Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 8165162" data-attributes="member: 93670">Thanks, but that's still not really defined &amp; basically just another example of legacy cruft in the 5e mm lacking the parts that made it have purpose. Nothing in 5e treats thst 16 natural armor different from 16 from some other source.&nbsp; If it puts on armor with less than 16 ac it still has 16 ac.&nbsp; If it puts on armor with more than 16 ac it has exactly the same ac as that armor.&nbsp; Compare that to the 3.5 vampire[spoiler='&quot;3.5 vampire'][ATTACH=full]130974[/ATTACH][/spoiler]Touchac &amp; flat footed ac were currently irrelevant 3.5 situational things mostly used by spells &amp; when surprised &amp; a few other things so can be ignored ac23(+3 Dex, +6 Natural, +4 masterwork chain) however is all meaningful information.&nbsp; That +3 dex is useful because it shows how much of his 17dex bonus adds to ac after armor (there were creatures with a dex bonus too big for their armor but used the armor anyways for whatever creature specific reason) sometimes it mattered suc as if an incorporeal creature was attacking or a pc was using a... blazing energy(?) weapon.&nbsp; That +4 mw chain was important because it shows the vampire was wearing armor &amp; how much of the ac comes from that armor, ac16 (natural armor) in 5e is a waste of 15ish characters to say nothing of value however &amp; says nothing about if that 16 ac is cming from armor his dex a spell hard skin or whatever.&nbsp; The 3.5 +6 natural armor is meaningful because it show what happens if barkskin of various levels is cast on the vampire or if the vampire has a +N natural armor item and combined with&nbsp; the dex mod shows his ac if surprised naked in bed or whatever.By pointlessly applying &quot;natural armor&quot; to the entire ac calculation 5e actually thwarts the GM's ability to homebrew things by doing something like changing incorporeal&nbsp; attackers, what certain spells target, or how specific magic items interact with different types of armor.&nbsp; It's not as if there isn't room to differentiate or that they don't differentiate anything either.&nbsp; Take this [spoiler=&quot;5e mm166 example&quot;][ATTACH=full]130976[/ATTACH][/spoiler]I added the missing bits to the armor class line in a larger font &amp; still had ample room remaining then below typed out the full thing in the same or close font/size &amp; again had plenty of room left over.&nbsp; Breaking it down by type &amp; adding it together rather than ust taking the largest also means that you can have nice things that differentiate like [spoiler=&quot;this&quot;][ATTACH=full]130977[/ATTACH][/spoiler]They aren't the only templates that differentiate like that, just some of the first ones I found searching for the word template &amp; looking at their effect on natural armor.&nbsp; Just because wotc did something silly that doesn't add anything isn't a good reason to continue the silliness when it can be fixed &amp; improve things without hurting anything.&nbsp; If a particular GM just wants simple, they get that too just by ignoring everything in the parentheses &amp; just looking at this part from a creature that had ac16 in 3.5 (the orca) [ATTACH=full]130979[/ATTACH]</blockquote>

[QUOTE="tetrasodium, post: 8165162, member: 93670"] Thanks, but that's still not really defined & basically just another example of legacy cruft in the 5e mm lacking the parts that made it have purpose. Nothing in 5e treats thst 16 natural armor different from 16 from some other source. If it puts on armor with less than 16 ac it still has 16 ac. If it puts on armor with more than 16 ac it has exactly the same ac as that armor. Compare that to the 3.5 vampire [spoiler='"3.5 vampire'] [ATTACH type="full"]130974[/ATTACH][/spoiler] Touchac & flat footed ac were currently irrelevant 3.5 situational things mostly used by spells & when surprised & a few other things so can be ignored ac23(+3 Dex, +6 Natural, +4 masterwork chain) however is all meaningful information. That +3 dex is useful because it shows how much of his 17dex bonus adds to ac after armor[I] (there were creatures with a dex bonus too big for their armor but used the armor anyways for whatever creature specific reason) [/I]sometimes it mattered suc as if an incorporeal creature was attacking or a pc was using a... blazing energy(?) weapon. That +4 mw chain was important because it shows the vampire was wearing armor & how much of the ac comes from that armor, ac16 (natural armor) in 5e is a waste of 15ish characters to say nothing of value however & says nothing about if that 16 ac is cming from armor his dex a spell hard skin or whatever. The 3.5 +6 natural armor is meaningful because it show what happens if barkskin of various levels is cast on the vampire or if the vampire has a +N natural armor item and combined with the dex mod shows his ac if surprised naked in bed or whatever. By pointlessly applying "natural armor" to the entire ac calculation 5e actually thwarts the GM's ability to homebrew things by doing something like changing incorporeal attackers, what certain spells target, or how specific magic items interact with different types of armor. It's not as if there isn't room to differentiate or that they don't differentiate anything either. Take this [spoiler="5e mm166 example"] [ATTACH type="full"]130976[/ATTACH] [/spoiler] I added the missing bits to the armor class line in a larger font & still had ample room remaining then below typed out the full thing in the same or close font/size & again had plenty of room left over. Breaking it down by type & adding it together rather than ust taking the largest also means that you can have nice things that differentiate like [spoiler="this"] [ATTACH type="full"]130977[/ATTACH] [/spoiler]They aren't the only templates that differentiate like that, just some of the first ones I found searching for the word template & looking at their effect on natural armor. Just because wotc did something silly that doesn't add anything isn't a good reason to continue the silliness when it can be fixed & improve things without hurting anything. If a particular GM just wants simple, they get that too just by ignoring everything in the parentheses & just looking at this part from a creature that had ac16 in 3.5 (the orca) [ATTACH type="full"]130979[/ATTACH] [/QUOTE]

Verification