Weapons as AC: It's about time...

[Gloombunny]

If you wanted to be realistic, then being unarmed should provoke an AoO every round from every enemy who can make one against you. I mean, AoOs are supposed to represent a person being open to attacks because they're casting a spell or rummaging in their bag or whatever instead of keeping the enemy at bay with a drawn weapon, right? If you don't have a weapon, then your enemy doesn't have to worry about leaving himself open by overcommitting to attacks, so he can just swing away with impunity. Of course, characters who threaten squares while unarmed wouldn't be subject to this rule.

(Of course, if you open up that can of realism worms, you have to start wondering why heavily-armored characters are threatened at all by enemies armed with most kinds of weapons, and why there's no option to take an extra attack in exchange for provoking AoOs, and so forth...)

 

[Aus_Snow]

What, what? Is that my house rules again? Harumph.

I've had it as a -4 penalty to Defence, for not being armed with a weapon you are proficient with. It's been that way for a fair while. It works fine.

But sure, go for -5. I mean, why not? Bah.

Oh yeah, I do also use a BDB (Base Defence Bonus) that is based on, but not equal to, BAB. I recommend something like that, too. It makes sense. In addition, there are feat chains for Attack Focus and for Defence Focus. This makes things a lot neater, as well.

Anyway. Enough of that, methinks.

 

[LostSoul]

I like Palladium Fantasy too.

 

[MarkB]

One way to do this would be: A character who does not threaten any squares (as defined in the rules for Attacks of Opportunity) takes a -4 penalty to AC versus the melee attacks of any character who does threaten his square.

Basically, if your weapon is good enough that you threaten for AoOs, it's also good enough to help you parry attacks.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

I'm confused about this thread.
What's the main idea here, to create a Base Defense Bonus or to create a mechanic so weapons give AC bonus?

They're the same thing, except would be always on, and the other would presumably only be active when the PC has a weapon in hand. I say go with BDB... many other games use this mechanic successfully.

 

[Thundershield]

It is indeed interesting to see a different approach to the system that will, at least at a first glance but also when toyed around with a bit, provide a more balanced way of increasing your defenses.

If BAB represents your basic fighting prowess, then why not have it represent one's ability to defend oneself? And as many suggest, armor could then provide some sort of damage migitation, should a blow connect after all.

One big flaw 3rd Edition always had, which became particularly noticeable at epic levels, was how AC and the spell's save DC couldn't keep up with BAB and Save Boni. At some point, players would have so insanely good BAB and Saves that magic was basically useless if it required a save (this trend started already at mid-levels), and boosting your AC was merely a way of avoiding iterative attacks, since the first attack always hit.

I would very much like to see some mending in that regard.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

IME, save boni were never overpowered. You targeted a weak save, and if you didn't know which was the weak save, you guessed. If it didn't work, try another save type... or Enervation.

 

[mcintma]

Hear, hear! Hate the way everything hits AC at mid-levels & up and the way 3.5 reduced options to heighten spell save DCs. Sounds like 4e will rectify the first (and I don't mind some fcn of either level or BAB adding to AC), now I hope they will address the latter.

 

[F4NBOY]

BAB represents defensive skill with the weapon you are using, as well as offensive.

What about ranged attacks? Magical attacks? Touch attacks? Unarmed attacks? Bites? Traps? Trip attacks?
What if a giant with a colossal great sword attacks you? Do you think your longsword should give you any defense against that tree-sized sword?

I've practiced a little fencing and I know how important a sword is defensively, but D&D is much greater than simple fencing duels.

I think the best way to represent that mechanically is creating a feat that gives anyone using a weapon, depending on the weapon, +1 parry bonus to AC against melee attackers.

In Arcana Evolved, some weapons give a AC bonus when you fight defensively. That works pretty well.

Or create a separate mechanic like the Block Talent from SWSE. You can make a Skill check to completely block a melee attack. The DC is the atackers roll. For each additional block in the round you gain a -5 penalty on the skill check. That's a REAL parry but in a game like D&D it would slow the game too much.

 

[teach]

What about ranged attacks? Magical attacks? Touch attacks? Unarmed attacks? Bites? Traps? Trip attacks?
What if a giant with a colossal great sword attacks you? Do you think your longsword should give you any defense against that tree-sized sword?

I've practiced a little fencing and I know how important a sword is defensively, but D&D is much greater than simple fencing duels.

I think the best way to represent that mechanically is creating a feat that gives anyone using a weapon, depending on the weapon, +1 parry bonus to AC against melee attackers.

In Arcana Evolved, some weapons give a AC bonus when you fight defensively. That works pretty well.

Or create a separate mechanic like the Block Talent from SWSE. You can make a Skill check to completely block a melee attack. The DC is the atackers roll. For each additional block in the round you gain a -5 penalty on the skill check. That's a REAL parry but in a game like D&D it would slow the game too much.

I like the idea of a skill roll mitigating it. Means that only some characters are trained enough to do more blocking of attacks than fighting defensively offers, and also the DC is related to something the attacker does.