Quote from: RandallS;518245In D&D, this is handled by the 10th level fighter having many times the hit points of the three year old. In my D&D games, a three year old human is going to have 1 hp where as a 10th level fighter is going to have a average of 45-50 hp. Like it or not, in D&D hit points represent nicks, scratches and near misses as well as actual damage.

Which is exactly what I said in my first post.

Then I outlined how there are examples of play like a first touch bout (or it could be a touch attack like a strike from a Ghoul or a ghost) where that maybe doesn't fit perfectly.

I then suggested possible solutions but agreed that by the time you implemented them you were probably not playing DnD anymore.

Of course your point brings up back to the question of why it takes me 3 days in 1e to recover from your blow which didn't actually touch me but that is a hit point argument so out of scope for this thread.

Quote from: jibbajibba;518250I then suggested possible solutions but agreed that by the time you implemented them you were probably not playing DnD anymore.

If one can maintain compatibility with whatever support materials one desires this, imo, becomes a meaningless distinction.

Quote from: jibbajibba;518241its an ad absurdia example yes... but AC 10 is AC 10 . My detail example compares a 1st level AC 10 fighter with a 10th level AC10 figther. You might argue that the difference between the two examples is similar.

They don't need to have different ACs to model one of the fighters being better than the other.  The 10th level guy already has a bigger bonus to hit and likely has multiple attacks.  The guy who gets hit more often and more times?  He's the lesser of the two fighters, despite them having identical ACs.  These examples are not equal.

QuoteSupposing a PC had to catch the royal 3 year old prince as they ran past them in order to help them escape the bandit attack most 1e DMS would say roll to hit vs AC10 to grab the royal prince as they dash past.....

I guess most 1e DMs have a serious lack of imagination or a strange addiction to rolling dice.  I would just say "Ok, you've grabbed the prince; he struggles and squirms in your arms--what do you do next?"

In other words, rolling to his AC is not a good way to model the hypothetical scenario you've just outlined.

Quote from: misterguignol;518252T

In other words, rolling to his AC is not a good way to model the hypothetical scenario you've just outlined.

Well, I think that's his point; it isn't and he'd like it to be.

Quote from: misterguignol;518252They don't need to have different ACs to model one of the fighters being better than the other.  The 10th level guy already has a bigger bonus to hit and likely has multiple attacks.  The guy who gets hit more often and more times?  He's the lesser of the two fighters, despite them having identical ACs.  These examples are not equal.



I guess most 1e DMs have a serious lack of imagination or a strange addiction to rolling dice.  I would just say "Ok, you've grabbed the prince; he struggles and squirms in your arms--what do you do next?"

In other words, rolling to his AC is not a good way to model the hypothetical scenario you've just outlined.

You obviously have never tried to catch a 3 year old

There is an example I think in the 1e DMG of a PC trying to grab a scroll case as it flows past in a stream and the advice is make a to hit vs AC 8 (that might be my old memory playing tricks) .

but again my example was just an absurd one the point is a good warrior should be harder to hit, not just better at hitting.

Quote from: jibbajibba;518254You obviously have never tried to catch a 3 year old

It's true; I've never been featured on To Catch a Predator.

QuoteThere is an example I think in the 1e DMG of a PC tryign to grab a scroll case as it flows past in a stream and the advice is make a to hit vs AC 8 (that might be my old memory playing tricks) .

For all the majesty of the 1e DMG, sometimes Gygax just plain gives bad advice if that's the case.

Quotebut again my exampel was just an absurd one the poitn is a good warrior should be harder to hit, not just better at hitting.

Fair enough, but that's not how D&D usually works.  Combat is abstracted to the point where being harder to hit is wrapped up in a bunch of other things besides Armor Class.

Quote from: Aos;518251If one can maintain compatibility with whatever support materials one desires this, imo, becomes a meaningless distinction.

To some of us yes

Quote from: misterguignol;518255Fair enough, but that's not how D&D usually works.  Combat is abstracted to the point where being harder to hit is wrapped up in a bunch of other things besides Armor Class.

but when that Spectre is about to drop you 2 levels and 3 months of game play ....

Scaling AC only really works if the characters are largely limited to light armor. Something that supports swashbuckling and monks. Other than that, I don't like the idea.

In newer editions I think AC should scale if attack bonuses scale.

I know that in older editions, hp represented straight misses sometimes, and attacking might represent several attacks, but certain things make that feel less right. Multiple attacks (iterative or against low HD foes) makes it seem like multiple swings isn't the norm for a single attack. Arrows do likewise. In later editions, shorter rounds make it seem as if rolling to hit once is really rolling to hit once. And so on.

But then I'm working on a system that is decidedly not D&D for all this. I think there's genuinely an unmet demand for a leveled game with RQ style rules-as-physics or 4e style powers lists (or both) in place of certain commonly complained about D&Disms.

Quote from: estar;518246Right there is your issue. D&D Combat is abstract in that the dice roll NOT equal to a swing of the weapon.

Tell that to the guy with the longbow.

Quote from: jibbajibba;518258but when that Spectre is about to drop you 2 levels and 3 months of game play ....

It seems you want a higher degree of realism in regards to combat with a fictional creature that is pretty fiercely anti-realist.

If the question becomes "How to we accurately model a trained warrior's prowess in combat against a ghosty thing that is ethereal and gosknowshowitreallyworks?" then there isn't anywhere to really go from here, you know?

D&D isn't a simulator of real-world combat.  It's really, really bad at that.

Quote from: misterguignol;518267It seems you want a higher degree of realism in regards to combat with a fictional creature that is pretty fiercely anti-realist.

If the question becomes "How to we accurately model a trained warrior's prowess in combat against a ghosty thing that is ethereal and gosknowshowitreallyworks?" then there isn't anywhere to really go from here, you know?

D&D isn't a simulator of real-world combat.  It's really, really bad at that.

I agree, but there is no reason not to tinker with it to make it less bad, or more to your liking.

Quote from: Aos;518268I agree, but there is no reason not to tinker with it to make it less bad, or more to your liking.

Apparently I am not allowed to

Quote from: jibbajibba;518270Apparently I am not allowed to

Sidenote: therpgsite isn't (currently) a great place for mechanical tinkering or getting good feedback on same, unfortunately. I'll let you know when I find a place. Currently I do most of my work on the cbg but I feel kind of weird sometimes obsessing over mechanics in a board for worldbuilding.