D&D 5E What's up with the Net?

[Hriston]

Anyone care to rationalize why it's harder to ensnare a target wearing plate with a net than it is to hit an unarmored target. Is it just me or should the net get a bonus on attack rolls against higher AC? It's not like it does any damage anyway. Your thoughts?

 

[S'mon]

It would probably work best as a DEX saving throw vs attacker (DC 8+DEX mod + Prof).

 

[Hriston]

It would probably work best as a DEX saving throw vs attacker (DC 8+DEX mod + Prof).

Sure. You could also set the DC with the attack roll, but that's sort of messy. My thinking is since AC is sort of a passive Dex check plus a possible bonus if armor is worn anyway, why not negate the armor bonus by giving the net an equal bonus on the attack roll? I don't think wearing armor's going to help you avoid a net in any case. If anything it's going to impeded your movement. A Dex save is good, but AC already models this by limiting or reducing your Dex bonus to AC for medium and heavy armor.

 

[Rune]

I think it's a good approach. Especially since, without feat support or some source of advantage, you'll always be using it at disadvantage, anyway.

 

[Horwath]

I would rule that you attack vs. static AC of 10. if you hit target roll dex save vs. your DC.
if your attack is a critical hit target gets no save.

 

[Dausuul]

Sure. You could also set the DC with the attack roll, but that's sort of messy. My thinking is since AC is sort of a passive Dex check plus a possible bonus if armor is worn anyway, why not negate the armor bonus by giving the net an equal bonus on the attack roll?

Why do that instead of a Dex save?

 

[dmnqwk]

I like the idea of using a Dex save, but I'm not sure I would want a Rogue to be more proficient in dodging a net than a fighter of the same dexterity score.

I'd prefer to see an opposed roll of an attack roll versus an acrobatics check (I'm sure you could argue athletics or acrobatics) to try and get a better balance. You could suggest armour offering disadvantage on stealth checks also offers disadvantage on this roll, so it's easier to net a heavy plate fighter... but that might just add a bit more than is necessary to create a nice rule to use.

 

[mellored]

Anyone care to rationalize why it's harder to ensnare a target wearing plate with a net than it is to hit an unarmored target. Is it just me or should the net get a bonus on attack rolls against higher AC? It's not like it does any damage anyway. Your thoughts?

There are plenty of situations where Dex/Heavy Armor both contributing to AC doesn't make sense.

 

[GMMichael]

Anyone care to rationalize why it's harder to ensnare a target wearing plate with a net than it is to hit an unarmored target.

[DrEvilFace] A chink in the armor of the combat rules? [/DrEvilFace]

Just give advantange to the unarmored target.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Anyone care to rationalize why it's harder to ensnare a target wearing plate with a net than it is to hit an unarmored target.

It's just 5e design dogma. In 3e & 4e you had different defenses you could target - Touch AC or REF Defense or whatever - that could model an attack like a net or flask of oil that the enemy had to avoid contact with, whether than one that had to punch through or avoid armor. 5e goes back to only a single AC defense as the only means of determining if attacks succeed or not, and generally doesn't use saving throws for anything but magic or poison.

You could have an attack like getting caught in a net require a DEX save instead of an attack vs AC.
Just use 8+attack bonus as the DC.