So, do you prefer armor to soak damage (damage reduction) or deflect (adds to armor class)?
I'm torn, and could go either way. Soak runs the risk of reducing all damage to small amounts, and making combat a slog. Deflect is easier but doesn't allow for armor's effect on specific attack types very well. The pierce, bludgeon, slash mods always seemed too fiddly, and we never used them, like encumbrance rules.
Both.
I don't use any rules about the advantages of weapon types versus armor types. Instead, we developed weapons with general principles, which works well enough.
For piercing weapons, they usually have the lowest base damage, a small crit range and the highest critical damage.
For bludgeoning weapons, they usually have the highest base damage, a small crit range, and the critical damage is roughly equal to the base damage.
Slashing weapons generally have moderate damage, a good crit range, and the critical damage is better than the regular damage.
We do use two hit point tracks (wounds and vitality); critical hit damage is applied directly to wounds. For example, here are three one-handed martial weapons:
Piercing: Trident (2d6/20/4d6)
Bludgeoning: Flail (1d10/20/1d10), has benefits for trip/disarm) or Ball and Chain (2d6/20/2d6)
Slashing: Battleaxe (2d6/20/2d10) or Longsword (2d6/19-20/2d8)
Those all happen to be weapons that could be used one- or two-handed, but the base damage doesn't change. Against an opponent you hit with an 11 or better, the average damage per round is pretty consistent for all but the flail (between 3.675 and 3.95; flail is 2.8875).
I usually prefer soak as a matter of preference but don't feel strongly enough about it to plant my flag firmly on either one.
It depends upon the rest of the system's mechanics.
I prefer the vibe of Armor=DR, and it can allow for more depth as various foes are either hard to hit or hard to damage. But it slows gameplay a bit & is a bit harder to balance. It's the method I went for in the system I'm building, but there are definite drawbacks.
Armor as deflection is the simpler solution, speeds up gameplay, and is better in zero-to-hero systems where you want the power levels to scale up a lot.
There is no X=Better in a vacuum. It depends upon how it meshes with the rest of the system.
Soak, but I'm torn between the straight damage soaking of Mongoose Traveller/T4/T5 and the ablative soaking of Mekton (where each hit on the armor location causes it to lose 1 point of stopping power on that location until it reaches 0).
I love the concept of Armor as DR or Soak...but in actual play, Deflect just moves the game along faster with less paperwork.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1106475I love the concept of Armor as DR or Soak...but in actual play, Deflect just moves the game along faster with less paperwork.
It can work - but other parts of a system need to be streamlined to compensate. And the DR should be kept in the single digits - which is one reason why it doesn't work well in D&D style systems.
Quote from: Charon's Little Helper;1106465It depends upon the rest of the system's mechanics.
I prefer the vibe of Armor=DR, and it can allow for more depth as various foes are either hard to hit or hard to damage. But it slows gameplay a bit & is a bit harder to balance. It's the method I went for in the system I'm building, but there are definite drawbacks.
For my Transformers homebrew, I went with armor as damage reduction, with staged penetration. It's a bit fiddly, but I wanted the tactile result of hitting an opponent, and having their armor soak the damage. (Or not) But being able to wear down the armor or penetrate it with armor piercing type attacks.
In Mongoose d20 Conan Str attacks are soaked by armor and Dex attacks are deflected. Seems to work well.
DR tends to run into common problems in systems that contain scaling.
If everything is fairly bounded then it works better and I tend to prefer it.
It's probably worth pointing out that DR is not ultimately more realistic.
Good armour should both deflect and reduce damage.
This makes it difficult to model, for example, Plate armour on a blow by blow method, as your chance of actually scoring a good hit on someone in full plate should really be frustratingly small.
Whichever you use, it has to be worked into the design of mechanics from the beginning; trying to switch from one to the other later is very likely to work out badly.
I think I prefer deflection with occasional small amounts of soak for additional interest in distinguishing armor; if it's all soak then the uncertainty of hitting (all or nothing) gives way to the lesser uncertainty of damage roll versus soak roll.
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1106452So, do you prefer armor to soak damage (damage reduction) or deflect (adds to armor class)?
I'm torn, and could go either way. Soak runs the risk of reducing all damage to small amounts, and making combat a slog. Deflect is easier but doesn't allow for armor's effect on specific attack types very well. The pierce, bludgeon, slash mods always seemed too fiddly, and we never used them, like encumbrance rules.
There is a third type. Armour that reduces the severity of the damage. Such as a d8 becomes a d6. Or a severe wound becomes a light wound. And so on.
I like D&D's approach that its doing "something". And what that is is up to the player to decide. Its probably doing both.
I also really like Palladium's older system where armour deflected a little. But it mostly soaked damage and eventually breaks.
In Albedo it reduces damage. What might have been a severe bleeding wound is reduced to possibly a light bleeding wound, or just a knockback and stun. Depending on the situation.
In my own book armour mostly deflects, but also soaks some damage depending on the location hit. And can only soak so much before it breaks. And reduces the damage in some armours cases. Mostly the really heavy or padded stuff.
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1106452So, do you prefer armor to soak damage (damage reduction) or deflect (adds to armor class)?
It's non-binary; there's also threshold. You can also have more than one method.
In KotBL, for example, it depends on attack type. Sharp attacks (Edge/Point) get deflected/negated if they don't exceed armor value - but armor does not reduce damage if they penetrate. On the other hand, blunt attacks always have the potential to have some effect, if only stunning or unbalancing the target. Therefore, blunt armor just adds to the target's Soak, thus being damage reduction rather than threshold.
(Plate armor is a special case in that it is so rigid that blunt attacks must exceed its threshold as well or be negated.)
Quote from: TJS;1106486It's probably worth pointing out that DR is not ultimately more realistic. Good armour should both deflect and reduce damage.
You're right but that is taking the second step before the first one. The primary question is: what are we even modeling? Reality, fiction or a mish-mash?
Take my case, modeling cinematic combat. I am pretty sure there have been cases where a sharp attack penetrated an armor in cinematic combat and yet the armor kept it from having full effect; but even if so, it's a fringe case, not worth modeling in basic rules. The norm, instead, is that either armor stops the attack (see Ser Jorah versus that Dothraki) or the attack penetrates the armor and takes full effect (wounds the target).
And, yes, you could model such deflection the way D&D does it. But in D&D the AC bonus due to armor class does not feel mechanically distinct to being harder to hit due to being swift. It's samey, monotonous. I'll gladly sacrifice speed to break up that uniformity and have armor have a distinct impact. (Which armor as DR has, btw.)
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1106452So, do you prefer armor to soak damage (damage reduction) or deflect (adds to armor class)?
I'm torn, and could go either way. Soak runs the risk of reducing all damage to small amounts, and making combat a slog. Deflect is easier but doesn't allow for armor's effect on specific attack types very well. The pierce, bludgeon, slash mods always seemed too fiddly, and we never used them, like encumbrance rules.
I like deflect plus Damage Threshold, a rule I've only ever seen in the 5e D&D DMG, and there only for objects. With DT the armour absorbs all damage up to the DT, but if damage exceeds the DT then full damage applies.
This feels to me a lot more like how (eg) battleship plating works IRL, and I'm surprised it's not more widely used. It could be used for large creatures to model eg arrows & ballistae vs dragons - arrows bounce off as they don't meet the DT, while ballistae penetrate. That's basically why you use an elephant gun vs an elephant, rather than a 9mm SMG - most systems either make the SMG more effective (armour as deflection, no absorption) or make the SMG ineffective and elephant gun only marginally effective (damage as absorption).
Quote from: S'mon;1106571I like deflect plus Damage Threshold, a rule I've only ever seen in the 5e D&D DMG, and there only for objects. With DT the armour absorbs all damage up to the DT, but if damage exceeds the DT then full damage applies.
This feels to me a lot more like how (eg) battleship plating works IRL, and I'm surprised it's not more widely used. It could be used for large creatures to model eg arrows & ballistae vs dragons - arrows bounce off as they don't meet the DT, while ballistae penetrate. That's basically why you use an elephant gun vs an elephant, rather than a 9mm SMG - most systems either make the SMG more effective (armour as deflection, no absorption) or make the SMG ineffective and elephant gun only marginally effective (damage as absorption).
This how Mutants & Masterminds Impervious Protection works too. If the damage ranks are less than the threshold, you don't even roll, but if they're above the threshold you roll a toughness save normally.
Armor = Extra Hit Points. That way armor has to be repaired or replaced.
(Or another slightly more fiddly option, Armor = DR but the DR decreases every time you are hit)
I love the way GURPS dealt with it before 4e.
Armor did both, which gave a second dimension to differentiate kinds of armor. It was really cool in practice.
It was kind of broken mathematically and led to some strange things, which is why they changed it, but I always liked it.
Chalk me up as another who likes the idea of DR better than the (usual) implementation. I think for DR to work well, it not only has to be designed into the system from the beginning, but it also has to have carefully considered math that minimizes the edge cases. Ideally, it also has some simplicity elsewhere in the system to make up for the complexity of the DR.
It also seems to me (though this is a nebulous thought so far), that going from Attack/Damage/Health to Attack/Damage/DR/Health as the core of a system is like going swimming by sticking your foot in the water. If DR is going to be a thing designed into the system, then there are probably some other details/complexity of the system that need to be included as well, besides Attack/Damage/DR/Health. Otherwise, it is better to stay out of the water.
Quote from: S'mon;1106571I like deflect plus Damage Threshold, a rule I've only ever seen in the 5e D&D DMG, and there only for objects. With DT the armour absorbs all damage up to the DT, but if damage exceeds the DT then full damage applies.
This feels to me a lot more like how (eg) battleship plating works IRL, and I'm surprised it's not more widely used. It could be used for large creatures to model eg arrows & ballistae vs dragons - arrows bounce off as they don't meet the DT, while ballistae penetrate. That's basically why you use an elephant gun vs an elephant, rather than a 9mm SMG - most systems either make the SMG more effective (armour as deflection, no absorption) or make the SMG ineffective and elephant gun only marginally effective (damage as absorption).
Interesting. I've been looking for an easy way to model that behavior. I was thinking of something like "Penetration value" but this has the potential to be far less fiddly and more workable. Technically "damage" to living creatures and armor penetration aren't EXACTLY the same thing, but this is probably close enough. You could also add a modifier if armor is penetrated or a subtraction to model purpose built weapons and ammo. Something like....
Armor piercing rounds/hardened point arrows: 2d6 vs DT, 1d6 to HP (or "-3" to original damage roll or whatever, min of 1)
Expanding rounds/broad-head arrows: 1d6 vs DT, 2d6 to HP ( or "+4" or whatever)
etc, etc
Quote from: Brendan;1106802Interesting. I've been looking for an easy way to model that behavior. I was thinking of something like "Penetration value" but this has the potential to be far less fiddly and more workable. Technically "damage" to living creatures and armor penetration aren't EXACTLY the same thing, but this is probably close enough. You could also add a modifier if armor is penetrated or a subtraction to model purpose built weapons and ammo. Something like....
Armor piercing rounds/hardened point arrows: 2d6 vs DT, 1d6 to HP (or "-3" to original damage roll or whatever, min of 1)
Expanding rounds/broad-head arrows: 1d6 vs DT, 2d6 to HP ( or "+4" or whatever)
etc, etc
Pathfinder and Starfinder (does 3rd edition do this?) have DR, which is functionally similar.
I prefer the deflect+WvAC mods in AD&D. If I can remember to give someone a bonus for a prayer spell or situationally apply a penalty for a slow spell, or provide bonuses for attacking from higher ground - I can do the same thing for using a mace against plate mail.
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1106805Pathfinder and Starfinder (does 3rd edition do this?) have DR, which is functionally similar.
For objects though, right? Not for armor.
Quote from: Brendan;1106809For objects though, right? Not for armor.
Some creatures have DR and some feats give it. It's not tied directly to armor.
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1106812Some creatures have DR and some feats give it. It's not tied directly to armor.
I don't know about Pathfinder. I have a copy but never played it. I do remember Damage Reduction being a thing in D&D, but just as a straight subtraction from damage done to HP, not as a threshold switch the way S'mon described.
Soak for me... ala Runequest. It always made more sense to me than relatively abstract AC in D&D.
Quote from: Brendan;1106823I don't know about Pathfinder. I have a copy but never played it. I do remember Damage Reduction being a thing in D&D, but just as a straight subtraction from damage done to HP, not as a threshold switch the way S'mon described.
*re-reads S'mon's post*
Ahhh. I missed that.
Quote from: Simlasa;1106826Soak for me... ala Runequest. It always made more sense to me than relatively abstract AC in D&D.
Me too.
I like my armor to be both resistive and ablative.
Quote from: VincentTakeda;1106887I like my armor to be both resistive and ablative.
I like mine to be shiny! :D
Damage reduction needs to be figured into the mechanics very early to avoid unbalanced outcomes. A threshold for damage seems good for objects (otherwise characters break down a wall with a dessert spoon) but not so much for creatures unless there truly are no weak spots (so maybe an animated stone statue) and with the same risk of unbalanced outcomes.
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1106452So, do you prefer armor to soak damage (damage reduction) or deflect (adds to armor class)?
I don't believe in "to hit" rolls.
Has to be soak for me I think? The Runequest system always made more sense to me. Although what would you call Rolemaster in this regard? A kind of advanced deflecting armor system?
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;1106896I don't believe in "to hit" rolls.
They exist whether or not you believe in them. :D
Quote from: Trond;1106900Has to be soak for me I think? The Runequest system always made more sense to me. Although what would you call Rolemaster in this regard? A kind of advanced deflecting armor system?
A mix of both. Light armor makes you harder to hit and heavy armor makes you easier to hit but reduces damage. As with D&D, my caveat is that you don't
feel the effect of armour - unless you have been playing for a while. An armor saving throw or a DR mechanic has a direct, palpable impact.
I generally like the idea of armor reducing damage (soaking hits) better than an all-or-nothing adjusting of a hit to a miss (like AC), but in practice I find many soaking systems bog down and get tedious in play. Both systems can be OK, but then you have wild ideas like the Shadowrun 6 idea that armor is simply there to add to your (or your opponent's) Edge (a luck rating) and it all goes to shit.
Quote from: Alexander Kalinowski;1107072A mix of both. Light armor makes you harder to hit and heavy armor makes you easier to hit but reduces damage. As with D&D, my caveat is that you don't feel the effect of armour - unless you have been playing for a while. An armor saving throw or a DR mechanic has a direct, palpable impact.
That's a good way to put it. Boy, it's been a decade or so since I last played Rolemaster.
After trying just about every type of armor mechanic, I've found an armor saving throw to work best. It doesn't have the scaling issues that DR has and it also makes it so the to-hit roll doesn't have to take armor deflection into account, meaning that it works better when there is little to no armor (such as with swashbucklers and guns).
If I had to use armor as DR, I wouldn't use the fixed values from Runequest (the game which burned me on armor as DR) but would use the variable armor DR values from Stormbringer/Elric.
Quote from: hedgehobbit;1107090After trying just about every type of armor mechanic, I've found an armor saving throw to work best. It doesn't have the scaling issues that DR has and it also makes it so the to-hit roll doesn't have to take armor deflection into account, meaning that it works better when there is little to no armor (such as with swashbucklers and guns).
If I had to use armor as DR, I wouldn't use the fixed values from Runequest (the game which burned me on armor as DR) but would use the variable armor DR values from Stormbringer/Elric.
What's armor saving throw, and variable DR?
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1107093What's armor saving throw, and variable DR?
Armor saving throws are seen in mini games like Warhammer (and 40K). As an example, after you roll to hit (based on your skill) and roll to damage (based on the power of the attack), the defender rolls the armor save to see if the armor stops the damage. Some weapons can completely bypass armor, but they do not make it any easier to actually hit the target. Likewise, in an RPG using such a system, the defender's skill in avoiding blows (and with Dex) might come up on the roll to hit, but it wouldn't change the chance of armor stopping a blow that lands.
Quote from: HappyDaze;1107101Armor saving throws are seen in mini games like Warhammer (and 40K). As an example, after you roll to hit (based on your skill) and roll to damage (based on the power of the attack), the defender rolls the armor save to see if the armor stops the damage. Some weapons can completely bypass armor, but they do not make it any easier to actually hit the target. Likewise, in an RPG using such a system, the defender's skill in avoiding blows (and with Dex) might come up on the roll to hit, but it wouldn't change the chance of armor stopping a blow that lands.
Huh, so a whole third roll? Doesn't that slow things down? What does the to-hit roll hit against if not AC?
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1107103Huh, so a whole third roll? Doesn't that slow things down? What does the to-hit roll hit against if not AC?
Yes, it can slow things down. For some this is an acceptable cost for more granularity.
The to-hit roll in melee is usually an opposed skill roll, or a roll against a static value based on such, while at range it is often based upon the range. Modifiers might apply in both cases according to the system.
Certain weapons might also modify the armor save, such as maces and warhammers being well suited to bashing through plate.
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1107103Huh, so a whole third roll? Doesn't that slow things down? What does the to-hit roll hit against if not AC?
The same thing as when armor is DR. It goes against their agility and/or weapon skill.
Quote from: hedgehobbit;1107090If I had to use armor as DR, I wouldn't use the fixed values from Runequest (the game which burned me on armor as DR) but would use the variable armor DR values from Stormbringer/Elric.
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1107093What's armor saving throw, and variable DR?
I don't know armor saving throws, but Stormbringer was the first game I saw where the effect of armor was to reduce damage by a die roll rather than a fixed amount; it was the one distinctive thing I remember about it. My copy is in one of the many boxes in the basement so it would require a major expedition for me to get more details.
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1107103Huh, so a whole third roll? Doesn't that slow things down?
Not as much as you'd think as the player can roll his armor save at the same time I roll damage. I don't use that many armor save modifiers so the players usually just roll what's on their sheet, like a regular D&D saving throw.
Also, because the chance to hit is based on skill vs skill, most monsters don't actually need an armor save to survive. It's mainly for PCs and bosses or monsters with notoriously thick skin like dragons or giant bugs.
Quote from: HappyDaze;1107105Yes, it can slow things down. For some this is an acceptable cost for more granularity.
Yeah, if you eliminate bonus actions and multiple attacks, you're good to go. Especially since these tend to be damage multipliers that are a leverage point for power gamers and tend to give GMs headaches - be it 40K Roleplay, RIFTS or Shadowrun. Plus an additional armour saving throw is at least not mechanically redundant like multiple attack rolls in one turn.
Quote from: HappyDaze;1107105Certain weapons might also modify the armor save, such as maces and warhammers being well suited to bashing through plate.
The problem with the armour save approach in RPGs is the question of how attacker skill affects it, if at all (where KotBL, as-is, falls short). Because in theory, high melee combat skill should help you bypass the enemy's parrying/dodging efforts and his armor at the same time.
This is where D&D's deflection approach also has an edge over soak-based approaches, even most hit location-based soak mechanics, as they too generally fail to address deliberate hit placement at soft spots.
Remember the glory days of Unearthed Arcana when Full and Field Plate absorbed damage?
Ahhh.... the air was sweeter back then. The sky... more blue.
What type of mechanic one uses to represent armor also needs to account for how damage is done in the system.
Do you roll for damage? A sword does 1d6 dmg
Or is damage a fixed value? A sword does 3 damage + degrees of success on attack roll?
Is the attack roll done just to hit? or does it have an affect on damage done like in some diepool systems?
Quote from: Alexander Kalinowski;1107186This is where D&D's deflection approach also has an edge over soak-based approaches, even most hit location-based soak mechanics, as they too generally fail to address deliberate hit placement at soft spots.
Most? RQ and the BRP family do. BoL does. Star Wars D6 does. That's a limited sample but it covers a wide range of settings and systems. What systems are there that don't provide for greater skill penetrating armor more frequently?
Quote from: Bren;1107318Most? RQ and the BRP family do. BoL does. Star Wars D6 does. That's a limited sample but it covers a wide range of settings and systems. What systems are there that don't provide for greater skill penetrating armor more frequently?
Ah yeah, you're referring to critical successes on the attack roll bypassing armour. Sure, you can take that into account. Fair enough. KotBL does that too. And I suppose there's also called shots in various systems, which are of course more feasible choices with a high skill. But that's not what I had in mind when I wrote the above.
I was just thinking that in most systems there is no direct correlation (other than the above) to defeating armour. Like, in WFRP, you reverse the attack roll percentile dice to determine hit location. But it's entirely random. It's not that higher skill allows you to select an unarmored location. In Hârnmaster 1E, it's also random, although you can make called shots at specific body regions. But it's not becoming increasingly likely to hit unarmored locations as you grow more skillful.
I guess the combination of critical attacks and called shots in various systems is a sufficient abstraction to avoid having to build a more complex model.
Quote from: Jaeger;1107304What type of mechanic one uses to represent armor also needs to account for how damage is done in the system.
What if damage is not expressed as a simple numeric value? ;)
Quote from: Alexander Kalinowski;1107355Ah yeah, you're referring to critical successes on the attack roll bypassing armour. Sure, you can take that into account. Fair enough. KotBL does that too. And I suppose there's also called shots in various systems, which are of course more feasible choices with a high skill. But that's not what I had in mind when I wrote the above.
Me either.
In Runequest and some versions of BRP your chance to get an armor ignoring hit or an increased damage hit (which is more likely to penetrate armor) is directly proportional to your skill level, unlike most D20 systems. And in RQ there are also ways to target a specific location. It's actually a problem for Humakti who had a geas not to wear armor on some location.
In Pendragon highly skilled characters have an increased chance to critical over the usual 5% chance that less skilled characters have. I don't recall if there is a way to bypass armor other than a critical hit.
In Honor & Intrigue you can use the
Called Shot maneuver to attack a location or bypass the armor. (Note: anyone can attempt the maneuver, but your chance to succeed is heavily affected by your combat ability, with an additional bonus if you have mastered Called Shot.
Called Shot: You attack for a vital area, or the gap
in the opponent's armor. This attack takes a penalty
to hit of up to -4. For each point of penalty, you do
+1 damage on a successful hit. A Called Shot can
instead bypass armor with a -1 Penalty to avoid Light
armor and a -3 to avoid Heavy armor (a helmet adds
another -1 to the penalty).