Armor and AC should matter…

[mobrien316]

Without getting into the validity of high level mobs rolling 1d20+80 to hit, I have a suggestion for making both armor type worn and overall Armor Class matter. As it currently stands, the example of a cleric doing higher level quests and wearing full plate armor with an AC in the 40’s derives exactly the same benefits from his armor as he would if he were naked (not including whatever magical enhancements the armor may provide.) A character’s armor class at higher levels is completely irrelevant until it reaches a certain (very high) value, at which point it often makes the character virtually unhittable (excepting bosses.) This just doesn’t make sense to me.

The idea I’m working toward is that various types of armor worn should be able to mitigate or absorb a certain amount of incoming physical damage, and heavier armor should be able to absorb more damage than lighter armor. That seems to make sense to me. Also, very agile and dexterous individuals should be able to dodge or otherwise avoid a certain amount of incoming physical damage, and the more agile an individual is the more damage they should be able to avoid. This also just makes sense to me.

Individuals who are agile and dexterous and who also wear armor should be able to see some additional damage reduction, though the heavier the armor they wear the less agile they will be.

With that in mind…

An individual wearing leather armor, studded leather, padded armor, or a chain shirt should be able to absorb a small amount of damage, say, the equivalent of a noncritical hit from a mundane short sword or hand axe wielded by a typical untrained combatant (no strength bonus or other bonus.) Wearing any of the armor listed above provides DR 6/-.

Wearing hide armor, scale mail, chainmail, brigandine, or a breastplate, an individual should be able to absorb a bit more incoming damage, say, the equivalent of a noncritical hit from a battle axe or longsword. Wearing one of these types of armor provides DR 8/-.

Wearing splint mail, banded mail, half plate, or full plate, an individual should be able to absorb a bit more incoming damage, say, the equivalent of a noncritical hit from a greataxe or a greatsword. Wearing one of these types of armor provides DR 12/-.

It seems reasonable that higher armor class values reflect the dedication of the individual in learning how to dodge or otherwise avoid hits, or they reflect at least some degree of skill in that area combined with wearing some type of armor. Armor will provide some burden to those who wear it, reasonably enough, which will lessen their agility to at least some degree.

It should take some degree of dedication in order to gain the ability to dodge or otherwise avoid incoming physical damage, so an individual must have an AC of at least 40 before gaining any damage reduction purely from AC. Individuals wearing armor will have the damage reduction provided by the armor, plus the stacking DR of their armor class, if it is high enough.

AC 40-49 = DR 6/-
AC 50-59 = DR 7/-
AC 60-69 = DR 8/-
AC 70-79 = DR 9/-
AC 80-89 = DR 10/-
AC 90-99 = DR 11/-
AC 100+ = DR 12/-

Thus, an individual wearing chainmail (DR 8/-) and having an overall AC of 55 (DR 7/-) would have a total damage reduction of 15/-. It is a benefit, to be sure, but I don’t think it is gamebreaking in the least.

Even if an individual wearing plate armor gets his or her AC to 100 or higher, their resulting DR of 24/- would hardly make them invincible at higher levels. It would make their survivability against incoming physical damage (as opposed to incoming spell damage) greater as, I believe, it should. Wearing armor should provide some degree of damage mitigation, even at high levels, and that damage mitigation should be more significant at lower levels. A paladin wearing full plate when fighting kobolds in the Harbor should be able to ignore a higher percentage of incoming damage than the same paladin fighting devils in Amrath.


Anyway, that's my idea for now. It is not perfect, but it would make armor and AC matter, which is not the case at higher levels now.

[easyaction]

An individual wearing leather armor, studded leather, padded armor, or a chain shirt should be able to absorb a small amount of damage, say, the equivalent of a noncritical hit from a mundane short sword or hand axe wielded by a typical untrained combatant (no strength bonus or other bonus.) Wearing any of the armor listed above provides DR 6/-.

Wearing hide armor, scale mail, chainmail, brigandine, or a breastplate, an individual should be able to absorb a bit more incoming damage, say, the equivalent of a noncritical hit from a battle axe or longsword. Wearing one of these types of armor provides DR 8/-.

Wearing splint mail, banded mail, half plate, or full plate, an individual should be able to absorb a bit more incoming damage, say, the equivalent of a noncritical hit from a greataxe or a greatsword. Wearing one of these types of armor provides DR 12/-.

umm... more like DR 1/- , 2/-, and 3/- respectively. especially with invulnerability being DR 5/magic and i can tank most low lvl content with a rogue, everyone would be dawning the full plate for lvls 1-10 invincible[er]

i agree armor should allow some damage reduction but you're being a little over zealous with armor type. also a little under zealous with AC attributed DR. youre telling me that a 100 ac character will get the same DR and some lvl 1 in full plate? think again.

[Gurei]

umm... more like DR 1/- , 2/-, and 3/- respectively. especially with invulnerability being DR 5/magic and i can tank most low lvl content with a rogue, everyone would be dawning the full plate for lvls 1-10 invincible[er]

i agree armor should allow some damage reduction but you're being a little over zealous with armor type. also a little under zealous with AC attributed DR. youre telling me that a 100 ac character will get the same DR and some lvl 1 in full plate? think again.

I like what you're saying here but I do think that isn't enough of a change to the armor. In tabletop DnD, the higher pluses in armor were godly, nearly regardless of the type of armor it is. To sort of build off this, how about the base of each is dr 1/-, 2/-, etc with a modifier of say, 1/2 the plus? So +5 leather would be dr 1/- plus an additional 2.5 dr (rounded to 3). I feel like this would be a nice equilibrium between both OP's and your ideals.

EDIT: Also, yes, if you look at my characters, I don't have ONE that cares about AC, which is one major reason I think this change needs to happen. As a caster, I'm throwing stoneskin on the entire party (except barbs now seeing how they have dr 9/- at cap). An arcane spell that provides a defense should not trump the DR of a well versed melee combatant, though it SHOULD help a very squishy caster who is scrambling for some sort of method to mitigate damage.

[wax_on_wax_off]

The only AC related fix that I've liked has been to simply change the players and monsters AC from 10+modifers to 1d20+modifiers. This is an official D&D variant that addresses many of our AC issues making AC more useful both at lower and higher numbers.

If I was to entertain the idea of any DR related to armour type I'd settle with % based determined by armour category, 5% for light, 10% for medium and 15% for heavy (which stacks with shield mastery of course).

Edit: as per the above post you could even add some DR based on enhancement bonus; 1% for +1 and +2, 2% for +3 and +4 and 3% for +5 armour.

[voodoogroves]

The only AC related fix that I've liked has been to simply change the players and monsters AC from 10+modifers to 1d20+modifiers. This is an official D&D variant that addresses many of our AC issues making AC more useful both at lower and higher numbers.

If I was to entertain the idea of any DR related to armour type I'd settle with % based determined by armour category, 5% for light, 10% for medium and 15% for heavy (which stacks with shield mastery of course).

Edit: as per the above post you could even add some DR based on enhancement bonus; 1% for +1 and +2, 2% for +3 and +4 and 3% for +5 armour.

In D&D, AC means the same for plate or PJs ... Mage Armor gives you a force field.

There are some variants with "armor as DR", but even those take core natural armor, etc. into account when calc'ing the DR.

[Alaunra2010]

The idea I’m working toward is that various types of armor worn should be able to mitigate or absorb a certain amount of incoming physical damage, and heavier armor should be able to absorb more damage than lighter armor. That seems to make sense to me. Also, very agile and dexterous individuals should be able to dodge or otherwise avoid a certain amount of incoming physical damage, and the more agile an individual is the more damage they should be able to avoid. This also just makes sense to me.

Individuals who are agile and dexterous and who also wear armor should be able to see some additional damage reduction, though the heavier the armor they wear the less agile they will be.

Hi mobrien316;

I think I understand what you're saying. We agree in part, but I feel as though your model double-dips by drawing distinction between armor and AC with respect to damage resistance. Armor is already a constituent of AC.

Let's start with the basics and build on them. AC is a derived value, consisting of armor, skill, and magic bonuses, that is used in determining the effort required to effectively strike a target. That is the current model in play. I assume you and I agree on this.

I believe you and I further agree that, in addition to determining difficulty, the target's AC should also play a role in determining the damage that is mitigated after the target is struck.

So far so good?

Alright, well, AC already represents a number which includes armor, and it also includes dexterity, a monk's wisdom, feats, magical items, magical auras, situations, other effects... all of that and much more is wrapped up into this big composite number we call AC. So, if we agree that AC should also determine damage resistance, a universal sliding scale based directly on AC is the shortest path to that goal. Further, based on what we have already observed about AC, the number would include armor already. Calculating an additional layer of DR based on armor is actually redundant.

If you think your model through when giving a layer of DR for armor specifically, every player can make a similar case for their specific situation NOT based on armor.

I'm a mage, I have uber magic gear that blocks lots of stuff... DR layer 2 for me too! Or, I'm a monk. I have uber reflexes, so my character moves in ways that are sympathetic to a strike when I receive it and I mitigate damage that way. So they all have a case for their own special rules.

Whew. Okay, well not all is lost! At least we agree that:

1) AC needs to be fixed.
2) Damage resistance needs to be incorporated somehow.

We simply disagree about how such DR is calculated. Sounds like a great place to start, to me.

[Ralmeth]

The only AC related fix that I've liked has been to simply change the players and monsters AC from 10+modifers to 1d20+modifiers. This is an official D&D variant that addresses many of our AC issues making AC more useful both at lower and higher numbers.

If I was to entertain the idea of any DR related to armour type I'd settle with % based determined by armour category, 5% for light, 10% for medium and 15% for heavy (which stacks with shield mastery of course).

Edit: as per the above post you could even add some DR based on enhancement bonus; 1% for +1 and +2, 2% for +3 and +4 and 3% for +5 armour.

I'm with you on the idea of DR based on the type of armor you are wearing. This extends on the concept of the shield mastery feats and provides more benefits for wearing heavier armor. However it should be the type of armor that it is based on, such as full plate, chainmail, etc. That way mithral armor isn't penalized.

[QuantumFX]

Another way of doing percentage based damage reduction would be:

% reduction = Armor Bonus [Including enhancement bonuses] + Shield Bonus [Including enhancement and blocking bonuses] + Natural Armor Bonuses + reduction amounts from stances and shield mastery [if applicable]

Examples:
20 Mountain Stance Monk: +8 Armor [Epic Braciers or Robe], +11 Natural [Yugoloth potion, Boat buffs and Mountain Stance], +20 Mountain IV stance = 39% reduction.

20 Paladin Defender: +14 Epic Full Plate, +8 Epic Heavy Shield, +7 Natural [Yugoloth potion and Boat buffs], +20 Improved Shield Mastery = 49% reduction.

I think this keeps a balance between the 2 tank builds. While the monk build gets better damage and threat the paladin is able to absorb more incoming damage and establish intimidate aggro. Also the paladin has additional ways to up both forms of reduction by hitting his shift key.

As far as non tanks go:

20 Cleric: +8 Armor [Epic Braciers or Robe], +7 Natural [Yugoloth potion and Boat buffs] = 15% reduction.

20 Cleric: +14 Epic Full Plate, +8 Epic Heavy Shield, +7 Natural [Yugoloth potion and Boat buffs] = 29% reduction.

So, the trade off becomes fast swap robes and dex skills vs. mitigating 14% of their incoming damage?

[tkneip1874]

i always though what should be done is whatever the base armor bonus is, that is the dr. so full plate armor would be dr8. this would stack with shields so full plate and tower shield would be dr12. i do admit that it could definitly be tweaked as there are way to op it. that was just my 2 cp.

[easyaction]

i know this goes against all things D&D but the most realistic thing would be the heavier the armor, the lower the AC gained from it, but the higher the DR. obviously if you're hulking around in a big metal suite you cant dodge very well. but arrows and swords may just glance off of you. of course that would mean all AC (because we could really just rename it dodge) would be based off of either dexterity or in the case of monks- wisdom. and now we're just getting into a horribly slippery slope where AC just doesn't exist, DR is king, and everyones running around in pajamas!!! wait, that seems familiar.

[grandeibra]

not signed in any way, shape, or form

DR != AC in DnD and DDO. I love that they are separate. One means avoiding damage alltogether, one means mitigating damage when a hit is scored. A toon can opt for neither, either, or both. Add in blur/displacement/resistances/immunities/saving throws etc and you got a myriad of ways to mitigate incoming damage and effects. Leave as is!

I do agree that more mitigation from heavier armor makes sense (is already in the game for shields and adamantine armor). This part could be upped but should not be mixed with the AC score imo.

The way to "fix" AC is to use the DnD reduction of to to-hit on later attacks in attack chains. That gives more than a d20 range for each mob. That coupled with possibly reducing some of the stacking/overpowered items to reduce the actual AC range of characters is all that is needed imo.