Max Dex bonus restricts Dex to attack rolls.
- Thread starter wuyanei
- Start date
Nyaricus
First Post
A (helpful??) house rule
a house rule I have considered using from a previous post is instead of having ACP (minus number for skills, etc) is that number goes directly against your Dex penalty. the max Dex bonus is only of consequence if you can raise your total Dex bonus high enough to compensate for your negative penalty for your ACP (basically re-named dexterity penalty).
example? here’s one. Your fighter has 13 Dex and is wearing some Fullplate. Normally, he gets +8 AC and +1 Dex to AC, and has a ACP(/DP) of -6. Instead, using the system explained above, he gets +8 AC, and gains a penalty of -6 Dex (which is now treated as being 7) and he still has a Max Dex of +1. Now, this is the tricky part, so read closely. Since the Fighter has –6 Dex, he needs to raise his Dex to a whopping 19 to gain his +1 Dex. 19-6 DP is 13 = +1 Dex bonus to AC. The Fighters virtual Dex was lowered when wearing the armour to 7 from 13, so thus he needs 19 Dex to be lowered to 13 to gain his bonus while wearing it. Of course, what with lighter armous probably being more optimal with his 19 Dex, he’d probably go for those instead; that is why I would use the Armours AC = DR system (when i try this HR out). Want more DR? Sure; but your Dex bonus is going to Hades.
Overall, this is a more realistic system than what is presented in the PHB, and also solves your Dex penalty question. Thoughts on this?
a house rule I have considered using from a previous post is instead of having ACP (minus number for skills, etc) is that number goes directly against your Dex penalty. the max Dex bonus is only of consequence if you can raise your total Dex bonus high enough to compensate for your negative penalty for your ACP (basically re-named dexterity penalty).
example? here’s one. Your fighter has 13 Dex and is wearing some Fullplate. Normally, he gets +8 AC and +1 Dex to AC, and has a ACP(/DP) of -6. Instead, using the system explained above, he gets +8 AC, and gains a penalty of -6 Dex (which is now treated as being 7) and he still has a Max Dex of +1. Now, this is the tricky part, so read closely. Since the Fighter has –6 Dex, he needs to raise his Dex to a whopping 19 to gain his +1 Dex. 19-6 DP is 13 = +1 Dex bonus to AC. The Fighters virtual Dex was lowered when wearing the armour to 7 from 13, so thus he needs 19 Dex to be lowered to 13 to gain his bonus while wearing it. Of course, what with lighter armous probably being more optimal with his 19 Dex, he’d probably go for those instead; that is why I would use the Armours AC = DR system (when i try this HR out). Want more DR? Sure; but your Dex bonus is going to Hades.
Overall, this is a more realistic system than what is presented in the PHB, and also solves your Dex penalty question. Thoughts on this?
genshou
First Post
That's why we have the House Rules forum (my favorite forum, of coursewuyanei said:As for your second point, you are right. I don't really expect it to affect many characters. It is just something that I believe *should* exist, but somehow doesn't exist in the RAW. Personally, I just think it makes more sense this way.
Thanks for sharing your opinions!
).The problem with having Dex-based skills limited by Max Dex is that–with the exception of Ride–they are already suffering an armour check penalty based on the type of armor you are wearing. Always always always avoid doing double duty like this. If there's already a penalty to Dex-based skills and Str-based movement skills for wearing armor, don't add another one.
As for the other stuff, I don't think it's a good idea. Dexterity represents accuracy and you don't lose any when wearing armor. Guys in heavy armor can still throw axes just as well as if they were unarmored, at least IME.
I believe that ACP deals with skills while MaxDex deals with combat. That is why I left Dex Mod to skills alone in the house rule I proposed. Adding another peanlity to skills is indeed redundant. However....genshou said:
Hmm... I confess that I have no experience in throwing axes/javalins or shooting arrows when wearing armor. Wouldn't the rigidness of the plate armor affect things such as the overhead throw? Wouldn't the elbow joint on full-plate intefere with aiming a bow? Wouldn't wearing a metal gauntlet negatively intefere with nocking and shooting an arrow? If not, I would find the answer most surprising.
I would really like to hear you elaborate on this subject. I think I have a chance to learn something new here, and I really hope to do so.
Thanks for replying!
Yanei Wu
Nyaricus
First Post
wuyanei said:
Max Dex is just a number that WotC added in so that the AC+Dex would never be more than (approximately) the number nine (9). ACP as a dex penalty makes perfect sense - since for those skills, its already a virtual negative. Ponder over the system i proposed, and you may learn something there - i certainly did when i first heard about it in another thread
ThirdWizard
First Post
I don't like this idea. For one, it takes away one of the few benefits Dex has for heavy armored combatants, leaving only, that I can think of, Reflex saves and Initiative, both arguably less imporant than ranged attack bonus.
Also, dex based combatants, archers and the like, are less likely to have high Strength, making them much more easily encumbered. Making encumbrance penalties to dex apply to attack as well as AC inhibits them more than, I think, is necessary.
It's actually very clearly only AC...
Also, dex based combatants, archers and the like, are less likely to have high Strength, making them much more easily encumbered. Making encumbrance penalties to dex apply to attack as well as AC inhibits them more than, I think, is necessary.
domino said:
It's actually very clearly only AC...
SRD said:
I've been using a house rule very much like this, since 3.0 and now carried over into 3.5.
The wording of my house rule is as follows...
Max. Dex Bonus applies to anything and everything that involves Dexterity, including your AC, your initiative, your attack with ranged weapons, your attack with melee weapons while using the Weapon Finesse feat, your Reflex saves, and your Dex-based skill checks.
The wording of my house rule is as follows...
Max. Dex Bonus applies to anything and everything that involves Dexterity, including your AC, your initiative, your attack with ranged weapons, your attack with melee weapons while using the Weapon Finesse feat, your Reflex saves, and your Dex-based skill checks.
ThirdWizard said:
Dex-based combatants are also less likely to be wearing heavy armor; historically, both in the real world and in fantasy role-playing worlds. I've yet to see an archer, a musketeer, or a swashbuckler wearing full plate armor, and even a ranger in same armor is a pretty rare occurance. Even samurai, who were certainly archers, did not really wear "heavy" armor. (Also, note the open-face helms of samurai armor, which did not interfere with their field of vision as did the closed-face, vented helms of European knights.)
Murrdox
First Post
Stupidest House-Rule ever, besides removing the 5' step.
Sorry, I have a bit of hostility towards this one, because I was forced to PLAY under it by my friend who started DMing (usually I'm the DM) and he sprung it on us about 3 sessions into the adventure.
The rule lasted 2 sessions before he gave up, and agreed it didn't make sense.
Max-Dex bonus is something that is supposed to balance out characters that don't wear heavy armor, but still allow them to dodge attacks. It is there so that you cannot both wear a tremendous suit of Full-Plate, AND be a speedy character stacked on top.
You have the full-plate knight AC route, where you rely on armor,
and then you have the stealthy rogue or swift monk AC route where you rely on personal abilities.
The max-dex was not put into the game with a thought towards balancing saving throws or attack rolls. It didn't make the game "more realistic" or "more fun" when we added this rule. All it did was make my ranged combat character much less effective in combat, and make me want to create a different character, because I couldn't hit crap compared to anyone else in the group.
In the campaign where I had created an Archer, my first Ranger...
it made me SOOO happy that the fighter could get Bull's Strength, and I couldn't get the DEX equivalent.
It made me VERY happy that the fighter could get Gauntlets of Ogre Strength to increase his attack and his damage, but I couldn't do anything similar with Dex.
The party witnessed it, It pissed me off, and it was changed. My to-hit bonus was something like a full 6 points LOWER than anyone else in the party, and I had 3-4 feats completely devoted to ranged combat.
Sorry, I have a bit of hostility towards this one, because I was forced to PLAY under it by my friend who started DMing (usually I'm the DM) and he sprung it on us about 3 sessions into the adventure.
The rule lasted 2 sessions before he gave up, and agreed it didn't make sense.
Max-Dex bonus is something that is supposed to balance out characters that don't wear heavy armor, but still allow them to dodge attacks. It is there so that you cannot both wear a tremendous suit of Full-Plate, AND be a speedy character stacked on top.
You have the full-plate knight AC route, where you rely on armor,
and then you have the stealthy rogue or swift monk AC route where you rely on personal abilities.
The max-dex was not put into the game with a thought towards balancing saving throws or attack rolls. It didn't make the game "more realistic" or "more fun" when we added this rule. All it did was make my ranged combat character much less effective in combat, and make me want to create a different character, because I couldn't hit crap compared to anyone else in the group.
In the campaign where I had created an Archer, my first Ranger...
it made me SOOO happy that the fighter could get Bull's Strength, and I couldn't get the DEX equivalent.
It made me VERY happy that the fighter could get Gauntlets of Ogre Strength to increase his attack and his damage, but I couldn't do anything similar with Dex.
The party witnessed it, It pissed me off, and it was changed. My to-hit bonus was something like a full 6 points LOWER than anyone else in the party, and I had 3-4 feats completely devoted to ranged combat.
