Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

What do you think of Burlew's Armor Focus, etc. feats?

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
July 3, 2005 3:02:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

http://www.giantitp.com/Func0004.html

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
July 3, 2005 3:18:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Malachias Invictus wrote:
> http://www.giantitp.com/Func0004.html
>

Hmm. Armor focus might be o.k. but it would allow higher ACs to people
focued on dex (or with enhancement bonuses to it at later levels), and
Armor Specialization seems a bit much combined with that, basically +3
to ac for 2 feats. Messing with AC & to hit's is a bit dangerous given
the d20 is your range. The Armor Specialization also seems to be a
"nameless" bonus, which seems a bad idea to me. It would pass the feat
tests though - would everyone take it, would anyone take it. And there
are similar feats for shields IIRC.

I'd be warry. I definatly wouldn't allow Armor Specilization with it.

- Justisaur
Anonymous
July 3, 2005 3:24:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Malachias Invictus wrote:
> http://www.giantitp.com/Func0004.html

I like them. They're powerful, but that's fine. There are too few
reasons to stick with straight Fighter for more than 4 levels.

Note that Greater Armor Focus should probably have "Fighter level 8th"
as a prerequisite.

I would modify Weapon of Choice slightly, as follows:
"You can choose _two_ specific weapons to benefit from this feat. If
you do, then the bonuses only apply when you're using both weapons
simultaneously."
This way, two-weapon fighters would also find it useful.

Laszlo
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
July 3, 2005 3:26:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Justisaur wrote:
> Malachias Invictus wrote:
> > http://www.giantitp.com/Func0004.html
> >
>
> Hmm. Armor focus might be o.k. but it would allow higher ACs to people
> focued on dex (or with enhancement bonuses to it at later levels), and
> Armor Specialization seems a bit much combined with that, basically +3
> to ac for 2 feats.

Only +2. Armor Focus doesn't grant AC.

> Messing with AC & to hit's is a bit dangerous given
> the d20 is your range. The Armor Specialization also seems to be a
> "nameless" bonus, which seems a bad idea to me.

No, it increases your armor bonus.

Laszlo
Anonymous
July 3, 2005 4:16:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
> Justisaur wrote:
> > Malachias Invictus wrote:
> > > http://www.giantitp.com/Func0004.html
> > >
> >
> > Hmm. Armor focus might be o.k. but it would allow higher ACs to people
> > focued on dex (or with enhancement bonuses to it at later levels), and
> > Armor Specialization seems a bit much combined with that, basically +3
> > to ac for 2 feats.
>
> Only +2. Armor Focus doesn't grant AC.

You missed my point. Armor Focus doesn't directly grant AC, but it
increases max dex bonus, allowing one to go up one AC through dex, or
through going to heavier armor.

>
> > Messing with AC & to hit's is a bit dangerous given
> > the d20 is your range. The Armor Specialization also seems to be a
> > "nameless" bonus, which seems a bad idea to me.
>
> No, it increases your armor bonus.
>

Ah, same difference then, it will stack with anything.

Thinking about Armor Focus, it is significantly better than Weapon
Focus for a couple reasons, 1 is you don't need a particular kind of
armor to overcome dr, so there's no reason to ever change the armor you
are wearing, focusing on one armor isn't anywhere near the burden of
focusing on one weapon. 2ndly no matter how high you get your attack,
your opponent is still going to be able to hit you. This prevents
damage through AC, which is much better. Also with shileds that get
increased AC bonus you are giving up a significant ammount of damage
either through using 2 handed weapons or 2 twf.

I definatly wouldn't allow it at this point.

- Justisaur.
Anonymous
July 3, 2005 5:26:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

> Malachias Invictus wrote:
> > http://www.giantitp.com/Func0004.html

I like the feats for the most part, some of the rules are a little
confusing though and perhaps over powered. Armor specialization gives
an armor bonus but only when you are not denied your dex which goes
against the concept of armor bonus, he should turn it into a dodge
bonus, but that means it would apply to touch attack and other such
things. I would either forgo the dex requirement making it a true armor
bonus or turn it into the more beneficial dodge bonus( but then bring
it down to +1)

Armor specialization gives a +2 ac bonus, opposed to weapon focus +1 to
hit, also it allows a character to sleep in the chosen armor without
fatigue, i think it is too much for one feat.

Shield deflection is an awesome feat, but i dislike shield focus, it is
under powered, a smaller armor check penalty is not very important as
much people will not be using their shield when they need to jump or
climb something, also anyone with a +1 bab can already ready a shield
as a free action.

anyway the dm would probably want to nerf the bonuses to +1 or drop the
no fatigue thing with armor specilization. Also i recommend deciding
what type of bonus it is and adjusting it accordingly. I might put
shield focus and specilization into one feat, granting a +1 shield
bonus, this also would encourage a player to spend a feat on it to get
shield deflection which is an awesome feat^_^
Anonymous
July 3, 2005 6:15:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Justisaur wrote:
> laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
> > Justisaur wrote:
> > > Malachias Invictus wrote:
> > > > http://www.giantitp.com/Func0004.html
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hmm. Armor focus might be o.k. but it would allow higher ACs to people
> > > focued on dex (or with enhancement bonuses to it at later levels), and
> > > Armor Specialization seems a bit much combined with that, basically +3
> > > to ac for 2 feats.
> >
> > Only +2. Armor Focus doesn't grant AC.
>
> You missed my point. Armor Focus doesn't directly grant AC, but it
> increases max dex bonus, allowing one to go up one AC through dex, or
> through going to heavier armor.

Okay, yes. But Armor Focus only improves your AC if you're using
heavier armors (unless you have a _really_ high Dex). And heavier
armors can use the help; they're generally understood to be slightly
underpowered.

> > > Messing with AC & to hit's is a bit dangerous given
> > > the d20 is your range. The Armor Specialization also seems to be a
> > > "nameless" bonus, which seems a bad idea to me.
> >
> > No, it increases your armor bonus.
>
> Ah, same difference then, it will stack with anything.

True, but it won't help your touch AC.

> Thinking about Armor Focus, it is significantly better than Weapon
> Focus for a couple reasons, 1 is you don't need a particular kind of
> armor to overcome dr, so there's no reason to ever change the armor you
> are wearing, focusing on one armor isn't anywhere near the burden of
> focusing on one weapon. 2ndly no matter how high you get your attack,
> your opponent is still going to be able to hit you. This prevents
> damage through AC, which is much better. Also with shileds that get
> increased AC bonus you are giving up a significant ammount of damage
> either through using 2 handed weapons or 2 twf.

Okay, but there are a lot of opponents against whom armor won't help
(incorporal undead, mages, gaze attack monsters, etc). There are a
_lot_ fewer monsters against whom a good whack on the head with a
powerful weapon is useless.

> I definatly wouldn't allow it at this point.

Eh. I probably would.

Laszlo
July 3, 2005 11:37:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Alien mind control rays made Malachias Invictus <capt_malachias@hotmail.com> write:
> http://www.giantitp.com/Func0004.html

i've had most of that IMC since it started a year and a half ago,
nobody's taken those feats yet. but, hardly any of the PCs has ever
even *worn* armor, and never anything more than light armor. not
even the front-line melee fighters.

they're funny like that.

--
\^\ // drow@bin.sh (CARRIER LOST) <http://www.bin.sh/&gt;
\ // - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
// \ X-Windows: More than enough rope
// \_\ -- Dude from DPAK
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 12:06:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

<laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
news:1120425358.951792.82090@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Justisaur wrote:

>> You missed my point. Armor Focus doesn't directly grant AC, but it
>> increases max dex bonus, allowing one to go up one AC through dex, or
>> through going to heavier armor.
>
> Okay, yes. But Armor Focus only improves your AC if you're using
> heavier armors (unless you have a _really_ high Dex).

No, period. The Max Dex bonus does not change for light armor.

> And heavier armors can use the help; they're generally understood to be
> slightly
> underpowered.

That was what I was thinking.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 12:08:21 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

<laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu> wrote in message
news:1120415042.405249.233810@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>
> Malachias Invictus wrote:
>> http://www.giantitp.com/Func0004.html
>
> I like them. They're powerful, but that's fine. There are too few
> reasons to stick with straight Fighter for more than 4 levels.
>
> Note that Greater Armor Focus should probably have "Fighter level 8th"
> as a prerequisite.

Indeed. I believe it is an accidental omission.

> I would modify Weapon of Choice slightly, as follows:
> "You can choose _two_ specific weapons to benefit from this feat. If
> you do, then the bonuses only apply when you're using both weapons
> simultaneously."
> This way, two-weapon fighters would also find it useful.

Hmm. Interesting.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 12:10:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

<ephemeralparadox@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1120422400.546732.115110@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Malachias Invictus wrote:
>> > http://www.giantitp.com/Func0004.html
>
> I like the feats for the most part, some of the rules are a little
> confusing though and perhaps over powered. Armor specialization gives
> an armor bonus but only when you are not denied your dex which goes
> against the concept of armor bonus, he should turn it into a dodge
> bonus, but that means it would apply to touch attack and other such
> things. I would either forgo the dex requirement making it a true armor
> bonus or turn it into the more beneficial dodge bonus( but then bring
> it down to +1)

I disagree. I think the mechanics are fine for the concept of using your
armor more skillfully to deflect attacks.

> Armor specialization gives a +2 ac bonus, opposed to weapon focus +1 to
> hit, also it allows a character to sleep in the chosen armor without
> fatigue, i think it is too much for one feat.
>
> Shield deflection is an awesome feat, but i dislike shield focus, it is
> under powered, a smaller armor check penalty is not very important as
> much people will not be using their shield when they need to jump or
> climb something, also anyone with a +1 bab can already ready a shield
> as a free action.

Then again, prerequisite feats for juicy downline feats are generally a bit
weak.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 2:16:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <rK-dnRlR0-uDtVXfRVn-hw@comcast.com>,
capt_malachias@hotmail.com says...

> http://www.giantitp.com/Func0004.html

Are the Mount Specialization and Greater Mount Specialization supposed
to stack? I think not, but as written, they would...

Shield Deflection seems really good. Raising your touch AC by +1 to +7
is definitely something to consider, for a feat.


--
Jasin Zujovic
jzujovic@inet.hr
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 3:01:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
> Justisaur wrote:
>> laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
>>> Justisaur wrote:

>>>> Messing with AC & to hit's is a bit dangerous given
>>>> the d20 is your range. The Armor Specialization also seems to be
>>>> a "nameless" bonus, which seems a bad idea to me.
>>>
>>> No, it increases your armor bonus.
>>
>> Ah, same difference then, it will stack with anything.
>
> True, but it won't help your touch AC.

Or flat-footed, as it goes away when you lose your DEX bonus.

That was the only thing that seemed cumbersome to me - the bonus granted by
Armour Specialisation is an armour bonus, but you have to track it
separately from your regular armour bonus because it only applies when
you're actively using it.

--
Mark.
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 1:22:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Malachias Invictus wrote:
> http://www.giantitp.com/Func0004.html

Very similar to, but more flexible than, Heavy Armor Optimization and Greater
Heavy Armour Optimization in "Races of Stone".

--
Christopher Adams - Sydney, Australia
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you
understand?
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/prestigec...
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/templatel...

Berawler: Is there any sanity or light left in this shrivelled husk of a world?
SingingDancingMoose: There was, but we had to trade it in for the internet.
Berawler: That is quite possibly the best response to any question ever.
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 1:22:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Christopher Adams" <mhacdebhandia@yahoo.invalid> wrote in message
news:D d7ye.14008$oJ.6376@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Malachias Invictus wrote:
>> http://www.giantitp.com/Func0004.html
>
> Very similar to, but more flexible than, Heavy Armor Optimization and
> Greater Heavy Armour Optimization in "Races of Stone".

Interesting. I had forgotten about that.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 1:23:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Malachias Invictus wrote:
> http://www.giantitp.com/Func0004.html

Also, epic my ass. I'm sure he's designing to the Wizards standard but that's
not a *good* thing.

--
Christopher Adams - Sydney, Australia
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you
understand?
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/prestigec...
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/templatel...

Berawler: Is there any sanity or light left in this shrivelled husk of a world?
SingingDancingMoose: There was, but we had to trade it in for the internet.
Berawler: That is quite possibly the best response to any question ever.
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 1:23:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Christopher Adams" <mhacdebhandia@yahoo.invalid> wrote in message
news:2e7ye.14009$oJ.8831@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Malachias Invictus wrote:
>> http://www.giantitp.com/Func0004.html
>
> Also, epic my ass. I'm sure he's designing to the Wizards standard but
> that's not a *good* thing.

What specifically did you think was problematic?

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 4:10:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 3 Jul 2005 14:15:59 -0700, laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu carved upon
a tablet of ether:

> > You missed my point. Armor Focus doesn't directly grant AC, but it
> > increases max dex bonus, allowing one to go up one AC through dex, or
> > through going to heavier armor.
>
> Okay, yes. But Armor Focus only improves your AC if you're using
> heavier armors (unless you have a _really_ high Dex). And heavier
> armors can use the help; they're generally understood to be slightly
> underpowered.

I don't know that doing it by making them more accessible to high-Dex
characters is the way to go, though.

My likely houserule when I next run a game is making medium armour
drop your run rate from x4 to x3 move, and letting the wearer keep
their normal move. If that's not enough I might consider giving medium
armour DR1/- and heavy armour DR2/-, or just boosting the AC bonuses
of medium and heavy armours.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 4:10:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Mon, 04 Jul 2005 12:10:13 +1200, Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
scribed into the ether:

>On 3 Jul 2005 14:15:59 -0700, laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu carved upon
>a tablet of ether:
>
>> > You missed my point. Armor Focus doesn't directly grant AC, but it
>> > increases max dex bonus, allowing one to go up one AC through dex, or
>> > through going to heavier armor.
>>
>> Okay, yes. But Armor Focus only improves your AC if you're using
>> heavier armors (unless you have a _really_ high Dex). And heavier
>> armors can use the help; they're generally understood to be slightly
>> underpowered.
>
>I don't know that doing it by making them more accessible to high-Dex
>characters is the way to go, though.

You can make heavy armors more accessable to high-dex people by simply
making them out of mithril. What's more valuable, a piece of equipment, or
a feat?
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 7:59:47 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Mon, 04 Jul 2005 03:24:46 GMT, Matt Frisch
<matuse73@yahoo.spam.me.not.com> carved upon a tablet of ether:

> >I don't know that doing it by making them more accessible to high-Dex
> >characters is the way to go, though.
>
> You can make heavy armors more accessable to high-dex people by simply
> making them out of mithril. What's more valuable, a piece of equipment, or
> a feat?

The feat, in this case.


--
Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 11:34:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Rupert Boleyn wrote:

> My likely houserule when I next run a game is making medium armour
> drop your run rate from x4 to x3 move, and letting the wearer keep
> their normal move.

I've used +1 and +2 cover bonuses to ref saves for medium and heavy
armour respectively. You have to be careful though, once the monies are
around most PCs can wear magic mithral full plate as a medium armour
with +8 to AC, +3 Max Dex, and only -2 ACP.

> If that's not enough I might consider giving medium armour DR1/-
> and heavy armour DR2/-, or just boosting the AC bonuses of medium
> and heavy armours.

That not much worse than adamantine for free. My usual trick is to
knock chain shirts back to +3 (with various ajustments to others to keep
the choices alive). Helps no end. 8]

What the game really needs is proper endurance rules, so that heavy
armour wears you out quicker in battle (and on the march), but lets you
move around just fine.

--
tussock

Aspie at work, sorry in advance.
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 8:44:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Christopher Adams wrote:
>
> All of Rich Burlew's feats under the epic level are really quite good,
> and I have no problem with them.

For instance, I find the defensive feat chains here quite interesting.

http://www.giantitp.com/Func0009.html

--
Christopher Adams - Sydney, Australia
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you
understand?
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/prestigec...
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/templatel...

Berawler: Is there any sanity or light left in this shrivelled husk of a world?
SingingDancingMoose: There was, but we had to trade it in for the internet.
Berawler: That is quite possibly the best response to any question ever.
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 9:13:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 04:44:30 GMT, "Christopher Adams"
<mhacdebhandia@yahoo.invalid> scribed into the ether:

>Christopher Adams wrote:
>>
>> All of Rich Burlew's feats under the epic level are really quite good,
>> and I have no problem with them.
>
>For instance, I find the defensive feat chains here quite interesting.
>
>http://www.giantitp.com/Func0009.html

There is definite inspiration of the House of Blue Leaves there. He does of
course admit to it.

Some of those feats are pretty situational...if your DM likes to throw one
beefy monsters at you instead of a bunch of mooks, a lot of them won't work
so well. But when they work...wow, they work.
Anonymous
July 6, 2005 12:39:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

ephemeralparadox@yahoo.com <ephemeralparadox@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Malachias Invictus wrote:
>> > http://www.giantitp.com/Func0004.html
>
> I like the feats for the most part, some of the rules are a little
> confusing though and perhaps over powered. Armor specialization gives
> an armor bonus but only when you are not denied your dex which goes
> against the concept of armor bonus, he should turn it into a dodge
> bonus, but that means it would apply to touch attack and other such
> things. I would either forgo the dex requirement making it a true armor
> bonus or turn it into the more beneficial dodge bonus( but then bring
> it down to +1)

I made it a competence bonus. It still only applies when you use it
'actively' (i.e. not denied Dex to AC). You can find my versions at

http://www.kjdavies.org/rpg/reference/feat/armor-focus....

They were also posted to a [kjd-imc] a while ago.

In short, pick an armor group (medium or heavy; light doesn't apply) and
get +1 competence bonus when wearing armor from that group (and ACP is
reduced by one). Greater Armor Focus increases this to +2 (but is only
available for heavy armor, not medium). Specialization gives a bonus to
attack rolls (+1, +2 for Greater Armor Specialization) -- you can rely
on the armor enough to take greater chances in combat, giving you a
better opportunity to hit.

I apply the bonuses for the entire weight category rather than
individual armor types. There isn't a *lot* of difference between half
plate and full plate, at least in how they are used, odds are you're
only using one type of armor anyway, and these are largely passive
feats, they don't really let you *do* anything.

You might look for 'kjd-imc Exotic Armor' and 'kjd-imc Armor Etceteras'
for conversation on this.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch
Anonymous
July 6, 2005 8:28:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
> On 3 Jul 2005 14:15:59 -0700, laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu carved upon
> a tablet of ether:
>
>> > You missed my point. Armor Focus doesn't directly grant AC, but it
>> > increases max dex bonus, allowing one to go up one AC through dex, or
>> > through going to heavier armor.
>>
>> Okay, yes. But Armor Focus only improves your AC if you're using
>> heavier armors (unless you have a _really_ high Dex). And heavier
>> armors can use the help; they're generally understood to be slightly
>> underpowered.
>
> I don't know that doing it by making them more accessible to high-Dex
> characters is the way to go, though.
>
> My likely houserule when I next run a game is making medium armour
> drop your run rate from x4 to x3 move, and letting the wearer keep
> their normal move. If that's not enough I might consider giving medium
> armour DR1/- and heavy armour DR2/-, or just boosting the AC bonuses
> of medium and heavy armours.

I'm dropping the limitation on base tactical speed for armor, but
keeping it for weight. If you're strong enough, you can move your
normal speed in full plate. I'm still limiting the run multiplier.

I've got feats to make you better with armor in general (link posted in
another message). Giving medium and heavy armor some small DR or bonus
to Reflex save is probably reasonable too, especially if you consider
that those who tank up rarely have a good Dex bonus to Reflex saves
(heh, Dolarn got set on fire by so many traps it's not funn... well,
yeah, it was funny).


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch
Anonymous
July 6, 2005 8:28:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Keith Davies" <keith.davies@kjdavies.org> wrote in message
news:slrndco1lc.q56.keith.davies@kjdavies.org...
> I'm dropping the limitation on base tactical speed for armor, but
> keeping it for weight. If you're strong enough, you can move your
> normal speed in full plate.

That is a very sensible rule. Really, well-made plate is no more bulky than
leather armor; it is just heavier.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 9:19:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Malachias Invictus wrote:
> "Keith Davies" <keith.davies@kjdavies.org> wrote in message
> news:slrndco1lc.q56.keith.davies@kjdavies.org...
>
>>I'm dropping the limitation on base tactical speed for armor, but
>>keeping it for weight. If you're strong enough, you can move your
>>normal speed in full plate.
>
> That is a very sensible rule. Really, well-made plate is no more bulky than
> leather armor; it is just heavier.

Heh. I have house rules for heavier built armour already, but you
can bet everyone would ask for some once their strength got up to silly
levels in the late game.

--
tussock

If mithral's half the weight, why not use twice as much of it?
!