Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Cowjuicer 04-02-08, 09:02 PM	Hi, I'm DM for, among others, a Dwarf Fighter in Full Plate. I don't understand why the check penalty for shields and armor apply only to skills that are modified by Dexterity. I was thinking about this rule: Apply half your Armor Check Penalty (rounded down) to all Dex checks and Reflex saves. Does this make sense to you? Am I missing something here? Please help me. Reasoning is this: You are wearing armor, which should penalize how nimble you are. Reflex saves and Dex checks represent your nimbleness with regards to manipulation of objects/quick thinking (and then quick movement).
Someone 04-03-08, 01:12 AM	If you're not proficient with the armor, then you are already penalized similar to you describe- you take the ACP on all Str-based and Dex-based ability and skill checks, as well as attack rolls. I can't be certain, but Initiative and Reflex saves might be affected, as they could be considered Dex-based ability checks.
Shaggy_Shaggs 04-03-08, 01:30 AM	It makes no sense whatsoever. Here's why: it is a modification to the rules that makes the game less fun. Heavy armor characters are already pretty hosed. Lighter armors are better, and no armor at all is often best (though you have to work for it). All making heavy armor worse can ever do is give you some powertrip jollies as a DM while further punishing a character that's already using a poor option. Try using touch attacks or incorporeal touch attacks once in awhile, instead. Changing the existing rules just to make life more difficult for a character is always a bad idea.
NoldorForce 04-03-08, 01:38 AM	Saves are distinct from ability checks, being based on two statistics (ability score modifier and base save modifier) rather than just one. It's the same thing with skill checks, which are based partly on your ranks in a given skill. However, initiative rolls are ability checks - if you look in the text on rolling initiative, it explicitly says so. Regardless, D&D is generally an abstraction of things. Having something "make sense" should always be secondary. If your player's fighter-in-full-plate were truly realistic, he'd likely be exhausted at the end of the day (ie, penalties) from wearing a seventy-pound suit of armor. If you're looking for a "realistic" system, you could probably find something more appropriate than D&D. Armor check penalties exist to restrict the stuff that requires the most mobility; going beyond that (even with proficiency) stiffs the character for little good reason.
Cowjuicer 04-03-08, 10:08 AM	It makes no sense whatsoever. Here's why: it is a modification to the rules that makes the game less fun. Heavy armor characters are already pretty hosed. Lighter armors are better, and no armor at all is often best (though you have to work for it). All making heavy armor worse can ever do is give you some powertrip jollies as a DM while further punishing a character that's already using a poor option. Try using touch attacks or incorporeal touch attacks once in awhile, instead. Changing the existing rules just to make life more difficult for a character is always a bad idea. I'm not trying to powertrip and lord it over my players. i just thought it would make sense. Since apparently it would needlessly penalize characters, I won't use it. Simple as that.
jaelis 04-03-08, 10:14 AM	I think the idea that plate armor might help protect you from a fireball or a dragon's breath is not unreasonable. Many reflex saves do involve effects that a physical barrier would help protect against.
mplindustries 04-03-08, 10:26 AM	Reflex saves do not represent "I dodge out of the way!" Reflex saves represent "Some effects would be too powerful if people could not reduce them, so you make a totally abstracted roll based on class, just as has always been done in (A)D&D that we happened to call Reflex just to make it easier." If you really need it to represent something, its as much luck as it is the ability to get out of the way. You do get a Reflex save, after all, even if you're asleep or bound or (I believe) even paralyzed.