Bonus to AC

Remove all ads!

I just think about something and I want to talk about it

when you play anykind of dungeon & dragon (BG, BG2, IWD, IWD2, pnp) you can get AC bonus if you have a high dex or with armor...

but I think that the weapon you wield shoud give you at least a bonus of 1 to your armor class because, you can block or can parry with your weapon, and example : someone with 1 sword could receive a + 1 or - 1 (depends on how you see it) on his or her AC and someone wielding 2 sword should have a greater bonus because you have more chance to block if you wield 2 swords instead of 1... no???

and another thing (perhaps it's just me) if you have a leather armor AC 8 (by 2nd edition rule IIRC) and a dex of 20 (bonus of 5 to your AC) you got 3 AC total (8 from the armor, and down to 3 with the dex...) but don't say to me that someone with say 10 of dex but a light plate mail (3 AC IIRC) have the same change of avoiding a hit...

I mean, the one with a 20 dex in light armor has more chance to avoid being hit than someone in heavy armor who will move very slow...

so I'd say, Instead of a full plate mail giving 1 of AC, it should give 5 or 6 but give a damage reduction bonus of let's say 2 per hit because of the big armor... but you will be easier to hit but harder to kill because of your armor...

I hope you understood my point here.
that's my point of view, if you have comments to do on it, feel free to do it. I want to know if someone think the same way.

Chris

[ December 11, 2002, 16:09: Message edited by: Christian ]

 

Had the same idea for weapons AC bonus I posted it somewhere even Would be cool, but....
As for the plate AC - the one with the plate does not need to avoid attacks - the attacker needs to penetrate his armour.That's the point on the heavy armored characters.Was one film once - Excalibur - see it and you'll know what I mean

Armour redusing damage is no new idea - All Fallout series are using it.I find it better also, buuuut not the Wizards of the Coast it seems

[ December 12, 2002, 02:27: Message edited by: AlexGK ]

 

As AlexGK pointed out, the AC provided by tougher armour does not mean that the "attacker" missed its target, rather that the shock was absorbed by the armour itself, thus protecting the wearer from physical harm. The idea of reducing damage is a good one, and I also like the idea that the armour has a number of "hit points" that would absorb hits made to the armour itself (not avoided by high dex), and once the armour "hit points" are reduced to zero, it reduces its AC effectiveness by one or two notch until it's repaired. Magical armour could be made even beter by adding more hit points, thus less maintenance, or even sustain no damage whatsoever.

With regards to weapons improving AC, I tend to disagree. Weapons' purpose is to attack afterall, but if you wanted to consider something I find more appropriate, allow the player the choice to reduce its AC by taking a defensive stance, but substract the reduction to AC from the ToHit roll. There are already rules for defensive stance, but this recommandation would allow the PC another choice which would still allow him to make an attack. In a certain way, this rule is similar to a Defender sword.

 

What you could also do is create a feat for defending with a weapon. It could go like:

You have been trained in the arts of defence with a blade. When you take this feat, if you use two weapons, you get a plus 1 bonous to AC.

 

Actually, there is a feat very similar to that in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting book. I don't remember the specific details about it but I think it is called 'Twin Sword Style' and is a regional feat for at least the Drow and Waterdeep.

MrGrouch

 

The feat says:

You have mastered a style of defence that others find frustrating.
Prerequisite: Two-Weapon Fighting
Region:Sembia, Waterdeep, Drow Elf
When fighting with two swords, you can designate a melee opponent during you action and recive a +2 armor class bonus against attacks from that opponent. This bonus stacks with the armor bonus from armor and sheild. You can select a new melee opponent on any action. A condition that makes you lose your dexerity bonus(if any) also makes you lose this bonus.
The benefits of this feat only apply if you are proficent the weapons you are fighting with.

 

I don't know about 3rd edition, but in good ol' 2nd edition, you could spend one of your attacks in a round to attempt a parry. You roll an attack, and if the hit-THAC0 ratio is higher than the attackers, it is successful, if not, or if you miss on the roll, it fails. A successful parry blocks an attack, though some weapons cannot parry, and others cannot be parried. It's common sense, really (a giants club would be hard to parry with a long sword)

This may or may not make sense. An example,
An enemy is weilding a longsword with a THAC0 of 16. He hits with a 17 (not regarding AC, etc.). You attempt a parry and roll a 19 with a THAC0 of 17. Your hit is 2 above your THAC0, his hit is only 1, so you parry.

 

In dragon issue 301, they have some parry rules in the swashbuckling section:

You can either have parry as a feat or it can be something everyone can do, it depends on the game.

Once per round, when you're attacked in melee, you can make a parry attempt. Much like in the 2nd version, you make an attack roll, and if it's higher than your attacker's then the attack fails. The attacker does however get a free disarm attempt against you, which does not provoke and AOO, plus you don't get a chance to disarm them. This happens whether or not your parry was successful. Wielding a light weapon gives a +4 bonus to the parry attempt.

There is a bunch of other stuff about it, which I can't be bothered getting. I really reccomend buying this magazine though....

 

If you get hit while wearing armor, or if you get hit while not wearing armor, it's still a hit. I don't see how being hit on an exposed area is going to hurt any less because of plates covering your body. Perhaps they could provide damage reduction to a type of damage. Piercing's gonna hurt the same with or without armor but you can bet that a blunt weapon will do more to an unarmored target.

 

You should realize that if a person makes contact with a another person with a weapon, that is not necessarily considered a hit. Furthermore, if a person makes a blow that gets past the armor, that also does not have to be a hit. If you make a blow that contacts the opponent with enough force, then you have made a hit that does damage. That is why Strength modifiers are applied to attack rolls (yes, sometimes Dexterity, and in rare cases, Intelligence).

Also, I don't like the parrying rule - it's too complicated. I think that the 10 AC everyone gets factors in the idea of parrying. If you are not holding a weapon (or are wielding a small one), then you cannot make a parry, but you are a bit less encumbered. So wielding a weapon and not wielding one, should, IMHO, even out to be the same for game balance.

But it should be reasonable to make a feat that gives a bonus to AC with parries.

Parry
You are better at parrying blows with a certain weapon.0

Prerequisites: Proficient with weapon.

You gain a +1 to AC when wielding a weapon of choice. It only applies when you are wiedling that weapon. That weapon must be at least the same size your are (e.g a human's weapon must be at least medium). The DM may rule that certain weapons cannot be used to parry, or that certain small weapons can be used to parry. For example, it is hard to parry with a Greatclub, but it is conceivable to do so with a short sword

Special: You may take this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Instead, every time you select it, choose a different weapon to be able to parry with.

 

If you can be 'hit' and not take damage because your armor blocks the blow, shouldn't physical electrical attacks ignore the AC bonus from metal armor?

 

They do. Physical electrical attacks (such as the Shocking Grasp spell are considered touch attacks, which ignore bonuses to AC granted by armor and shields. This applies to many ray spells as well, since the ray only needs to physically hit the person to affect him/her.

MrGrouch

 

I think what Izaad means by "physical electrical" attacks is magic items such as a +1 Shocking Longspear. That's interesting to note, as in that case, the electricity damage should be dealt even if the attack misses. In compliance with the 3E rules, we might say that the magic electrical nature of the weapon works only on a successful strike that injures the opponent through non-electricity damage. Or you might just say (if you were the DM) that only a touch attack is necessary to deal the electricity damage, and that you get a bonus to the touch attack if the opponent is wearing metal armor.

 

You know, I can honestly say I never thought about that? And I am usually such a stickler for things like that. Since most of my players have weapons that have some sort of electrical enchantment on them (the main bad guys are susceptible to it), you'd think I would have thought of it.

I think I will have to notate the AC of the PC's enemies both armored and unarmored. If the weapon misses, but would have hit with a touch attack, the electric damage will be applied even though the normal damage won't. I think the Shocking Grasp spell give a +3 to attack when the target is covered in metal, so I would have to apply something similar if I do do the "shock but not hurt normally" thing.

Sorry if I misunderstood you Izaad.

MrGrouch