Post/Author/DateTime	Post
fatal error 11-09-06, 11:58 PM	So, for my urban campaign I wanted to discourage armor use without making it entirely useless. Thus, I changed armor values to DR, made them give a penalty to AC equal to their old armor value, and gave classes a defense progression. This is working fine so far, except for one thing. Potion of Mage Armor. Under my rules, this gives DR 4 with no AC penalty (Bracers of Armor do similar, but aren't a mere 50gp a pop!). I don't want to just knee-jerk ban something like Potions of Mage Armor (by making Mage Armor Range: Personal). On the other hand, I don't want to make armor up through Chain Shirt useless and allow my players to waltz through the majority of low-level adventures (level 3 currently). So, what do you all think? Get rid of the potions?
Seerow 11-10-06, 12:04 AM	"Mage Armor, as a force spell, counts as an AC bonus rather than DR bonus as normal for armors. You may not use this spell while wearing armor of any kind" There you go.
fatal error 11-10-06, 12:25 AM	"Mage Armor, as a force spell, counts as an AC bonus rather than DR bonus as normal for armors. You may not use this spell while wearing armor of any kind" There you go. But. But. . . Yes, I suppose that would be best, even if does somewhat unstreamline my armor to DR rules. Although, now the potions will still be more powerful than they should be. Compared to say, a potion of Shield of Faith +2. This was not the case before, because everyone other than arcanes wore armors but fewer wore shields, now it's reversed. Maybe I'll just drop Mage Armor to +2.
Aerunation 11-10-06, 12:50 AM	make "mage armor" a higher level spell.
Krusk 11-10-06, 12:54 AM	If your PC's want to walk around carrying enough potions of mage armor to get them through combat every single day for the entire campaign, at 50gp a pop let them. its a ton cheaper to just buy some decent armor in the long run, and it dosnt take part of their first round action to drink a potion. Might not be too bad for casters who spend time buffing anyway and the primary users of the spell normally, but for a fighter who needs to get out and in front early or take out the enemy mage quick half of the first round is a pretty big price.
fatal error 11-10-06, 01:12 AM	If your PC's want to walk around carrying enough potions of mage armor to get them through combat every single day for the entire campaign, at 50gp a pop let them. its a ton cheaper to just buy some decent armor in the long run, and it dosnt take part of their first round action to drink a potion. Might not be too bad for casters who spend time buffing anyway and the primary users of the spell normally, but for a fighter who needs to get out and in front early or take out the enemy mage quick half of the first round is a pretty big price. 1875gp for enough potions to last approximately 3 levels (at 12.5 combats a level). Once they hit 6 or so I'm sure the usefulness of DR 4 will be falling rapidly. However, that really doesn't fix the short term problem. If my thugs are doing 1d6+2 their average hits are barely getting through the DR, and it even more severely hurts ranged attackers. Thus, I'm thinking of dropping DR to 2, or reverting it to an AC bonus and reducing it to 2, although I still like the consistancy provided by keeping all armor bonuses as DR.
starfire311 11-10-06, 02:29 PM	1875gp for enough potions to last approximately 3 levels (at 12.5 combats a level). Once they hit 6 or so I'm sure the usefulness of DR 4 will be falling rapidly. However, that really doesn't fix the short term problem. If my thugs are doing 1d6+2 their average hits are barely getting through the DR, and it even more severely hurts ranged attackers. Thus, I'm thinking of dropping DR to 2, or reverting it to an AC bonus and reducing it to 2, although I still like the consistancy provided by keeping all armor bonuses as DR. so if someone has a breasplate, DR 5 they are absically immune to your thugs also, for a lot less cost. Personally I dont have a problem with Mage armor granting DR 4, and that is how I run it in my game. Granted I also dont make it easy for a 1st level character to afford the 13 potions for 650gp, and it really isn't easy to get the 52 potions to outfit an entire party at 1st level, and it really isnt worth having the entire party spending a action each encounter to "armor up".
theotherdraxen 11-10-06, 10:30 PM	Converting AC into DR does not factor as nicely as you might want. The longbow is famous for pushing right through platemail, but with DR 7, the regular longbow is going to have a 1/8 chance of dealing 1 point of damage (and anything less than 1d8+0 you are openly immune to). That's why the UA variant has it 1/2 AC and 1/2 DR. Mage Armor normally provides +4 AC. Under armor as DR, it should provide +2 AC and DR 2/-.
fatal error 11-11-06, 02:02 PM	Converting AC into DR does not factor as nicely as you might want. The longbow is famous for pushing right through platemail, but with DR 7, the regular longbow is going to have a 1/8 chance of dealing 1 point of damage (and anything less than 1d8+0 you are openly immune to). That's why the UA variant has it 1/2 AC and 1/2 DR. Mage Armor normally provides +4 AC. Under armor as DR, it should provide +2 AC and DR 2/-. Yes well, under my system, armor is entirely converted to DR. Furthermore, I believe it will work just fine with the exception of potions of mage armor at level 3. Merely the fact that a potion of mage armor is significantly better than a potion of shield of faith should be a signal that something hasn't been accounted for. Normally, most people will be wearing armor bonuses, making the potions useless. But since no one in my game has an armor bonus normally, they become significantly better, twice as good as a Shield of Faith, and I think that is a bad thing. As for your 'realistic example' of the longbow: I've heard several different opinions on the effectiveness of longbows on plate. The mere fact that breastplates were tested against musketfire makes me think perhaps the longbow was not as good as it was supposed. But that is really neither here nor there, this is an entirely mechanical problem as it relates to a spell's ability to create damage reduction.
theotherdraxen 11-11-06, 02:34 PM	Yes well, under my system, armor is entirely converted to DR. Furthermore, I believe it will work just fine with the exception of potions of mage armor at level 3. Merely the fact that a potion of mage armor is significantly better than a potion of shield of faith should be a signal that something hasn't been accounted for. Normally, most people will be wearing armor bonuses, making the potions useless. But since no one in my game has an armor bonus normally, they become significantly better, twice as good as a Shield of Faith, and I think that is a bad thing. What do you do when you get a character in Dwarven Mountain Plate? He'll be immune to so much, with that DR 10/-. I'm just trying to help. As for your 'realistic example' of the longbow: I've heard several different opinions on the effectiveness of longbows on plate. The mere fact that breastplates were tested against musketfire makes me think perhaps the longbow was not as good as it was supposed. But that is really neither here nor there, this is an entirely mechanical problem as it relates to a spell's ability to create damage reduction. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Agincourt Should offer some insight. Plus, you might want to do some research into the 'bullet proof armor' that came out during the Civil War. Plus, bows were still just as effective as muskets for a long time: it wasn't until some time after their invention that they replaced them and defeated armor all together.
058 11-11-06, 07:40 PM	An arrow, due to its length and weight, puts a lot more force on impact for the amount of power it takes to launch it than does a musketball.
trapspringer 11-13-06, 04:52 PM	Plus, IIRC, it was a hail of arrows that was so famous for shredding plate, but I'm no historian. Anyway, I'd just up the cost of mage armor potions. Supply and demand kicks in or they supply is nearly cut off entirely. Make an adventure out of it. Maybe some guild has started buying them up as part of a plan to overthrow something or somehow.
Rhialto 11-13-06, 05:15 PM	Range and damage are quite closely correllated for both kinds of weapon. It wasn't until the mid-18th century that muskets achieved the same kind of range and relability of a longbow. By this time, body armour such as breastplates were long since obsolete. Also, by virtue of their business end being a sharpened point rather than a ball, arrows genuinely do have better armour penetration, all other factors being equal.
058 11-13-06, 08:04 PM	It should be noted that militaries wore the cuirass (front and back breast-plate) up until the early 20th Century, when mounted cavalry in The Great War rode into battle clad with it.
Rhialto 11-14-06, 12:11 AM	Yes, it was still used. And can you tell us all what happened to the light brigade? Just because something is still used, it doesn't mean it isn't militarily obsolete. The Royal navy still has an age of sail ship in comission. Still in active service by all official definitions, but it's hopelessly outclassed, and has been for literally centiries.
Dunelord 11-14-06, 12:26 AM	not to sound like a jerk but this is why house rules need to be very carefully thought out. Why don't you want them wearing armor in the first place?
fatal error 11-14-06, 01:06 AM	not to sound like a jerk but this is why house rules need to be very carefully thought out. Why don't you want them wearing armor in the first place? Mainly because it did not fit my vision of urban adventuring. In addition, it encourages characters with horrid armor check penalties, making it sometimes difficult to involve any sort of physical skill checks as part of a combat encounter. However, with this and some othe concerns, I may just abandon the DR solution and simply make armor bonus and class defense bonuses not stack. In addition to giving heavy warnings that most citizens do not take men in heavy armor lightly, and generally you'll get a poor reception if you walk into a tavern or manor with full plate and a greatsword. At least for this campaign, the classes they chose (swashbuckler, swordsage, favored soul) won't be wearing tons of armor anyway.
FlameLover 11-14-06, 03:12 AM	At least for this campaign, the classes they chose (swashbuckler, swordsage, favored soul) won't be wearing tons of armor anyway. Is that everyone? If so, don't do any house-ruling on armour. All you'll be doing is making more rules for your group to remember without impacting play in a meaningful way. None of those classes even CAN wear heavy armor easily, so just give the class defense bonus and you'll have the same effect.
Jaxgaret 11-17-06, 06:52 PM	Is that everyone? If so, don't do any house-ruling on armour. All you'll be doing is making more rules for your group to remember without impacting play in a meaningful way. None of those classes even CAN wear heavy armor easily, so just give the class defense bonus and you'll have the same effect. Perhaps they chose those classes after hearing of the armor-nerfing rules the DM has put into play. They are excellent choices for an armor-nerfed campaign, after all, for classes not named Druid or Wizard.