Weapon Penetration

[Scupper]

One of the things that kind of trips me up in D&D3e is the absence of weapon penetration. A fighter has just as good a chance of wounding a dragon with a dagger as he does with a greatsword. An archer can shoot right through platemail, etc.

Can somebody tell me either: 1) What system they would use to represent variable penetration or 2) Why I shouldn't consider this a fault with the system?

Thanks.

 

[Crothian]

Well, it is there in the form of AC, DR, and hardness of objects. It really depends on what one is trying to pentrate.

 

[Scupper]

Yeah, but AC doesn't factor into it. The weapon used has no bearing on whether or not it can damage a given AC.

Hardness would be appropriate, except that it mainly applies to inanimate objects, generally speaking.

I'm talking purely about combat, here.

I saw another thread discussing using a DR mechanic, so I may look at that. The question remains whether the designers just didn't think it was important and if so, why not?

 

[Crothian]

What hardness is to inanimate objects, DR is to animate objects.

In your examples Dragons have DR so that is what determiones if a dagger or greatsword hurts it.

Arrow going through platemail is a hardness issue.

 

[Scupper]

But DR is a magical ability. It's not modeling the toughness of a dragon's hide, per se. Otherwise, wouldn't a T-Rex have DR?

If a T-Rex has no DR, then the game mechanic suggests that it is no harder to cut through a T-Rex's hide with a dagger than it is with a greatsword.

And even with the dragon, the implication is that it's no harder to wound with a +3 dagger than it is with a +3 greatsword.

It's not really the protection that is the issue, but rather the reduction of all weapons to a scale of damage that has little or no bearing on the ability of those weapons to actually damage the target in question.

 

[Angcuru]

One of the things that kind of trips me up in D&D3e is the absence of weapon penetration. A fighter has just as good a chance of wounding a dragon with a dagger as he does with a greatsword. An archer can shoot right through platemail, etc.

Can somebody tell me either: 1) What system they would use to represent variable penetration or 2) Why I shouldn't consider this a fault with the system?

Thanks.

The system works fine the way it is. You use different weapons in different ways against different types of armor. I.E. you arent't stabbing through the dragon's scales, you're slipping the blade underneath them. You aren't shooting an arrow through the acutal metal plates themselves(most of the time), but rather hitting the chinks in the armor, slipping by the plates, etc.

And while I think the HP system is a bit wierd in 3rd edition, I use it as a point for my argument. HP is not completely how much punishment a body can take before failing, but a combination of extreme fatigue, bodily endurance, ability to dodge blades, and a lot of other things. I.E. While a strike of 18 damage could split a lvl 1 fighter in half, the lvl 6 fighter is only slightly wounded, but is also a bit winded, and lightheaded. He can stand only a few of those strikes, getting more disoriented and less able to avoid the lethal effects of attacks that connect with him, until he starts taking heavy wounds and eventually croaks. I.E. Smacking that dragon with your +3 Thundering War Hammer at first doesn't so much heavily damage his body as wear him down, tire him out. The progressive hits wear him down to the point where he's really tired out and starts taking the heavy hits as big wounds instead of getting a bit winded.

the game mechanic suggests that it is no harder to cut through a T-Rex's hide with a dagger than it is with a greatsword.

The dagger focuses all it's energy on a single point, better piercing hide but doing far less damage than a greatsword, which focuses far more energy into a long line on the body, hitting a greater surface area and perhaps lot inflicing as deep a wound as the dagger, but a far larger wound.

Etc. Etc.

 

[Crothian]

But DR is a magical ability. It's not modeling the toughness of a dragon's hide, per se. Otherwise, wouldn't a T-Rex have DR?

If a T-Rex has no DR, then the game mechanic suggests that it is no harder to cut through a T-Rex's hide with a dagger than it is with a greatsword.

And even with the dragon, the implication is that it's no harder to wound with a +3 dagger than it is with a +3 greatsword.

It's not really the protection that is the issue, but rather the reduction of all weapons to a scale of damage that has little or no bearing on the ability of those weapons to actually damage the target in question.

DR is not magical or else barbarians are a very magical class. And this also goes back to AC because of Natural AC bonuses.

 

[Coredump]

I understand your point. Back in the days of 1e, they had modifiers depending on the weapon vs. armour type. It was the mechanic that dealt with what you are talking about. (ie. it made chainmail less useful against a mace than against a sword)

In general, while most people liked the idea, I don't know of anyone that actually used it. The reason is simlicity and accuracy. Ignoring that mechanic greatly simplifies the system, trying to use it brings up all sorts of problems if you try to be accurate.

It is similar to weapon speed, a great concept, but hard to get a system that is realistic, and not be as cumbersome as Morrow Project.

.

 

[Scupper]

... a great concept, but hard to get a system that is realistic, and not be as cumbersome as Morrow Project.

Yeah, or GURPS. Point taken.

 

[CCamfield]

I was sort of thinking about this after reading the initial post earlier. (Actually, I was thinking about how you might incorporate weapon reach.) But if you gave larger weapons a bonus to penetrate or for reach on top of higher damage, it'd be overkill. So, wacky idea though this is, you could reduce all damage to about 1d4 or 1d6, and give weapons which currently have a higher damage value a corresponding bonus to hit - because their larger reach and better ability to penetrate means they'll get in hits more often. (1d8 = +1, 1d10 = +2, etc)