Wednesday, April 21, 2010

#2 Old School Rules I Don't Use, Weapon vs Armor.

Weapon vs Armor.

Its a perfectly sensible rule and its even somewhat realistic, if thats of any matter but in my really slows down play and is a poor fit for the highly abstract D&D combat system.

The AD&D 1e version was especially complex and not well thought out (little was known about weapons then) and since I never used it there, I never saw any use in using it in 2e either.

1 comment:

  1. I'm afraid here I must disagree. I don't find it slows down anything (at least, any more than any other oddball rule does), and it gives a certain justification for the use of different sorts of pole arms, especially when wielded by units of humanoids.

    Take, for instance, a group of gnolls with footmans' flails. All of a sudden those paladins in their plate mail aren't looking so invincible, when the gnolls have what are effectively +2 weapons.

    What most people don't realize is that the adjustment is against base armor *type*, not armor *class*. If the one were A-H, rather than 2-10 (just to differentiate the two), it might have made a lot more sense.