Armor

[dotHackSign]

There are times when I wonder why I bother putting heavy armor on a fighter, paladin, ect... at some point it really doesn't make a difference anymore unless you put a major effort into raising your ac. You see many builds opting for the dexterity route ditching heavy armor. I would like to see a change made to make armor "useful" again. It seems to be it should be able to give more benefit than it currently does.

One Method would be to have armor give fortification based on the type. Light - light fortification, Medium - Moderate fortification, Heavy - Heavy fortification. This would give an immediate benefit to wearing heavier armor, though at higher levels this isn't that much of a benefit aside from possibly allowing the use of slightly different gear. It would benefit lower level characters more which isn't really where the problem lies.

Another option would be to create enhancements to for fighters,rangers, paladins and barbs to better use their armor. Though this might be a problem for some AP starved builds, I'm looking at you pally, It would allow the benefits to be added at more appropriate levels. I would envision, a percentage damage reduction to physical damage for wearing an armor type.
An example might be:

12th melee lvl: Armored Warrior 1 - light 5%, medium 10%, heavy 15%

18th melee lvl: Armored Warrior 2 - light 5% + light fortification, medium 10% + moderate fortification, heavy 15% + heavy fortification

In theory this would stack with shield mastery, though some might think that is over powered.

[Kinerd]

The introduction of physical damage resistance with new Shield Mastery and new Earth stance was a perfect opportunity to give heavy armor an advantage over streaking that it could not attain under the AC system alone. It resembles a very successful dynamic in a game I used to play: heavy armor wearers were easy to hit but hard to hurt, nudists were hard to hit but easy to hurt.

Paladins are very tight on AP and feats, but making it free gives too much of an advantage to divine caster tanks: what about granted feats at 12 and 18 levels of paladin or fighter? They are the most armorly of the melee types, after all.

[dotHackSign]

Granted feats would certainly solve the problem for the feat/AP starved, but I can see the complaints about giving fighters another feat already

[Talias006]

Nice rundown, and even though it's been brought around before, armor mastery mitigation would be good for the melee types.


If you're going with enhancements, if it were going with the way structures are now, should be gotten at level 5, 10, and 15.


You don't want to put them into the same level gained as your Prestige's, so taking it earlier won't hurt.
Face it, if you have to make players choose between a Prestige or mitigation, most will go with the Prestige.


I go with the 5/10/15 route because it makes more sense to me.
Stacking +5% mitigation per armor BASE type at 5.
An additional +5% mitigation, plus stacking 5% Fortification per armor BASE type.
And finally, another +5% mitigation (not per armor type) and +10% Fortification (not per armor type).


Why emphasize BASE? Mithral Full Plate should have as much mitigation and fortification as normal Full Plate.
This also extends to Elven Chain (base of Medium armor Chainmail) and others that have been noted/seen in the past.


These numbers would mean that at level 15, a Full Plate wearing Paladin or Fighter would be eligible for a total of 25% armor mastery Mitigation and Fortification.
That it stacks with Shield Mastery wouldn't be a bad thing, as in itself it's not overly powerful.


And you have to admit, Sword & Board needs all the help it can get, since you get no extra attacks, glancing blows or double-strike proc chances with just the style alone.

[dotHackSign]

If you're going with enhancements, if it were going with the way structures are now, should be gotten at level 5, 10, and 15.

You don't want to put them into the same level gained as your Prestige's, so taking it earlier won't hurt.
Face it, if you have to make players choose between a Prestige or mitigation, most will go with the Prestige.

I actually started out with similar level progression when I first considered this. I went with the higher levels for two reasons: 1. Target the levels where armor is losing its meaning. 2. Ensure a solid investment in the class has to be made. Instead of picking it up with a splash.

I go with the 5/10/15 route because it makes more sense to me.
Stacking +5% mitigation per armor BASE type at 5.
An additional +5% mitigation, plus stacking 5% Fortification per armor BASE type.
And finally, another +5% mitigation (not per armor type) and +10% Fortification (not per armor type).

The initial boost at 5th lvl is a little high for my tastes. I also brought my maximum benefit down some as I wanted to stack with the shield mastery and I can imagine some would be opposed to a sword and board with 45-50% damage mitigation plus what ever reduction they possess.

Why emphasize BASE? Mithral Full Plate should have as much mitigation and fortification as normal Full Plate.
This also extends to Elven Chain (base of Medium armor Chainmail) and others that have been noted/seen in the past.

Great catch here, I didn't consider these but I definitely agree

These numbers would mean that at level 15, a Full Plate wearing Paladin or Fighter would be eligible for a total of 25% armor mastery Mitigation and Fortification.
That it stacks with Shield Mastery wouldn't be a bad thing, as in itself it's not overly powerful.

again that 45% seems large to me

And you have to admit, Sword & Board needs all the help it can get, since you get no extra attacks, glancing blows or double-strike proc chances with just the style alone.

I do agree, sword and board needs help. I gave up my shield shortly after I started playing and would love to see something that brings that play style back. I suppose adding a % elemental energy deflection would create a small war...

[grodon9999]

No.

[licho]

Personally i like the idea as a whole, i also have the feeling that the fact that my toon can use heavy armor is totally useless, since it demands sacrizes in other areas to reach noticable AC and its faster to swap robes. SO all ma champions are running with pyjamas.

I also doubt that the system of AC will ever work, there will be always the issue that once we r below hit on 1 its useless, and once we r not hit on 20 we r god of war.

I would also like to see some solid benefit from wearing armor and having heavy armor feat as a class feature.

***

I mostly liking inbuild dmg reduction %. The number could be small. For example:
Light armor 5% less physical dmg
Medium Armor 10% less physical dmg
Heavy 15% less physcial dmg.
+1% for each enhancement point (like +5 heaby armor will reduce incoming physical 20%)

To benefit from this character need to be proficient with said armor type. (but can be any class, even cleric)
The monk would get similar effect with certain stance/feat/ap spend.

Some classes/races could have Enchantmen to boost it futher. Like FIghters, Paladins, and Dwarves.
The mirror will be for WF and docents, especially one who has Adamantium body.

If character uses DR, then value is reduced by DR, and if anything left % mitigacion is applied. (so its not very profitable to build both DR and %)

I prefer to attach it to feat, since there is no reason to exclude any class from benefiting from armor proficiency. Like if you are Ranger why cant u have benefit from your light armor as well?

I dont mind possibility of Shield Mastery + Armor mitigacion. In fact if smbd focused himself to spend 2 feat for shields, and probably another one for Bastrads then he deserve this 50% reduction.

Im not scared of divines benefiting from this, since to use it they 1st need to stop jumping kiting for BB so taking any dmg will be actual improvments. And casters already have easier life thanks to current state of game. (like better mass cc, better sod, better aoe dots, easy self heal, utylity)

***

Unfortunetly i dont sense much support for this aproach in community. Probably its very un dnd pnp solucion.
Who knows, maybe we actually like the complain "oh no, AC still dont work". Or ppl are happy with giving some feat to the class, no matter if it has any use.
:-)

[dng242]

I like the idea in general. A few points I would like to make

- AC is far more effective in early game than end game.
- This is really about making armour/shields useful towards end game
- I would not tie it to a feat, beyond the armour/shield feat. Given the feats are of little us end game anyway; they should get value back. Afterall, your character paid a price for them in some way.
- Remember, in the world of AC you can max at 95% damage reduction (in effect). Don't get too excited over high values. Anything below about 40% is not all that effective.
- With the above said, 5 - 10 - 15% reduction is of very little use. A maxed out sword and board type should be targeting 75+% reduction to be worthwhile (remember, loosing a lot of damage for the shield).
- The reduction for armour alone needs to have value, but shouldn't be too high (maxing around 40% I would think)
- The reduction should be related to quality of the armour/shield (e.g. a +5 should do better than a masterwork).

[Aesop]

Why not make the Mitigation equal to the AC value of the Armor

Master Work Padded shouldn't protect as much as Epic KDS right?

Heavier Armors have higher AC values and thus Heavier Armors would benefit more from it.



Maybe implement Armor Specialization (from PH2) and have it add 5% to the chosen Armor Type (and maybe +1 AC or something)

While we're at it change up Shield Mitigation to equal the Shield's AC Value as well. Then drop Shield Mastery and Improved Shield Mastery (as they are made up anyway) implement Shield Specialization (PH2) and let that add 5-10% (and 5-10% to Shield Bash Proc). Add in Shield Ward (PH2 though this version is completely different) and let the Shield Mitigation apply to Spell damage.




Then things will have a little more grounding in what they do and make a little more sense than a Normal Wooden Tower Shield mitigating more damage than an Epic Light Shield of Uberness.


Aesop

[sephiroth1084]

Well, in order to make a better shield give more AC bonus, but not have light, heavy and tower shields end up all granting basically the same mitigation, it could be changed to:

Small: Damage Mitigation (DM) % = shield bonus
Large: DM % = shield bonus * 1.5
Tower: DM % = shield bonus * 2

Epic Swashbuckler would be 2 base +7 (assumed for blue slot) +1 alchemical = +10, or 10% (same as a small shield grants now).
Epic KWS would be 2 base +7 (assumed for blue slot) +1 alchemical = +10, or 10*1.5 = 15% (same as a large shield grants now).
Levik's would be 4 base +5 +1 alchemical = +10, or 10*2 = 20% (same as a tower shield grants now).

Most other shields would grant less, though, but not by much. This means that alchemical shields from MA/LoB would be a bigger step of improvement at tier III than they are currently, though not by much (4 + 7 enhancement +1 alchemical = 12*2= 24%).


Get rid of Improved Shield Mastery, or change it to something else.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For armor...I think the gains should be smaller, since more people wear armor than carry shields and do so with less purpose. If we think that a the reduction needs to be tied to a feat, like the shield DM is tied to Shield Mastery, but don't want to hurt paladins, give paladins a couple of bonus feats or tie this right into Defender of Siberys. Honestly, paladins do need a couple of extra feats, perhaps at 13 and 19 or 20.

It needs to be determined how much stacked DM is reasonable on a tank designed to take advantage of it; 50% damage mitigation seems like too much, so I don't think we'd want heavy armor to get up anywhere near 25% DM. Plus, armor is better than a shield in most cases (non-Evasion toons), so it doesn't need to be as big a draw.

Maybe 5% for light armor, 7.5% for medium, and 10% for heavy? Mithral armor would lose a little bit of its allure, but not too much I should think. Hurtlocker-type builds won't feel too screwed by using light armor on their way to AC.

The most mitigation anyone would be able to achieve in the current game would be 35% (tier III alchemical tower with Enchant Weapons buff from an artificer, full plate, and both feats).

[sephiroth1084]

I like the idea in general. A few points I would like to make

- AC is far more effective in early game than end game.
- This is really about making armour/shields useful towards end game
- I would not tie it to a feat, beyond the armour/shield feat. Given the feats are of little us end game anyway; they should get value back. Afterall, your character paid a price for them in some way.
- Remember, in the world of AC you can max at 95% damage reduction (in effect). Don't get too excited over high values. Anything below about 40% is not all that effective.
- With the above said, 5 - 10 - 15% reduction is of very little use. A maxed out sword and board type should be targeting 75+% reduction to be worthwhile (remember, loosing a lot of damage for the shield).
- The reduction for armour alone needs to have value, but shouldn't be too high (maxing around 40% I would think)
- The reduction should be related to quality of the armour/shield (e.g. a +5 should do better than a masterwork).

The problem here is that if the damage mitigation becomes that good, AC tanks will become almost entirely irrelevant. If you can get 75% mitigation by taking two feats and wearing full-plate and holding a shield, there will be almost no need to bother getting the AC to go with that, and you'll get more S&B tanks built strictly for mitigation, threat, amp and DPS. Meanwhile, those people who do persist with building for AC will be too invulnerable if they can get, say, 80% effective AC and 65% damage mitigation. Forget scroll healing, we'd see people wand-whipping them in elite and epic raids.

[Aesop]

But Seph remember that the Shield Mitigation would stack with the armor mitigation.


so the +5 Heavy Shield might only be 7% bonus, but it would stack with the +5 Mithril Full Plates 13% for 20%. then with the +5% for Armor Spec and the +10% from Shield Spec you'd have 35% total mitigation if you are building a tank that's not too bad.

Epics could get you even higher with up to 10% more between the two as future possibilities. Make it a tower shield adds 2 more as well. Perhaps something like the reinforced armor for another 2 and maybe another for the shield and there is 50% Damage Mitigation. That should be about the top end for it.

Aesop

[sephiroth1084]

But Seph remember that the Shield Mitigation would stack with the armor mitigation.


so the +5 Heavy Shield might only be 7% bonus, but it would stack with the +5 Mithril Full Plates 13% for 20%. then with the +5% for Armor Spec and the +10% from Shield Spec you'd have 35% total mitigation if you are building a tank that's not too bad.

Epics could get you even higher with up to 10% more between the two as future possibilities. Make it a tower shield adds 2 more as well. Perhaps something like the reinforced armor for another 2 and maybe another for the shield and there is 50% Damage Mitigation. That should be about the top end for it.

Aesop

I know they would stack. What are you addressing this to?

I think 50% is too high.

[Aesop]

I know they would stack. What are you addressing this to?

I think 50% is too high.

This quote... but I'm tired so it may not be entirely relevant. the 50% would of course require +10 reinforced armor and tower shield and then some; it was just a top end scenario kind of thing not a projection so much. Back on what you were saying about making them actually have a difference perhaps a smaller bonus instead of the 1/1.5/2... otherwise we'd end up something like the 50% before they get to the crazy stuff in the not so distant future

Well, in order to make a better shield give more AC bonus, but not have light, heavy and tower shields end up all granting basically the same mitigation, it could be changed to:

Small: Damage Mitigation (DM) % = shield bonus
Large: DM % = shield bonus * 1.5
Tower: DM % = shield bonus * 2

Epic Swashbuckler would be 2 base +7 (assumed for blue slot) +1 alchemical = +10, or 10% (same as a small shield grants now).
Epic KWS would be 2 base +7 (assumed for blue slot) +1 alchemical = +10, or 10*1.5 = 15% (same as a large shield grants now).
Levik's would be 4 base +5 +1 alchemical = +10, or 10*2 = 20% (same as a tower shield grants now).

Most other shields would grant less, though, but not by much. This means that alchemical shields from MA/LoB would be a bigger step of improvement at tier III than they are currently, though not by much (4 + 7 enhancement +1 alchemical = 12*2= 24%).


Get rid of Improved Shield Mastery, or change it to something else.

Aesop

[sephiroth1084]

This quote... but I'm tired so it may not be entirely relevant. the 50% would of course require +10 reinforced armor and tower shield and then some; it was just a top end scenario kind of thing not a projection so much. Back on what you were saying about making them actually have a difference perhaps a smaller bonus instead of the 1/1.5/2... otherwise we'd end up something like the 50% before they get to the crazy stuff in the not so distant future





Aesop

Well, if full plate tops out at 10% mitigation, we'd need a shield that grants +20 AC to hit 50%. We may eventually end up with a +10 tower shield (14 +1, *2=30%), but that's still just hitting 40%, which is about as high as I think we should go as far as mitigation is concerned, and probably about as high as we can expect shield AC to go.

[licho]

Just as quick note, the final dmg mitigacion % can be counted not as simple addicion but more like multiplyier from various sources.

Lets imagine we can get:
25% from Epic HEavy armor of Uberness
20% from epic tower shield of Godness
15% From Shield Mastery feat
15% from Armor mastery Feat
15% from Paladin/Fighter enhancement
15% from Dwarven racial mastery, or WF addamantive docent mastery.

So the final reduction will not be 105%.
But more like:
(1-.25)(1-.20)(1-.15)(1-.15)(1-.15)(1-.15)= 30% innitial dmg.
The benefit of it is that stacking multiplied sourcerces of reduction has lesser impact, and we cant reach like 105% dmg mitigacion, while we can achieve similar goal with varous means (like we can go with feats, or enchantments, or hunt this epic shield)

But then again it will be profit from going full speced, if we have just epic stuff we can get 60% of inicial dmg, but once we spec up (taking feats and enhancement) we land on 30% so its even better.

[Aesop]

Well, if full plate tops out at 10% mitigation, we'd need a shield that grants +20 AC to hit 50%. We may eventually end up with a +10 tower shield (14 +1, *2=30%), but that's still just hitting 40%, which is about as high as I think we should go as far as mitigation is concerned, and probably about as high as we can expect shield AC to go.

but then you have the same problem of the armors being based on type instead of their overall power. So a Normal set of Full Plate would have more mitigation than an Epic set of Uberness.

Maybe have a set of modifiers that are slightly different.

or

How about a Base Number + Enhancement Value.

ie maybe Light Armor has a basic Mitigation value of 1%, Medium has a value of 3% and Heavy has a base value of 5% the Enhancement bonus would add directly to that so a +1 Full Plate would have a 6% value while a +10 Chain Shirt would have an 11% value.

Same thing with Shields. Light could have 3% Heavy could have 5% and Tower Shields could have 7%. A +10 Light Shield would have 13% and the +1 Tower Shield would have 8%.

Then the +10 FP and +10 Tower would grant 32%... which leaves a little room for some feats if that is desired. Like Shield Spec adding 5% Mitigation and 10% Bash. Armor Spec could grant 5% Mitigation and some other bonus. Topping out at about 42% or so with crazy uber gear and built for tanking.

Aesop