Candlekeep Forum
Candlekeep Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Forgotten Realms Journals
 General Forgotten Realms Chat
 Fighters that dont wear armor

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Screensize:
UserName:
Password:
Format Mode:
Format: BoldItalicizedUnderlineStrikethrough Align LeftCenteredAlign Right Horizontal Rule Insert HyperlinkInsert Email Insert CodeInsert QuoteInsert List
   
Message:

* HTML is OFF
* Forum Code is ON
Smilies
Smile [:)] Big Smile [:D] Cool [8D] Blush [:I]
Tongue [:P] Evil [):] Wink [;)] Clown [:o)]
Black Eye [B)] Eight Ball [8] Frown [:(] Shy [8)]
Shocked [:0] Angry [:(!] Dead [xx(] Sleepy [|)]
Kisses [:X] Approve [^] Disapprove [V] Question [?]
Rolling Eyes [8|] Confused [?!:] Help [?:] King [3|:]
Laughing [:OD] What [W] Oooohh [:H] Down [:E]

  Check here to include your profile signature.
Check here to subscribe to this topic.
    

T O P I C    R E V I E W
jordanz Posted - 02 Jan 2012 : 20:25:54
Outside of Monks,how do they realistically survive at high levels? What do they compensate with to compete with their armored brethren ?
30   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
Kilvan Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 16:37:29
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay

I had created a DMPC in 3e that got benefits from INT and WIS as well as DEX - he was almost impossible to hit by people around his level. That kind of simulates the Kensai/Mage thing (he was just starting the wizard class).




I started D&D in 2e, back when heavy armors (read full-plates) were not only very good, but also an important event in the life of any fighter I played. In 3rd ed, with dex and movement penalty, I never once had a fighter-type character who used anything heavier than a mithril breastplate.

Also, there is so many cool PrC that forbids you to use heavy armor (you can but lose all class abilities), there is very few builds that would need these heavy armors. And I'm not even a min-maxer.
Mournblade Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 16:26:46
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

quote:
Originally posted by Lady Shadowflame

Oh, pish, who needs armour?

The mightiest warriors just strip down, flex their muscles, and a barricade forms out of women and men swooning at the sight!



You've read Robert Jordan's Conan books, huh?

But an par with something akin to Conan, he doesn't wear much (if any) armor and he does well in fights. I think this goes to show that he battles creatures much less than himself.



ABSOLUTELY!

Especially in the Roy Thomas Comics, when Conan meets his match he often wins by using the environment. I picture Conan as like a 15th level guy used to fighting the level 3 warrior guardsmen.

Markustay Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 16:24:01
I had created a DMPC in 3e that got benefits from INT and WIS as well as DEX - he was almost impossible to hit by people around his level. That kind of simulates the Kensai/Mage thing (he was just starting the wizard class).

I'd still prefer a system wherein armor only reduced damage, not made it harder to hit. A guy wearing 100 lbs is not going to be able to dodge very well, and the rules do not take that into account at all. I figure its really a wash - whatever small benefit you get from weapons 'skidding' off the armor (from indirect blows) you would lose from the inability to dodge effectively.

This should be the real difference between 'finesse' classes and power-hitters: Finesse fighters (Swashbuckler, Monk, etc) rarely get hit, but when they do it's BAD, but 'walking tanks' should get hit all the time, but barely take any damage. D&D just doesn't reflect this very well.

And as I've said in another thread, the damage done should be reflected by the 'to hit' roll - not only would this simulate 'accuracy', but it would also REDUCE the amount of die rolling!

And maybe some of those weapon-specific Crit tables from Arms Law - those were Da Bomb.
Thauranil Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 07:52:56
quote:
Originally posted by Lady Shadowflame

Oh, pish, who needs armour?

The mightiest warriors just strip down, flex their muscles, and a barricade forms out of women and men swooning at the sight!



Wulgar should have tried out this technique. But i guess he was worried about an arrow in the back from Cattie Brie.
Icelander Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 00:17:23
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone

Besides Conan ran around in a loin cloth and bracers...


I've seen several references to this in this thread. This is emphathically not true.

In the Robert E. Howard books, Conan runs around, at all times, wearing as much armour as he can get. The times he is all but naked are those times when he has been wounded, looted and left for dead or is in the process of escaping some vile slaver or captor.

In the majority of the stories, he is wearing good mail or scale, as a mercenary, or nice plate harness as the King of Aquilonia.

Realistically, wearing armour in battle is simply better than not wearing armour. The reason there are lots of stories and real incidents about people who fought without armour is that not every violent encounter is a set-piece battle.

People who fight without armour are known as civilians and they might be fighting duels, brawls or even a deadly knife-fight for leadership of a street gang. But at any time after the Stone Age, soldiers wore armour, as much as they could get away with. That was, in fact, how you could tell the difference between soldiers and the rest.
The Sage Posted - 06 Jan 2012 : 05:14:37
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

As for 2E Kensi, at least they got something equivalent to armor that kept it comparative to other classes, not sacrificing a necessity for flavor and all that.

I've never had the chance to play a Kensai, but I have always been keen on the concept.

Not sure whether I'd multiclass, though, as I'm satisfied with what I've read about the class -- since it keeps the "flavour" largely intact, as you say.
Diffan Posted - 06 Jan 2012 : 05:04:09
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert


I briefly played a kensai, and with him, I certainly didn't think of armor as a necessity. I was playing the class for the flavor.

I played a minotaur in 2E, as well. Very much a front-line fighter, happily wading in with his bastard sword in motion. He didn't wear armor, either. With him, it was because he initially couldn't afford armor that was more than a point or two above his natural AC! And I again did not feel that armor was a necessity.

Armor, dodging, parrying, it all has the same end result -- soft fleshy person with a weapon doesn't get hit by an opposing weapon. Not getting hit is the necessity -- how that is accomplished is irrelevant.



Which is why it's important for rules to help adhere to these typs of styles. When I was looking at choosing some different Homeland aspects of my Berserker, I really thought about going with the Desert theme, because he was un-armored (just wore billowing clothes) and had BETTER AC than my Temperate Forest Berserker with Hide armor, heh. The main point is, rules mechanics shouldn't crap in player's cheerois just because a theme or concept is different from the norm. Basically I feel players shouldn't be penalized for flavor.
Wooly Rupert Posted - 06 Jan 2012 : 04:53:33
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

there were a few scenes........

As for 2E Kensi, at least they got something equivalent to armor that kept it comparative to other classes, not sacrificing a necessity for flavor and all that.



I briefly played a kensai, and with him, I certainly didn't think of armor as a necessity. I was playing the class for the flavor.

I played a minotaur in 2E, as well. Very much a front-line fighter, happily wading in with his bastard sword in motion. He didn't wear armor, either. With him, it was because he initially couldn't afford armor that was more than a point or two above his natural AC! And I again did not feel that armor was a necessity.

Armor, dodging, parrying, it all has the same end result -- soft fleshy person with a weapon doesn't get hit by an opposing weapon. Not getting hit is the necessity -- how that is accomplished is irrelevant.
Diffan Posted - 06 Jan 2012 : 04:17:37
there were a few scenes........

As for 2E Kensi, at least they got something equivalent to armor that kept it comparative to other classes, not sacrificing a necessity for flavor and all that.
Ayrik Posted - 06 Jan 2012 : 01:27:41
Ah, I can promise you that analyzing Conan has never excited me that much, Lady Shadowflame.
The Sage Posted - 06 Jan 2012 : 00:01:57
quote:
Originally posted by Therise

quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

As I recall, the 1E kensai couldn't wear armor or use a shield, but one of the benefits of the class was that his armor increased with his levels. I think the 2E kit did much the same thing.


I think you're right. And wasn't the kensai/mage an "ideal dual class" in the old Baldur's Gate 2 SoA-ToB game? The benefits of both classes in synchrony were apparently amazing (for 2E generally also, IIRC... same math, yes?).



'Twas Yoshimo, as I recall.
Therise Posted - 05 Jan 2012 : 20:50:16
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

As I recall, the 1E kensai couldn't wear armor or use a shield, but one of the benefits of the class was that his armor increased with his levels. I think the 2E kit did much the same thing.


I think you're right. And wasn't the kensai/mage an "ideal dual class" in the old Baldur's Gate 2 SoA-ToB game? The benefits of both classes in synchrony were apparently amazing (for 2E generally also, IIRC... same math, yes?).

Wooly Rupert Posted - 05 Jan 2012 : 19:14:07
As I recall, the 1E kensai couldn't wear armor or use a shield, but one of the benefits of the class was that his armor increased with his levels. I think the 2E kit did much the same thing.
Lady Shadowflame Posted - 05 Jan 2012 : 15:01:14
Diffan: No, never read Conan, but it was the flippant answer of a drow character of mine regarding why he didn't really need to carry a poisoned blade...

quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik

Real men don't swoon. They analyze.



If by analyse you mean 'find privacy for an urgent consultation with Rosie Palm and her five daughters,' sure...
Ayrik Posted - 05 Jan 2012 : 14:28:35
Real men don't swoon. They analyze.
Diffan Posted - 05 Jan 2012 : 14:18:18
quote:
Originally posted by Lady Shadowflame

Oh, pish, who needs armour?

The mightiest warriors just strip down, flex their muscles, and a barricade forms out of women and men swooning at the sight!



You've read Robert Jordan's Conan books, huh?

But an par with something akin to Conan, he doesn't wear much (if any) armor and he does well in fights. I think this goes to show that he battles creatures much less than himself.
Lady Shadowflame Posted - 05 Jan 2012 : 13:36:22
Oh, pish, who needs armour?

The mightiest warriors just strip down, flex their muscles, and a barricade forms out of women and men swooning at the sight!
Diffan Posted - 05 Jan 2012 : 04:17:45
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus

-Ironically, I just created a character who fits this mold, a level 10 samurai who does not use traditional armor.

  • Base AC= 23 (+4 DEX, +1 Amulet of Natural Armor, +3 Rings of Protection, +2 Dervish Armor Class Bonus)
  • +2 Defending Weapon= +2 Attack Bonus converted into AC on command
  • Combat Expertise (PHB) + Improved Combat Expertise (CW)= Up to +10 BAB converted into AC upon use


-The Allied Defense feat from Shining South allows me to bestow my Combat Expertise AC bonus on an ally standing next to my character as well, which is nifty.



To show some comparisons, I went looking through the SRD and found a few CR 9-11's that would hit that AC with rolls of 5 or less. Whether this is a failing of un-armored characters or with CR is another matter, but I'd rather hope the enemies I'm going against are hitting between 45-50% accuracy and not 75-80% accuracy, espically when the typical role of Fighters are "meat-shields".

To refer back to the OP's question, I'd think that a good majority of non-monk/swordsage melee combatants don't survive long at higher levels without armor. Just one example is my "lightly" armored Fighter 12/Tempest 5 character with a staggering AC of 32. And in one eno****er, fought two monsters that would've rolled a 2 or better (on a d20) to hit him. Luckly other aspects such as DR 5/bludgeoning saved his life and the monster being blinded after some spell-support.
Lord Karsus Posted - 05 Jan 2012 : 00:53:37
-Ironically, I just created a character who fits this mold, a level 10 samurai who does not use traditional armor.

  • Base AC= 23 (+4 DEX, +1 Amulet of Natural Armor, +3 Rings of Protection, +2 Dervish Armor Class Bonus)
  • +2 Defending Weapon= +2 Attack Bonus converted into AC on command
  • Combat Expertise (PHB) + Improved Combat Expertise (CW)= Up to +10 BAB converted into AC upon use


-The Allied Defense feat from Shining South allows me to bestow my Combat Expertise AC bonus on an ally standing next to my character as well, which is nifty.
_Jarlaxle_ Posted - 04 Jan 2012 : 15:03:44
Being faster means more attacks per round and more power means a higher attack bonus to increase your chance to hit and more damage output per hit.
BEAST Posted - 04 Jan 2012 : 14:58:38
I don't play the game, so I don't know the rules or the jargon.

But what about simply hitting faster and harder than your opponent? If you get the drop on a guy, then even with his armor, he should be stunned for a moment, during which you wail away on him with abandon. Theoretically, he might never recover until you finish him or tire yourself out (especially with some sort of great weapon).

Smash his plate helmet hard enough and you give him a concussion, regardless of whether it prevents a surface wound to his flesh. Smash it even harder, and you separate his C-spine deep down inside all of that armor.

So I guess this would be akin to that old saying that "the best defense is a good offense".

What game features simulate being faster on the draw and overwhelming power?
Wolfhound75 Posted - 04 Jan 2012 : 03:42:13
@Thauramarth
Apologies for poorly wording my response to sound like a disagreement. As I noted in another post, I was bored at work and needed something to keep my mind occupied so I worked on a bit of a discourse. I agree with the fact that there may not be rhyme or reason to it so just hack away and have fun and, I rationalize it with the saying I used, '...over time, individuals can condtion their bodies to accept punishments that Joe Villager would not be able to...' Afterall, it's a game and games are played for fun.

Good Hunting!
Eldacar Posted - 04 Jan 2012 : 01:56:44
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone

In high level 3E most monsters have True Sight, or other means of seeing so the 50/50 miss chance doesn't work anymore.


High-level 3rd edition is commonly known as rocket tag, played by the spellcasters. Basically, the first person to win initiative and throw out their encounter-ending spell of choice wins. The game begins to break down. While melee combatants can keep up somewhat (one particular build I know of called the "ubercharger" can deal upwards of 500-600 HP damage in a single turn), particularly if they make use of Warblade, Swordsage and similar classes, it's only forestalling the inevitable, since the majority of melee builds are concentrated around one or two "tricks" that they rely on, and anything that can nullify those tricks will shut them down.

One way around antimagic field, though, is to take the Martial Study: Iron Heart Surge feat. When you use it, you immediately end a single effect that is affecting you. Any effect. You can indeed break antimagic fields with it. It's also described as the equivalent of shouting "By Crom!" mid-battle.
Thauramarth Posted - 03 Jan 2012 : 23:36:13
quote:
Originally posted by Wolfhound75

quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
...but ultimately, there's no way around the fact that, all things being equal, an arrow can kill a healthy, prime-of-life orc (with 1d8 hit points, in 2E), while that same arrow will be no more than a scratch to an 80-year old decripit archmage, with 11d4+7 hit points to his name.


I think we should compare apples to apples here. From your example, it's clear that the Archmage has been an adventurer while the orc has not. I'd suggest that when you compare the average village-dwelling orc to the average village-dwelling elf, human, gnome, etc. that the same lowly arrow would slay all equally.
(...)

What I think is the biggest disconnect in the combat system is the sheer number of hit points a PC has. Granted, over time, individuals can condition their bodies to accept punishment that Joe Village-dweller would not be able to withstand. But, no matter what level, getting your throat cut open should be relatively fatal (...).


Whichs is basically what I said, no ? A 100-year old human, with all human frailties, caught with his robes down, should not be able to withstand an arrow better than a bulked-up orc. That is, if "realism" is what one looks for in a system. As long as I have played D&D, everyone has tried to rationalise the hit points disconnect in order for the system to be "realistic". I've grown to accept the fact that there's no realistic rhyme or reason to it, and just hack away .
Wolfhound75 Posted - 03 Jan 2012 : 22:49:53
quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
...but ultimately, there's no way around the fact that, all things being equal, an arrow can kill a healthy, prime-of-life orc (with 1d8 hit points, in 2E), while that same arrow will be no more than a scratch to an 80-year old decripit archmage, with 11d4+7 hit points to his name.


I think we should compare apples to apples here. From your example, it's clear that the Archmage has been an adventurer while the orc has not. I'd suggest that when you compare the average village-dwelling orc to the average village-dwelling elf, human, gnome, etc. that the same lowly arrow would slay all equally.

quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
If you're not wearing armor, your best bet is to not get hit... So a high dexterity, and/or class features that boost AC (either by blocking or by dodging) would work. And magic, of course.


Heh...you sound like Mr. Miyagi from The Karate Kid. "Best way to avoid getting hit, Daniel-san, is no be there!"



Ultimately, this whole issue revolves around game mechanics and how they're implemented. They're not perfect and ultimately never will be able to simulate the reality of combat - no matter how one 'Tactically Studies the Rules'. There is a defined limit inherant to the system.

IMO, and having little-to-none for experience with 0E and 4E, the rules have, overall, done a good job of simulating the effects of armor in combat. The reason I feel this is that Armor should make it more difficult to score a 'lethal damage' hit. I think that many DMs misinterpret the terms 'Hit' and 'Miss' to literal standards - your swing connected or whiff, nothing but air. I prefer to think of it as something along the lines of 'you swing and your opponent catches the blow on his shield' unless of course the attack is a natural one - then it's a whiff with chances of misfortune.

Armor protects the wearer and absorbs blows that otherwise would cause lethal damage to the individual. That doesn't mean it's impervious to damage, it means the attacker has to more carefully aim his blows in order to find the chinks and score damage. So to bring this back to the OP's question, and with the obvious game changing aspects of magical assistance aside, they don't compensate.

Reference many movies such as "The Three Musketeers". Characters die easily in taverns from a knife in the back or a rapier through the guts in a street brawl when not wearing armor but, even veteran fighters, when given the chance, will don the greater protection that armor offers. Again, referencing the movie "The Musketeer", before charging off to storm the castle, the Musketeers almost to a one don breast plates.

Does that mean that every character that engages in a fight without armor is going to die? No. Specially trained, Dexterous, Intelligent, or otherwise experienced heroic adventurer types can draw on their experience to guess where the next attack will come from. Some specially trained characters, reference the Monk, have an almost preternatural sense of where the next attack will come from, allowing that individual, over time, to become a very difficult target to hit. Particularly adroit (dexterous) characters may be able to see the blow originating and react accordingly (DEX bonus to AC, Dodge Bonus) - but they have to be aware of the attack to react to it, which is where the surprise/flat footed mechanic enters play. Intelligent characters may be able to use their knowledge of combat (something akin to the 3.xE feat of Combat Expertise) to anticipate and intercept/parry blows as they come in.

But, when all is said and done and special training aside, an unarmored fighter should be more vulnerable than an armored one. If the assassin gets the drop on you and attempts to put a blade in your spine, you're probably going to die. If you're wearing armor, he has to aim his blow a lot more carefully or the armor may defeat his intended attack.

What I think is the biggest disconnect in the combat system is the sheer number of hit points a PC has. Granted, over time, individuals can condition their bodies to accept punishment that Joe Village-dweller would not be able to withstand. But, no matter what level, getting your throat cut open should be relatively fatal which is where I feel the Massive Damage / Save vs. System Shock is designed to come into play. The attack was so effective it might slay you instantly, like being run through in a tavern brawl.

My two coppers on the subject of armor anyway. Though I admit I've toyed with the idea that armor not only makes it harder to score a hit but degrades the blow somewhat (read that as Damage Reduction) or attenuates it (read that as causes non-lethal/subdual damage instead) depending on how close the 'to-hit' roll was to scoring lethal damage.

Good Hunting!
Brimstone Posted - 03 Jan 2012 : 22:48:00
In high level 3E most monsters have True Sight, or other means of seeing so the 50/50 miss chance doesn't work anymore.
Diffan Posted - 03 Jan 2012 : 16:27:49
Eldacar makes a very good point, as from my experiences most monsters in the 16+ CR range are going to be hitting the fighter with most attacks that roll above a 5 or 6 anyways. DR plays a very important part in your defenses as many monsters get multiple hits per-turn. Miss chance and the like are also great ways in reducing your chances of being hit compared to attempting to gain an impressive AC. The main problem is that Fighters (meaning the class) don't really have access to any of these options except a few Wondrous Items and Rings that can be made. Furthermore, at those levels Anti-magic fields are more likely to occur and thus, negating pretty much everything that was just mentioned.

4E does this a bit better overall (not in the Fighter class sense, however) as many un-armored classes get benefits to AC for NOT wearing armor unlike just the Monk and Swordsage in 3E.
Eldacar Posted - 03 Jan 2012 : 08:36:53
As far as 3rd edition is concerned, it's not your AC that should worry you, since touch AC is never going to be perfect. It's nice to have, but you can do without it. What you want to do is capitalise on the miss chance mechanics. Displacement, blur, and all those effects. For example, the Shadow Blend ability of the Shadow Dragon is a 50% miss chance in anything less than full daylight. That's a 50/50 chance of not being hit, period.

Couple that with some hefty DR to nullify the damage you do end up taking, and you should be set.
Ayrik Posted - 03 Jan 2012 : 08:17:10
I suppose fantasy barbarians, forbidden to wear shields*, would survive through raw hit points and hardiness. They might wield a second weapon for defensive emphasis although I doubt it - warriors who scorn shields as unmanly just wouldn't think that way, they'd use that second weapon to batter the enemy. D&D offers all manner of feats and powers so we can pretend the PC berserker is able to get really angry and magically harden his skin into a flexible sheet of stone. D&D also treats shields as next to useless low-defense encumbering items, which I personally feel is unrealistic, but it's the way it is.

* Dumb. RL Eurasian barbarians, Germanic berserkers, Norse and Celtic raiders, pretty much everyone who went to war without armor used a shield. Even if the best they could manage was basically a leather and wicker frame.
Thauramarth Posted - 03 Jan 2012 : 05:59:27
quote:
Originally posted by jordanz

Outside of Monks,how do they realistically survive at high levels? What do they compensate with to compete with their armored brethren ?



How do they realistically survive? Well, they don't, really. The D&D system was never realistic. My experience does not include 4E, so I cannot comment on the combat system for that edition, but realism is not a primary concern of the D&D combat system, as designed. There have been plenty of attempts (TSR/WotC-official, 3rd party, and fan-made) to make the system more "realistic", but ultimately, there's no way around the fact that, all things being equal, an arrow can kill a healthy, prime-of-life orc (with 1d8 hit points, in 2E), while that same arrow will be no more than a scratch to an 80-year old decripit archmage, with 11d4+7 hit points to his name.

As Wooly said, the best way to avoid dying is not to get hit, but from OD&D to 2E, the chances to be hit were determined mostly by armour (or its equivalents, like Bracers of Defense). The main exception to this was the 1E barbarian, which massively increased the Dex bonuses, and the Barbarians' hit points (an 8th-level barbarian with 18 Con could get 8d12+64 hit points, or 72-160; an 8th-level fighter with 18 Con could get 8d10+32, or 40-112).

Other more "realistic" gaming systems that I know (mostly BRP and GURPS; I've never played Rolemaster, which was supposed to be extremely detailed) have armour for damage reduction, and rely mostly on parrying / blocking or dodging to avoid being hit - important, since under those systems, one good hit can kill a long-time character.

Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2024 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000