (but not DR) equal to their BAB (base attack bonus)? As a move action, using this would preclude full attacks at higher levels - essentially a character could make a full action, all out attack with two or more attacks (in the case of two weapons or a BAB of +6 or higher) or could fight conservatively with a single attack (or standard action, such as cast a spell) and gain a significant bonus to AC for the round?

(I don't know if another gaming system uses this option; if so, I'm curious how it works).

Interesting idea, although it really belongs in the house rules section. I think applying a character's full BAB to AC would be too much, though. Perhaps half their BAB or maybe a bonus depending on how many attacks they are giving up; +2 or +3 per attack.

 

[comareddin]

I do not know if this will help with ruling mechanics but as a historical side-note in real life full plate armor gave you almost total immumity from every sort of attack. The only things that could penetrate were longbows, crossbows and maybe a lance charge. Everything else (sword swings, rocks, etc...) just bounced off harmlessly. The order of Teutonic Knights frequently employed by the Catholic Church to wipe out pagans used full plate armor to vicious efficiency.

Com

 

[Cam Banks]

I do not know if this will help with ruling mechanics but as a historical side-note in real life full plate armor gave you almost total immumity from every sort of attack.

Yeah, because that's fun and exciting in a fantasy RPG. If full plate did that in D&D, everybody and their dog would be wearing it.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[Nim]

I do not know if this will help with ruling mechanics but as a historical side-note in real life full plate armor gave you almost total immumity from every sort of attack. The only things that could penetrate were longbows, crossbows and maybe a lance charge. Everything else (sword swings, rocks, etc...) just bounced off harmlessly. The order of Teutonic Knights frequently employed by the Catholic Church to wipe out pagans used full plate armor to vicious efficiency.

No.

A careful look at the medieval arms race will show you that weapons generally didn't lag very far behind armor. Just about every advance in armor technology was soon followed by weapons intended to counter it. The armor DID stay ahead until the advent of firearms, but it certainly didn't grant 'almost total immunity'. For instance: late medieval warhammers were a specific response to full plate, intended to either cave it in or pierce it with the pick on the reverse side.

And of course, even a full plate harness isn't a containment suit. Armoring locations like the insides of joints (the backs of the kness, the insides of the elbows) is very difficult with period tech if you want to retain mobility. So even the best suit of armor would have weak points.

In D&D terms, plate armor offers excellent protection against slashing attacks. It offers less protection against a strong piercing attack. A 'strong' piercing attack in this context is either the longbows and crossbows you mentioned (high velocity), the lance (huge mass behind the charge), or a swung piercing weapon (like a pick. And a sufficiently strong bludgeoning attack will deform the armor, which doesn't do anything good to the body inside. Unlike the illustration in the PHB, real warhammer heads had a very small face - about 1 inch square, and they weren't flat. That's a lot of force in a small area.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

Good point - UA doesn't mention that (unless I missed it).

In our Planescape game, which used Armor as DR, the DM decided that he just couldn't see breaking Bracers and Mage Armor's armor bonus into DR. I can see it either way.

Personally, I don't like Armor as DR. The piddling DR I get by exchanging part of my Armor and Natural Armor bonus to AC just makes it that much easier to be hit, which means more damage will get through in the long run. I'd rather not be hit in the first place, thank you.

Brad