Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 shpelley Jan 13, 2015 9:49:40	Figure since someone else was posting an "Armor as DR" thread, I'd throw around the idea of an Active Defense System (ADS) while it's fresh on my mind. One of my players has lamented that the defender of an attack is very passive with the AC system, as-is. I personally don't mind it, but thinking of a variant for players with this mindset is a fun little exercise so I figured "why not?" and decided to come up with some simple variants that might be fun to try.   Active Defense Whenever an attack calls for a roll against AC, instead of using your AC as currently calculated, roll a D20 + (Calculated AC - 10). That roll is your AC for the purposes of resolving the attack. Variant: NPCs/monsters use a static attack value of 10 + Proficiency Bonus + Other Modifiers (ie: "take 10" on the attack) instead of rolling.   Pros: Simulates "actively defending yourself" Easy to calculate No changes to armor necessary Cons: Swingier combat More time consuming as there is an extra roll and RP considerations (Variant removes this issue) --------------------------------------------------------- Active Scaling Defense Whenever an attack calls for a roll against AC, instead of using your AC as currently calculated, roll a D20 + (Calculated AC - 10 + Proficiency Bonus [if proficient with all armor being used] - 2). Variant: NPCs/monsters use a static attack value of 10 + Proficiency Bonus + Other Modifiers (ie: "take 10" on the attack) instead of rolling.   Pros: Simulates "actively defending yourself" Easy to calculate No changes to armor necessary You get better at defending yourself over time Scaling is small enough that hopefully won't break any math too bad Cons: Swingier combat Scaling AC could be touchy as you level, as AC is generally assumed to be static. Testing required. More time consuming as there is an extra roll and RP considerations  (Variant removes this issue) --------------------------------------------------------- Armor-Points DR Whenever an attack calls for a roll against AC, the roll is against 10 + DEX (or whatever your Unarmored Defense calculation is) instead of your normal AC value. You can also "cancel out" a certain number of points of damage by spending Armor Points. You have armor points equal to the "base" AC provided by your armor - 10 + Character level. Example: A level 3 Rogue wearing Leather Armor (base AC 11 - 10 = 1)  + 3 = 4 Armor Points per round. You regain these points at the beginning of your turn.   Pros: More "simulationist" Allows swarms to overcome a heavily-armored person via attrition Adds some early level survivability without making the party's tank nigh-unkillable Cons: More book-keeping No clue how well this scales, though thanks to attacks vs AC generally scaling as "multi-attack", hopefully it stays relevant. Definitely would need testing Isn't really "active" at all   Come up with your own and post them for people to see, or critique the ones already posted!
#2 bawylie Jan 13, 2015 12:24:55	Armor as protection:   Each set of armor has an AC as normal. Additionally, you can use armor to gain resistance to the incoming damage of an attack.    Light armor can reduce damage twice before requiring repair.    Medium armor can reduce damage 4 times before requiring repair.   Heavy armor can reduce damage 6 times before requiring repair.    The cost to repair armor is 25% of its purchase price. Maybe 33%. Whatever.
#3 edwin_su Jan 13, 2015 12:34:54	shpelley wrote:
#4 shpelley Jan 13, 2015 12:36:19	edwin_su wrote:
#5 edwin_su Jan 13, 2015 12:40:51	shpelley wrote:
#6 FFSAA Jan 13, 2015 13:35:37	shpelley wrote:
(Reply to #6) beowulfvii	FFSAA wrote:
#8 seti Jan 14, 2015 23:56:21	My 5e AC 'variant' is bringing back Fort, Ref, and Will as static defenses (along with AC), pretty much eliminating saves. fortitude =8 +better mod of STR or CON + magic, feat, class prof, etc. reflex = 8+ better mod of DEX or INT + magic, feat, class prof, etc. will = 8 + better mod of WIS or CHA + magic, feat, class prof, etc.   "Attacker always rolls" was a brilliant thing to give the game. It just makes sense. It always bothered me that weapon attacks and spell attacks/imposed conditions resolved totally opposite of each other.   It's a pain to DM 5e that way, but we're changing it as we go, so as to not burn ourselves out fixing every monster, spell, etc. even if they're never used. We just change as needed at the table.
#9 Coredump00 Jan 15, 2015 5:17:38	shpelley wrote:
#10 shpelley Jan 15, 2015 5:34:04	Coredump00 wrote:
#11 Brock_Landers Jan 15, 2015 10:30:07	seti wrote: