Hi guys.
I couldn't find a thread about this, so I decided to post it.
I'm thinking about using armor as Damage Reduction.
Basically, armor gives an AC bonus plus some Damage Reduction. I brought the AC bonus from the PHB down by 1 and added a DR stat.
What do you think? I think the armor bonus may still be a little too high and have been thinking about bringing it down by another 1.
Armor Cost AC DR Str Stealth W.
Light Armor
Padded 5 gp 10 + Dex 1 — Disadvantage 8 lb.
Leather 10 gp 10 + Dex 1 — — 10 lb.
Studded 45 gp 10 + Dex 2 — — 13 lb.
Medium Armor
Hide 10 gp 11 + Dex (max 2) 2 — — 12 lb.
Chain shirt 50 gp 12 + Dex (max 2) 2 — — 20 lb.
Scale mail 50 gp 13 + Dex (max 2) 2 — Disadvantage 45 lb.
Breastplate 400 gp 13 + Dex (max 2) 3 — — 20 lb.
Half plate 750 gp 14 + Dex (max 2) 3 — Disadvantage 40 lb.
Heavy Armor
Ring mail 30 gp 13 3 — Disadvantage 40 lb.
Chain mail 75 gp 15 3 Str 13 Disadvantage 55 lb.
Splint 200 gp 16 3 Str 15 Disadvantage 60 lb.
Plate 1,500 gp 17 5 Str 15 Disadvantage 65 lb.
CC are more than welcomed.
Damage scales with level, reduction needs to as well in some fashion.
This type of idea comes up now and then, and while it's not a bad idea I don't personally like it.
There are a couple of issues. If someone takes the Heavy Armor Master does their DR in plate become 8? Or do you just take the higher number?
Does the DR affect all damage, including spells? What about poison? If you are hit with something that does multiple types of damage like a flaming sword (1d8+3 slashing +1d6 fire) how does it work?
If wearing the heaviest armor you become practically immune to damage from low level monsters. So goblins can only damage if they crit, etc.
It also just seems likely to throw the math of the game off ... although that's more of a hunch than backed up by actual number crunching. Heavy hitting monsters like Frost Giants are still going to do a significant amount of damage while lesser monsters are going to do practically none (goblins) or very little (orcs).
But that's just my personal preference. You can try it and see if your group likes it. 
I'm brand new to 5E, and learning. One of the reasons of posting the Armor as DR here was to get feedback. So thank you so far ;)
My group likes the Armor as DR thing and we used to use it in our 3.5 games. As we are migrating to 5E...
I've been thinking about using the Proficiency Bonus as the escalating factor, rampant, or have it go up more or less at the same reason.
I'm still working on these.
Each and every comment/suggestion/criticism is welcomed.
Artifex1979 wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
Armor as DR would have been more possible in D&D4E, where character progressions were more regimented and magic item progression was expected; you could have tied damage reduction to the armor's enhancement level rather well. In 5E, it would be tough; character damage seems to double every 5 levels or so, so the armor's damage reduction would need to go up too. You maybe could tie it to proficiency bonus, having an armor's DR be multiplied by proficiency bonus so that it scales with level.
That's not a bad idea ...
Then again, weapon damage scales by number of attacks, which would make armor as damage reduction still apply to each attack. Monsters, though, often have single big hits, which would skew this.
Just thinking out loud:
If you roll dmg for monsters/NPCs, here is a way to make dmg reduction scale with levels. Rather than a set amount of damage, have the armor make the enemy roll additional damage dice, but damage is calculated by taking the lowest number. For example: When fighting an Orc, the orc normally does 1d12+3. If my character were wearing light armor, they woudl roll 2d12, drop the highest value, and add 3.
Additional dmg dice by type:
Light armor: 1 dmg die
Medium: 2 dmg dice
Heavy: 3 dmg dice
Plate: 4 dmg dice
This way goblins still do dmg, just low rolls of it, as do high CR creatures.
Not sure how well it'd work, just happened to think of it.
Armor already has damage reduction built in, in the sense that you need a roll higher to hit your target. A roll missing an attack all together that goes just over the target's Dex bonus and not higher than their armor bonus is basically like the armor negating all damage. And if somebody with armor gets hit for little damage such as 2 out of a 1d8, the player's could imagine the armor had a hand in it, helping to reduce the blow of the sword cleaving into it's target. That way, your dexterous Rogues wielding daggers can still hit and hurt a heavy plated foe on the field.
Edit:
I noticed in the armor section it says the armor provides 11, 12, 13, etc... Armor Class rating. Does that mean every character starts out with a 0 + Dex mod in Armor Class without Armor and Shields? Or does it start out at a base of 10 like older versions of D&D?
OoftaMeg wrote:
Slit518 wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
For what it's worth:
I altered the armor AC chart to be more representative of 2E's armor (although not quite as varied) and added WIS modifier in addition to variable dex (Full/Half/None) so that not everyone has an AC within a point or two of each other (which tends to make armor a cosmetic choice unless you're an all-out tank, which I find silly). Then, to make type of armor a decision, I altered speeds and added DR but only to medium and heavy armors and substantially increased the cost and time of creation of metal armors. At level 6 , the characters have just gotten their first suit of Chain Mail (which is classified as a medium armor). Soo...
Unarmored
+5 speed
AC=10+Dex+Wis
0 DR
Light
0 speed
AC=ArmorType+Dex+Wis
0 DR
Medium
-5 speed
AC=ArmorType+1/2Dex+Wis
DR=1 pt per die rolled of damage for Slash/Bludg/Pierc and 1pt per die magic. Static modifiers to damage are unaffected.
Heavy
-10 speed
AC=ArmorType+Wis
DR=Resistance to Slash/Pierc/Bludg including static modifiers, and 2pts per die magic.
No die can be reduced to less than 1 and any remainder of damage is rounded up to the next whole point. All speed increases/decreases are independent of strength or dexterity score. Magic armor of +2 or higher adjusts speed by a 5' increment (Robes become +10, Light becomes +5, Medium becomes 0, Heavy becomes -5).
Edit: Also of note is that to offset the hit that spellcasters take from armor DR, I adjusted all classes base spell points by 50% and increased the base damage of spells when using higher level slots. So far, all the changes seem to have gone over pretty well.
Part of my problem with the armor table is the price progression of each armor type. Such that literally no one will ever use anything other than Studded, Breastplate, Halfplate and Splint beyond level 2. Platemail is a bit different because it is priced exorbitantly. It means that your party will sigh at a Leather Armor +1. So if you're interested in tweaking the armor table with house rules, I'd do it differently: I'd make each armor have a property that makes it useful, e.g.
Padded: AC 10 + DEX, DR 2
Leather: AC 11 + DEX
Studded: AC 12 + DEX, Disadvantage on Stealth
@CVB
Goblins are never a threat to people in plate armour?
You must come along to one of my games... 
I'd not mess with AC, if I want DR from armor I'd simply give DR from 1 to 3 and change heavy armor mastery to allow 1 dex bonus wearing heavy armor and grant +1 strength.
light armor DR 1, medium armor DR 2, heavy armor DR 3, all versus non-magical weapons.
Is there any point making it more complicated than that ?
EDIT: I'd probably adjust multi-classing rules a bit to make acquisition of armor proficiency so you do not go from non-proficient to heavy armor proficient (ever) by taking a level dip and in some cases make it easier to go from medium armor to heavy armor if multi-classing in a class that is usually proficient with heavy armor.
Caliburn wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/rants/armorasdamagereduction.html
Armor doesn't need damage reduction. How about having damage reduction be a seperate magical enchantment (defeats the purpose of this thread, I know)?
Most of why armor has a rating instead of damage reduction, is that extra rating acts as attacks already deflecting off the armor. Heck, even a suit of full plate armor has spots where if lucky or skilled enough one could hit. It would just take precise hits in-between the grooves of the armor's inter-locking plates (dex) or a massive swing of a larger weapon to rip through the armor (str).
Or, alternatively, you can completely replace armor with a damage reduction rating all together, but again, it renders most weapons obselete as you get into higher armor. And they would never be able to perform high damage, unless you had certain rules like if you beat the roll by 5 it does full damage instead, etc...
Just some thoughts!
I'm of the opinion that Armor DOES need damage reduction. It doesn't have damage reduction in-built, since damage reduction addresses all kinds of damage, even from attacks that don't use an attack roll, or otherwise bypass DC. Plus, damage reduction IS a thing in D&D, so not only is it not like it's an out there idea to incoorporate it in armor, it's a wonder it hadn't already been done ages ago, in a non-variant, core way.
Now then, there's plenty of valid criticism to be had about any implementation of DR on armor, first and foremost being the complexity level. 5E is designed in a very rules-lite way, in comparison to 3.5E/4E, so I can see why people may not wish to add to that complexity, and on that front, I've got nothing to say. Either you'll want the DR on armor despite/because of the complexity, or you won't. So, for those of you (like me) belonging in the first category, here's my advice on what to do, regarding said issues.
1. Scalling issue: Attack, and therefore accuracy, scales with level. Even in a bounded accuracy system like 5E, this is an inescapable fact of D&D life, that you'll have to deal with. There's two solutions that I can think of for this one; more available equipment, and/or natural AC(Hell, why not do BOTH!?).
1.a ) So... let's take a page out of Final Fantasy here. As you progress through the game(s), you meet stronger enemies, and they deal punishingly high damage, even if you have high stats. Your old armor just doesn't compete anymore. Enter new and improved armor, mythril armor, linen cuirass, adamant vest, diamond armor, platina armor, etc. Adding to these, are of course, enchanted/magic armor.
1.b) Natural AC, is an entirely different approach to the problem. Traditionally, Natural AC has been used to signify someone(usually but not exclusively an enemy/monster/creature) who has a naturally thick hide, or a strong scally body, or something along those lines. Right? Great. Now scrap that entirely, since we're using DR on armor. Instead, let everyone have Natural AC, and let it grow in relation to each subject's class level. My personal prefference, here, would be to have three different speeds of AC growth, namely poor, medium, and good. As an example, good AC growth would be +1 to AC every 3 levels, starting at level 2, and capping at +7 at level 20 (Unless you wanna go Epic). That would mean that your AC at level 20 would be 17+DEX. medium AC growth would be +1 to AC every 4 levels, starting at level 3, and capping at +5 at level 19. Finally, poor AC growth would be +1 to AC every 6 levels, starting at level 4 and capping at +3 at level 17.
Class | Good | Medium | Bad | Level | | | | 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 3 1 1 0 4 1 1 0 5 2 1 1 6 2 1 1 7 2 2 1 8 3 2 1 9 3 2 1 10 3 2 1 11 4 3 2 12 4 3 2 13 4 3 2 14 5 3 2 15 5 4 2 16 5 4 2 17 6 4 3 18 6 4 3 19 6 5 3 20 7 5 3
OoftaMeg wrote:
Vahnyu wrote:
Slit518 wrote:
Thanks for all the comments, suggestions and critique so far, people!
Still working. 
There's two easy ways I see to add armor counting as damage reduction, and a possible, easy mechanic to adjust AC if it's felt the DR is very advantageous.
One could simply say all light armor has DR +1, medium is DR +2, and heavy is DR +3. I present them as bonuses as I think it should stack with other sources (which reduce the amount taken before Resistance is applied). I do not think Psychic damage should be reduced, and am dubious about it reducing Poison damage or that metal armors should reduce Lightning damage. It has the advantage of being very simple to add to equipment armor, but it has the disadvantage in that you'd have to arbitrarily decide what class of armor a creature's touch hide counts as (including Draconic Ancestrous Sorcerers' AC from Draconic Resiliance).
Another way would be to take the armor's AC value, subtract 10, divide by 3, round up, and use that as its DR bonus (so armor ACs 11-13 have DR +1, 14-16 have DR +2, etc). This makes it so you can easily give it to creatures with natural AC (including the afore mentioned Sorcerer), as the only additional steps you have to do is account for the Dex bonus and possible shield values for monster/NPC stat blocks.
A question also enters on whether you want magical armor, such as Mage Armor, to also grant DR, though the latter DR option doesn't require defining armor "weights." I don't think the Unarmored Defense ability should grant DR, nor should shields.
Magical armor should then add its bonus to AC and DR, much like magical weapons add their bonus to attack and damage rolls. I feel this also helps put enchantments on armor closer to the power of enchantments on weapons, and better represents its importance. I do not feel magical shields should increase DR though, as a shield works by deflecting blows before they would connect to the body.
Now, for those that feel that if you add DR from armor you should decrease the AC value to balance it out, the simplest mechanic I can think of is just subtracting the DR value from the AC value (thus studded leather would turn from being AC 12 to AC 11 and DR +1).
Either of those are what I'd use if I was to implement such in a campaign, possibly going with the first for equipment armor and the latter for natural armor. I feel that anything much beyond such would require a very intense overhaul on the combat system to adjust to-hit ratios and damage values, which, while I wouldn't be opposed to such an optional system, would drastically change the flavor combat.
I like that idea upthread of applying a system (roll 2d20 take the high or low) like adv/disadv to damage rolls for DR; ie: monster rolls their damage die(dice) twice and takes the lowest.
Maybe light armor could cause one re-rolled die per round, medium could cause up to two re-rolled dice (either one attack that hits, or two sperate attacks that hit) per round, and heavy armor could cause a total of three re-rolled dice (again, can be used all at once, or spread out over 2, or 3 damage rolls...) ?
This could apply to things other than armor, too. a new homebrewed defensive spell, a magic item, a curse, even circumstances...
I think AC should be broken down into Deflection, Absorption, and Avoidance.
For DR, I would make a chart that has a different value by weapon type (slashing, piercing, bludgeoning). That way a mace is more effective against chainmail than a sword.
Avoidance would simply be dex and training, but the modifier would be zero when surprised.
Deflection would come into play for more advanced armors like plate that have segments designed to deflect attacks.
Something like this was an optional rile in AD&D, but a little different:
A speccific type or armour had a DR to a specific type or weapon.
Like chainMail for example:
A (real life) chainmail was good against slashing weapons, normal vs. piercing but bad against bludgeoning.
So in AD&D there was an optional rule saying that it had a DR vs. Slashing, but an Increase vs. bludgeoning.
Just think about it, a chainmail was flexible (So bludgeoning has more effect due to spreading), piercing went through becous the rings opened eventually but slashing skids right off it.
Can't recall the other types, but i'm sure someone here has the AD&D Arms and Equipment book somewhere laying around.
I believe they have damage types,
CFK wrote:
CFK wrote:
On average, having the armor cause misses, and having the armor reduce damage are statistically the same. For example, If on average your armor would cause a creature to miss 70% of the time. It's the same as getting hit all the time and mitigating 70% of the damage.
The difference is one option would stay closer to the average and cause smaller changes at a time, and the other can spike before averging out. The spike can make an interesting game mechanic as weaker opponents still have a chance to do something.
But most likely the reason D&D uses the hit-or-miss approach and not reduction, is because there's usually so little hit points that you would need to play with fractions. You would either have to either have hitpoints in the hundreds or thousand ranges or start using decimals. And most likely play with a calculator at hand.
When games started moving from tabletops to computers, things like armor reduction were a lot easier to implement. And it also allowed for Dodge to be a separate statistic.