Please rate Chink in the Armor

[smetzger]

Chink in the Armor [General]
REQ: Expertise

If you take a standard action to study an opponent, you can ignore half of his or her armor bonus (rounded down) during your next single attack. Only bonuses from actual armor (including natural armor) are halved, not those from shields, enhancements bonuses on armor, or magic items that provide armor bonuses. Song and Silence, pg 38.

 

[the Jester]

You lose a round for a bonus on a single attack... not too hot, if you ask me. I guess if the armor was some sort of hooptie gnarly stuff that gave a +22 armor bonus before enhancements it might be worthwhile sometimes, but I give it a 4... and a low one at that.

 

[Darklone]

Depends if your DM likes to throw monster at the group that have an AC of 20+to hit of the rogue...

 

[Celebrim]

It is a solitary rogue/assasin feat and not much else. Even then, it is primarily useful against creatures with high natural armors. Still, a occasionally getting +4 or higher bonus to hit on your sneak attack isn't entirely useless, though I would expect that given that the 'game' part of RPG encourages group play that it is more often a NPC feat than a PC feat.

 

[aliensex]

I gave it a 5. It's a pretty good ability, but limited in it's uses. Definately only a "strike from the shadows" kind of ability. Cool for a hidden Rogue or Assassin for one big strike, but in general combat, I'd rather Bluff (if I'm not already flanking).

 

[Benben]

Good For

• Snipers.
• Assassins
• Backstabing dragons and other creatures with insane natural armor bonuses.

It works for melee and ranged as written, which bumps it from a 3 to a 4.

 

[Kemrain]

I've played and ran games where armor bonuses were changed into DR, so for that type of game, this feat is quite usefull. However, it isn't making them easier to hit, it's making them easier to deal full damage to. Plate armor gives a DR of 8, so reducing that to 4 can make a short sword a viable weapon against a knight. It may not be useful in vanilla D&D, but in Grim and Gritty games (Not to mention games like d20 Star Wars) bypassing armor can mean the difference between a hit for no damage and a kill.

I gave it an 8, to tip the scale.

- Kemrain the Unarmored

 

[Celebrim]

Somehow I thought the rating was versus some consistant standard and not just any hypothetical rules set one might choose to use.

 

[Kemrain]

I thought it was personal preference. Since I prefer to see things from the perspective of the games I play, I voted accordingly. If I should have been looking it at from the persepctive of vanilla D&D, I apologise. Had I known that this was the case, I would not have taken the poll.

- Kemrain

 

[Angcuru]

I've played and ran games where armor bonuses were changed into DR, so for that type of game, this feat is quite usefull. However, it isn't making them easier to hit, it's making them easier to deal full damage to. Plate armor gives a DR of 8, so reducing that to 4 can make a short sword a viable weapon against a knight. It may not be useful in vanilla D&D, but in Grim and Gritty games (Not to mention games like d20 Star Wars) bypassing armor can mean the difference between a hit for no damage and a kill.

That's a good point, this adds a bit of realism that D&D is so lacking. But then again, if you're stabbing a chink in the armor, you're going at a gap in their armor, which when successfully hit, would allow for no armor DR.

EX.

Knight in full plate is being attacked from behind by a rogue with a short sword. The Rogue targets a chink in the Knight's armor, the unprotected spot beneath hit arms(armpits), and succesfully put his blade in the knight's ribcage, completely bypassing the armor. So....how would you justify the DR still being applied, even IF halved?