Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Poll: Historical Kit & realistic rules
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Elder-Basilisk" data-source="post: 1679026" data-attributes="member: 3146"><p>You're right that it's the kind of realism that gives systems a bad name. However, let's not pretend that a flanged mace, a wooden club, a quarterstaff, a flail, and a warhammer are equally effective against fullplate. One of the primary differences between a club and a mace is the mace's superior ability to penetrate armor. Nor should we pretend that an arming sword, a falchion, a battle axe, a greatsword, and a halberd are equally effective against fullplate. One of the reasons that falchions were developed was to better concentrate the force of a blow and to penetrate armor. Similarly, as I understand it, hand and a half swords developed when arming swords began to have greater difficulty penetrating armor.</p><p></p><p>Dividing weapon vs. armor effectiveness into slashing, bludgeoning, and piercing may be more complex than simply giving armor equal defense against all three categories but I don't see it as being any more realistic. Added complexity without added realism or playability is a bad thing in my book. Just because the 1e weapon vs. armor type chart was not conducive to play doesn't mean that the simpler classification system is an improvement. If the selling point of tracking three armor classes rather than one is realism, I want the system to actually be more realistic than what it replaces.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Fair enough. I guess I can see that. However, it seems like it would overly advantage two handed weapons unless it were coupled with adequate rules for shields. 3e is a lot better in that regard than previous editions but adding a 7.5' reach increment would be a big push back towards the previous editions where shields were really only good if they had massive magical bonusses.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Actually, I think swapping out power attack (and, to a lesser extent, cleave) would go a long way towards allaying some of my concerns. Power Attack is, IMO, the biggest failing of the armor as DR systems I've seen presented since, with 3.5 power attack an Unearthed Arcana style armor as DR system trades 4 points of AC from fullplate for 4 points of DR. This works fine until the barbarian with the greataxe power attacks for three, does more damage to you than before and still has a better chance of hitting than he did before. If you replace power attack with other feats, I think the resulting system probably has a better chance of being balanced.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I suppose so. It's really too bad these are being sold as a pdf. They're the kind of thing I'd want to pick up and read through in a store before making a purchasing decision rather than buying sight unseen.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Elder-Basilisk, post: 1679026, member: 3146"] You're right that it's the kind of realism that gives systems a bad name. However, let's not pretend that a flanged mace, a wooden club, a quarterstaff, a flail, and a warhammer are equally effective against fullplate. One of the primary differences between a club and a mace is the mace's superior ability to penetrate armor. Nor should we pretend that an arming sword, a falchion, a battle axe, a greatsword, and a halberd are equally effective against fullplate. One of the reasons that falchions were developed was to better concentrate the force of a blow and to penetrate armor. Similarly, as I understand it, hand and a half swords developed when arming swords began to have greater difficulty penetrating armor. Dividing weapon vs. armor effectiveness into slashing, bludgeoning, and piercing may be more complex than simply giving armor equal defense against all three categories but I don't see it as being any more realistic. Added complexity without added realism or playability is a bad thing in my book. Just because the 1e weapon vs. armor type chart was not conducive to play doesn't mean that the simpler classification system is an improvement. If the selling point of tracking three armor classes rather than one is realism, I want the system to actually be more realistic than what it replaces. Fair enough. I guess I can see that. However, it seems like it would overly advantage two handed weapons unless it were coupled with adequate rules for shields. 3e is a lot better in that regard than previous editions but adding a 7.5' reach increment would be a big push back towards the previous editions where shields were really only good if they had massive magical bonusses. Actually, I think swapping out power attack (and, to a lesser extent, cleave) would go a long way towards allaying some of my concerns. Power Attack is, IMO, the biggest failing of the armor as DR systems I've seen presented since, with 3.5 power attack an Unearthed Arcana style armor as DR system trades 4 points of AC from fullplate for 4 points of DR. This works fine until the barbarian with the greataxe power attacks for three, does more damage to you than before and still has a better chance of hitting than he did before. If you replace power attack with other feats, I think the resulting system probably has a better chance of being balanced. I suppose so. It's really too bad these are being sold as a pdf. They're the kind of thing I'd want to pick up and read through in a store before making a purchasing decision rather than buying sight unseen. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Poll: Historical Kit & realistic rules
Top