Armour Issues [Archive] - Wizards Community

Armour Issues [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
FlameLover
10-09-05, 11:51 PM I had my case all typed out but then FireFox crashed so i'll just give y'all the short version:

Armour is pretty stupid in standard D&D. I don't mean that it gives you AC instead of DR or anything from a "realism" perspective but my peeve is with "balance". You see armour doesn't scale like weapons do, and it produces all sorts of problems (like Chainmail vs. Breastplate). Anyway this thread is for discussion about a possible way to fix the issues that plague armour in its current form.

First thing that i feel needs addressing is categorization. Weapons are organized by 2 seperate groups, weight (light, 1-handed & 2-handed) and complexity (simple, martial & exotic). Armour is only distinguished by one category: weight (light, medium & heavy). I feel that a second category should be added which would aroganize armor into Simple, Martial & Exotic. This would add more variety to armour and hopefully fix up alot of the issues currently in the system.

I'd also bring the list of "basic" armours down to 9, ranging from 1 AC to 9. Armour would mainly scale smoothly and should just make things simpler overall. Now i'm not sure exactly how to go about doing this but i know that it needs to include some sort of 1 AC = -1 ACP - -5% ASF, etc. although i'd have to re-do all of the armours from the ground up with this system. If some sort of Critical Defence was added it would help too (it'd effectivley lower the threat range of the attacker's weapon by one for each point in it) but that adds too much complexity to combat i guess.

Anyway i feel something needs to be done with armour because at the moment it seems more like an afterthought than a prominent part of the system. I have a general idea what needs to be done but i havn't quite worked it out yet so i'd like to know what everyone else thinks on the matter.
Gilean
10-10-05, 09:31 AM Remember, armours were not as cumbersome as they are described to be. See the 4th myth here (http://www.thearma.org/essays/TopMyths.htm), and this (http://www.thearma.org/essays/armoredlongsword.html) may also prove useful.
Against the early firearms, armours were made. They were even shot at with a firearm to create evidence. The armours were plate. They didn't last all too long, though.
FlameLover
10-10-05, 06:56 PM Ok, so you're saying that armour should have a much decreased ACP and maybe no speed decrease? I like things to be reasnobly "realistic" i guess too but i don't see a reason NOT to where heavy armour if i did it that way. Anyway here here is what i'm thinking of:

You start with Light, Medium or Heavy armour. Light has 1 AC, 9 MaxDex and 1 ACP. Medium has 4 AC, 6 MaxDex and 2 ACP, and Heavy has 7 AC, 3 MaxDex and 3 ACP.

Simple armours have one "point" to spend on increasing effectiveness. Martial has 2 and Exotic 4. Each point can be used to increase AC, increase MaxDex or lower ACP. You can also get a few "extra" points by taking a -1 to MaxDex or +1 to ACP. It does get some weird results so it needs abit more tweaking but i think it is a step in the right direction overall.

And the Armour Proficiency feats would change also, to Simple/Martial/Exotic Armour Proficiency. If Armour was seperated into AC and DR it would help design the system too.
Verelor
10-11-05, 11:07 AM Eh...I don't like it. This is taking way too much flavor out of armor, of all things (in my time on these boards, I think I have seen EVERYTHING contested for balance). Believe me, "balance" only really matters if it has a noticeable effect upon the amount of fun your players have. It is a continuosly moving target and an ideal that will never be reached (at least not without stripping everything of it's uniqueness).

Seriously, how are you going to tell me ARMOR is an afterthought?
Hierarch Leviticus
10-11-05, 12:53 PM The real problem with good armor was, is, and will always be, the weight.

Several of the downsides of armor can be reduced or dropped realistically, but the encumbrace rules would need to be severely altered to accomodate this if game balance remains a prominent idea.
FlameLover
10-15-05, 01:02 AM Eh...I don't like it. This is taking way too much flavor out of armor, of all things (in my time on these boards, I think I have seen EVERYTHING contested for balance). Believe me, "balance" only really matters if it has a noticeable effect upon the amount of fun your players have. It is a continuosly moving target and an ideal that will never be reached (at least not without stripping everything of it's uniqueness).

Seriously, how are you going to tell me ARMOR is an afterthought?
How am i removing the flavour of armour? By building a system where you can loads of cool and exotic armours? If that's removing flavour i must have missed the memo that this was inverse-day or something. I mean think about weapons - how cool would they be if all you had was Light, One-Handed and Two-Handed with 3-4 in each group?

I just feel that armour could be a more interesting part of the game. I think the weapons work is fine and it's great but armour feels like it's a "red-headed step-child with buck teeth" at the moment (no offense if you do have the above metnioned traits). Anyway here is my thinking: skill increases likleyhood to hit and weapon determines damage while chance to dodge is determined by armour and lessening damage isn't done with armour - but why?

I think classes should have a "Base Defence Bonus" similar to the system presented in UA and Armour should provide DR like it does in Iron Heroes (like Armour as DR from UA except you roll DR - it's not static). This would keep things interesting especially since you could have lots of different types of armour with DR/MaxDex/ACP/ASF variances. It'd also allow you to have cool, exotic armours that could really add flavour to the world (like a Dwarfplate armour that is like Fullplate +1 if you know what i mean). It would allow a greater variety of options but also make the system simpler to understand (since it'd be very similar to weapons).

Oh and shields would remain as AC-boosters - just incase anyone thought i was trying to pass them off as DR.
Ranger REG
10-15-05, 02:03 AM I had my case all typed out but then FireFox crashed so i'll just give y'all the short version:

Armour is pretty stupid in standard D&D. I don't mean that it gives you AC instead of DR or anything from a "realism" perspective but my peeve is with "balance". You see armour doesn't scale like weapons do, and it produces all sorts of problems (like Chainmail vs. Breastplate). Anyway this thread is for discussion about a possible way to fix the issues that plague armour in its current form.
Weapons don't scale at all, especially when the PC is leveling up. Whether you're a 1st-level fighter or a 20th-level paladin, a longsword is still going to do 1d8 points of damage.

First thing that i feel needs addressing is categorization. Weapons are organized by 2 seperate groups, weight (light, 1-handed & 2-handed) and complexity (simple, martial & exotic). Armour is only distinguished by one category: weight (light, medium & heavy). I feel that a second category should be added which would aroganize armor into Simple, Martial & Exotic. This would add more variety to armour and hopefully fix up alot of the issues currently in the system.
Why? So a caucasian from Europe would have a difficult time wearing an o-yoroi (samurai armor) and vice versa? Isn't that wasting feats?

If you ask me, just use the "armor as DR" in the Unearthed Arcana (I like armor stats having both AC and DR values). And compensate that with Class Defense Bonus (I'd rather use the d20 Modern model than the one in UA).
FlameLover
10-15-05, 02:45 AM Weapons don't scale at all, especially when the PC is leveling up. Whether you're a 1st-level fighter or a 20th-level paladin, a longsword is still going to do 1d8 points of damage.
I should have been clearer - i meant your "attack" scales while your "AC" doesn't without items and some class features. So while damage/DR wouldn't change both attack and defense bonuses should imporve as you gain levels i feel.

Why? So a caucasian from Europe would have a difficult time wearing an o-yoroi (samurai armor) and vice versa? Isn't that wasting feats?
The only reason i can see you saying this is that you're one of the people who doesn't think "Exotic" weapons should exist. While i agree that some weapons shouldn't be Exotic (just look at the Monk weapons) they are an interesting part of the system from a design perspective because they allow you to make more varied and unique items without feeling quite as constrained as you would making a Simple or Martial item.

If you ask me, just use the "armor as DR" in the Unearthed Arcana (I like armor stats having both AC and DR values). And compensate that with Class Defense Bonus (I'd rather use the d20 Modern model than the one in UA).
While i already do both i don't feel it doesn't goes far enough. I think that the system would benefit from more variety in armour and i'm not sure what the downsides would be. It'd allow for some quite interesting armours like Elven Breastplate that allows casting with no ASF or Halfling Hide that allows you to move as if you were wearing light armour. Under the current system there is no unified way to accomplish this.

I'm obviously not articulating my idea very well, or else i'm just going stupid but i cannot see why this would be a step-back or anything.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
FlameLover 10-09-05, 11:51 PM	I had my case all typed out but then FireFox crashed so i'll just give y'all the short version: Armour is pretty stupid in standard D&D. I don't mean that it gives you AC instead of DR or anything from a "realism" perspective but my peeve is with "balance". You see armour doesn't scale like weapons do, and it produces all sorts of problems (like Chainmail vs. Breastplate). Anyway this thread is for discussion about a possible way to fix the issues that plague armour in its current form. First thing that i feel needs addressing is categorization. Weapons are organized by 2 seperate groups, weight (light, 1-handed & 2-handed) and complexity (simple, martial & exotic). Armour is only distinguished by one category: weight (light, medium & heavy). I feel that a second category should be added which would aroganize armor into Simple, Martial & Exotic. This would add more variety to armour and hopefully fix up alot of the issues currently in the system. I'd also bring the list of "basic" armours down to 9, ranging from 1 AC to 9. Armour would mainly scale smoothly and should just make things simpler overall. Now i'm not sure exactly how to go about doing this but i know that it needs to include some sort of 1 AC = -1 ACP - -5% ASF, etc. although i'd have to re-do all of the armours from the ground up with this system. If some sort of Critical Defence was added it would help too (it'd effectivley lower the threat range of the attacker's weapon by one for each point in it) but that adds too much complexity to combat i guess. Anyway i feel something needs to be done with armour because at the moment it seems more like an afterthought than a prominent part of the system. I have a general idea what needs to be done but i havn't quite worked it out yet so i'd like to know what everyone else thinks on the matter.
Gilean 10-10-05, 09:31 AM	Remember, armours were not as cumbersome as they are described to be. See the 4th myth here (http://www.thearma.org/essays/TopMyths.htm), and this (http://www.thearma.org/essays/armoredlongsword.html) may also prove useful. Against the early firearms, armours were made. They were even shot at with a firearm to create evidence. The armours were plate. They didn't last all too long, though.
FlameLover 10-10-05, 06:56 PM	Ok, so you're saying that armour should have a much decreased ACP and maybe no speed decrease? I like things to be reasnobly "realistic" i guess too but i don't see a reason NOT to where heavy armour if i did it that way. Anyway here here is what i'm thinking of: You start with Light, Medium or Heavy armour. Light has 1 AC, 9 MaxDex and 1 ACP. Medium has 4 AC, 6 MaxDex and 2 ACP, and Heavy has 7 AC, 3 MaxDex and 3 ACP. Simple armours have one "point" to spend on increasing effectiveness. Martial has 2 and Exotic 4. Each point can be used to increase AC, increase MaxDex or lower ACP. You can also get a few "extra" points by taking a -1 to MaxDex or +1 to ACP. It does get some weird results so it needs abit more tweaking but i think it is a step in the right direction overall. And the Armour Proficiency feats would change also, to Simple/Martial/Exotic Armour Proficiency. If Armour was seperated into AC and DR it would help design the system too.
Verelor 10-11-05, 11:07 AM	Eh...I don't like it. This is taking way too much flavor out of armor, of all things (in my time on these boards, I think I have seen EVERYTHING contested for balance). Believe me, "balance" only really matters if it has a noticeable effect upon the amount of fun your players have. It is a continuosly moving target and an ideal that will never be reached (at least not without stripping everything of it's uniqueness). Seriously, how are you going to tell me ARMOR is an afterthought?
Hierarch Leviticus 10-11-05, 12:53 PM	The real problem with good armor was, is, and will always be, the weight. Several of the downsides of armor can be reduced or dropped realistically, but the encumbrace rules would need to be severely altered to accomodate this if game balance remains a prominent idea.
FlameLover 10-15-05, 01:02 AM	Eh...I don't like it. This is taking way too much flavor out of armor, of all things (in my time on these boards, I think I have seen EVERYTHING contested for balance). Believe me, "balance" only really matters if it has a noticeable effect upon the amount of fun your players have. It is a continuosly moving target and an ideal that will never be reached (at least not without stripping everything of it's uniqueness). Seriously, how are you going to tell me ARMOR is an afterthought? How am i removing the flavour of armour? By building a system where you can loads of cool and exotic armours? If that's removing flavour i must have missed the memo that this was inverse-day or something. I mean think about weapons - how cool would they be if all you had was Light, One-Handed and Two-Handed with 3-4 in each group? I just feel that armour could be a more interesting part of the game. I think the weapons work is fine and it's great but armour feels like it's a "red-headed step-child with buck teeth" at the moment (no offense if you do have the above metnioned traits). Anyway here is my thinking: skill increases likleyhood to hit and weapon determines damage while chance to dodge is determined by armour and lessening damage isn't done with armour - but why? I think classes should have a "Base Defence Bonus" similar to the system presented in UA and Armour should provide DR like it does in Iron Heroes (like Armour as DR from UA except you roll DR - it's not static). This would keep things interesting especially since you could have lots of different types of armour with DR/MaxDex/ACP/ASF variances. It'd also allow you to have cool, exotic armours that could really add flavour to the world (like a Dwarfplate armour that is like Fullplate +1 if you know what i mean). It would allow a greater variety of options but also make the system simpler to understand (since it'd be very similar to weapons). Oh and shields would remain as AC-boosters - just incase anyone thought i was trying to pass them off as DR.
Ranger REG 10-15-05, 02:03 AM	I had my case all typed out but then FireFox crashed so i'll just give y'all the short version: Armour is pretty stupid in standard D&D. I don't mean that it gives you AC instead of DR or anything from a "realism" perspective but my peeve is with "balance". You see armour doesn't scale like weapons do, and it produces all sorts of problems (like Chainmail vs. Breastplate). Anyway this thread is for discussion about a possible way to fix the issues that plague armour in its current form. Weapons don't scale at all, especially when the PC is leveling up. Whether you're a 1st-level fighter or a 20th-level paladin, a longsword is still going to do 1d8 points of damage. First thing that i feel needs addressing is categorization. Weapons are organized by 2 seperate groups, weight (light, 1-handed & 2-handed) and complexity (simple, martial & exotic). Armour is only distinguished by one category: weight (light, medium & heavy). I feel that a second category should be added which would aroganize armor into Simple, Martial & Exotic. This would add more variety to armour and hopefully fix up alot of the issues currently in the system. Why? So a caucasian from Europe would have a difficult time wearing an o-yoroi (samurai armor) and vice versa? Isn't that wasting feats? If you ask me, just use the "armor as DR" in the Unearthed Arcana (I like armor stats having both AC and DR values). And compensate that with Class Defense Bonus (I'd rather use the d20 Modern model than the one in UA).
FlameLover 10-15-05, 02:45 AM	Weapons don't scale at all, especially when the PC is leveling up. Whether you're a 1st-level fighter or a 20th-level paladin, a longsword is still going to do 1d8 points of damage. I should have been clearer - i meant your "attack" scales while your "AC" doesn't without items and some class features. So while damage/DR wouldn't change both attack and defense bonuses should imporve as you gain levels i feel. Why? So a caucasian from Europe would have a difficult time wearing an o-yoroi (samurai armor) and vice versa? Isn't that wasting feats? The only reason i can see you saying this is that you're one of the people who doesn't think "Exotic" weapons should exist. While i agree that some weapons shouldn't be Exotic (just look at the Monk weapons) they are an interesting part of the system from a design perspective because they allow you to make more varied and unique items without feeling quite as constrained as you would making a Simple or Martial item. If you ask me, just use the "armor as DR" in the Unearthed Arcana (I like armor stats having both AC and DR values). And compensate that with Class Defense Bonus (I'd rather use the d20 Modern model than the one in UA). While i already do both i don't feel it doesn't goes far enough. I think that the system would benefit from more variety in armour and i'm not sure what the downsides would be. It'd allow for some quite interesting armours like Elven Breastplate that allows casting with no ASF or Halfling Hide that allows you to move as if you were wearing light armour. Under the current system there is no unified way to accomplish this. I'm obviously not articulating my idea very well, or else i'm just going stupid but i cannot see why this would be a step-back or anything.