Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7421183" data-attributes="member: 996">Damage per attack doesn't climb quite as fast as hps in 5e, the idea is you'll attack more often and hit /even more often/, so a climbing AC would presumably leave weapon attacks and attack cantrips trailing.&nbsp; You'd want to reduce the armor bonuses by more than 2, if you're basing it on proficiency in armor.&nbsp; You might, instead, bring proficiency in for more active defense, like dodging, or a limited AC for attacks you're aware of...If you don't mind the complexity of 3e-style multiple ACs, you could even go with something like:&nbsp; Armor would be passive AC, it's always there for you.Proficiency + whatever would be when you're actively defending yourself in whatever sense, and could be 8+prof+stat for say, parrying with a weapon.&nbsp; 10 + prof + stat for a shield.&nbsp; When you're say, engaged with a target you can see, you get to use your armor AC, or your proficiency AC, whichever is higher.&nbsp; At range your weapon proficiency (probably) doesn't help (a high level feature for arrow-cutting maybe?), but 10+prof+stat for a shield wouldn't be crazy.&nbsp;&nbsp; If you use your action for defense the enemy has to hit both (kinda like disadvantage).&nbsp; Since your Armor should usually give you better AC than your prof in this hypothetical system, it could be later-game complexity that you add in if people start /asking/ &quot;hey, why am I not getting better at avoiding being hit?&quot;&nbsp;&nbsp; Of course, the old standby &quot;that's reflected in your hps&quot; is always there, too. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7421183, member: 996"] Damage per attack doesn't climb quite as fast as hps in 5e, the idea is you'll attack more often and hit /even more often/, so a climbing AC would presumably leave weapon attacks and attack cantrips trailing. You'd want to reduce the armor bonuses by more than 2, if you're basing it on proficiency in armor. You might, instead, bring proficiency in for more active defense, like dodging, or a limited AC for attacks you're aware of... If you don't mind the complexity of 3e-style multiple ACs, you could even go with something like: Armor would be passive AC, it's always there for you. Proficiency + whatever would be when you're actively defending yourself in whatever sense, and could be 8+prof+stat for say, parrying with a weapon. 10 + prof + stat for a shield. When you're say, engaged with a target you can see, you get to use your armor AC, or your proficiency AC, whichever is higher. At range your weapon proficiency (probably) doesn't help (a high level feature for arrow-cutting maybe?), but 10+prof+stat for a shield wouldn't be crazy. If you use your action for defense the enemy has to hit both (kinda like disadvantage). Since your Armor should usually give you better AC than your prof in this hypothetical system, it could be later-game complexity that you add in if people start /asking/ "hey, why am I not getting better at avoiding being hit?" Of course, the old standby "that's reflected in your hps" is always there, too. ;) [/QUOTE]

Verification