Armor Class range and damage reduction

[jeff]

So, in D&D, the range of AC is 2-9. AC doesn't really go below a 2 (as far as I can tell) and the trend seems to me that magical equipment that would lower it below 2 are applied as penalties against the enemy's rolls rather than as a reduction to AC.

Thus, Plate Mail +1 & Shield do not give AC of 1, rather, they give AC 2 and a -1 is applied to enemy attack rolls. Correct?


If I am correct in that assumption, here's an idea that I would like some feedback on.

Any magical or other bonuses that would reduce AC below 2 are, instead, subtracted from the damage received with a minimum of 1 damage always being sustained.


Thus, Plate Mail +1 & Shield are still AC 2, but damage taken is reduced by 1 (a minimum of 1 point of damage will always occur).



Your thoughts?

[Lorgalis]

I think this was Arduin's AC mechanic, or close to it.

Keeping it easy and old school, I suggested using a Sundering Shields approach

Warriors only can take a hit or critical and have the armor take the damage. One hit equals losing 2 AC, a crit equals losing 3 AC.
This can be done until armor is gone or near gone or maybe better yet, only once until the armor is repaired.
Maybe another rule - will only work with fitted armor.

I do like this idea ridding off yours

Magic armor is damage reducing only. Each +1 reduces damage by a point but offers no other protections - no bonus to be missed.

[Anathemata]

Conceptually I think it's a fine idea; it also equates supernatural toughness with the ability to literally ignore damage, which is neat. But it adds another calculation, however brief, to combat, and thus may not improve the experience of the game much--or maybe your players will like the idea it seems to suggest and it won't bug them.

[snorri]

My experience is that players do'nt like DR so much, because they feel cheated when they hit and do no damage.
But like you suggest, a limited DR for magical armor si fine.

[sepulchre]

Conceptually, I think this idea misses the mark. If you want to play with damage reduction, play Chaosium, perfectly good system, but conceptually very different from OD&D/AD&D. Damage reduction adds an unnecessary step to the abstraction of armor class. What you are looking for is already assumed in the abstraction presented.

[oakesspalding]

I like the idea of preserving the, so to speak, sanctity of Armor Class 2. For mere material protection how could one improve upon dragon scales and steel plates? But damage reduction seems too fussy and also too powerful. If a 7th level Fighting-Man hits an armor class 2 critter on a 12, that's a 45% chance to hit. A -1 damage reduction would reduce expected damage by 24% of that or the equivalent of slightly more than a -2 to hit adjustment, double the effect of the old scheme. And it gets worse if the target has an initially higher armor class than 2, or if the attacker has better than an initial +5 to hit modifier relative to a normal man. What's wrong exactly with the penalty on enemy attack rolls?

Of course the other way to go, for monsters at least, would simply be to pump up their hit dice and/or hit points proportionately. Even in the original edition, the concept of armor class as actual physical protection was starting to blur (is Vampire skin made out of steel?). I think this was unfortunate.

[Anathemata]

Y'know, Dave Arneson had a rule that made AC 0 the lowest you could get for a human in plate mail with all the bells and whistles. That meant that any magic armor or magical creature that was more difficult to hit than humanly possible had a negative AC. Cool idea.