D&D 5E Why AD&D Rocks and 3e - 5e Mocks all over AC...

[Oofta]

Fixed it. You know, I've never seen damage reduction in 5e, but I saw it in 3e. A pretty simple fix to the 3e version is to require minimum damage - so your example hydra would still do damage if the DM fudged rolled high enough.

EDIT: ninja'd by an admin. FYI while I don't care, "fixing" someone's post is apparently considered a Bozo no-no on this sight.

But I still think it has a ripple effect. If my monk fights someone with DR, suddenly hitting a lot is significantly worse than the rogue who has a single (sneak) attack. In addition IIRC, DR in 3E was pretty low. Wasn't it something like 2 points? I always thought it was more headache than it was worth. In addition it's far different from the proposed 8 points of DR suggested in the post I was quoting.

I will be the first to admit that armor is pretty FUBARed. Someone in high quality plate should be very hard to damage unless you wrestle them to the ground and stab them in the face. But that wouldn't work for D&D combat. So with a high DR you'd have to have some way to bypass it, but then in D&D people can take multiple hits ... and it would just be a mess. IMHO of course.

 

[Oofta]

One work around for this is to have the DR apply per turn, not per attack. For example, a fighter with DR 8 is attacked by a big brute for 15 damage. His DR reduces that to 7 (15 - 8 = 7). A Second fighter with the same DR 8 is attacked by 3 weaker foes who do 4, 5 & 6 damage respectively. Fighter 2 takes 0 damage from the first attack, but only has 4 DR remaining this turn (8DR - 4 Damage = 4 DR remain). Fighter 2 takes 1 damage from the second attack burning through remaining DR (5 - 4 =1) and takes full damage from the third attack (6 - 0 = 6). For both cases total damage on the turn was 15, and both fighters took 7 points of damage after DR. It's a bit more fiddly with the math, but doesn't penalize small damage attacks as much.

Maybe? What about multiple attackers then? Let's say you're PC is being turned into a pincushion by a horde of goblins all attacking from range. Some arrows are going to find a gap in the armor just by shear luck. How do you model that?

Question: Does armor DR affect spell damage? If 'Yes', all around tougher to kill. If 'NO' tougher to kill with weapons only, spells same.

I've always thought armor should help with dex saves. Not sure how.

As an aside: DR per turn could be a class feature for the fighter, with bonuses to armor DR at higher levels. This would make the fighter harder to kill with weapons, without just an hp increase, meaning damaging spells would be more useful against them.

 

[James Gasik]

Maybe? What about multiple attackers then? Let's say you're PC is being turned into a pincushion by a horde of goblins all attacking from range. Some arrows are going to find a gap in the armor just by shear luck. How do you model that?


I've always thought armor should help with dex saves. Not sure how.

Shields should totally grant a benefit to Dex saves, especially against breath weapons. But I'm all about adding functionality to shields, because shields are a big deal in real world combat, for a wide variety of reasons.

Here's my easy fix for armor. Actual physical armor (not namby pampy Mage Armor) protects you from a set amount of damage based on it's protective value. So say, as an example (these probably aren't the numbers I would use, but it's an example):

Light armor: 1 hp/level.
Medium armor: 2hp/level.
Heavy armor: 3 hp/level.

A 5th level character wearing heavy armor ignores the first 15 points of damage they take. They can regain this "damage buffer" by performing some minor repairs to the armor, ie, after completing a short or long rest.

 

[Oofta]

Shields should totally grant a benefit to Dex saves, especially against breath weapons. But I'm all about adding functionality to shields, because shields are a big deal in real world combat, for a wide variety of reasons.

Here's my easy fix for armor. Actual physical armor (not namby pampy Mage Armor) protects you from a set amount of damage based on it's protective value. So say, as an example (these probably aren't the numbers I would use, but it's an example):

Light armor: 1 hp/level.
Medium armor: 2hp/level.
Heavy armor: 3 hp/level.

A 5th level character wearing heavy armor ignores the first 15 points of damage they take. They can regain this "damage buffer" by performing some minor repairs to the armor, ie, after completing a short or long rest.

When I first saw Shield Master I thought it was awesome. Finally a way to improve my poor strength based fighter's dex save and push people around in combat or knock them prone to get advantage. Then I read it again. Dex save? Only if you're the sole target*, so ... two spells in the book. But I can still push people around as a bonus action, right? Well, then Crawford came out against that as well. The feat is now practically pointless - in the few cases where it would be useful I can just use one of my attacks to get the same result.

In my home game I can make it happen, I think shields should be better. Maybe someday we'll have official rules to support that iconic imagery in fantasy of having a shield blocking a breath weapon. I'm not going to hold my breath.

*which also adds confusion. If a hell hound breaths fire on my fighter and they're the only one in the AOE, do I get the bonus? If I do, why do I lose it if someone else happens to also be included? Why can I block that disintegrate with my shield if I'm the only target but not if the sorcerer targeting me used twin spell?

 

[Lanefan]

Maybe? What about multiple attackers then? Let's say you're PC is being turned into a pincushion by a horde of goblins all attacking from range. Some arrows are going to find a gap in the armor just by shear luck. How do you model that?

Criticals bypass/ignore any and all DR effects.

Howzat?

 

[James Gasik]

When I first saw Shield Master I thought it was awesome. Finally a way to improve my poor strength based fighter's dex save and push people around in combat or knock them prone to get advantage. Then I read it again. Dex save? Only if you're the sole target*, so ... two spells in the book. But I can still push people around as a bonus action, right? Well, then Crawford came out against that as well. The feat is now practically pointless - in the few cases where it would be useful I can just use one of my attacks to get the same result.

In my home game I can make it happen, I think shields should be better. Maybe someday we'll have official rules to support that iconic imagery in fantasy of having a shield blocking a breath weapon. I'm not going to hold my breath.

*which also adds confusion. If a hell hound breaths fire on my fighter and they're the only one in the AOE, do I get the bonus? If I do, why do I lose it if someone else happens to also be included? Why can I block that disintegrate with my shield if I'm the only target but not if the sorcerer targeting me used twin spell?

I'd like to like this post, but it really is a sad state of affairs. D&D traditionally just treats shields as this AC booster you strap to your arm and hide behind. You might get some neat optional rules, but by and large, if you want to do something cool with a shield, you need some kind of special feature, as if anyone with proficiency has no idea how to actually employ one to bash foes, knock people off balance, use it to brace a spear, form a shield wall, angle it to provide cover from arrow fire, etc. etc..

 

[James Gasik]

Criticals bypass/ignore any and all DR effects.

Howzat?

If they weren't so rare, maybe. It's a nice buff for critical hits, but it's still 5% of the time for most people.

 

[Lanefan]

If they weren't so rare, maybe. It's a nice buff for critical hits, but it's still 5% of the time for most people.

In the situation described - goblins pincushioning someone in plate with many arrows hoping a few get through - having crits bypass DR would I think model quite well the idea of the occasional lucky shot getting through a crack and really hurting the armour's occupant.

'Cause otherwise, the plate-wearer will become nigh-invulnerable to most ordinary attacks; and that's just too good.

The other aspect here, not yet touched on I don't think, is that any type of DR effect that reduces melee/missile damage but leaves magic damage alone only serves to power up the casters even further in relation to the fighters.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I can now just imagine a DM forcing the players to sit through 30+ goblin attack rolls just hoping to force damage through in this manor.

 

[Brainwatch]

In the situation described - goblins pincushioning someone in plate with many arrows hoping a few get through - having crits bypass DR would I think model quite well the idea of the occasional lucky shot getting through a crack and really hurting the armour's occupant.

'Cause otherwise, the plate-wearer will become nigh-invulnerable to most ordinary attacks; and that's just too good.

The other aspect here, not yet touched on I don't think, is that any type of DR effect that reduces melee/missile damage but leaves magic damage alone only serves to power up the casters even further in relation to the fighters.

I like the idea of Crits bypassing DR, makes them extra special.

As to powering up casters if DR doesn't affect magic No, but Yes. No it doesn't power up casters, they do the same damage they are doing now to the armor wearer. But yes in the sense that the wizard's melee body guard is now doing less damage to the armor wearer. I think the simplest way would be to just let DR effect any source of damage. Then there is no debate on whether something is magic damage or not. In essence DR/turn would function as an non-magical temp hp source.