Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Yoshimatsu 03-29-06, 09:20 PM	Why is it that even as your base attack bonus goes up, your ability to defend yourself never increases (unless you increase your dex). Especialy at higher levels, with characters with large base attack bonuses basicly automaticly hit another PC of the same level if they have no magic items. I don't think it makes sense to have to rely on items to protect yourself.
Seerow 03-29-06, 09:25 PM	There's a level based defense bonus outlined in Unearthed Arcana iirc.
WhiteHarness 03-29-06, 10:37 PM	When we play low-magic/no-magic games, we just house rule that the Class Defense Bonus Stacks with full armour bonus at high levels since magic defenses are unavailable.
meatrace 03-29-06, 10:46 PM	well without magic, damage doesn't scale either. at 1st level your fighter with a greatsword and an 18 str is doing 2d6+6. assuming he takes all the weapon spec feats and puts all his stat bumps into str, you're looking at 2d6+13 at 20th level. not too spectacular. but then enters the almighty power attack, not to mention magical enhancements to weapon damage and your str, and boom, powerhouse. dodge, mobility, TWD, expertise, improved expertise, rings of protection, magical armor, spells like greater mage armor, ioun stones, that's how your AC scales with level. it may not be part of your class abilities, but in the "basic" gameplay style it all works out OK. if you're playing in a low-magic world then the class defense bonus is always an option too.
Vrellum 03-29-06, 10:50 PM	You ability to defend does go up. Your hit points increase every level to represent you ability to dodge blows and evade spells. The only thing that doesn't really follow the system is touch attacks.
Dalthbar 03-29-06, 10:54 PM	There's a number of ideas about this and a ton of house-rules and supplimental rules you can use. The example I like to use is a 20th level fighter in normal clothes with his sword. Two 2nd level bozos come up to him and try to attack him. Assuming no magical aid and a Dex score that's standard for a human, he has an abismal AC that a common housecat can hit 1/2 the time. While the 20th level fighter will likely destroy these guys, if they're lucky enough to win init (which is very possible), then they should be able to hit this guy without too much difficulty.. which seems odd to me. It makes sense to me that as your combat ability increased (which is reflected by your BAB), that some of that should reflect your ability to defend yourself in melee as well. This number isn't *just* the "how I hit things" number. It's supposed to represent your proficency in combat in general. That's why there should be *some* sore of level-based/BAB-based AC bonuses for melee characters and/or certain classes IMO.
DungeonMaster 03-29-06, 10:56 PM	I don't understand why people find it odd? You take a plain dex 12 fighter with full plate and a tower shield and you're at AC 8+1+4 = 23. With 1 feat, expertise, you can get AC 28. With dodge you're at AC 29. Take mithral full plate and dex 16 you're at AC 31. That's +21 AC from purely non magical sources. The basic suite of magic items: +5 armor and +5 shield, +5 ring of protection, +5 amulet of natural armor. Another +20 from magical sources. What's the issue? Your advancement from levels barely compensates for the enhancement of magic. If your nonmagical AC could increase even more you would need to severely impede the magical AC gain. In other words completely redesign the game, for no good reason.
Dalthbar 03-29-06, 10:59 PM	It's odd because someone of a 2nd level skill should not be able to touch a 20th level fighter in all but the rarest circumstances. Talk about how HP are a measure of your ability to dodge all you like, but the 20th level fighter shouldn't even be hit in the first place. That's why it's odd.
aelryinth 03-29-06, 11:03 PM	IT doesn't scale because you are assumed to be acquring magic and gear that scales with you. Games that don't have magical enhancements to AC use a class based Defense bonus for this very reason. Take out magical means of gaining AC and you would be wise to introduce the same...or reduce magical means to hit by the same amounts. Note that CR of various monsters and the like assumes magical weaponry, so without it, you have to ramp down the monsters (or increase the CR) ==Aelryinth
Dalthbar 03-29-06, 11:09 PM	Personally, I find those excuses lazy and unimaginative. This isn't a dig at anyone, but it just doesn't make sense when you think about the situation for half a second. So just because we "assume someone has access to magical items" doesn't mean that they're useless without them. A 20th level fighter SHOULD, in almost all circumstances, naked as the day he was born, be harder to hit than a 1st level fighter in full plate. Just because it'd be "hard work" to make the mechanics fit, doesn't mean that it's not an obviously glaring hole in how we gauge combat ability. Why, with the exception of a very few classes, does NOBODY ever get better at avoiding getting hit? It makes no sense that it's not accounted for across the board for all characters.
SlagMortar 03-29-06, 11:26 PM	Why, with the exception of a very few classes, does NOBODY ever get better at avoiding getting hit? It makes no sense that it's not accounted for across the board for all characters. If this is not reflected in hitpoints, then what are hitpoints?
StevenO 03-29-06, 11:43 PM	... The example I like to use is a 20th level fighter in normal clothes with his sword. Two 2nd level bozos come up to him and try to attack him. Assuming no magical aid and a Dex score that's standard for a human, he has an abismal AC that a common housecat can hit 1/2 the time. While the 20th level fighter will likely destroy these guys, if they're lucky enough to win init (which is very possible), then they should be able to hit this guy without too much difficulty.. which seems odd to me. ... If one group gets the jump on the other there is no reason skill will protect you. Given a moment to prepare the 20th level fighter could use Advanced Combat Expertise (no limit) to take -10 to hit (he still has +10 plus everything else) but those 2nd level thugs (warriors?) are going to find his standing AC 20 very hard to hit. They may get close (hit) and cause some fatigue (hp lose) but still don't stand a chance. As already stated it is possible to get sky high ACs at higher levels. The problem is that AC only offers protection from a limited number of problems (namely attack rolls) and can be overcome regardless the odds (nat 20 = hit) and by non-roll attacks.
ReverendCow 03-29-06, 11:49 PM	Personally, I find those excuses lazy and unimaginative. Or is it that you don't really understand how the rules work? This isn't a dig at anyone, Could have fooled me. but it just doesn't make sense when you think about the situation for half a second. Case in point. Ixnay on the condescensionay there, Chet.
Generic Poster 03-30-06, 12:58 AM	if we are talking about realism here, a veteran fighter is almost as likely to die from a sword thrust as a commoner. His increased muscle mass may give him a little more protection then the common man, but nothing to the extent in which it's represented in D&D. So in reality, the skill in avoiding blows has been simplified into the hit point system, since hit points are a more general representation that can cover more situations then armor class can.
Frostbrand 03-30-06, 02:26 AM	Well, if you have some weird thing, where you like to run around with out any clothes on and beat people up.... just Play a Monk.... Or a Rogue, they seem to do good with that whole... Armor needing thing.... Theres a reason that a Fighter with 12 Dex uses Sheilds... and most of the Characters who I've been in a Party with are really leery in any situation that requires them to strip down.... for example there was a Cave that had like a Magic Barrier that required you remove all Weapons and Sheilds and Armor... as like a sign of Faith or what not, so me playing the Monk, I think the 10 Dex Fighter in his Bulky Plate Mail of +whatever and his Shield of +Whatever... yeah his exact words where "Monk, go check it out, If theres Monsters come tell us well send in the Wizards and the Sorc with ya, but if theres no Monsters look around find the Magic Tome and bring it back out, we'll all wait out here..." If all Characters AC scaled with them Fighters whould become Archers in light Armor, Paladins whould become Bowmen Healers, and Clerics well Clerics in Light Chain Shirts... It whould severly limit the need for Armor at all, and if it Stacked with Armor... the Dragons whould have like what, 90 AC or something.... You whould give this Bonus to everyone not just the Good Guys/Heros It whould make the world insan-o complicated....
DungeonMaster 03-30-06, 03:38 AM	A 20th level fighter SHOULD, in almost all circumstances, naked as the day he was born, be harder to hit than a 1st level fighter in full plate. Where are you taking this absolute necessity from? It certainly isn't realistic. A really good fighter knows how to change what would be a death blow to a weaker opponent into a minor scratch. That's the abstract hit point system. The 1st level fighter is going to have to slash and slash and slash until finally the 20th level fighter will give. The UFC or any other similar fighting situation is an example of this. People get hit, even the best. They can't miraculously avoid every last one of each other's attacks, even from much weaker opponents. The reality is the human body can only move so fast. However by properly defending against the attacks they can much lessen the damage to themselves. Let's take the standard array 15,14,13,12,10,9. You make a 1st level fighter in full plate and I'll make a 20th level fighter stark naked. You'll lose, guaranteed. The 20th level guy will take a piddly amount of damage vs. his 20d10+con hitpoints and in one power attack knock you out and bleeding - with his fist, lord forbid a weapon in hand. There is absolutely no one in the world today that can do this. It is already the stuff of fantasy.
Dalthbar 03-30-06, 07:05 AM	The UFC is a bad example. 1) They're going to be of similar level 2) They're nothing close to "20th level fighters" - in D&D terms, I'd be surprised if they were over 4th level all things considered 3) Most of them are far less concerned with not getting hit than landing a powerful blow (e.g., they're closer to barbarians than fighters) Plus, when you say "there's nobody in the world today that can do this" - of course not. When is the last time someone walked around in full plate or spent years training to be a master swordsman? Even those people that are proficient at swordsmanship today aren't close to what a high level fighter can do in D&D terms. Here's the thing - I'm not discounting the merits of the current AC system. All I'm saying is that it's unrealistic for a 20th level fighter to be as easy to hit as a 1st level fighter with the same equipment. Whether the equipment is nothing, a +1 shield or the full +5 kit, that 20th level fighter should have an edge to _not be hit_. If we talk about their hit points coming into play, then the 20th level fighter is already hit and outside of what I'm talking about and quite frankly, irrelevant. The highly skilled fighter, in most circumstances, shouldn't be hit at all by the 1st level fighter. I think everyone seems far too complacent with the concept that fighters are little more than a collection of feats and magic items.
FEADIN1 03-30-06, 10:25 AM	Dodge Fight on the defensive Combat expertise Power attack Improved disarm Improved sunder.... Your low level fighter without these feats (because he is low level) will not last long and touch very often the high level one. And as said earlier HP are exactly that on top.
Someone 03-30-06, 11:49 AM	You're looking at it from the wrong end. The 1st or 2nd level goon IS going to have a hard time hitting the 20th level fighter, especially compared to the ease in which the 20th level fighter can hit them. Everyone starts with a 10 AC for a reason. A 2nd level warrior-type with a half decent Str score will still miss quite often, especially against a target with a half decent Dex score. The 20th level fighter, on the other hand, could stab them to death regardless of a layer of steel encasing almost all of their bodies. Is it too hard to accept that in this situation, a 1st level commoner misses half the time, while a 10th level fighter doesn't?
tarkin 03-30-06, 12:07 PM	Actually the truth is that a 10th level fighter WILL miss 1/2 the time. He usually hits on his +10, but usually misses on his +5. The high level fighter types only hit all the time on their top BAB. They miss more than often enough on their lesser attacks.
David_Roben2 03-30-06, 12:16 PM	My question to the naysayers of the current system is why is a 20th lvl fighter harder to hit? Without his armor he can be SA'ed just as easily as my grandma. Now if he is aware of the attack what skills does he posess that keeps him from being hit? Does he move out of the way? I'm pretty sure that is the definition of Dodge. Does he block the hits with his sword/fists/tankard? That would be the Expertise feat there. Like it is explained above the to hit bonuses are just as important to the realism as AC. If a commoner throws a punch at my loin-clothed barb, I can avoid it more by the fact that it is a terrible shot as by the fact that my AC is thru the roof. With full plate on I'll just let it bounce off my chest and laugh at him. On the flip side, the commoner is more likely to catch a knukle sandwich because I know how to hit. High dex is accounted, as well as armor and feats. Special attention needs to be paid to feats as the level adjuster for AC. By learning how to Dodge I can more easily get out of your path. Low levelers don't know as much. Conversely, if I focus on hitting harder (think power attack) then I haven't taught myself to avoid damage. The system is fine.
Mist of Shadows 03-30-06, 02:29 PM	I did martial arts for years, you still get hit, the thing you hope is that you get hit less then the guy laying in a pool of blood. I don't really like the idea of a class based ac for a few reasons. one it's assumed that fighters are doing more dodging then wizards. So it's built into the system that wizard's are going to suck at dodging. So what happens if your an archer (fighter) you are so good that you never get into combat? Now take the wizard with one level of say fighter a decent str and a sword. He could very well for a few levels be fighting in melee a lot a lot more then the archer. (you cast your one spell for the day oh maybe 3 and your still fighting because the group isn't going to waste a day for you to get your spells back.) And yet with your level system the archer that never had to dodge nothing is going to be the better dodger. That is why I HATE level based things like that. I would rather have a fighter that wants to get better at dodging take some feats, gods know he gets enough of them and sink them into ac upping skills. There is a reason most people wore armor. What about intimadation to cause them a penalty to hit you. Hey look that raging psychopath doesn't have any armor and he is still charging me and he doesn't look sane enough to be afraid, does he know something I don't? Okay so maybe would require a house rule or something but still it would be using skills in a useful way. If you are really so stupid concerned about ac take some levels in duelist. This type of no armor fighting is what they do. There are plenty of paths to ac with or without magic. I think my friend got like a 50 something without magic being a duelist at I think 17 or lower level. So that's plenty high enough. It was more disqusting after magic. That dropped his to hit by like 5 I think. So not a lot for a lot of gain.
rice830 03-30-06, 05:35 PM	i agree with yoshimatsu, yeah you still get hit, but say your a black belt, and the opponent is a white belt, then there is very little chance that the black belt will get hit, mr. martial misty shadows. so a class based AC is a very good idea.
Cadfan 03-30-06, 06:09 PM	Is this an apparently very well veiled attempt at sarcasm regarding the recent to-do about the Truespeaker?
booge 03-31-06, 02:45 PM	It seems to me that the higher in level you go, you don't get harder skin (as a default human warrior), or more reflective of blows. To use the previous example, a black belt would be hit less by a novice because of his experience and training. He has trained to move out of the way, to turn hits aside, to examine his opponent. All this can be taken into consideration in the upping of ability scores (i.e. dex to increase dodge ac), and feats like the afforementioned dodge, two weapon defense, combat expertise, and all of the other feats in supplimental books.
Hakar Maloye 03-31-06, 11:37 PM	A level 20 fighter is in fact less likely to be hit by a level 1 fighter, on account that he chops him in half with a big sword before the level 1 can act.
Rallek 04-01-06, 07:22 AM	The Level 20 fighter is harder to hit. That's what HP represents. HP in D&D have always (and yes I am invoking the blasphemous 2nd ed., and the obscure 1st ed. here) been an extremely abstract system. Just because an oponent makes a successful "to hit" or "attack" roll, does not mean that they actually contacted the oponent with a weapon. I know that given the vocabulary involved this seems counter intuitive, but it's true. HP represents things like the character's ability to dodge, and his fatigue and stamina. Think about it, if even the lowly 10 str peasant gives you a good whack with a razor sharp, +5 two-handed axe, you're a dead man. Be you a skinny little mage, or a big, burly fighter, you're equally a corpse. So why does the fighter have higher HP? Because as was stated earlier HP does not = physical damage taken. When a 5th level mage is "struck" for 10 HP, he is staggered. The shock of the blocking the incoming blow with his staff has thrown him off balance and numbed his arms, making him slower to respond to the next attack. This brings him one step closer to the time when he will not be able to raise his guard, or leap aside in time, and that sword thrust will take him through the neck, or the chest, and he will be left unconcious on the floor, bleeding to death. Now let's say the 5th level fighter takes the same 10 HP damage. He blocks the attack with far more alacrity. Sure, arresting the blow, or turning it aside has taken something out of him, but battle like this is his bread and butter. He is not winded and off balance like the mage, and his attacks and defences still have the strength of force that his training and conditioning have instilled in him. The moment when his guard will finally fail him is a long way off yet. This is what is meant when they say that hitpoints are "abstract". Just becasue the "attack roll" succeeded and the target took "damage" that doesn't actually mean that you hit him. If we consider the rogue and his "sneak attack" we at first might think that he must have surely stabbed him squarely in some vital organ, I mean just look at that massive damage! But if we think about it for a moment longer we realize that even given our "layman's" knowledge of anatomy, if we were presented with an unguarded back (or neck) to pierce with a razor sharp blade, could we not deliver an almost certainly fatal wound? Of course we could. So why isn't the rogue's sneak attack an "insta-kill throat cut"? Again the answer must be that hitpoints do not represent "real" damage done, rather they are abstract. So we did not really just cut the guard's throat, or skewer a kidney, rather we got in a vicious strike that likely left him bleeding, but either he became aware of us at the last moment and somehow slipped away from the most fatal part of the cut, or a piece of his armor "turned the blade" and we were unable to deliver what would have otherwise been that certainly fatal blow. So we see that your ability to defend yourself does in fact go up with level, and it is indeed dependent on the combat prowess of your class. It's just that D&D represents this through a system of "abstract" hit points which may be a bit dissimilar to the HP systems that we typically think of in modern games.
Mist of Shadows 04-01-06, 02:32 PM	Shrugs black belts do get hit, normally we just manage to not get hit in areas that matter. So we turn into the blow and take the shot on a shoulder or something that doesn't hurt as much. We use feats that we learned to block. Or we take the shot and rely on training (hp) to soak it. But we do get hit. As for hp being the ability to turn horrible blows into less horrible blows at what level do we just consider you not human any more? (epic level quote an epic level hero has the ability to live through being sumerged in lava for a round or two.. Do to high hp, no normal human can do that. So at what point do we say the hero isn't human anymore.
BladeMage_1 04-01-06, 03:14 PM	A level 20 fighter is in fact less likely to be hit by a level 1 fighter, on account that he chops him in half with a big sword before the level 1 can act. :) , agreed. Your 20 lvl fighter is not getting hit as much as your 1st level one because of all the hit points he/she has. Basically, your last positive 10 HP represents your "real wounds". So if you have 100 HP (avg 20 lvl ftr with no Con mod.), it would take awhile for that 1st level fighter with 5 HP to give you a painful scratch. Chances are, you will cut him in half before he gives you a papercut. Your AC does represent your ability to dodge/avoid blows, this is true. However, a "hit" on a 20th lvl fighter from a 1st lvl fighter basically is a small scratch, while vice versa it is a lost limb/bleeding wound/heavy trauma.
Kursk 04-01-06, 03:39 PM	The example I like to use is a 20th level fighter in normal clothes with his sword. Two 2nd level bozos come up to him and try to attack him. Assuming no magical aid and a Dex score that's standard for a human, he has an abismal AC that a common housecat can hit 1/2 the time. While the 20th level fighter will likely destroy these guys, if they're lucky enough to win init (which is very possible), then they should be able to hit this guy without too much difficulty.. which seems odd to me. Considering the hit point system in D&D, the two 2nd level fighters will never actually hurt the 20th level fighter before they are both killed stuffed and mounted...
Rylen 04-02-06, 10:49 PM	This is a problem I had in a passed campaign with higher-level characters, particularly the Fighters. Two high-level fighters fighting one another is a bash-fast. We avoided this simply enough as such: 1. Hit-points don't mean you can get run-through by a sword and survive it simply because you have 40 HPs and the sword does 1d8. Hit-points being taken off are near-misses, or even solid hits that barely peirce armor creating a flesh-wound. So a naked 20th level fighter losing 20 HPs in a battle with a 2nd level fighter really means he had several near-hits he barely dodged/parried. 2. The House-Rule Feat Combat Expertise, Greater. With this Feat, there is not limit to how much of your base attack bonus you wish to allocate to AC. So a naked 20th level fighter could subtract 10 points from his attack, make his AC a 20, and still have a high attack rating to cut the 2nd level fighter to pieces. (10 (base attack) + Str + magic-sword + weapon focuses + misc.)
Mist of Shadows 04-03-06, 09:18 PM	Mister hps are just near misses then how to you deal with falling damage or exposer to fire. Or having a vial of acid tosses at you. Or falling into lava is that a near miss even if you have the hp to survive?
Zephyr_Blue 04-03-06, 10:39 PM	in this situation im reminded of a game mechanic used in Neverwinter Nights, the Parry skill, now a skill would be a weird place for this, maybe their should be an AC increase that increases with BAB, like 1/6th or something, that way someone with a better skill with weapons can use his weapon to parry, this AC bonus would be negligable against non-physical attacks, such as magic, but in the instance where a dis-robed level 20 was against some level 2's, it would give him a level advantage essentially my reasoning is that as you get better with a weapon, you can use it to defend yourself my two cents
Mist of Shadows 04-04-06, 01:21 AM	skill at parrying and using bab to increase ac that sounds like combat expertise to me.
serow_#R 04-04-06, 02:07 AM	question: how many percent does equipment account for in a party's CR? is the number fixed? does the amount get higher, or lower as the party levels?
Schmendrick 04-04-06, 04:32 AM	HP are abstract, yes, but the 3.5 ruleset seems to make it fairly clear that HP do represent physical damage. Nonlethal damage: how do you recover more quickly (1hp/level/hour) from a near-miss by a sap than by a near-miss by a sword (which heals at 1hp/level/day)? Massive damage: specifically created to mitigate the hp abstraction, quite explicitly states that 50 hit points of damage is a very real physical problem, no matter how statistically significant it is to your total. The Vitality Points system, whose flavor many here are claiming for the Hit Points system, is a very well-defined variant rule. To the OP, however, your question has already been answered; the class defense variant is one option for people unsatisfied with the general "magic items keep your AC high" system. It's not without its flaws, but it's not bad for what it is.
CattleProdMan 04-04-06, 09:51 AM	If HP was regarding your ability to dodge so a less vital spot is hit or represents fatigue, wouldn't a rogue or a monk have a higher hit die to represent their cunning ability to dodge?
Rylen 04-06-06, 06:48 PM	Mister hps are just near misses then how to you deal with falling damage or exposer to fire. Or having a vial of acid tosses at you. Or falling into lava is that a near miss even if you have the hp to survive? You can think of HPs however you like. It comes down to style, really. I don't like the look or 'feel' of a Fighter rushing into combat, getting a sword plunged into his belly 5 or 6 times, then walking around like nothing happened. Just my personal taste, that's all. In fact, the rule of healing 1hp/level/day aids my idea, IMHO. If a 10th level fighter is stabbed in the gut by a long-sword, the 6 or 7 HPs he lost will come back in one day. In reality, it'd take months to fully heal from a gut hit, not even counting the high chance of dying hours later. But if the gut-hit barely pierced his armor, and created a flesh-wound, it'd heal over enough to not hinder him very quickly. In reality, a sword cleaving into a shoulder is a crippling blow, whether you're a battle-hardened 20th level fighter or a 1st level wizard. I suppose my long-winded point is really: "I think of hit points as vitality points." It's my personal taste, is all. There's no wrong or right. PS: non-sword hits, like acid, are easy enough to explain. An inexperieced fighter with 16 HPs isn't as quick-witted enough to hold up his arm to take most of the acid's splash, so when he loses 10 HPs, it means it splashes on his face. A higher level combatant shields his face/vital structures with his arm, so the acid burns his arm instead of burning his eyes out. Apply this to any sort of damage (a Ray spell, or Fireball, or what-not). PPS: Hit point (or Vitality Points, as I prefer) are the quick-wit in combat. A rogue is good at dodging and such, but a Fighter is simply quicker at parrying or avoiding direct blows, since he's more skilled in direct combat. There's a subtle difference between 'dodging a fireball' (a rogue's speciality) and 'dodging/parrying a sword' (a fighter's specialty by having more HPs/VPs). Your point about rogue's makes sense, but I think it's perfectly reasonable to say the skill at melee combat is BOTH attacking and parrying. When a Fireball is thrown at you, parrying with your sword isn't going to help.... but a Rogue leaping out of the way will.
Lina_Inverse 04-06-06, 06:56 PM	question: how many percent does equipment account for in a party's CR? is the number fixed? does the amount get higher, or lower as the party levels? Depends on the class. In the case of fighters, by 20th level. Nearly 90% of his power is in magic items, putting him around CR10 or so without it. In the case of wizards, never more than half(2 CRs.) his power comes from magic. In the case of what hps represent. I look at it as the bodys stored positive energy. It explains why cure spells work, how you survive stupid crap everything. Fighters spend alot of time training there bodys to contain positive energy so...lots of hitpoints.
Mist of Shadows 04-06-06, 09:12 PM	I personally find the 1/level/day annoying because of that gut stabbing healing up. I would rather them stick to 1 a day with maybe 2 points for complete bed rest. More hp should be about pushing your body past any resonable limits. But that sword to the side is still going to hurt. I don't know I find my self discribing things as cuts and bruises until you are starting to get close to zero, so I guess I'm no better at figuring out how to justify the hp thing. I just sort of work around it and ignore discribing the pcs injuries. Though thinking about hps like stores of possitive energy works in some cases.
Elthbert 04-06-06, 09:18 PM	Mister hps are just near misses then how to you deal with falling damage or exposer to fire. Or having a vial of acid tosses at you. Or falling into lava is that a near miss even if you have the hp to survive? Lets see knowledge of how to fall, knowledge of how to not get burned severely when in a fire, The acid is easy the fighter turns the hit into a mild splash with withhis skill. The lava that is really not defensable, if you fall into lava in my campaign you !/2 your hitpoints the first round and make a massive damage save, the next round you take the other half, at the end of that round you are utterly destroyed--- its Lava after all. HP's are an abstraction of skill in dodging blows, they are not repersentations of someones ability to simply take damage, but of thier ability to turn what should be a killing strike into nothing much at all.
Elthbert 04-06-06, 09:20 PM	If HP was regarding your ability to dodge so a less vital spot is hit or represents fatigue, wouldn't a rogue or a monk have a higher hit die to represent their cunning ability to dodge? No.
Mist of Shadows 04-06-06, 10:28 PM	And yet in the epic book it specificically mentions the ability to survive a few rounds in lava. Granted it does a horrible amount of damage but nothing you couldn't survive past level 20. So I think you're at odds with the books Elthbert. (not that your point about lava being lava doesn't make sense in a real world idea)
NorthGuard 04-07-06, 01:41 AM	Um, you guys, just take the improved combat expertise feat from complete warrior and fight defensively... that's a -24 penalty to your Attack, but a +22 to your AC off the bat, and if you buy an item that does true strike for you... I mean, you could get yourself up to 31 with the mithral full plate setup (see above) and another 20 from magic items, (also see above) that's an indefinite 73 AC, and if you have uncanny defense or something you could get it up to like 75 with a 15 int. and you still get to make 4 or more attacks per round, nothing is ever gonna hit you, and you have four (or more with haste/form of doom) chances per round to roll a 20. I could build my elocator with a couple feats and a few magic items up to have 9 chances a round to get a 20 on one of his attacks, And I'll power attack for 20 as well, since nobody said I couldnt, and I'll two hand it what the hey, I'll get a 73 AC, an almost half and half chance of hitting for at least 33 damage with a nonmagical greatsword, I make it a vorpal greatsword with a blessed scabbard (3x per day blessed weapon) then I have 9 chances a round to automatically insta-kill stuff, and a 73 AC. Why am I still sitting here, I gotta go have a chat with my DM.
crowclub 04-07-06, 09:29 AM	High (ish) AC at low levels is very do-able. Take a 5th Level Dwarven Fighter with these (28 point ) stats.. Str 16 Dex 13 Con 18 Int 13 Wis 8 Cha 6 Take the following Feats (for example) Heavy Armour Specialization Exotic Armour Proficiency Dodge plus say,.. Weapon Focus Dwarven Waraxe Combat Expertise Ask your DM to swap Tower Shield Prof. with Extreme Shield Prof. Starting Gold at Lvl 5 is 9000 Battle Plate +1 (3500gp), +11 AC Extreme Steel Shield +1 (1030gp), +4 AC Ring of Protection +1 (2000gp), +1 AC Dwarven Waraxe +1 (2030gp) Ok, Base 10 AC Armour +11 AC Shield +4 AC Ring +1 AC Dodge +1 AC DEX +1 AC That'll give you +10 to hit with the Axe and 28 AC at 5th Level ! And with Combat Expertise you can adjust that to +5 to Hit and 33 AC I'm sure its possible to get even more, But you get the point. You can achieve High AC at low levels. .....the whole lvl20 Fighter and the 3 Stooges thing...I'm not getting involved...!
aotrscommander 04-07-06, 11:20 AM	I think the first question that should be asked in all of these rules queries is: what do I want to model? First, in the case of a naked high level fighter verses low-level thugs, what do *you* think should happen? If you think that your 20th level fighter will win (a reasonable assumption), do you think he will do it without a scratch (i.e no hit point damage), or is he going to be be hit a few times with glancing blows? Let's leave aside the hit point/vitality point debate for a second and concentrate on the game mechanics. If you think your high-level fighter can dodge every blow sent at him by a low-level character, that's fine, but in terms of pure rules mechanics, that's not what D&D fighters were designed to do. If this hypothetical fighter doesn't have any weapons and his opponents are fully armoured and shielded, he's going to get a little banged up, unless he's Jackie Chan. But if he's Jackie Chan he's a MONK not a fighter! Remember that in core D&D fighters don't get ANY kind of unarmed skills (even thought they ought to really get Improved Unarmed Strike). So a Fighter as per the D&D CLASS specificallly ISN'T trained or expected to fight unarmoured or unarmed. So he won't be any easier to hit (in pure game mechanics terms) than a first level fighter, who also hasn't has any unarmed or unarmoured training, nor should he be. However, you naked fighter is likely to be feeling all vulnerable, and taking greater care. So this can be modelled by fighting defensively, or using any relevant defensive feats the fighter posses; they've been mentioned often enough I won't repeat them. If you think your fighter should be better unarmed an unarmoured, then you might have a word with your DM. In my campaigns, if a player wanted a fighter who he saw as fighting unarmoured, I'd modify the class slightly; say, take away all shield and armour proficiency, and let the character have something like the Monk or Swashbuckler Wis or Int based bonuses to AC. If your campaign is low-magic and/or has a higher degree of unarmed combat, you will want to make some slight tweaks, for example, making Improved Unarmed strike effective a Martial weapon feat. The same would apply to a campaign that was designed where few people wear armour (a friend of mine once looked at running a Xena game in D&D for example which has all these criteia). To some extent I do agree with you on the magic-makes-bonuses front; as a DM, I am finding it increasing ly difficult my a mid level party to bring the NPC's AC to the point where the parties fighter's do not simply laugh and power attack to the max without stuffing them full of magical kit the PCs will later use against the next group of NPCs. The basic theory behind the magic-makes-bonuses is not dissimilar to playing something like Diablo II or simialr hack-and-slash console or PC games. In them, most of your bonuses come from equipment not your base stats. The creators of D&D, rightly or wrongly, assumed this was going to be part of the fun of playing, so they assumed that a certain level of equipment. If your game is not playing to that convention, then you WILL have to make some adjustments, because you are no longer playing same game. The easiest way to do this is to scale a class-based AC bonus, as many of the non-magic based D20 systems do (like Stargate or Star Wars or example). This systems also has it's flaws as well, as Mist of Shadows mentioned. Whatever you or your DM choose to do, just remember the one cardianl rule; don't get so caught up in modelling one specific instance that you break the rest of the system. For example, a Dragon with a BAB based AC bonuses would be nigh-impossible to hit, because non-humanoid monsters were not intended to use equipment like the humanoids, but needed to have a comparable target number (i.e AC) for rules balance. You may wish to drop (say halve) natural armour bonuses to maintain parity. Like I said at the start, first you must decide exactly what it is you want to be happening and then tweak the rules to fit.
Elthbert 04-07-06, 11:31 AM	And yet in the epic book it specificically mentions the ability to survive a few rounds in lava. Granted it does a horrible amount of damage but nothing you couldn't survive past level 20. So I think you're at odds with the books Elthbert. (not that your point about lava being lava doesn't make sense in a real world idea) I am at odds with the books I admitted that and I told you how I delt with that absurdity in my campaign. However Hit Points are an abstraction of skill and have been defined as such ever since the late 70"s that is what they are and that is how the awesome ability of a 20th level fighter to avoid blows is represented.
Spike_Fightwicky 04-07-06, 11:45 AM	Actually, HP aren't so much undefined as they are explained. HP has nothing to do with avoiding attacks and such. That mentality is from the Vitality/Wound point games. What Hit Points Represent: Hit points mean two things in the game world: the ability to take physical punishment and keep going, and the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one. So your 20th level fighter is very much getting hit by the level 1 commoner. However, that 2-3 damage he received just a minor scratch. The same attacks that turn a commoner into hamburger meat (an ogre's club) are much less of a concern to a high level fighter. Also, about lava.... How is 20d6 damage a round (+ 1d3 rounds after you're out of it) not realisticly deadly?
deanruel 04-07-06, 12:50 PM	I think the first thing to realize here is that this is a game and it is not meant to be a perfect representation of real life. It is meant to be fun and interesting and HP is the classic form of health in games, because it is fun and entertaining. I don't think anyone at Wizards knows -exactly- what Hp represents and I don't think we need to either, I also don't think it really matters. Moving on... I agree that a class based defense bonus should exist. And not the Unearthed Arcana variant because quite frankly it's ridiculous (all you really need to do to get a kickass armor rank is take one level of fighter, even if you're otherwise a full mage). And even the combat expertise, dodge, etc. feats don't quite do it for me because I believe these bonuses should be somewhat inherent. Meaning that simply fighting all the time does make one better at avoiding blows, and feats should not have to be dedicated to such. It would also help to shore up another weakness in the DnD fighting systems, which is that DnD is fairly unfriendly to the light fighters as opposed to the tanks. Offering a class based defense bonus which DOES NOT stack with armor would go a long way to balancing light with heavy fighters and also making sure that even with ubered up armor bonuses things do not become broken.
Elthbert 04-07-06, 01:23 PM	Actually, HP aren't so much undefined as they are explained. HP has nothing to do with avoiding attacks and such. That mentality is from the Vitality/Wound point games. So your 20th level fighter is very much getting hit by the level 1 commoner. However, that 2-3 damage he received just a minor scratch. The same attacks that turn a commoner into hamburger meat (an ogre's club) are much less of a concern to a high level fighter. Also, about lava.... How is 20d6 damage a round (+ 1d3 rounds after you're out of it) not realisticly deadly? Um NO that mentality comes from Gary Gygax in the origional DMG. The wound vitality points are a method of deabstracting it from the origional abstraction. As for the lava-- it is becasue there is no differance in the amount of burning involved if you are in lava you are burned over what ever percent of your body was submerged. I think I am generous to give 2 rounds 12 seconds in lava is already unrealistic 20d6 a round means high level characters could potentially live trough 4 or 5 rounds.
NorthGuard 04-07-06, 02:50 PM	High (ish) AC at low levels is very do-able. Take a 5th Level Dwarven Fighter with these (28 point ) stats.. Str 16 Dex 13 Con 18 Int 13 Wis 8 Cha 6 Take the following Feats (for example) Heavy Armour Specialization Exotic Armour Proficiency Dodge plus say,.. Weapon Focus Dwarven Waraxe Combat Expertise Ask your DM to swap Tower Shield Prof. with Extreme Shield Prof. Starting Gold at Lvl 5 is 9000 Battle Plate +1 (3500gp), +11 AC Extreme Steel Shield +1 (1030gp), +4 AC Ring of Protection +1 (2000gp), +1 AC Dwarven Waraxe +1 (2030gp) Ok, Base 10 AC Armour +11 AC Shield +4 AC Ring +1 AC Dodge +1 AC DEX +1 AC That'll give you +10 to hit with the Axe and 28 AC at 5th Level ! And with Combat Expertise you can adjust that to +5 to Hit and 33 AC I'm sure its possible to get even more, But you get the point. You can achieve High AC at low levels. .....the whole lvl20 Fighter and the 3 Stooges thing...I'm not getting involved...! Yeah, it's too bad though that a 3rd level psion could kill that dwarf by ego whipping him twice and coup de grace him. or you could hit him with any kind of ray attack that has medium+ range, because your speed is so slow that you'd run 60 feet a round and wouldn't ever hit them with an attack... or, to be fair, another fighter could spring attack you with acids and alchemists fires and kill you with less than 9000 gold's worth, especially with quick draw so he can get two or three off a round. which brings me to my question, if you have quick draw and it counts for drawing viles of acid, you could rapid shot them, can you manyshot with acids or alchemists fires? what you guys think?
NorthGuard 04-07-06, 02:56 PM	You want a kickass AC? just be a war cleric. 'nuff said
Vrellum 04-07-06, 04:17 PM	What Hit Points Represent: Hit points mean two things in the game world: the ability to take physical punishment and keep going, and the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one. Spike_Fightwicky, you posted a direct contradiction to your claims, straight from the SRD. The bolded part highlights the section that deals with hp representing a creatures ability to dodge attacks. Elephants have a lot of hp because they can take a beating and keep on ticking. Fighters get most of their hp because of their martial training and ability to dodge blows. DnD doesn't differentiate between the two and in your games, you can describe it however you like, but idea of a fighter getting turned into hamburger every fight just isn't appealing to me. Oh, and Elthbert is correct, hp have been described this way for over twenty years. On a side note, this concept works pretty well with saving throws too. The fighter didn't make his fort save against the wyverns poison because he is so tough that a quart of the stuff doesn't phase him, he made it because he deflected the stinger away and was never actually stung. In the process the wyverns tail bruised his arm/rib/chipped a nail, or whatever, resulting in hp loss.
Mist of Shadows 04-07-06, 08:47 PM	Shrugs, I choose to look at the saving throw part as a little of both. You make the fort save you got lucky and only a small dose of the venum went in. Though for the necromancy spells it's very much you pushing back the magic. As for the surviving lava just think of the scars that leaves and be happy there are spells to fix it. But yeah it's going to leave a mark. And Vrellen it says nothing about dodging blows so quit miss quoting. It mearly says turn a serious blow into a less serious you still get hit. It's not cause you pulled a muscle while dodging that axe blade. You take damage cause it nicked you while dodging. Actually managing to dodge is it missing because of dex. :) As for the lava and 20d6 not being deadly enough, really it is deadly enough. Only the most epic characters could servive that. By that point you can argue that they aren't really human anymore. As for that dwarf with the ac from the full plate well bad idea, as the spring attacking person said. As for the defense class ability people want. Oh so it doesn't stack with armor, well nice I have these cool bracers of armor 8. So I'm better then the guy in full plate. If you argue that they shouldn't stack I'll ask why not? Other then game balance issues is there a reason that a class ac wouldn't stack with bracers? The people that wear armor are already outclassed then the people that don't. Oh lets see my high dex of +4 or more gives me a +12 from bracers and dex. Full dwarf cheese is 11 (as the guy said that's with a +1 ball plate) So fine sure make it plus 5 so that's 15 to ac.) I'll take the chance to have a higher dex and better ac by dropping some gold on a monks belt. So yeah armor is rather point less other then flavor. So now you want a system that increases that gap even more. :cheer: :clap: :cheer: for beating the fighter into the ground.
Kursk 04-07-06, 10:33 PM	You can think of HPs however you like. It comes down to style, really. I don't like the look or 'feel' of a Fighter rushing into combat, getting a sword plunged into his belly 5 or 6 times, then walking around like nothing happened. Just my personal taste, that's all. I just think of it the same way it is in the core rules. I guess if you want to house rule otherwise it's up to you...
Vrellum 04-07-06, 11:28 PM	And Vrellen it says nothing about dodging blows so quit miss quoting. It mearly says turn a serious blow into a less serious you still get hit. It's not cause you pulled a muscle while dodging that axe blade. You take damage cause it nicked you while dodging. Actually managing to dodge is it missing because of dex. :) . I did not misquote. Turning a serious blow into a less serious blow is done by dodging/deflecting the blow. And Kursk By the core rules, hit points represent how hard it is to kill something. If that something is an elephant, they largely represent how much damage it can take because of size and toughness. If that creature is a human, they represent how skilled that person is at dodging and deflecting attacks. If some people wish to portray combat between two characters as a hackfest where each takes repeated direct hits to the the body then fine, but your view is not supported by the core rules.
Kursk 04-07-06, 11:33 PM	I did not misquote. Turning a serious blow into a less serious blow is done by dodging/deflecting the blow. And Kursk By the core rules, hit points represent how hard it is to kill something. If that something is an elephant, they largely represent how much damage it can take because of size and toughness. If that creature is a human, they represent how skilled that person is at dodging and deflecting attacks. If some people wish to portray combat between two characters as a hackfest where each takes repeated direct hits to the the body then fine, but your view is not supported by the core rules. Keep reading and someday you'll find it. I'd give you the page and book but I think you should take the time to really learn the game. Have a nice day.
runestar 04-07-06, 11:55 PM	Well, this means that a lv20 barb with 400 hp could take a swim in lava for a minute and come out unscathed(assuming lava deals an average of 35hp each round), since his "real 10 hp" hasn't been touched yet. ;)
deanruel 04-08-06, 12:30 AM	I would like to make the observation that this thread has gone from an intelligent idea discussion to a bunch of guys saying "The rules say you have to picture combat my way". This is not only ridiculous but futile. Now I'm not going to type much here because I'm sure you will continue on anyways despite anything I may say here, so I will only say this. This is a game based on the interactions of several peoples imaginations given rules to facilitate this interaction and allow for people to have fun and enjoy themselves. If player A pictures his character in a different way than you he is not wrong, niether are you. If that same player pictures his characters actions differently than you then by the same token he is not wrong, niehter are you, and it doesn't really matter. Our jobs are to create stories and have fun. Enjoy your column.
Blu Death 04-08-06, 01:10 AM	Actually the truth is that a 10th level fighter WILL miss 1/2 the time. He usually hits on his +10, but usually misses on his +5. Actually, you have no idea what your talking about, do you? Do you know how probability works? Sure, it can be tricky, but anyone can use common sense to know that what you said is wrong. Anyways, Blu Death
Vrellum 04-08-06, 09:11 AM	Keep reading and someday you'll find it. I'd give you the page and book but I think you should take the time to really learn the game. Have a nice day. Hmm, seems you don't have anything to backup your statements so you've resorted to insults. Very mature of you.
Rapiersman 04-08-06, 03:36 PM	I think the AC/HP system of D&D is pretty messed up indeed. You know when I hear that "the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one", some really ridiculous images pop into my mind... like a fighter being hit and turning around before that and saying "HAHHAH! I turned so that you didn't hit my heart but my back instead! I'm so 1337, ain't I?" More than "turning serious blows into a less serious one", high-level fighters would simply parry better. But instead in D&D, those high-level fighters always get just some scratches, never instantly fatal hits, even from other experienced warriors? It just doesn't look good when two skilled fighters hit each other all the time, almost never dodging or parrying. Someone said that a fighter shouldn't be any better defending himself without armor than he is now in D&D, because he isn't a unarmed or unarmored specialist. Still, his ability to attack with his bare hands does increase, so why not the ability defend without armor, especially if he has a weapon in hand which he can use to parry? Awhile ago I thought that you could just describe fights so that when these experienced combatants slowly lose their HP, they are just getting tired and possibly taking some minor scratches. However, first is that really good thing that suddenly hit isn't a hit? First DM says "OK you hit, throw damage" and then he describes "the fight continues, your opponent parrying your blows." And how isn't this then nonlethal damage? And why the experienced guy again can jump from the highest mountains and survive because of her great ability dodge or something? Yes, there are some ways you can get pretty high AC, but those are feats, prestige classes, magic items or stuff like that. Why should you need some special stuffs for it? It should be something every warrior would learn, because not getting hit is pretty important for your survival from fights, aren't it?.
Rylen 04-08-06, 10:41 PM	I just think of it the same way it is in the core rules. I guess if you want to house rule otherwise it's up to you... Exactly. In the end, thinking of HPs as VPs doesn't change the game mechanics at all. Once a characters reaches zero HPs/VPs, he's out for the count, regardless of how the damage is explained. This talk is really about how we think a battle looks. It doesn't affect rules or numbers on a sheet whatsoever. I prefer a battle between two fighters to be a lot of sword-play, parrying with the occasional blade banging agaisnt armor or stabbing into a leg. At low-levels this looks perfect, since a low-level combatant can only take a few solid hits before dropping. At higher-level, you need to get a little more creative, unless you think it's fine to have someone get run-through by a sword 10 or 12 times and keep on tickin'.
tridiak 04-09-06, 04:52 AM	For the lava dunking thing : my house rule is that you must make a Fort save vs half damage done or die outright, regardless of hp. And they suffer major tissue damage where Regenerate spell will acutally be used. For HP : I think there should be two sets of HPs, one for representation of experience, skill and ability to reduce blows. And the other for events where the above is irrelevant (your skill and experience will not save you when dunked in lava) or helplessness. #1 is the standard HP. #2 is some value based roughly equal to racial HD+Con+~BAB(+feats or whatever).
aotrscommander 04-09-06, 12:02 PM	I think a lot of the questions about why a fighter is no easier to hit at low-level than high level boils down to the modelling of parrying in D&D. I think we are more-or-less agreed that a high-level fighter is by definition a more skilled combatant, and the question is why don't fighters gain some kind of AC bonus? That comes down to how the rules were written and the way rules work. There's only so many ways of making a set of rules, especially if you want to make it balanced. D&D does not model parrying, per say. Rightly, or wrongly, D&D also assumes that fighters and most other characters will gain AC bonuses from primarily armour, and does not take into account and kind of dodging or parrying skill with the exception of feats. D&D does *sort* of model parrying, but its implicit in the hit point system. D&D makes the abstraction that higher-level characters take less 'real' damage from the same source (modelled by their higher hit points). Why? For the purposes of melee combat, we can assume that the 'real' damage is reduced by a combination of parrying and evading. That may not be quite what the designers intended, but that's the best rationalisation I can come up with. It also falls down when you get to missile or energy weapon damage, but let's leave that aside for the moment. The trouble with the hit-point system, is frankly, it isn't very realistic. Remember it originated in the original D&D, where they didn't even try to rationalise what a hit point was; because back then the emphasis was more of 'game' than 'simulation' which it is now. In the same way that television programmes have had to become more 'real' for account for the public's increasing taste in accuracy, we as gamers are no longer satisfied with flat hit-points as an arbitrary number. To their credit, in 3.0 and 3.5, the writers did actually try to rationalise what a hit-point was (which was more than was true for 2nd). If you look at other roleplaying systems, many don't use hit-points in the same manner as D&D. I have a fair number of other RPG (but by no means exhaustive; I'm sure older and wiser gamers have many more), and they often have a wound number of something, but often this is not simply a stand alone number like out hit points, but is mitigated by critical hits or other effects as the number gets lower. Whether or not you think this is better or worse is up to you. I personally have no problems with the hit point system, since it means that at least the PCs can't kill that bad guy I've spent three hours making in the first round with one lucky shot - which happens in some of my other games, notably Rolemaster. Back to parrying then. First question. What is parrying? It' putting your weapon - or shield - up to block an in coming blow. Does that mean the blow has not hit you, or that the damage done by the blow is actually some minor bruising and fatigue? That's a point you can argue until you're blue in the face, but for now, let's say it's either avoiding the blow or effectively reducing the damage. Second question. How do you model it? D&D models it as effectively reducing the damage from an incoming blow, rather than stopping the blow hitting. Assuming you don't agree with that, how could you model it? I've seen many systems (even variants on D&D) that model parrying as the defender making an attack roll against the targets attack roll and on equal or greater, the blow is either stopped or reduced by the amount of damage the attack would have inflicted. This has the advantage that fights are always scaled to the attack bonus of the combatants, but as you will no doubt notice, it adds a whole other set of attack rolls, degrades the point of AC in the first place and penalises larger differences in attack rolls. Let's take a brief aside and look at how it's done in Rolemaster, because the basic mechanics are broadly similar (roll a dice, add an attack bonus). In Rolemaster, the target has a defensive bonus (which is subtracted from the attacks attack roll) an armour type (which the net result is cross-referenced against). To parry in Rolemaster, you take a proportion of your offence for that round and add it to defence. This is almost exactly what Combat Expertise does. In Rolemaster though, equipment bonuses are generally not as large as those in D&D and there aren't really any significant buffing spells to defence. You end up more or less being REQUIRED to parry at higher levels, otherwise the enemy will hit you and deal a critical hit (which in Rolemaster, is what kills you, not concussion hit damage). What this means is a skilled fighter can use his skill to deliver an all-out attack which leaves himself open for a strike OR he can use his superior skill to defended himself - but not both, and that's important. So you could make the argument that Combat Expertise shouldn't be a feat, and it's effects should be swapped with Fighting Defensively. I'd buy that argument. I don't think that would have too much effect on the game (since you are trading off accuracy for AC in the same way Power Attack trades accuracy for damage). Why the writers didn't use this idea in the first place, I don't know. Having written rules myself, I have to say that it probably didn't occur to them until afterwards (if at all); hindsight is one of the best rules writing tools. But by not doing this, and abstracting parrying to a sort of passive effective damage reduction, the writers crunched the number for balance on the assumption that all fighters would where heavy armour. The design philosophy of the heavy armoured classes is that they wear armour, and don't fight unarmed or unarmoured (and therefore are at a disadvantage when they do). Whether you agree with them or not (and I don't totally agree myself) that's the way the rules were written in intent. If, of course, you want to change, that, that's fine; players and DMs alike have a tendency to push the boundaries of the rules in ways the designers didn't think of. I'm not criticising either the writers or those or you who didn't agree with them; I'm trying to point out what the problem is (game mechanic verses realism) and several potential solutions, which I shall recap: 1) For Fighter who don't use armour, grovel to have armour feats swapped out for Monk AC bonuses 2) Make Improved unarmed strike a Martial Weapon Proficiency. 3) Swap the effects of Combat Expertise and fighting defensively, such that any character can trade up to their BAB for an AC bonus (verses melee). This of course, won't reduce missile and ranged touch ACs (thus maintaining game balance). Combat Expertise then would provide the normal benefits of fighting defensively (-4 attack, +2 dodge AC as a standard action or +4 for a full round action) as a feat. 4) Leave it as it is and just grit your teeth and rationalise it away. Any of the above options are equally acceptable to your (or more importantly, your DM's) game.
Rapiersman 04-09-06, 12:37 PM	Yeah you could indeed so that everyone would practically have the Improved Combat Expertise feat, it would make fights maybe a bit more realistic. However it still wouldn't do anything to the other problem: way too much HP. I think it's good that adventurers can become tougher than people in real life, so that they won't die too easily because that isn't fun at all, but I think the amount of HP the high-level D&D characters get is just insane. Adventurers in D&D should be about as tough as they are in heroic fantasy stories IMO, but even in those they can't get run-through by a sword twenty times, can they? :P
aotrscommander 04-09-06, 12:48 PM	However it still wouldn't do anything to the other problem: way too much HP. I think it's good that adventurers can become tougher than people in real life, so that they won't die too easily because that isn't fun at all, but I think the amount of HP the high-level D&D characters get is just insane. That's the problem with the hit-point system, unfortunatly. There's not a lot you can do about it, either. You can't really just cap off the hits (like they did in 2nd ed) without having to drop the damage spells deal and everything else; unless you want to up PC mortality. Like I said, I actually like the fact that you can't kill anyone in a single hit (regardless of what you define a single hit to actually mean). In dear old Rolemaster, it was realistically implausible but statistically possible that a 0th level hobbit apprentice armed with a bent knife could kill 500th level Morgoth with one attack! Them's the breaks. It's a simple equation. The more realistic you make the combat, the more character fatalities you will get. Personally, I think the often used VP/Wound point system isn't a bad compromise; but you still have the problem of a lucky critical hit swacking your low-Con Level 20 Jedi/Sith lord.
TheNarrator 04-09-06, 08:54 PM	The fact that how difficult it is to hit you is almost entirely based on what you wear and hardly at all based on your skill in combat is one of my pet peeves with D&D. But while I'll moan about it from time to time, in the end I sort of shrug, accept it and move past it. It's a pet peeve with the system, but it's part of the system, and I like most of the game enough to sort of whistle and move past the parts that bug me. As for Hit Points: well, they're not realistic. But then, it's a fantasy game with a distinctly non-realistic feel, based more on the notion of the epic action heroes who keep going even though they're taking a beating while less important characters go down easily. So I figure that how serious a wound is depends on proportion: when a 1st level guy takes a sword hit for 1d8, it's a solid hit that cuts deep (a big chunk of his hit points gone), but when a 10th level guy takes 1d8, it's more of a grazing slash that does only cosmetic damage, like you frequently see in swordfighting movies. I guess that fits with how Hit Points are described in the SRD, to a degree. Hit Points are definitely not Vitality Points, that's for sure. Vitality Points are literally you exhausting yourself dodging stuff, and Hit Points definitely represent real damage. That's why you need magic to heal them, and why they deliver poison. The system breaks down a little again when the same Cure Light Wounds that brings the 1st level guy back from the brink of death simply patches the 10th level guy's minor scratch, but that's the problems of an abstract game system for you. Other d20 games give class-and-level based AC bonuses, which is good because it means skill is actually a factor, not just gear, (often armor becomes Damage Reduction, which is probably a bit closer to reality as well) and/or use the Vitality Points, which does likewise, but in a less "epic hero shurgs off tiny scratches" way than Hit Points and more of a "decently cool guy tires himself a bit dodging all those attempts to kill him" way. And non-d20 games change things entirely. They make melee combat be an opposed roll between the two combatants' skills: In Shadowrun if you've got a sword and they've got a club, you roll your Edged Weapons skill vs. their Clubs skill, and whoever rolls better did better in the fight, either getting through the other guys' defenses to score a hit or blocking the other guys' attack and maybe counterattacking for a hit of their own. Often in these games ranged weapon skills get opposed by Dodge rolls: again, skill and speed coming into play. In many of these games, if you're hit, there aren't Hit Points. Armor will help resist damage, along with whatever stat is equivalent to Constitution (Body in Shadowrun, Stamina in Mage), and better results on the attack roll will stage damage up (again, letting skill play a bigger factor). But everyone's got a limited amount of harm they can take, and that doesn't increase as you gain experience. So, even skilled, super-cool guys can die like everyone else if they take Deadly damage. It's a very different mentality than d20, less epic action heroes and more gritty and lethal. So really it's a matter of flavor. If you want skill to have more of a factor in determining your AC in D&D, there's a few ways to do it. You could use the Unearthed Arcana rules (just make sure that you keep them from abusing it by taking oen level of fighter to get the good AC). I've played in a D20 Swashbuckling game where we did that, and it works okay. There's a couple flaws that arise from basing it on armor proficiency. It keeps the balance from regular D&D rules because that's how armor bonuses to AC (which it replaces) would be, but there's a couple of spots where it seems odd conceptually: rangers with their full fighter BAB getting a smaller bonus than clerics with their 3/4 BAB because rangers are proficient in light armor and clerics in heavy and the like, even though rangers are better fighters than clerics, and likewise less than barbarians, even though barbarians are very much a "go ahead and hit me, I don't care" class. So you might have to shuffle them based on what seems appropriate, or make your own. Conceptually it seems like the AC bonus should be tied to BAB, because they both represent combat skill. Just not equal to BAB, because then it's too small at 1st level and too big at 20th. And, as I said before, you'd need to jimmy with things when people multiclassed. A fighter 1/wizard 9 should not have the AC of a fighter 10. It also works well conceptually when combined with the "Armor as Damage Reduction" varient rule on the very next page. Now, it's not that the cleric, who's slow moving and unskilled in combat, is harder to hit than the fast, skilled fighter. It's that the cleric's armor protects him from some of the damage when he gets hit, which happens more often for him than for the quicker fighter who defends himself better. Alternatively, one could do opposed attack rolls and the like, which makes a certain degree of sense. It's for the house-ruling DM to decide.
Kursk 04-10-06, 08:52 AM	Anyone here remember or play Runequest? Detailed combat but took forever to run when large #'s invovled.
babysamurai 04-10-06, 09:07 AM	All you need for any of this to "make sense" is to have a DM who provides good descriptions. ...for any RP game.
Elthbert 04-10-06, 09:05 PM	I think the AC/HP system of D&D is pretty messed up indeed. You know when I hear that "the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one", some really ridiculous images pop into my mind... like a fighter being hit and turning around before that and saying "HAHHAH! I turned so that you didn't hit my heart but my back instead! I'm so 1337, ain't I?" More than "turning serious blows into a less serious one", high-level fighters would simply parry better. But instead in D&D, those high-level fighters always get just some scratches, never instantly fatal hits, even from other experienced warriors? It just doesn't look good when two skilled fighters hit each other all the time, almost never dodging or parrying. Someone said that a fighter shouldn't be any better defending himself without armor than he is now in D&D, because he isn't a unarmed or unarmored specialist. Still, his ability to attack with his bare hands does increase, so why not the ability defend without armor, especially if he has a weapon in hand which he can use to parry? Awhile ago I thought that you could just describe fights so that when these experienced combatants slowly lose their HP, they are just getting tired and possibly taking some minor scratches. However, first is that really good thing that suddenly hit isn't a hit? First DM says "OK you hit, throw damage" and then he describes "the fight continues, your opponent parrying your blows." And how isn't this then nonlethal damage? And why the experienced guy again can jump from the highest mountains and survive because of her great ability dodge or something? Yes, there are some ways you can get pretty high AC, but those are feats, prestige classes, magic items or stuff like that. Why should you need some special stuffs for it? It should be something every warrior would learn, because not getting hit is pretty important for your survival from fights, aren't it?. YOu do realize that a parry IS turning a serious blow into a less serious one don't you?
BW0222 04-11-06, 03:20 AM	Folks, It is fairly well balanced. At low-levels it takes about 30 seconds to get through one initative and the combat can take 10 rounds -- as folks repeatedly miss each other. Given 10 combatants, that is about an 45 minutes. At mid-levels it combats typically settles in at 1 minute per initiative and about 5-8 rounds of combat. Given 10 combatants, that is about about an hour for a typical combat. At high levels, initiatives often take well over a minute -- at you make 5 attack rolls, add up damage, apply feats, figure out DR, roll SR checks, scan through dozens of spells, apply saves over dozens of combatants every round, etc. and combat typically only last 2 hours or more for a 5-6 round combat. Honestly, if high-level folks missed half the time, a 300hp monster would take ages to kill of and 5-6 round combats would last well over 4 hours. One heal spell could literally make a combat non-ending. The only thing which ensures that high-level combat functions within a 2 hour time slot is the fact that fighters and creatures hit almost automatically. If you want to see how dramatic an effect this has on time, try running two groups of six 15th-level fighters against each other. Then try again with each having an extended displacement up. Combat literally goes all night.
Rapiersman 04-11-06, 08:03 AM	YOu do realize that a parry IS turning a serious blow into a less serious one don't you? Parry is rarely that.... parry is more like turning a blow into nothing = no damage at all.
Elthbert 04-11-06, 10:51 AM	Parry is rarely that.... parry is more like turning a blow into nothing = no damage at all. HMMMM --- NO damage at all --- that is a bit less serious than say one that damages you isn't it. And as someone who has been training seriously with swords for 12 years now, a parry is certianly not turning it into nothing, not from a sword and certianly not from a pole arm or an axe. Parrying a thrust may in fact be easy so weapons like Rapiers and spears do in fact have their attacks turned into nothing, but cutting weapons can be quite a chore to parry.
prozacman 04-22-06, 06:02 AM	i just had an idea for a "Solution" to this issue. (more likeley a way to powergame and make things more complicated.. but meh. everyone gets an unnamed +1 bonus to AC every time their BAB splits. by lvl 20 a ftr would get +3, a monk would get +2, a wizzy would only get +1 but i wouldnt do this.. with the right feats a fighter is hard enough to hit. but if you absolutely had to make a naked fighter harder to hit.. thats how i'd do it happy gaming