Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="JohnSnow" data-source="post: 3439881" data-attributes="member: 32164">I wouldn't do it in a system where you weren't using class bonus to defense.If you are using a system where there's a meaningful class bonus to defense (such as Iron Heroes), it might make combat more dynamic. There'd be a more active feel to defense. On average, it wouldn't change, but it would leave open the possibility (however remote) of a low-level noob taking out the high-level character. Consider (I'll use Iron Heroes classes for the example):A is a Man-at-Arms 12 (Atk: Longsword +18, Def: +17 (flat-footed +3))B is a Man-at-Arms 1 (Atk: Longsword +5, Def: +6 (flat-footed +3))I'm assuming each character has a longsword and heavy shield (+3 to defense), and has devoted a reasonable number of feats to those (given their levels). For simplicity, I've given A 3 levels of Weapon Focus &amp; Shield Mastery (+3 to hit &amp; to active defense), and devoted 2 of B's feats to acquiring 1 of each (+1 to hit and defense). That means A's devoted slightly about 1/2 his feats (6/12) to these two areas, whereas B's used 2 of his 3 starting feats. Which is about right, given their level differences.&nbsp; Assume both characters have Str 16 (+3) &amp; Dex 13 (+1). With static defense (10 + bonus), B's only chance to hit A is to roll a 20 (5%). A can't miss (100%).With rolling for defense, B can hit A as long as he beats A's roll by 12. Which, while not a very good chance of success, is better than 5%. By contrast, A can hit B unless B beats his roll by 12. Which isn't very likely, but it's better than no chance at all.Assuming they're both wearing full plate (DR 1d8), this fight could actually take a couple rounds.Now, if A starts pulling out his other feats, B's probably still screwed. But that's as it should be. At least without the tricks, he's got a fighting chance.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="JohnSnow, post: 3439881, member: 32164"] I wouldn't do it in a system where you weren't using class bonus to defense. If you are using a system where there's a meaningful class bonus to defense (such as [i]Iron Heroes[/i]), it might make combat more dynamic. There'd be a more active feel to defense. On average, it wouldn't change, but it would leave open the possibility (however remote) of a low-level noob taking out the high-level character. Consider (I'll use [i]Iron Heroes[/i] classes for the example): A is a Man-at-Arms 12 (Atk: Longsword +18, Def: +17 (flat-footed +3)) B is a Man-at-Arms 1 (Atk: Longsword +5, Def: +6 (flat-footed +3)) I'm assuming each character has a longsword and heavy shield (+3 to defense), and has devoted a reasonable number of feats to those (given their levels). For simplicity, I've given A 3 levels of Weapon Focus & Shield Mastery (+3 to hit & to active defense), and devoted 2 of B's feats to acquiring 1 of each (+1 to hit and defense). That means A's devoted slightly about 1/2 his feats (6/12) to these two areas, whereas B's used 2 of his 3 starting feats. Which is about right, given their level differences. Assume both characters have Str 16 (+3) & Dex 13 (+1). With static defense (10 + bonus), B's only chance to hit A is to roll a 20 (5%). A can't miss (100%). With rolling for defense, B can hit A as long as he beats A's roll by 12. Which, while not a very good chance of success, is better than 5%. By contrast, A can hit B unless B beats his roll by 12. Which isn't very likely, but it's better than no chance at all. Assuming they're both wearing full plate (DR 1d8), this fight could actually take a couple rounds. Now, if A starts pulling out his other feats, B's probably still screwed. But that's as it should be. At least without the tricks, he's got a fighting chance. [/QUOTE]

Verification