On Helms, AC and spell failure

[Ryujin]

Still doesn't work for me though. So at what point have you added enough armor that you gain some measure of protection a an AC bonus and some measure of either casting penalty or dex/movement penalty?

If I was dressing as a wizard in plate, it wouldn't effect me until I put the last piece, the helm on?

I know this may seem overly complicated but I'm trying to work out where and when AC bonuses and the negatives that come with armor actually get applied. Only when the whole thing is on? Do you get half of everything if you're wearing say, only the left side? Or the top? Or the bottom?



-Ben

You gain some measure of protection when you put on a SUIT of armour. If you're putting on a couple of things, like a helm and a (Michael Jackson style) single gauntlet, then you're neither helped nor harmed. It you start armouring-up limbs or torso, then all bets are off. You're being weighted down, while getting effectively no benefit from the armour.

Like most things in role playing, there isn't a hard and fast rule. Being a good GM frequently is no more than being able to think on your feet and make a ruling that won't come back to bite you later.

 

[Maidhc O Casain]

Never mind for now. Had an idea but the more I wrote about it the more I got lost in it.

Edit:

d20/Pathfinder doesn't really lend itself to hit location rules. Increasing the difficulty to hit a specific part of the body because it's more lightly armored sort of defeats the purpose (taking a -8 to hit the head in order to avoid the 4 points of armor on the rest of the body doesn't make much sense).

Off-Topic/Not of much use: I like the HERO System's treatment of armor. In this system, 'AC' is based on mobility/Dexterity etc. Armor doesn't make one harder to hit, it soaks up damage. Therefore, it sometimes makes sense to try to hit a specific target - even though the target number is harder - in order for more of your damage to get through to the body underneath.

That said, increased 'realism' makes for more cumbersome rules. There's a reason I play Pathfinder a LOT more than I play HERO.

 

[Kvantum]

The idea I've had regarding helms is that they might make it harder to confirm a critical threat against you. Sort of helping protect against head shots and the nasty amount of damage that those can do being equivalent to protecting against critical hits in game. Though you would take a Perception penalty from the helm as well as the bonus AC for critical threats, to offset the benefits.

 

[spaceLem]

Oops, posted this twice.

 

[spaceLem]

I'd definitely give at least a +1 AC bonus for wearing a helmet, as it protects the head, which is a well known vital spot. I'd also give a 5% arcane failure to go with it.

d20 doesn't really do called shots, as it just assumes you're aiming randomly, and the damage roll takes care of where you hit. Any armour presents you with a smaller target, and thus decreasing your chances of hitting (to be fair, armour does work partially like this). You can aim where you like but it's still more difficult to hit.

Full plate is assumed to include a helmet, however I wouldn't press the issue if you said that your particular armour didn't include a helmet. Of course you wouldn't get a +1 for adding one, and taking one off to give to a mage would lose you a point of AC.

Then again, if it was a helmet made of tin foil then you wouldn't get a bonus (except against government mind control rays).