Post/Author/DateTime	Post
fatal error 09-22-06, 10:35 PM	Yes, I found three posts about this in the last two pages. No, none of them fit exactly what I was looking for. Yes, I'm going to post my own and further clutter up this forum. I need a way to allow non-armored fighters to survive. Why? Because I'm planning on running an urban campaign, and everyone walking around in full plate erks me. At the same time, I'd like to retain full plate's effectiveness, but not make it required for lower-dex fighters. Armor becomes a DR die equal to it's AC bonus. Thus, Leather = 1d2, Studded Leather = 1d3, Chain Shirt = 1d4, Chainmail = 1d5, Breastplate = 1d5, Banded = 1d6, Full Plate = 1d8. Each "+1" magic armor has, otherwise known as an enhancement bonus, increases this DR by 1. This DR is not bypassable (X/-) Thus, against a longsword, with equivelent magical bonuses, only the strength bonus should go through full plate assuming average rolls and no +1d6 abilities. Each class and prestige class gains a defense bonus progression. Here's the thing. Amazingly, there are many different ideas on what this should be. The UA one starts at 6 and goes to 12 for the highest. SWRPG goes to 10, 11 and 12. D20 Modern goes up to 6, 10 and 14. And Iron Heroes goes to 15 and 17. This is interesting, if only because four different system variants can come up with four different answers to the same question. Of course, UA attempts to model itself after the magical armor worn by a fighter at that level (though this leads to very high ACs for dex fighters). SWRPG and D20 Modern are the closest to each other, and both possess more 3/4th BAB classes than not (even D20 Modern's Gunslinger and Bodyguard have 3/4th), so perhaps this progression is too low to adequately shield a D&D character. Then again, a D&D character could still gain access to deflection bonuses Iron Heroes, on the other hand, has nearly every class with a full BAB, and some even with BAB 25 at level 20. So presumably they need higher defenses to compensate. So, which one do you think is best for maintaining relative AC numbers in D&D? I don't like UA's because of the nearly direct ties to armor proficiency, very high starting numbers, and multiclassing mixups. Unfortunately, I'll end up back where I started if armor doesn't somehow hurt a low dex fighter's AC. Sure, it won't be necessary, but every fighter will still want to where it all the time. Meanwhile, high dex fighters will reach even greater heights of AC madness since they're getting 'equivelent to magical full plate' class defense bonuses with no max dex. So what is the solution? How do you make Full Plate still effective, but not necessary to a game, and keep previously high-AC-low-armor builds from skyrocketting? Only solution I can think of is to simply gimp armor to the point where it's a serious trade off, like severely hampering or replacing your class defense progression. But that doesn't solve the high-AC-low-armor (HAC-LA) build problem. It always comes back to either boosting the HAC-LA or nerfing the low dex fighter.
Jerks 09-23-06, 01:42 PM	I use a class defense bonus equal to 1/2 the characters base attack bonus. Armor functions primarily as DR, but also provides a minor defense bonus as well. Light armor = +1 AC Medium armor = +2 AC Heavy armor = +3 AC The maximum class bonus to defense you can achieve is limited to either the max dexterity bonus of the armor or the defense bonus to armor; whichever is greater. So in this system, high level warrior face a distinct choice between armor and defense. As they level, they start hitting the caps and must chose between defense and DR. If you want to de-emphasize heavy armor even more, you could play around with the defense caps to limit it even more to find the right balance for you. Another good way of figuring class bonuses to defense that I've seen involve setting the class bonus to defense progression as either a strong 2 >12, mid 1 > 9, or weak 0 > 6 save progression. Then you just have to decide which progression different classes get.
Pellanor 09-26-06, 04:02 PM	Here's the problem, you want non-dex based fighters to have good AC without needing armor. That's like saying you want non-str based fighters to have a good attack bonus without needing weapon finesse. Everything you give to the non dex based character will also be given to the dex based character, meaning that a dex based character will always have a better AC than a non-dex based character, when neither is wearing heavy armor. I don't really have an answer for you. Good luck finding something that works. By the way, what's with the wonky DR 1d8/-? why not just make it a flat DR?
starfire311 09-26-06, 04:18 PM	ok here is what I do. 1st armor provides DR ok you got that. 2nd classes provide a class dodge bonus to AC this ranges from 7 to 12 at level 20. Armor Check penalty applies to this bonus, bonus can not be reduced to less than 0 from check penalty 3rd classes provide a class parry bonus to AC this ranges from 5 to 10 at level 20. This parry bonus functions just like a shield bonus to AC, and stacks with a shield bonus.
Pellanor 09-26-06, 06:28 PM	Hmmm... that sounds interesting, though I would rename the Parry bonus if I were you. Parrying seems more like an active defence to me, something that would be used to prevent somebody from touching you, and not apply while flat footed (much like a dodge bonus), so turning it into a shield bonus (the exact opposite) doesn't quite fit with me. I'm not sure what I would call it, but it definatly needs a better name.
Waterhammer 09-27-06, 12:57 AM	I wonder if the solution might lie elsewhere. Maybe fatigue factors for full plate. Something silly, like if the character in full plate is riding or walking all day they do not suffer the fatigue, but if they are sitting or resting; hanging out, and having fun the fatigue begins to kick in. Basically the arbitrary rule would kick in whenever the DM wanted it to. Just an alternative angle to approach the problem. :rolleyes:
rydi123 09-27-06, 02:10 AM	the defense bonus categories from UA don't always make much sense, and they overcomplicate it imo. i have decided that in my next campaign i will just make the defense bonus equal to 1/2 the BAB. simple, elegant, and is a direct relation to how well the character fights. the armor is a bit more difficult a problem. i think that in my campaign i am just going to make armor dr with no armor bonus to ac (except magical armor). but for your campaign you might try using the max dex bonus as a cap on the defense bonus allowed, or use the armor penalty as a penalty to the defense bonus. or just make all the things that armor penalties normally apply to a bigger part of the campaign (if sneaking around and acrobatics are constantly required, heavy armor will be gone in a hurry).
Wayside 09-27-06, 04:17 AM	In my campaign i spent a long time fletching out rules for class defense and armor. Class Defense Bonus: 1/2 base attack bonus as a dodge bonus to AC. Armor: Armor provides no bonus to AC. All armors have an armor die which is rolled whenever you take damage (d4 for light, d8 for medium, d12 for heavy). Enhancement bonuses are bought at increments of +1(+1), +2(+2), +4(+3), +8(+4), +16(+5). Add your armor bonus plus its enhancement bonus to the armor die, this is your armor roll. So a suit of +2 Full Plate would have an armor roll of d12+10. All armors have a DR value and a soak value. DR is the damage reduction the armor provides, and Soak is the amount of damage it converts to subdual when you get hit. When hit, you roll your armor roll, if it meets or exceeds the damage of the hit, then you apply both your full soak and DR values. If you fail, the appropriate defense is reduced by the amount by which you failed. Always apply your full DR versus slashing and piercing, and your full soak vs bludgeoning. If an attack does both bludgeoning and slashing/piercing the attacker chooses which applies. Example: Tordek is hit by an orc's axe for 7 dmg. Tordek is wearing a suit of scale mail, so his armor roll is equal to d8+4. Scale normally provides 4 DR and 3 Soak. He rolls his armor roll and rolls a 1. 1+4=5. Tordek missed his armor roll by 2 points. So he applies his full DR against the attack since it was slashing, and 3-2=1 point of his soak. Tordek takes 1 point of subdual damage and 2 points of normal damage from the blow. Full rules include a modified reserve point system applying only to subdual damage. A completely reworked critical hit system, increased critical threat range of all weapons by 1, critical hits do a special wound and max damage automatically bypassing armor DR and Soak. Dr and Soak values for all armors, rules for natural armor and special materials, and spells that grant armor.
fatal error 09-27-06, 10:30 PM	the defense bonus equal to 1/2 the BAB. I've seen this idea several times, it seems like a good one, but it also looks low. A 20th level fighter can have +5 Full Plate, which is 13 AC, vs. 10 from this 1/2BAB thing, but those extra three could be made up for by the increased dexterity he could be utilizing. So at level 20 it looks to be pretty good. But what about lower levels? By level 6 you can have a +1 or maybe +2 full plate set. That's +9/10 AC, vs +3. Dexterity, especially without higher level items to boost it, isn't going to make up that gap for most fighters. Of course, theoretically that 2,500gp could buy a different defensive upgrade like a ring or protection or amulet of natural armor, or just a better weapon. Still, not sure. Maybe slant the chart towards the lower levels to get over the initial gain that characters normally have from the mundance armor's AC bonus. Then it progresses more slowly later, just like armor enhancement advances in price geometrically. Has anyone used this system with a simple armor=DR system and found any problems like those I stated?
Jerks 09-27-06, 10:49 PM	Yes, the AC bonus does start off fairly low. I use 1/2 BAB, but I also allow armor to provide a modest defense boost so this makes up for it. You might consider giving full bab characters a defense bonus equal to that of a strong save. +2 at first level, +3 at third, maxes out at +12. 3/4 BAB could get a medium save +1 to +9 1/2 BAB would get a weak save +0 to +6.
Wayside 09-27-06, 11:47 PM	Yes, the AC bonus does start off fairly low. I use 1/2 BAB, but I also allow armor to provide a modest defense boost so this makes up for it. You might consider giving full bab characters a defense bonus equal to that of a strong save. +2 at first level, +3 at third, maxes out at +12. 3/4 BAB could get a medium save +1 to +9 1/2 BAB would get a weak save +0 to +6. setting the class defense progression at the same rate as base save progression is an interesting option, i'll have to play test it and see how it works out. EDIT: the only problem i see with this offhand is multiclassing
riceisnice 09-27-06, 11:59 PM	I wonder if the solution might lie elsewhere. Maybe fatigue factors for full plate. Something silly, like if the character in full plate is riding or walking all day they do not suffer the fatigue, but if they are sitting or resting; hanging out, and having fun the fatigue begins to kick in. Basically the arbitrary rule would kick in whenever the DM wanted it to. Just an alternative angle to approach the problem. :rolleyes: I really love this idea. However, to be fair, the fatigue rule should apply to everyone and just hit the heaviest armored combatants earliest. I'd say that after a number of rounds equal to the characters Constitution score - Armor Check Penalty (possibly adding any Str bonus/penalty as an additional modifier?), the character becomes fatigued (-2 penalty to Strength, -2 penalty to Dexterity, can’t charge or run) for the duration of the current encounter, a la a post-raging barbarian.
fatal error 09-28-06, 12:45 AM	Yes, the AC bonus does start off fairly low. I use 1/2 BAB, but I also allow armor to provide a modest defense boost so this makes up for it. You might consider giving full bab characters a defense bonus equal to that of a strong save. +2 at first level, +3 at third, maxes out at +12. 3/4 BAB could get a medium save +1 to +9 1/2 BAB would get a weak save +0 to +6. Yes, I should have thought of this earlier, it's how D20 Modern does the defense progression.
fatal error 09-28-06, 01:17 AM	Defense Bonus Progressions and Armor as Damage Reduction: Kalnath is a city. Not nearly as many people walk about incased in field plate or hauberks of mail within a city, but going unarmored in basic D&D is the purview of monks and the poor arcane spell casters. Thus, certain things must be changed to allow the majority of big and brawny fighters, paladins and thugs (urban barbarians) to go about their business of combat without the need of armor to be effective. Armor must become an option, not a requirement. Class Defense Bonus: Level: Good Med Bad 1 2 1 0 2 3 2 0 3 3 2 1 4 4 2 1 5 4 3 1 6 5 3 2 7 5 4 2 8 6 4 2 9 6 4 3 10 7 5 3 11 7 5 3 12 8 6 4 13 8 6 4 14 9 6 4 15 9 7 5 16 10 7 5 17 10 8 5 18 11 8 6 19 11 8 6 20 12 9 6 Defense Bonus: Each class gains a class defense bonus related to their base attack bonus. Classes with good base attack bonuses gain the best defensive progression, medium to medium, and lowest to lowest. These progressions are the same as save progressions for fortitude, reflex and will. Instead of adding to a saving throw, however, this class defense bonus adds to a character’s Armor Class, along with all the other factors that normally add to one’s Armor Class. Listed below are the defensive progressions for all classes found in the Player’s Handbook, alternate base classes and prestige classes can easily be determined by their base attack bonus progression, as mentioned above. Armor as Damage Reduction: Armor, instead of granting an Armor bonus to Armor Class, grants Damage Reduction. The Damage Reduction granted is equal to the armor’s old Armor Bonus. However, there is an additional drawback, the armor’s Armor Check Penalty is applied as a penalty to the wearer’s Armor Class. Thus, a fourth level fighter (class defense bonus of 4) with a dexterity of 12, chooses to wear a Breastplate. He gains Damage Reduction 5/-, but suffers a -4 to his Armor Class because of the Breastplate’s Armor Check Penalty. Therefore, he has a final Armor Class of 11 (+4 from class, +1 from dexterity, -4 from his armor) and DR 5/-. He will be hit often, but will also be absorbing a good chunk of the damage at that level. Magical armor increases in Damage Reduction just as it would have increased its Armor Bonus. So magical +1 Full Plate grants DR 9/-. Magical Items: Magical items that add bonuses other than Armor bonuses, such as Rings of Protection, Amulets of Natural Armor, and Ioun Stones, still add to Armor Class normally. Shield bonuses and Dodge bonuses also function as they did. Bracers of Armor, however, add Damage Reduction, equal to the Armor bonus they would have granted. It is worth noting, therefore, that Bracers of Armor are actually quite valuable to primary fighting classes, as they provide Damage Reduction without Armor Check Penalty. Armor bonuses still do not stack with each other, so one cannot wear Bracers of Armor +3 and Full Plate for DR 11/-, he would instead have DR 8/- for just the Full Plate. Note; my chart doesn't actually say: Good, Medium, Bad, it lists the PHB classes, but that didn't translate to the Forums very easily. So, do you think it'll work? I'm thinking of adding a -2 Defense penalty every time you multiclass, just to avoid too much of that, especially if full BAB prestige classes start at +2.
rydi123 09-28-06, 01:49 AM	But what about lower levels? By level 6 you can have a +1 or maybe +2 full plate set. That's +9/10 AC, vs +3. Dexterity, especially without higher level items to boost it, isn't going to make up that gap for most fighters. Of course, theoretically that 2,500gp could buy a different defensive upgrade like a ring or protection or amulet of natural armor, or just a better weapon. the half BAB thing works at lower lvls too. the characters capable of wearing heavy armor will still have the armor as DR rules going for them, so even though they are hit a bit more frequently, it means less.
riceisnice 09-28-06, 04:55 AM	The armors themselves are going to need a bit of tweaking if Armor Check Penalty now applies to Armor Class and not just skill checks. The difference between a breastplate and chainmail is normally pretty negligible. They provide the same defense, but its somewhat easier to perform skills checks that require mobility in the breastplate. But with this variant, nobody is going to wear chainmail armor ever. They give you the same DR, but now the breastplate is a full point of AC better. The gap between the two is much larger. Same thing goes applies to splint mail and banded mail. And "upgrading" from a Medium breastplate to a Heavy suit of splint mail actually makes you MORE vulnerable in combat (DR is 1 better, but AC is 3 worse AND your maximum possible Dex bonus drops from +3 to +0). ACP goes from a relatively minor trait that hampers your movement skills into being a defining characteristic that renders several types of armor completely obsolete.
Jerks 09-28-06, 07:55 AM	You are right, that multi-classing would be too advantageous when multi-classing. You ideal about the -2 penalty only works if every class starts off at a +2 bonus. Otherwise you could get a character with two levels in a weak progression classes having a -2 penalty to defense. An easier way to define it, might be that when multi-classing a character gets no defense bonus for the first level in a new class. It's worth noting that in Star Wars D20, prestige classes don't inflict an defense penalty because these are all figured at a lower progression. So if you wanted to adopt that you could make all prestige classes medium or weak progressions. Riceisnice has a point that the armor check penalty being applied against AC may not work with all armors. The combo of max Dex and AC penalty can be harsh. If you set the class defense penalty equal to the DR of the armor that might be a bit more balanced as in scales in direct proportion to the quality of the armor.
fatal error 09-28-06, 10:25 AM	Hmmm, I hadn't thought of it making certain armors suck even more, already no one takes them do to their inferiority. Rydi: Characters will not typically have heavy armors, at low or high levels, so no, that doesn't make up for it. I shall think about this defense penalty, have to go to class.
rydi123 09-28-06, 02:48 PM	Characters will not typically have heavy armors, at low or high levels, so no, that doesn't make up for it. not in the current system, but in the one i am proposing it is actually beneficial. one of the problems i've had in my games is that no one wears any armor, or if they do it is only light armor. im trying to come up with ways to tempt people into it.
fatal error 09-28-06, 04:21 PM	Alright, so if I set the armor penalty to be equal to the DR provided, I see two main differences: 1) Mithral no longer decreases the penalty (which would have allowed for a DR 8 but only -3 ACP set of full plate), unless we state it does. Similarly, Masterwork will no longer reduce the defense penalty unless that is tacked on as an additional feature of Masterworking. 2) Armors become more 'balanced' to each other. The biggest things I see are padded and leather now actually have a penalty, before everyone would have worn them since they provide free DR and a platform for enchantments. Also, certain armors, like chainmail, become more likely to be worn. However, most of these 'inferior' armors, chainmail to breastplate, splint mail to banded mail, scale mail to chain shirt. But most of these armors will still not be used because they're still inferior in ACP and some in max dex. Thus, is it really a big deal if they become further inferior, since no one wears them if they have a choice anyway? On the other hand, it might be good to keep mithral from possibly unbalancing the system, and to avoid having everyone running around in leather. Though I don't find the idea of leather-clad fighters chasing foes through city streets and gathering information in local taverns so disconcerting as all these fighters wearing full plate while walking around town. I'm still not sure if I like the idea of leather armor being an exception to all the others in having no drawback. 'Course, with mithral, everyone'll quickly be in penalty-less chain shirts. Hmmm, started off this post trying to reason that ACP was better. Ended up reasoning myself into thinking its worse. . .