|
12 months ago ::
Jul 19, 2012 - 11:20AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
May 27, 2012
|
I apologize if this sounds goofy. The premise is that Bounded Accuracy and (Dis)advantage are starting to grow on me, and I can actually see serious potential for DDN. The one thing that still bothers me, though, is armor. I don't like that the primary factor in determining whether or not you hit that smelly orc is what she is wearing rather than how good she is at fighting. As such, I was thinking about removing the AC bonus from armor, and replacing it with a class-specific Defense bonus (to which you would add Dex as normal, no penalty for heavy armor). Armor would serve another purpose, like functioning as DR or reducing susceptibility to crits. As an outline:
- Fighter-type classes (any class where combat is their main thing) gain +4 Defense.
- Rogue-type and gish classes (any class where combat is still a main focus, but with sacrifices for versatility) gain +3 Defense.
- Cleric-types (any class where physical combat is an option, but not necessarily the first option) gain +2 Defense.
- Wizard-types (any class whose best defense is to avoid being anywhere near the enemy) gain +1 Defense.
Enemies could be lumped into one of those categories based on their supposed combat ability (fluff). Does that sound about right to everyone? I'm okay with rogues being harder to hit than fighters, since they don't always hit as hard. I'm kind of worried about a Dex-based fighter getting to 20 AC or beyond, but most enemies seem to have at least some small bonus to hit, and you'd have to sacrifice a lot of Strength to put so much into Dex. Does anyone see any likely complications? I recall that money was supposed to be a balancing mechanism, with some armors having +1 AC at ten times the cost or whatever (relative to basic armor of that weight category), but I figure that should be easy enough to just add into the class Defense bonus at the appropriate level.
The metagame is not the game.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 19, 2012 - 12:26PM
#2
|
|
|
The only downside I can see is that "Armor Class" is one of those things that keeps getting mentioned as core D&D, and I've given up all hope that we'll ever see armor as DR or such.
Beyond that, I agree with you. It gets very odd when, say, wizard rays don't work on creatures which have higher armor.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 19, 2012 - 12:39PM
#3
|
|
|
Yes and No.
I do like Armor still contributing some to AC. I just think the value of contribution is too high, especially with bounded accuracy. I'd rather have AC values be more like 1-5 at level 1, and apply DR based on that value. Let it scale more at higher levels.
Similarly, I wouldn't want a flat bonus. I'd rather have a progression, similar to BAB, rather than a flat bonus at level 1 in the class. If you are making fighting skill the primary factor in whether you get hit or not, it makes absolutely no sense that a level 20 fighter is as easy to hit as a level 1 fighter. In all that time you didn't gain more skill at defending? Sorry, can't get behind that.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 19, 2012 - 12:46PM
#4
|
|
|
Sounds kind of like how Mearls did it in Iron Heroes. I'm expecting something like this as a module.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 19, 2012 - 12:49PM
#5
|
|
|
I will remain hopefull that an armor as DR system will be a module for D&D Next.
But, you're right, these are fundamental numbers, that make it really difficult to house rule without feeling like your'e screwing up game balance.
Although a high dex fighter reaching AC 20 might not be awful, it feels right cinematically. all you can do is try it and see.
As for a lvl 20 fighter being as easy to hit as a lvl 1 fighter, I keep believing that skills, themes, and abilities will solve this problem with bounded accuracy. Getting the ability to 'deflect' attacks, or temporarily boost AC, or whatever, could be the sort of thing a fighter would pick up in those 20 levels, without messing with bounded accuracy.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 19, 2012 - 12:54PM
#6
|
|
|
I will remain hopefull that an armor as DR system will be a module for D&D Next.
But, you're right, these are fundamental numbers, that make it really difficult to house rule without feeling like your'e screwing up game balance.
Although a high dex fighter reaching AC 20 might not be awful, it feels right cinematically. all you can do is try it and see.
As for a lvl 20 fighter being as easy to hit as a lvl 1 fighter, I keep believing that skills, themes, and abilities will solve this problem with bounded accuracy. Getting the ability to 'deflect' attacks, or temporarily boost AC, or whatever, could be the sort of thing a fighter would pick up in those 20 levels, without messing with bounded accuracy.
This seems to be a recurring theme. Bounded accuracy being described as being fine because we can have a whole bunch of abilities that give the same effect scaling used to grant automatically before.
I guess that's one way for the developers to avoid giving Fighters nice things. Giving them the illusion of nice things by giving them stuff they used to have already back at the cost of character resources, so it looks like they're getting more effective while it's still just the same old same old.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 19, 2012 - 12:56PM
#7
|
|
|
I think a combination approach might work. Light Armor gives +1 AC, Full Dex mod, no DR. Medium Armor gives +3 AC, half Dex mod, 1 DR. Heavy Armor gives +5 AC, no Dex mod, 3 DR, and some penalties.
Then classes can have a class bonus to AC and possibly a scaling DR bonus for armor. So fighters might be +3 AC, +1/3 Level to DR. Rogues and clerics +2 AC, +1/5 level DR, and wizards +1 AC, no DR. Masterwork armor could simply provide a DR bonus instead of an AC bonus.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 19, 2012 - 1:07PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
May 27, 2012
|
Then classes can have a class bonus to AC and possibly a scaling DR bonus for armor. So fighters might be +3 AC, +1/3 Level to DR. Rogues and clerics +2 AC, +1/5 level DR, and wizards +1 AC, no DR. Masterwork armor could simply provide a DR bonus instead of an AC bonus.
I don't like the first part (armor penalties, especially the loss of Dex, are something I'm trying to get away from), but this is really something.
One of the problems with armor as DR has always been poor scaling, so what if the AC bonus came from class and then armor granted scaling DR based on weight category?
Heavy armor grants your level as DR.
Medium armor grants +2/3 level as DR.
Light armor grants +1/2 level as DR.
I mean, of course we would need to see final numbers for how damage is expected to scale, but something like this could really work.
The metagame is not the game.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 19, 2012 - 3:30PM
#9
|
|
|
Does that sound about right to everyone?
Ugh! No way!
While I do think it would be nice if fighting ability contributed to avoiding injury in the game, I absolutely cannot support the "nerfing" of the effect of armor. Even 4e's half-level bonus to BAB did a better job of representing skill at arms when defending than what you propose.
So pardon me for hoping that the developers look upon your idea with horror and revulsion.
|
|
|
|
12 months ago ::
Jul 19, 2012 - 4:00PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
May 27, 2012
|
Does that sound about right to everyone?
While I do think it would be nice if fighting ability contributed to avoiding injury in the game, I absolutely cannot support the "nerfing" of the effect of armor.
If anything, I was hoping armor itself would become more meaningful in some way, by removing some of the maneuverability penalties and allowing the fighter to compete with the rogue on even footing. The math here mostly works out the same, except it doesn't encourage the fighter to treat Dex as a dump stat.
Contrast with the current armor rules, where a rogue in light armor can have higher AC than the fighter in heavy armor (due to Dex contributions) and the fighter suffers weight penalties from the heavy armor.
Still, I am under no illusion that this model would ever make it into the core default method. Armor as AC is too ingrained into D&D history for that to change now. (Something like this has appeared as an optional rule before, though, so I have hope.)
I just happen to prefer the "a hit is a hit and a miss is a miss" model, which is better represented by armor not contributing to AC. That being the case, how do you think these rules would hold up to that?
The metagame is not the game.
|
|
|
