Armor Fix Idea [D&D 3.5]

[Seerow]

Originally Posted by Deepbluediver

Shall I assume you'd make the same arguments about the Bard you made for the Rogue?

My argument for bard would be similar to rogue, but would also include "They're spellcasters and can come up with other defenses" and "They rarely go on the front lines without something like song of the white raven anyway"

Alternatively getting off topic; while the cap on the penalty for iterative attacks makes this less critical, how badly boggled would things get if we just eliminated the middle BAB from the game altogether, so classes had only a good/bad option, like for saves?

If you were going to go this route, I'd highly recommend Good/Medium only instead. Medium becomes the new bad. A variance of 10 from one variable is pretty bad for the RNG, honestly. But since it's things like wizards that suffer most from it, it's not something I cry over.

Personally I'd keep the three progressions as they are, but maybe buff a few classes. (For example maybe give rogue a dodge bonus to AC similar to the monk's AC bonus).

Oh don't worry, I know where to find your customization system.
And while I love it for weapons, it just doesn't seem as exciting for armor, somehow.

*shrug* well I've been updating the armor more frequently than weapons the last few weeks, given the weapons are more or less done as far as I'm concerned. While there's less fun properties for armor (which is why I imagine it feels less exciting), the baseline changes help a lot with balance and not gimping people wearing heavy armor imo.

[Just to Browse]

The Shield doesn't seem like it would be weaker, actually. Instead of also providing temp HP per round, it's providing a bonus to all three forms of AC (flat-footed, touch, regular). It should be fine.

[Pechvarry]

Originally Posted by Seerow

It should make more sense that way. If you're still confused let me know.

Yeah, I get it now. Not sure how I feel about it, though. Size penalties to AC always negate themselves under this system (though they DO become natural armor bonuses, which are inferior to the untyped base amount), and Dex always undoes itself as well. The net result is that all opponents have very close to the same AC, which doesn't seem very good for variety of foes.

However, I do understand this is because WotC didn't stat monsters anything in regards to a RNG very well. So I think my best bet - as well as anyone like me - is to follow your guideline to attain what their AC "should be" and then adjust it accordingly to how we see fit (lower natural armor for something I see as a meat bag, increasing dex bonus to AC to represent a tricksy foe, etc).

Well I think there's a certain elegance to getting more hp at the same time as getting more attacks. It helps slightly with keeping defense up to par with offense. If/when I get a campaign going with this I'll probably make changes, but for now I'm actually pretty happy with it.

I agree. I just wanted to point out that if people liked a lot of this fix but not all of it, there are a lot of ways to fiddle with it until it fits their table.

@BAB-to-AC: I do worry a wee bit for the Rogue, but I think it's squarely a Rogue problem.

More terrifying to me is the Cleric. I already intend to run (if I ever DM more than one-shots...) Clerics as poor-BAB and Medium armor proficiency (and, as mentioned before, no-such-thing as Divine Power). Without such changes, a Cleric in this system is even more absurd than normal.

[Seerow]

More terrifying to me is the Cleric. I already intend to run (if I ever DM more than one-shots...) Clerics as poor-BAB and Medium armor proficiency (and, as mentioned before, no-such-thing as Divine Power). Without such changes, a Cleric in this system is even more absurd than normal.

True, but it's like adding a pebble to a mountain. It's more, but nothing too outrageous relative to what they can already do. I'm honestly more worried about spells that provide really high scaling AC bonuses that were introduced as bad bandaids by wotc for the low AC issue, but am just leaving the assumption the DM will nerf or limit them as needed.

Yeah, I get it now. Not sure how I feel about it, though. Size penalties to AC always negate themselves under this system (though they DO become natural armor bonuses, which are inferior to the untyped base amount), and Dex always undoes itself as well. The net result is that all opponents have very close to the same AC, which doesn't seem very good for variety of foes.

Well WotC already did this. Monsters that grew larger almost universally gained Natural Armor to make up for it. I guess I could make a note that larger creatures get extra temp hp but less armor (and vice verca) but I think the way it currently is works.