Can someone explain this to me: armor v. deflection [Archive] - Wizards Community

Can someone explain this to me: armor v. deflection [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Saurstalk
09-15-04, 05:21 PM I need someone to explain to me the rationality of differentiating between armor bonuses and deflection bonuses.

Namely, Studded Leather = +3 Armor. +1 Studded Leather Armor = +3 Armor, +1 Deflection.

Rings of Protection = Deflection ... but
Bracers of Armor = Armor.

I thought I got it on the armor issue. I perceived that your armor provides a solid level of protection based on the type of armor it is, but when you instill magical protections, you create an emanating magical field that serves to assist in deflecting attacks. Makes sense with you talk armor or shields, or even rings of protection ... but it doesn't make sense with bracers of armor .. or more so, spells like mage armor OR powers like inertial armor.

Thoughts?
Will Brandiman
09-15-04, 06:39 PM Studded Leather = +3 Armor. +1 Studded Leather Armor = +3 Armor, +1 Deflection. That's where you're going wrong. The +1 bonus is NOT a deflection bonus. It's an enhancement to the armour bonus. Therefore the correct situation is Studded Leather = +3 Armor. +1 Studded Leather Armor = +4 Armor.

Rings of Protection = Deflection ... but
Bracers of Armor = Armor. The ring generates a field that actually makes it less likely that something will hit you. The bracers generate a field that makes it no less likely that you will be hit but less likely that the hit will penetrate the armour and cause damage. The combat system in D&D however does not differentiate between misses and non-damaging hits in most cases. So they both have the same effect, ie increasing your AC.

I wouldn't worry too much about the different types of bonus except when working out what stacks.
masterofmayhem
09-15-04, 06:42 PM I see why you're confused. Allow me to attempt to help clear things up. The enhancement bonus from armor (i.e., the +1 from your +1 studded leather) is not a deflection bonus, but an enhancement bonus to armor. This means that +1 studded leather gives you +4 armor to your AC. The magical enhancement that can be added on to an armor can bee seen either as a powerful feidl of force (like that made by the bracers of armor) or a hardening of the material that the armor is made of. Either way is merely an artistic choice.

There really is no difference (to my knowledge) between the field of force provided by the bracers to the field of force provided by any deflection bonuses, other than their diferent names and stackability.
Nom
09-15-04, 09:34 PM There really is no difference (to my knowledge) between the field of force provided by the bracers to the field of force provided by any deflection bonuses, other than their diferent names and stackability.Not true. Bracers provide an armour bonus, which is ignored by touch attacks. Deflection bonuses apply against touch attacks.
masterofmayhem
09-15-04, 11:35 PM Sorry, I phrased that poorly. What I meant was that there was no aesthetic difference between the two. Flavor-wise, they seem very similar. Rule-wise, the differences are clear-cut.
Saurstalk
09-16-04, 12:29 AM Um, I was under the impression that the +1 magic enhancement to armor does work against touch attacks, i.e., deflection.

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I swear I recall reading it somewhere that this was so. Hence, the nature of my confusion. (Oh woe to go back and change every character sheet!) :D
DM Zoc
09-16-04, 01:05 AM There's an alternate rule in Unearthed Arcana that says exactly what you're thinking. Maybe your DM is using that rule.
Elspooky
09-16-04, 01:15 AM Um, I was under the impression that the +1 magic enhancement to armor does work against touch attacks, i.e., deflection.

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I swear I recall reading it somewhere that this was so. Hence, the nature of my confusion. (Oh woe to go back and change every character sheet!) :D

It's the way that D&D tracks bonuses (in order to keep too many bonus "types" from stacking with each other); it might not make complete sense, but it keeps the universe from collapsing on itself ;)

Like Will, Masterofmayhem, et. al. said, adding a +1 enhancement to studded leather armor results in a total armor bonus of +4. The enhancement isn't deflection, it's making your armor "better" (if it helps, think of it as making it tougher and more resilient). It isn't a deflection bonus; or, more precisely, it counts as an armor bonus and not something else.

From the Armor and Weapons section of the SRD (or p. 216 of the DMG):

In general, magic armor protects the wearer to a greater extent than nonmagical armor. Magic armor bonuses are enhancement bonuses, never rise above +5, and stack with regular armor bonuses (and with shield and magic shield enhancement bonuses).

Hopefully you wrote on your character sheets in pencil ;)
Saurstalk
09-16-04, 02:02 AM Ok. Makes sense .. now how about these:

1. Ring of Protection doesn't stack with magic armor bonuses. (I believe this rule still applies, and if so - ring of protection offers a deflection bonus.) P.S., I'll be happy if you say I'm wrong! (But only if you mean it.)

2. WHY are mage armor and inertial armor armor bonuses instead of deflection bonuses? I always pictured them providing a protective field of energy, be it magic or psionic in origin, but by so doing would protect the person (in addition to armor). Purely balance reasons, or does someone have a more logical explanation?
t_chal
09-16-04, 02:15 AM 1.
Ring of Protection = Deflection bonus
Magical Armour = Armour bonus

bonuses of different names stack, so these stack

Bracers of Armour = Armour bonus

stacks with ring of protection, but not magical armour

2.
Purely arbitrary, maybe balance reasons. Though you could say that they simply make you/your clothing more likely to block an attack like armour does, but not stop something from touching you, i guess. I'm not going to go any further into that argument though, since it is simply however you choose to have it "look" to acheive its defined effect.
TheAmethystDragon
09-16-04, 02:20 AM Think of it this way:

armor bonus: mentally picture a suit of armor that blocks something from hurting you, even though you have technically been hit (you are wearing the armor, after all)

deflection bonus: now picture a slightly angled angled wall that deflects an attack away from you before it can even touch you, let alone cause damage or other ill effect

With an armor bonus, you're still being touched, just not normally hurt if the armor protects you. With a deflection bonus, you're not even being touched (which is why a deflection bonus protects from lots of nasty magic).

A ring of protection provides a deflection bonus to AC, which stacks (adds to) your protection from your armor, plus provides some protection from touch attacks.

http://www.amethyst-dragon.com/Aenea/TopFrame/aenea2.gif
http://www.amethyst-dragon.com/Aenea/TopFrame/aenea.gif (http://www.amethyst-dragon.com/Aenea)

Original Spells: 341 and counting
Original Items: 26 and counting

www.amethyst-dragon.com/Aenea (http://www.amethyst-dragon.com/Aenea)
http://www.amethyst-dragon.com/Aenea/TopFrame/aenea2.gif
- All spells, items, and concepts in Aenea use 3.0 rules.
- Spells listing a domain are either domain spells or normal
spells that appear on the spell list of clerics with that domain.
http://www.amethyst-dragon.com/Aenea/TopFrame/aenea2.gif
Nom
09-16-04, 03:44 AM 1. Ring of Protection doesn't stack with magic armor bonuses. (I believe this rule still applies, and if so - ring of protection offers a deflection bonus.) P.S., I'll be happy if you say I'm wrong! (But only if you mean it.)An enhancement bonus to armour modifies the armour, not you. From a users' perspective, a suit of studded leather +1 and a conventional chain shirt both provide a +4 armour bonus to AC.

A ring of protection provides a deflection bonus to AC. This stacks with (at least) armour bonus, shield bonus, natural armour bonus, luck bonus, dodge bonuses and unnamed bonuses.
2. WHY are mage armor and inertial armor armor bonuses instead of deflection bonuses? I always pictured them providing a protective field of energy, be it magic or psionic in origin, but by so doing would protect the person (in addition to armor). Purely balance reasons, or does someone have a more logical explanation?(a) Balance and historical precedent. Mage armour (or bracers of armour) have always worked "instead of" regular armour. In 3.*, this is implemented by making them give the same sort of bonus ("armour"), thus it doesn't stack.

(b) Alternatively, picture mage armour as an almost invisible energy shield around your torso and head, which helps absorb the impact of blows. In contrast, deflection is an active magical effect that attempts to turn away attacks. It works for me.

Important: enhancement bonuses enhance something; any 3rd party effects are due to the improved value. A +2 enhancement bonus to strength makes your Str function as if it were +2 better (a +1 bonus). Thus, anything which depends on your Str bonus gains a +1. It's the same with armour.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Saurstalk 09-15-04, 05:21 PM	I need someone to explain to me the rationality of differentiating between armor bonuses and deflection bonuses. Namely, Studded Leather = +3 Armor. +1 Studded Leather Armor = +3 Armor, +1 Deflection. Rings of Protection = Deflection ... but Bracers of Armor = Armor. I thought I got it on the armor issue. I perceived that your armor provides a solid level of protection based on the type of armor it is, but when you instill magical protections, you create an emanating magical field that serves to assist in deflecting attacks. Makes sense with you talk armor or shields, or even rings of protection ... but it doesn't make sense with bracers of armor .. or more so, spells like mage armor OR powers like inertial armor. Thoughts?
Will Brandiman 09-15-04, 06:39 PM	Studded Leather = +3 Armor. +1 Studded Leather Armor = +3 Armor, +1 Deflection. That's where you're going wrong. The +1 bonus is NOT a deflection bonus. It's an enhancement to the armour bonus. Therefore the correct situation is Studded Leather = +3 Armor. +1 Studded Leather Armor = +4 Armor. Rings of Protection = Deflection ... but Bracers of Armor = Armor. The ring generates a field that actually makes it less likely that something will hit you. The bracers generate a field that makes it no less likely that you will be hit but less likely that the hit will penetrate the armour and cause damage. The combat system in D&D however does not differentiate between misses and non-damaging hits in most cases. So they both have the same effect, ie increasing your AC. I wouldn't worry too much about the different types of bonus except when working out what stacks.
masterofmayhem 09-15-04, 06:42 PM	I see why you're confused. Allow me to attempt to help clear things up. The enhancement bonus from armor (i.e., the +1 from your +1 studded leather) is not a deflection bonus, but an enhancement bonus to armor. This means that +1 studded leather gives you +4 armor to your AC. The magical enhancement that can be added on to an armor can bee seen either as a powerful feidl of force (like that made by the bracers of armor) or a hardening of the material that the armor is made of. Either way is merely an artistic choice. There really is no difference (to my knowledge) between the field of force provided by the bracers to the field of force provided by any deflection bonuses, other than their diferent names and stackability.
Nom 09-15-04, 09:34 PM	There really is no difference (to my knowledge) between the field of force provided by the bracers to the field of force provided by any deflection bonuses, other than their diferent names and stackability.Not true. Bracers provide an armour bonus, which is ignored by touch attacks. Deflection bonuses apply against touch attacks.
masterofmayhem 09-15-04, 11:35 PM	Sorry, I phrased that poorly. What I meant was that there was no aesthetic difference between the two. Flavor-wise, they seem very similar. Rule-wise, the differences are clear-cut.
Saurstalk 09-16-04, 12:29 AM	Um, I was under the impression that the +1 magic enhancement to armor does work against touch attacks, i.e., deflection. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I swear I recall reading it somewhere that this was so. Hence, the nature of my confusion. (Oh woe to go back and change every character sheet!) :D
DM Zoc 09-16-04, 01:05 AM	There's an alternate rule in Unearthed Arcana that says exactly what you're thinking. Maybe your DM is using that rule.
Elspooky 09-16-04, 01:15 AM	Um, I was under the impression that the +1 magic enhancement to armor does work against touch attacks, i.e., deflection. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I swear I recall reading it somewhere that this was so. Hence, the nature of my confusion. (Oh woe to go back and change every character sheet!) :D It's the way that D&D tracks bonuses (in order to keep too many bonus "types" from stacking with each other); it might not make complete sense, but it keeps the universe from collapsing on itself ;) Like Will, Masterofmayhem, et. al. said, adding a +1 enhancement to studded leather armor results in a total armor bonus of +4. The enhancement isn't deflection, it's making your armor "better" (if it helps, think of it as making it tougher and more resilient). It isn't a deflection bonus; or, more precisely, it counts as an armor bonus and not something else. From the Armor and Weapons section of the SRD (or p. 216 of the DMG): In general, magic armor protects the wearer to a greater extent than nonmagical armor. Magic armor bonuses are enhancement bonuses, never rise above +5, and stack with regular armor bonuses (and with shield and magic shield enhancement bonuses). Hopefully you wrote on your character sheets in pencil ;)
Saurstalk 09-16-04, 02:02 AM	Ok. Makes sense .. now how about these: 1. Ring of Protection doesn't stack with magic armor bonuses. (I believe this rule still applies, and if so - ring of protection offers a deflection bonus.) P.S., I'll be happy if you say I'm wrong! (But only if you mean it.) 2. WHY are mage armor and inertial armor armor bonuses instead of deflection bonuses? I always pictured them providing a protective field of energy, be it magic or psionic in origin, but by so doing would protect the person (in addition to armor). Purely balance reasons, or does someone have a more logical explanation?
t_chal 09-16-04, 02:15 AM	1. Ring of Protection = Deflection bonus Magical Armour = Armour bonus bonuses of different names stack, so these stack Bracers of Armour = Armour bonus stacks with ring of protection, but not magical armour 2. Purely arbitrary, maybe balance reasons. Though you could say that they simply make you/your clothing more likely to block an attack like armour does, but not stop something from touching you, i guess. I'm not going to go any further into that argument though, since it is simply however you choose to have it "look" to acheive its defined effect.
TheAmethystDragon 09-16-04, 02:20 AM	Think of it this way: armor bonus: mentally picture a suit of armor that blocks something from hurting you, even though you have technically been hit (you are wearing the armor, after all) deflection bonus: now picture a slightly angled angled wall that deflects an attack away from you before it can even touch you, let alone cause damage or other ill effect With an armor bonus, you're still being touched, just not normally hurt if the armor protects you. With a deflection bonus, you're not even being touched (which is why a deflection bonus protects from lots of nasty magic). A ring of protection provides a deflection bonus to AC, which stacks (adds to) your protection from your armor, plus provides some protection from touch attacks. http://www.amethyst-dragon.com/Aenea/TopFrame/aenea2.gif http://www.amethyst-dragon.com/Aenea/TopFrame/aenea.gif (http://www.amethyst-dragon.com/Aenea) Original Spells: 341 and counting Original Items: 26 and counting www.amethyst-dragon.com/Aenea (http://www.amethyst-dragon.com/Aenea) http://www.amethyst-dragon.com/Aenea/TopFrame/aenea2.gif - All spells, items, and concepts in Aenea use 3.0 rules. - Spells listing a domain are either domain spells or normal spells that appear on the spell list of clerics with that domain. http://www.amethyst-dragon.com/Aenea/TopFrame/aenea2.gif
Nom 09-16-04, 03:44 AM	1. Ring of Protection doesn't stack with magic armor bonuses. (I believe this rule still applies, and if so - ring of protection offers a deflection bonus.) P.S., I'll be happy if you say I'm wrong! (But only if you mean it.)An enhancement bonus to armour modifies the armour, not you. From a users' perspective, a suit of studded leather +1 and a conventional chain shirt both provide a +4 armour bonus to AC. A ring of protection provides a deflection bonus to AC. This stacks with (at least) armour bonus, shield bonus, natural armour bonus, luck bonus, dodge bonuses and unnamed bonuses. 2. WHY are mage armor and inertial armor armor bonuses instead of deflection bonuses? I always pictured them providing a protective field of energy, be it magic or psionic in origin, but by so doing would protect the person (in addition to armor). Purely balance reasons, or does someone have a more logical explanation?(a) Balance and historical precedent. Mage armour (or bracers of armour) have always worked "instead of" regular armour. In 3.*, this is implemented by making them give the same sort of bonus ("armour"), thus it doesn't stack. (b) Alternatively, picture mage armour as an almost invisible energy shield around your torso and head, which helps absorb the impact of blows. In contrast, deflection is an active magical effect that attempts to turn away attacks. It works for me. Important: enhancement bonuses enhance something; any 3rd party effects are due to the improved value. A +2 enhancement bonus to strength makes your Str function as if it were +2 better (a +1 bonus). Thus, anything which depends on your Str bonus gains a +1. It's the same with armour.