Brainstorming for relevant armor (3.5, Peach)

[eftexar]

Thoughts and Musings
The problem with armor is that it becomes more irrelevant the higher your level because BaB scales while armor does not. Unfortunately, simply increasing the effectiveness of armor without caveats leaves some builds with a much higher AC than others and runs into some other new imbalances.

So it occurred to me that every armor fix ever has tried to rewrite the armor itself, but D20 modern already has something called a defense bonus which worked perfectly when I played it and I'd like to run with it.

While I realize a straight defense bonus might be out of place in D&D, why couldn't we just make armor scale with proficiency or, in this case, with BaB?

Using BaB prevents spellcasters from stealing all the armored glory, keeps armor in scale with the classes that traditionally use it, makes wearing heavier armor worthwhile, and also make it relevant, but not provide complete protection, against touch attacks.

It also works perfectly with multiclassing since it isn't class based. But what I'd like to now is your thoughts on this system and some problems it might or might not present to gameplay.



Defense Bonus
The bonuses presented below are a new type of bonus. They stack with all other bonuses to AC, including armor and shield bonuses, and function even against touch attacks.
In the case someone isn't proficient with the armor they gain bonuses for armor of a category one lighter, to a minimum of light. Note that this is in addition the AC normally provided by armor.

{table=head]BaB|Light Armor|Medium Armor|Heavy Armor
+1|+0|+1|+2
+2|+0|+2|+3
+3|+1|+2|+3
+4|+1|+3|+4
+5|+1|+3|+4
+6|+2|+3|+5
+7|+2|+4|+5
+8|+3|+4|+6
+9|+3|+5|+6
+10|+3|+5|+7
+11|+4|+5|+7
+12|+4|+6|+8
+13|+5|+6|+8
+14|+5|+7|+9
+15|+5|+7|+9
+16|+6|+7|+10
+17|+6|+8|+10
+18|+7|+8|+11
+19|+7|+9|+11
+20---|+7|+9|+12
[/table]

[eftexar]

Armor and Shield Related Feats
Shield Defense
When you take the total defense action a heavy shield provides you with cover and a tower shield provides you with total cover. It is impossible to hide with this cover.
Special: You do not gain the benefits of this feat with any shield for which you do not have proficiency with.

Shield Ally
As long as you aren't flatfooted or helpless you provide a deflection bonus to all adjacent allies' AC equal to your shield's bonus to AC.
Special: You do not gain the benefits of this feat with any shield for which you do not have proficiency with.

Absorb Blow
By sacrificing your defense bonus, as an immediate action in response to an attack or hazard you are aware of, you redirect any damage you would have taken, from the attack or hazard this was used in response to, to your armor (apply hardness as normal).
You do not regain your defense bonus until the start of your next turn and any damage beyond that your armor absorbs is still taken by yourself.
Special: You do not gain the benefits of this feat with any armor for which you do not have proficiency with.

Fortify
By sacrificing your defense bonus, as a swift action, you gain immunity to critical hits and gain a +4 bonus to any check or save to resist being forcefully moved, even by effects such as teleportation. This effect lasts until your next turn begins.
Special: You do not gain the benefits of this feat with any armor for which you do not have proficiency with.

[Yora]

I think the first two questions that need to be answerd are
What is wrong with armor as it is?
What would improve the situation?

As it is, adding an AC bonus is just a change to the numbers. But to judge if it's a good change or a bad change, the existing problem first needs to be identified.

[eftexar]

The problem is that armor becomes more irrelevant the higher your level because BaB scales while armor does not, but simply increasing the effectiveness of armor without caveats leaves some builds with a much higher AC than others and runs into new problems.

The system above takes into account different classes and the likelihood that some of they probably have a higher dexterity than others.

Another problem is that there is no point in buying heavy armor when you can just ramp up your dexterity or take advantage of concealment. Basically any other defensive option is better than armor right now.

I've already listed out a few other points, in addition to some of this, in my post above. So thoughts?

[eftexar]

Does anybody have any thoughts on this at all?

[scarmiglionne4]

I have never participated in a game with characters above tenth level. I never saw a problem with armor myself.

At what point does BaB vastly outshine AC? Aren't you just making the numbers larger? If AC increases with BaB, how do character's feel like they are improving? The chance to hit would remain more or less the same, would it not?

I think BaB is meant to overtake AC to some extent. The closer a character gets to 20th level I should think the more mundane items such as armor will cease to matter. It would be like a guy with Wolverine's healing factor and battle prowess wearing plate mail. What's the point?

[eftexar]

The point is making armor worth it. It's silly to think that every hero just ditches his armor when he reaches higher levels. And I don't to need to improve how well I hit thing to feel awesome, as I'd rather learn better ways to hit (overcome DR, making touch attacks, etc).

And it's even sillier to think that I can get better at hitting things, while simultaneously not getting better at defending myself. It's like training in judo and not learning how to counter an opponents throw.

But more to the point, mechanically anyways, the problem is that at higher levels monster AC does scale more often than not, while player AC does not. So monsters hit players more often then they are hit by the players.

Here's some math:
average AC at level 20: 10 (base) + 4 (dex) +4 (armor) +2 (shield) = 20
average to hit at level 20: 20 (base) + 4 (str) + 4 (misc) = 28
Eventually your attack rolls become greater than AC. Unless you can roll a -8 you'll never miss and monster BaB tends to be even higher because their HD are often higher. We could factor in magic enchantments, but they will be about equal anyways.

While this may not seem like a problem at first, it actually reeks of magic favoritism. Spellcasters not only have better ways to defend themselves than armor, such as blur and displacement, but CR is based on having wizards, clerics, and druids in your party.

If all players attempted to play all mundanes it's unlikely they would survive very long. You would have to knock the CR of monsters fought down. While not necessarily a realistic scenario it demonstrates a gap in the system where mundanes are unable to defend themselves, but casters are.

[Empedocles]

If all players attempted to play all mundanes it's unlikely they would survive very long. You would have to knock the CR of monsters fought down. While not necessarily a realistic scenario it demonstrates a gap in the system where mundanes are unable to defend themselves, but casters are.

Well...no offense but, duh. Welcome to the biggest problem in 3.5.

More on topic, if you really want to reflect warrior's learning to better defend themselves, why not provide a Defense bonus similar to base attack not based on armor at all? This would reflect things like a fighter parrying his opponent with his own weapon.

You ask about problems it would present to game play? Well...it doesn't really change much. At 1st level smashing, where the fighter with 18 attack and a greatsword is a god among men who kills all the kobolds, he's about the same. After 3rd level, the fighter becomes irrelevant for reasons that stretch waaaaaaaaaaay beyond his AC (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=276366). So, in closing, this system doesn't really change anything.

[scarmiglionne4]

Don't hit points and saving throws represent a character getting better at defending themselves?

I think an interesting point is caster's defenses coming from spells that grant miss chances and such. Wouldn't a scaling miss chance be more appropriate? Sort of like the Evasion rating in Final Fantasy games. You may have more die rolls, but the numbers would be more manageable I should think.

[GunbladeKnight]

Level 20 normal rules:
AC = 10 (base) + 3 (DEX) + 13 (+5 mithril full plate) + 5 (amulet of natural armor) + 5 (ring of protection) = 36. Touch AC = 18

Level 20 under yours:
AC = 10 (base) + 3 (DEX) + 25 (+5 mithril full plate) + 5 (amulet of natural armor) + 5 (ring of protection) = 48. Touch AC = 30

Likely to-hit at level 20:
Full BAB: 20 (BAB) + 5 (+5 weapon) + 12 (18 base stat + 5 from levels + 5 tome + 6 item) = 37. Could add weapon focus or greater weapon focus to bring it up to a 39 to hit.

Half BAB: 10 (BAB) + 7 (14 base stat + 5 tome + 6 item) = 17 vs. touch AC.

Some monster attacks:
Pit Fiend, CR 20: +30 to attack
Balor, CR 20: +33 to attack
Red Dragon, Old, CR 20: +36 to attack
Terrasque, CR 20: +57 to attack

Hm... looking at the numbers, it certainly does help in most cases. The only problem is explaining the fluff for it. Though there are likely to still be points where CR appropriate monsters will still auto-hit.

It also doesn't address the fact that without that armor, melee classes will likely be dropped due to monster reach and AoO's.

[eftexar]

Empedocles my problem with a straight defense bonus is that it doesn't make armor relevant. Besides that a class-based defense bonus would get hairy with multi-classing, like saves already do, and I would have to assign it on a class by class basis.

And I'm well aware that the fighter is irrelevant for more reasons than AC. I'm merely trying to experiment at improving one problem in the system instead of trying to fix the whole system.
While system fixes are nice and all, DM's are more likely to patch up the system they have with 3 or 4 houserules than swap out the entire system for a slightly different one or a new one.

scarmiglionne4, saves don't apply to most attacks that allow for AC. I guess hit points maybe, but I've always imagined it more anime beat down style than representing 'scathing' blows (like a lot of other people have explained it away as). They take some serious damage.

A scaling evasion rate is an interesting idea though. The problem comes with miss chances and having to roll two or three times. I suppose an option to institute would be a damage reduction in percentage style based on BaB.

Thanks for the math check GunbladeKnight. I hadn't compared to monster AC yet. I was thinking as far as fluff we could just call it proficiency with armor; basically at lower levels you are too clumsy to fight in it properly.

Good point on the outside of armor thing... What about just providing the light armor bonus I've listed for unarmored characters as well?