What if AC didn't exist, and I used Reflex values instead?

[Daniel D. Fox]

What would be the net effect on the game between the classes if in fact I dumped AC as a value and used Reflex instead?

Undoubtedly, there are diminishing returns for wearing light/heavy armor, coupled with a shield and Dexterity bonus. In some cases, there isn't a real return for wearing heavy armor whatsover. I don't want to get too far into the weeds here (as I am thinking of using AC values for damage resistance or hit point), but I am attepting to determine what boost or cut classes will get if I used Reflex instead of AC.

Thanks in advance!

 

[weem]

Hmm.. off the top of my head I imagine a large/slow creature with a high AC, but low Reflex... Suddenly in your situation this creature is very easy to hit as attacks that WERE against AC (most attacks) are now against Reflex (which for this large/slow creature is lower than normal) whereas before, the creature may have taken a while to chop down trying to get through that armor.

--- edit ---

Of course this does not take into consideration anything else you may do with AC (such as damage reduction, etc - as you mentioned). In this case (using AC for damage reduction) I like the idea of it... not sure how well it could be implemented/balanced.

 

[Mentat55]

Powers that currently target Reflex instead of AC wouldn't be as good (e.g., Piercing Strike) and would need some sort of boost.

You'd also have to retool the weapon proficiency bonus, since I think weapon attack values would outplace Reflex defense as it currently stands. And similarly monster attacks vs. AC would need to be revised downwards slightly.

 

[Rafe]

Moniker, are you thinking of trying to implement the SW Saga paradigm in that there is no AC, only Reflex Defense? Just curious what is spurring the interest.

 

[Daniel D. Fox]

Moniker, are you thinking of trying to implement the SW Saga paradigm in that there is no AC, only Reflex Defense? Just curious what is spurring the interest.

I want to break the conventions of 4E. I want to dump tracking Healing Surges and use Second Wind for an Encounter power for all players, and I want a real return to wearing heavy armor for mechanical reasons. Light armors, when coupled with a shield, give better protection to high dexterity Fighters than those who wear heavy armors.

I want armor to mean something, and instead of using Healing Surges I am considering armor as HP bonus and/or Damage Reduction.

 

[Saeviomagy]

I want a real return to wearing heavy armor for mechanical reasons. Light armors, when coupled with a shield, give better protection to high dexterity Fighters than those who wear heavy armors.

So is your problem that you want a dextrous fighter to still wear heavy armor? In my experience it's a rare fighter that's going to be better off in light armor than heavy. Warlords and paladins can forget it.

As for damage reduction: adventurers vault has some variants of high level heavy armor that trade AC for damage reduction. I'm not entirely sure it's a great rule though.

 

[WalterKovacs]

If going with Reflex to act as AC you need to address:

(a) Most attacks against AC factor in armor/weapon prof. Put simply, most people would have leather/hide (+2/+3) bonuses to their armor, and most weapons give (+2/+3) bonuses to hit.

(b) Any weapon based power that attacks a non-AC defense has to factor in any change made via proficiency. Similarly, any non-weapon based power that attacks AC will have to factor in whatever change losing armor does.

(c) Certain classes do not have dex or int as a primary, or even secondary, stat. Clerics, Paladins, Barbarians, melee rangers, bravura/inspiring warlords, certain kinds of fighters (hammer or axe) would be severely punished in this system as they would often have very high AC but only ok Reflex. On the flip side, the Rogue's reflex is often as good as their AC, better if you have a racial bonus to reflex, until you get to masterwork armor ranges. Suddenly the rogue has the best AC in the party, and the defender has the worst.

(d) Part of the class to class balancing has to do with weapon and armor proficiencies. A Paladin is meant to have a great AC, but wants to pump just about every stat but DEX or INT.

Ultimately: Non-AC defenses are supposed to be attacked by implements that do not get prof bonuses, while AC defenses are supposed to be attacked by weapons. Meaning that, for the most part, AC should be 2 or 3 above ... and there will always be variations on that. The balancing of weapons has a lot to do with whether they give +2 or +3 as a prof bonus.

Also, replacing AC with Reflex just makes Reflex even more important than it already is. It's pretty much the second most targetted defense by monsters, so this would make a large majority of monster powers going after a single defence making increasing that defense a priority over all other options ... making a paladin or fighter or ranger pumping str and wis a character that is going to fall behind.

 

[DracoSuave]

A lot of this is based on the assumption that heavy armor should be better than light armor just because it's heavy. This wasn't true in D&D 3rd, and it's not true in 4th. The two armor types should be -about- equivalent. Heavy armor is how non-dex/int characters get an AC defense. Remove AC, and you heavily nerf the people who you're intending to boost.

This is counter-intuitive.

 

[chitzk0i]

In SW Saga, physical attacks actually target Fortitude and armor gives a bonus to the same. It works out OK because nobody in the Star Wars films uses weapons that aren't blasters or lightsabers. You just don't see enough attacks against AC in Star Wars to justify having that stat.

I just don't see what you would gain from folding AC into something else.

Also, why isn't this in the house rules forum?

 

[Plane Sailing]

Moved to house rules.