Vagueposting- Gryphons are hard to beat

 Art @Tomasz Chistowski

When it comes to designing fantasy mounts or animal companions/warriors for fantasy settings, it's REALLY hard to beat the griffon.

I don't necessarily mean beating as in like, they're really strong and powerful in a fight or whatever- though that is certainly the case. It's like a flying horse that can fight, both with a beak AND claws. This makes it pretty powerful in combat, and that's without the high level badass knight no doubt riding its back. Also: I'm using Gryphon as I like that spelling the best, but Griffon in the text, because that's the one that doesn't trigger my spellchecker.

But anyway; specifically I meant the griffon is hard to beat as a conceptual mount. What do I mean by this? Let's examine it.

In fantasy worlds, you tend to think of ways to "power up" medieval warriors or battles- as to add levels of power not available in the real world. Of course, it's difficult to do so. Don't take me as a historical revisionist or history worshiper, but typically speaking the people of the past are going to roughly use the most efficient and effective means available to them to basically anything; including warfare. It's kind of hard to improve on the concept of slashing someone with a sword or polearm, so in order to add some fantasy pizazz on top, you make them out of magical materials and the like. Pretty simple.

Mounts are a bit of a tougher problem. In real life, people never decided to go around riding hippopotami or bears because they're scary and never got around to domesticating them. Which is fucking stupid, because they totally should have. Horses were used as mounts probably because they eat grass, which is something humans can't directly eat, had backs uniquely suitable for carrying a heavy person in a way that a wolf or cat simply can't do even if sized up appropriately, and because they're already social animals that fit well for domestication. This is, of course, all armchair theorizing stuff, but you're reading Vagueposting so I guess that's your fault right? lmao.

Anyway, with that in mind, you want to make up a fantasy animal that knights and warriors can ride into battle. Being on a mount is such a massive advantage in any pre-modern combat; but horses are kind of lame. Note: Obviously, horses are actually extremely dangerous, and the simple momentum of being on a giant animal is more then enough to give this huge advantage! But they don't have claws or a fearsome bite of a predator- they're grounded, and aren't especially armored. They are mostly known for being fast. Of course, realistically, that's all they NEED to be; no animal can fulfill all of these qualities in a way with the same efficiency in a realistic way- but in fantasy you can make animals fit these roles.

Art @Studio 0618(?)

 
BUT But there is more to this! You could take things like giant cats and lions, which is fine, or giant wolves or bears or boars and what not- BUT there's a bit of an issue here. I'll take lions out of this; but for all of these animals there is a bit of a wild or negative connotation connected to them in certain ways. This is why you see orcs riding wargs and not humans. And then you have tigers and elk and stuff, but those are more fitting for one off, special natural characters like elves or druids, not a "knight".

So in order to make a more powerful, sup-ed up version of a horse, it needs to be something that has a bit of nobility to it, has to be able to fight or be more intimidating then a horse. In this, I would say that lions/big cats can be a good substitute. However, lions in my opinion are a bit harder to sell because everybody kind of already has an idea of what a lion is and how big it roughly is, and they aren't quite horse sized. Perhaps specifying that they are giant lions could help, but in the end, lions are still grounded. They can't fly. They are also a "mundane" animal, which lacks some of that fantasy danger/power level increase.

Now you COULD go with magical version of a horse. Typically, a Pegasus (or THE Pegasus) is a cool one, but is a bit weak in terms of combat prowess. It's just a horse with wings; could be incredibly fantastical in a grounded setting, but in a setting where players are going to be jousting against dragons, it's comparatively weak. Another example would be a unicorn, or an alicorn to borrow My Little Pony terminology (which is a winged unicorn.) These are pretty badass on their own, but we're talking specifically about combat mounts.

There are some magical beasts or beings you could use for this too. Flying sharks, wyverns, harpies, sphinxes, gragoyles, manticores could all be potential monsters- but here's the thing. They can't be too innately magical or "out there"- I won't even get into detail about all these creatures being typecast as evil or bestial as you can kinda change that, but the point stands. They need to be grounded somewhat, biologically and in terms of ability. The standard fantasy knight needs to be the "mundane" character, and can't be too crazy or else it breaks some of the fantasy suspension of disbelief.

Art @Deiv Calviz

Now let's discuss the elephant in the room- not an actual elephants. Dragons. Dragons are the big one you could argue are stronger or "better" then a gryphon; but herein lies the issue. Dragons are actually TOO powerful to really serve as a mount in my honest opinion. Now I know dragons have a long history of serving as heroic (and evil) character mounts, but dragons fail for two reasons in my opinion. Firstly, dragons are a bit too powerful and outshine their riders in a way- this is not something you want a mount to do. Breath weapons change up the dyanmic in a way that takes away from the "flying/magical knight dude" idea. If the dragon is significantly small then it could work in this context, but then the other issue is that dragons are too smart. Dragons are usually portrayed with a human level of intelligence or "greater", thus meaning they can usually talk and would be more of a partnership of the rider and the dragon they are riding. 

In my opinion, this messes up the dynamic. For two reasons primarily- first, it takes away focus from the combat power and prowess of the rider once again, but two, it makes them irreplaceable in a way. If you ride a dragon into battle, you ride A dragon, not a dragon. The thing about mounts, in my mind at least, is they need to be at least somewhat replaceable, or at the very least, not of equal value to the rider if one had to be slain in a fight, if that makes sense.

To better explain this; you could imagine a fantasy knight going into a stable getting a new horse if theirs died, or if the horse is exhausted and needing to switch it out for a long journey. You could imagine a fantasy knight doing the same thing with a griffon- but NOT with a dragon. Not with a character. Of course, if you make dragons into the setting closer to animals then it works out- but these are starting to not resemble the stereotypical fantasy version of dragons!

What about other mounts? Well- anything reptilian (including dragons to an extent) is going to be a bit too sinister to work as the generic noble knight mount. Those flying Fell-Beasts that the Nazgul ride around are also great, but once again, very villainous! An artificial mount, like a flying carpet or something would only really fit for a Wizard and is a bit too wacky. Giant bugs would also totally fall flat here- most people don't like bugs except for maybe a big fuzzy moth, but that lacks punching power. Now riding around a giant bird or eagle has a lot of promise here- I think these are plenty good, (and in a way, you could argue they are the in between of a horse and griffon; a "mid level" option, if you would, that or a Hippogriff.), but the griffon is still a bit more powerful in this direct confrontation. Being the "most" powerful isn't necessarily a good trait here, but it's part of the factors for being in the running.

Now, you could always make up your own mount, which is totally fine. I have no problems with that; but it lacks a certain fantasy "realness" that existing creatures have. I'm sure that you as a worldbuilder or dungeon master run into a similar issue; you'll make up a unique race and just feel they can't really stand up to the mass cultural power that things like elves, dwarves, and orcs simply have. I feel the same way about trying to make up my own fantasy mounts or "good" creatures for people to use or live with in a fantasy setting. In a weird way, I actually think that random whacko made up stuff works better for monsters then for knowable, domestic creatures in the setting- though if you're trying to make your own setting, it's equivalent.

Art @Seb Lee

But the Griffon? It has clout. It's a real mythological beast. It's been used as a fantasy flying mount for a long time- I know Warhammer and Warcraft have done it, I'm sure at least one of the official D&D settings have done it; and there are certainly more examples I cannot name here. It's part of the pop culture and social consciousness for fantasy tropes. While that's not really a "fair" reason- it IS a reason nonetheless. You can even switch them up a bit; griffons could be made of different birds or cat bottom halves; it isn't too hard to imagine giving griffons animals stereotypes of birds, or lions, or both in a combination. Their capabilities could be more grounded and animal, like roughly equal to a flying predatory cat/bird creature, or they could be supernaturally strong and "boss like", as they are seen in games like the Witcher, Dragon's Dogma, etc.

And another thing; birds are attractive. Not in a weird sexual bestiality way, but in an purely looks way. They're majestic, especially birds of prey. Larger reptiles we would associate with mounts (like crocodiles, komodo dragons, etc.) are scraggly, not symmetrical and "cute" enough to really cut it as something humans want to ride around on and pet and feed scraps around the campfire- same goes for giant flying bug mounts, massive bats, or like weird giant smoke monsters or whatever.

So to sum up; When it comes to giving a good or generally honorable Knights a souped up version of a knight for epic fantasy battles or powerful tools for adventuring types- griffons are going to be really hard to beat in terms of aesthetics, power, plausibility, thematic grouping, and especially cultural relevance and reiteration.

If you have ANY ideas on mounts that can beat the Gryphon- please share. I'm desperate.

Really Strong = Laser Vision

So this one time, I got into a very stupid debate with someone about what “magic” is in a fantasy world, where the physical laws of reality in that fantasy world would be totally different from our own. All you need to know is that I was right and smart, other guy was wrong and a poop head, etc.

However- it got me thinking of something very specific. And that is- what if having the ability to fire laser beams from ones eyes is a trainable skill? It's a sort of function of Strength. Basically, being really strong means you can focus your vision to the point where it can kill people.

Laser Vision

Laser Vision isn't a magical skill. It isn't a spell, it's a natural function of one's eyes if one becomes strong enough. You see- the eye is a muscle like any other, and being able to use it to focus ones attacks to kill foes is as much a function of the eye as focused rays of force. It can't be counterspelled nor is it subject to magic resistance; this is as physical as getting stabbed with a sword. However, a mirror shield works wonders against an eye-beam, and reflects the damage right back at its user.

In order to fire an eye beam, you must have a Strength modifier of +4 or better. This counts regardless of if you have Giant Strength or not- even giant creatures need to be strong in comparison to other giant creatures. In the same way the weakest human is stronger then the strongest worm, you still need to be an exceptional human to be able to fire eye beams.

To fire one's eye laser- one must focus all of their mental energy and stare at a target. The beam will emit as a red colored beam of energy- it creates intense heat and a dull glow, as well as being powerful through concussive force. The beam uses your To-Hit modifier from your class + Strength modifier to hit. When it hits, it deals 1d6 + Strength modifier in damage.

After firing an eye beam once, you must lower your Strength modifier by -1 for the rest of the day. This is muscular exhaustion. Despite the energy beam coming from your eyes, it drains ALL of your body's strength and resources to fire even a basic beam. As such, you can only fire it a few times per day. Also, your other combat abilities will suffer for using an eye beam, as you have exhausted yourself. However, the eye laser can do things regular attacks cannot, such as attacking at range, cutting through ropes, lighting something on fire, and so on.

If this ability is STILL too unrealistic for you, just make it a Special Move.

Ability Score Requirements for Weapons Concept

This blogpost is a concept for a ruleset restricting items based on a character's stats, either Strength or Dexterity depending on the item used. This concept therefore ONLY applies if you accept three other concepts along with it;

#1- Weapons are stronger. The normal range of d4 for minor weapons to d12 for really powerful weapons is the default (at least for “normal” weapons) in most games. As such, these rules thrive on weapons that are more powerful; weapons may very well deal 2 or 3 dice worth of damage of various sizes, combining together to make really strong attacks. You could also use this rule with the normal range of weapons and it would be fine (better even- changing less math and already fits into the basic conceptualization of the game's world in regards to the abilities of player-characters based on their attribute scores), but this blogpost contains a larger scope then that.

#2- Characters don't get extra attacks. The damage numbers to make these rules significant is much, MUCH higher then the damage of “normal” weapons you would see in a DIY or OSR game. The idea here is Fighters do a ton of damage and have other ways of dealing with multiple opponents, such as a mighty cleave (kill monster = attack next monster) or baked in multi-target attacks to the rule system.

#3- Characters have a method to improve ability scores. This improvement is either based on leveling up, a type of downtime activity or training as a money sink, or something that happens in the world or through a magic item treadmill. You can regularly make Rings of Strength and upgrade them as you progress in the game, to better equip stronger and stronger weapons. Of course, you don't HAVE to include this concept- but doing so means character creation will rule out a huge number of characters on a huge number of weapons, so it comes with the territory that you need a way to actually use these if you include them.

Finally; the purpose for outlining these three concessions above is to avoid the obvious complains about balance, change, or unfitting nature of these rules with how most people play OSR. I know. This isn't supposed to be directly bolted onto a game engine that can't support it. Don't assume so.

Strength

In order to successfully use a melee weapon, your Strength must be equal or greater than the highest possible roll on its larger dice PLUS one half the highest possible roll on all other dice.

For example, a d6 standard sword has a Strength requirement of 6. The d12+1 Magic Greatsword has a Strength requirement of 12. The Twinblade Katana deals 2d6-2 damage, so it requires 6+3 for 9 Strength. The Mighty Meteor Flamehammer deals 1d20+1d4 damage, so it requires 22 Strength.

Dexterity

In order to successful use a melee weapon, your Dexterity must be equal or greater than the number of damage dice the weapons deals times 4, MINUS the Magic/To-Hit Bonus of the weapon.

The standard d6 sword only has one dice, and as such only requires 4 Dexterity to use. The d12+1 Magic Greatsword has 1 die +1, meaning it actually only takes 3 Dexterity to use. Bloodsucking Razor Whips that deal 4d4 damage require 16 Dex to use. The Twinblade Katana example from above deals 2 damage dice, so it requires 2x4 Dex, MINUS the negative To-Hit value, meaning it really takes 10 Dex to use it correctly. The idea is a negative to-hit of an unwieldy or low quality weapon would also make it a little harder to handle.

Explanations – What's the Point?

The purpose for this ruleset is a bit more of a “holistic” way to generate requirements for Fighters or Fighter-Types to use powerful weapons, as opposed to something like weapon egos or what have you. Of course, in that context it only works for the absolute bare essential stats of the weapon; more of something you'd have in a purely combat engine game- it doesn't make much allowances for things like powerful at-will or daily powers or spells bound up in the weapon that would make it much more powerful then just raw damage.

The reasons why I really like it are two fold, the first is because it makes weapons feel really powerful. It encourages creative weapon design. I get the opposite argument and even agree with it myself sometimes; the idea that a +1 magic sword should be enough. You should be excited for that, it's a cool magic sword and your character gets it from hard work, it's not flashy or mechanically deep, it's part of the game that makes it feel cool. But at the same time, we have all these dice and we have stuck in our minds this concept of low damage numbers- a more delayed gratification in a way. Clearly the ability of a Fighter-Type to annihilate a powerful monster in two or three rounds with a really big, badass weapon is appealing to some, but not appealing at all to others. I want to mention here that this really isn't a post about stats as a mechanic, or game balance or anything like that.

Secondly; the idea of playing with stats. I often contemplated the concept of a classless OSR/DIY game focused entirely on character stats- there would be training or experience points used to get them, or perhaps items found directly in the dungeon like elixirs that permanently improved your body or mind, or magic blessings from the Gods won by your feats. If you wanted to be a Fighter you'd just keep improving your Strength- all class features and benefits that would belong to a Fighter are just gained gradually be improving your Strength. You can cast any spell you want, doesn't matter your class, just be smart enough to do it. Turning Undead isn't a class feature, it's something anyone can do with enough Wisdom, and the more Wisdom you have the more or better your healing magic becomes too.

What's the Inspiration for it?

I like the concept of big powerful weapons, but also ones that can be represented in the game world. The idea of fantasy with actual fantastical weapons; huge buster swords or flaming whip flails are really cool- but the drawbacks and difficulties to using them could be put into the rules using a method. I've been playing Monster Hunter recently and the idea of high level D&D characters using those gigantic, ridiculous weapons just seems like a perfect fit for a big Fighter or Barbarian.

Why those equations for each Stat?
This concept revolves around powerful weapons dealing loads of extra dice, or having really big dice. The idea is bigger, swingy dice mean higher Strength needed, but many and more reliable damage dice is more for a Dexterity driven weapon. There is also a bit of a one sided relationship with the scaling; there are weapons that require very high Strength but very little Dexterity, but all reasonable weapons that require high Dex will also require high to decent Strength. Partially for this reason the To-Hit bonus directly lowers the requirement for Dexterity for weapons is to reign it in a bit, since each dice of damage is a big step up.

Why does magical stuff increase Strength requirements?

This was one of my favorite aspects of writing up these rules, but you are free to ignore them. I prefer my games and settings more mythological inspired in a way; it felt natural that any kind of martial power requires Strength to wield. It's not a simulationist view of Strength, where Strength is only just your lifting capacity, but a more vague usage of the word Strength to include a sort of warrior spirit or killer instinct. Even if you are physically strong enough to hold a magic sword, the powerful blast of elemental energy or incredible sharpness is too much for you to handle.

What happens if you can't use a Weapon based on these requirements?

That depends. You could say that the character simply can't use it in a fight, or they fumble the weapon on a miss and drop it. Maybe they can use the weapon, but its maximum damage is capped as equal to their total Strength score. So even if you pick up that meteor hammer and roll a 19 or 20, you're only going to be doing your low Strength in damage. If you wanted to make it more minor, they can use the weapon but fumble and drop it on an attack roll of 1, or perhaps they damage the weapon on a maximum damage roll or drop it yet again- lots of ways to handle this.

What about class restrictions?

If you don't already have a sort of attribute score maximum in mind for classes (though naturally people will want to play classes with higher attribute scores in what the class is all about; ie only Fighters really care about having big Strength, so it's kind of irrelevant), you could just say that the biggest size die weapon they can use is equal to their class HD or less, with Fighters either being totally uncapped in this regard or getting a bonus at a certain level to say they can now use weapons that include a d12 or higher.

Why would weapons have a bunch of dice and sizes and stuff anyway?

This is a total opinion piece, not just this answer for this entire blogpost. Saying it's an “experiment” isn't much of a defense, but I think the core concept is interesting. Imagine it; a character rolls a bunch of die all at once to do a huge hit. Maybe they craft or find a weapon with a very strange manner of attack; it can swap between forms and attack multiple targets at once. The practiced user can use all of its skills to the fullest, dealing huge damage but requiring a great deal of skill and raw physical ability in order to use. Lesser warriors can't even imagine it- they would get killed in droves. It also is the primary way for the Fighter-Type classes to feel powerful and useful, at least in a game mechanic sense. Armor is almost totally reactive and most DIY shies away from things like daily powers or combat maneuvers set in the rulebook; as such a weapon is a nice gap between them. It has a bit more meat then a traditional game, but is still pretty simple and provides the Fighter-Type with something to work towards in their progression system.

Clearly, this would require a big rewrite of any homebrew ruleset, at least when it comes to “end game” gear. The basic iron and steel weapons are one dice affairs, simple to use. But you can already see how this could work in creating a more varied combat system. I also like it for the potential to create verisimilitude; One of my favorite Eastern weapons is the Naginata. It's a lightweight, two handed polearm with a sword-like blade on the end. It's descvribed as a “woman's weapon”, due to focusing more on agility over physical Strength. Using the above system, you could easily design the Naginata to be a 2d4 weapon. It's got higher average damage then a big 1d8 polearm, but less of a chance to do the maximum damage. But it also has a lower strength requirement- only 6 compared to the other hypothetical weapon's 8.

As we can use the above; you could imagine lighter or more “Dexterity” weapons having smaller dice but higher numbers of dice, with heavy “Strength” weapons having small numbers of really big dice. The material or quality level of the weapon could determine it's magic bonus; I once read a Goblin Punch post about that- +1 magic weapons aren't really deserving of the “magic” title. They count as magic and get a bonus, but they're really just made of a special material or are really well made- we could say that being made of better materials increase die size, for being heftier, where as materials that are finer and hold a better edge could be the magic bonus To-Hit.

There is also an interesting idea buried here; weapon dice and sizes of dice based on object or abstracted measurements in the game's world, as opposed to a more vague “killing power” potential. How would you stat a Halberd? Well, I think most people would deem it a 1d10 or 1d12 weapon. Two handed, pretty strong, all that. But what about this system? You can get a little creative. Maybe we say the Axe-head is a 1d10 for its sharpness and length, the war-pick side is a 1d6, and the spike on the end is a 1d4. So you can imagine in your mind how this weapon is actually used in combat; a ton of complex maneuvers and attacks using all of the weapon's parts. You could argue every weapon is stated in this way; each part of the weapon actually used as a weapon counts for an abstracted over-all attack. The double ended spear for example could be a 2d6 weapon- but a long spear or blade-staff with a smaller spike on the opposite end has different sized dice, like a 1d8 + 1d4 situation. Or maybe a sword with a heavier pommel that can use it for crushing attacks? The sword's damage of d6+1d2

What about ranged weapons?

Ranged Weapons are unfinished at the time of me typing this. Core ideas take a similar approach; perhaps the largest sized die of the bow is used as a Strength requirement; so some d12 warbow has to be used by strapping Strength 12 Yeomen, as opposed to d6 hunting bows used by wimpy elves. Perhaps a Dex requirement uses the same system, or the system as Strength does, or adds +1/2 all the dice sizes together to determine a minimum since Dex should be more important then Strength for ranged weapons.

While it's not exactly traditional, I also kind of like the idea of making bows deal no damage at all, all damage comes from the types of ammunition loaded. Instead their Strength requirement could be based on the magic item bonus instead, representing a heavier draw weight, and the bow itself only has a Strength requirement based on the range it shoots. Or one die is the bow's power, and the types of arrows or bolts have their own dice. If every single bow attack was a two die damage roll this would sort of suggest that ranged combat is more of a “Dexterity” affair. Obviously you can just ignore a Strength requirement at all for crossbows since they're mechanical, but I could see an Intelligence requirement instead for using the machine- or at least its maintenance.

[Class] Seed Samurai

Seed Samurai

HD- d10

Max AC- 15 / Minimum Hit-Points- 5

The Seed Samurais are protectors of nature. But not all nature, not of wild or chaotic places and especially not rare or primal beasts. No, they protect the lawful, correct, defanged and moral type of nature that humans have imposed. They protect the health of the crop and of the land, from both human and spiritual pollution. To them, grains of rice are like their serfs that serve to keep the land safe. They are known as being more humble then most Samurai, despite humility being a virtue they are all supposed to have.

You can wear any armor and are trained with several weapons; the sword, the spear, the spiked club, the bow as well as the hand-cannon. You can fight indoors and on horseback. You carry multiple swords, the shortest one of which is used for the exclusive ritual of severing stems or branches from plants, or slicing open fruit. If this sword ever draws blood, you are dishonored and are told to regain your honor by willingly being buried alive underneath an orchard.

As a warrior of the warrior caste, you are trained in martial combat. You get +1 To Hit and Damage at 2^nd, 4^th, 7^th, and 9^th level.

At 2^nd level, you can the at-will ability to Purify Food & Drink as the Cleric/Druid spell. This only applies to the products of plants and animals, and pure spring or mineral water or plant-based beverages- you cannot purify meat this way.

Your magical powers grow with your level. At 3^rd level, you gain access to a single 1^st level Druid or Ranger spell, tied to nature. You can perform this spell through a ceremony, which requires a place of sereneness and a turn to complete. You can use this spell once per day. At 8^th level, gain a second spell.

The Seed Samurai is a warrior and a sage at the same time. You have the arts of healing equal to a Sage of 1/3^rd your level. You can substitute feeding someone a single grain of rice for any standard medical supply by the time you reach 6^th level, but only once per day.

At 10^th level, you become a Seed Shogun. The Seed Shogun gains more respect then the Samurai, but more responsibility. You will be granted a fortress towards the interior of the Kingdom in a peaceful farming village, no where near the dangerous and exciting borderlands. While not quite as glamorous as a Fighters fort, you have the incredibly important job of keeping the land fed and protecting the interior from more insidious threats, such as bandits, spies, corrupted animals, pestilence demons, and militant yokai born from farm equipment. This fortress has few men of fighting ability and would be ill-prepared to deal with a serious invasion or military force, but has a constant stream of high quality food and income.

Additionally, you gain the power to be reborn if you die on fertile soil. Your spirit becomes a seed buried in the ground. This power only works once, and will fail if your enemy anticipates this and salts the Earth after defeating you. It takes until the next spring where you will emerge from a cherry-blossom tree that grows to adulthood and blooms with incredible speed and vigor.

Vagueposting- Weapons

Vagueposting- “Weapons”

I've been recently mulling over the concept of “weapons” and the advancement of weapons. More specifically; vague weapons that aren't really real, or rather, how they can be described without going into detail. These “weapons” are essentially a retrofuturistic vision of what ancient or fantasy people imagined weapons of the future being life, but without relying on actual real world technology and with as little magical or supernatural context as possible. Also in this write up I'm going to use the term “weapon” for 99% of it but armor, equipment, or even vehicles could be substituted based on what you're looking for.

Imagine it like this; a club is the most basic and primitive weapon a person could use. Then it advances to a spear. Then the spear becomes the short sword, made of bronze, and then later the swerd in an iron age sense. Of course at this point we can't say objectively a poleaxe is superior to a sword, obviously in real life weapons are used for different purposes. Now in real life, we know that from this point we could roughly (very generally) say that weapons advanced to muskets, then guns, and then will advance to laser guns or robot drones (more then likely the drones in real life). But in a fantasy setting, these are using types of technology and such that didn't exist in the day. Naturally neither did metalworking exist that could make the fullplate and polearms of the day exist in the bronze ages, but hopefully you get a concept of what I'm going for here.

This rather vague concept for weapons and “weapons” as superior and advanced things in a fantasy context (more on that weapon) comes from three main sources that I can think of at this time. I'm sure there are more that vaguely fit this, and I'm sure I've seen more that I can't list now (probably something from Dominions), but these are the ones I thought of while writing this “vague post”.

The first is from “Conan of the Isles”, the only Conan book I have read at the time of this writing. My Appendix N is shameful, I know. In this book, Conan has a vision of being taken to a black hall which shows an endless battle between good and evil; man and chaos. In this battle, Conan sees men in animal skins battling with clubs; primitives fighting with primitive weapons. People of his day fighting with more contemporary weapons, and then people fighting with weapons he doesn't recognize. These are obviously implied to by guns and laser weapons and the like, but in our context they could be anything. They are intentionally left vague, which I think is great.

The second is from a little game called “Defenders of the Oasis”, which is one of my secret favorite games. It's a casual game that would have been a phone game if it was released anywhere close to 10 years ago. Basically you play as a Pharaoh and have to find an obelisk to obtain a glyph of power- the whole while connecting cities on the map with roads, mining for ancient technology, and growing in power to fight barbarians that attack at the end of each stage. I really, really like this game partially for its story and in-universe elements; mostly for divorcing magic and the supernatural from the western fantasy Wizard archetype that is so prevalent and that I complain about all the time. In this fantasy setting, which is literally just Egypt, the Pharaoh IS magic and he is powerful.

In one of the campaigns, you actually play as a female priestess. You don't get a new sprite or anything (it's a shitty old game remember), but in the first level you steal the glyph from the sacred isle of the Gods, which angers them. The first god who sends their wrath at you is Thoth, who brings down “scrolls of wisdom” which the barbarians use to make mighty weapons and armor. I love this passage because of how vague it is. In game, we get to see what weapons and armor they are more or less (just gives the barbarians technology bonuses in fights, which usually only you get), but in lore it could mean anything, which is why I like it. Thoth's knowledge of weapons, you could easily imagine, would include things like muskets and modern guns and catapults and stuff. But this doesn't really fit the imagine of an Egyptian supernatural technology alternate history; I'd much prefer to see this as something like a giant mechanical scarab, the kopesh designed in such a way it can cut through almost anything, weaving the hot desert sands into cloaks that let you blend into the dunes, that kind of thing. It's almost magic and a bit mystical without being a “spell”, you know? It's “knowledge”, which fits better in a mythological setting anyway. Many of the powers of the Gods could just be secret knowledge, and magic is often fluffed as secret knowledge, not something separate.

The third and final example I have for this concept is from a great Chinese wuxia movie, this one called the “Dragon Gate Inn”. I love this movie and it's shitty translation. It's chalk full of Chinese fantasy tropes, which I love. There's an evil Eunuch who wants to take over the legitimate government, tons of people on wires battling with decent choreography and sword fights with decent special effects- all practical for this day and age which has a charm to itself. However right in the opening scenes of this movie we can see how cruel and evil the Ennuch's splinter government is; they are testing “new weapons” on prisoners. All of these are arrowheads; the “Plum Blossom” arrow, the “Dog Teeth” arrow, and the “Phoenix Tail” arrow. The Plum Blossom and Dog Teeth just seem to be deadly effective, where as the Phoenix Tail arrow is fired and dramatically curves to strike down the last prisoner, implying it has some kind of homing or tracking ability.

Now in any kind of realistic setting or sense, these would have a lot of problems or be downright impossible. They'd be far less effective then real, simple, straight arrows. But something about this I really like. Like you found a way to sculpt the metal or bind it up just right; these special arrows cause horrible injuries that are hard to heal, making these arrows very good for injuring and capturing enemy soldiers. They may even fly faster or straighter then regular arrows, despite it having no sensible basis in reality. They're just “more advanced”. We don't really get a good idea of what these do in Dragon Pass Inn other then the grievous injuries that the Dog Teeth arrows make when they are used later in the story, but I still like them.

Finally- ask yourself this. How can we port this over and use this organically?

Well firstly, the one big advantage of written media (and by extension, tabletop games) is that this vagueness can abound. You can stretch over long periods of time with a single sentence, or imply a ton of stuff without detailing any of it. Something as simple as “then he brought forth many advanced weapons, and used them to defeat the tribes and bring peace to the land” implies a huge amount without needing to actually show any of it as opposed to a movie or bit of animation which is visual, or a video game which is more tactile. You could easily play a tabletop game and grant a player an “advanced weapon”, never actually describe it, but mention how it isn't necessarily magical or doesn't use technology as we understand it. Of course, this is a bit of a cop out. We wanted to have this cake and eat it too, so some description is both desired and necessary.

Secondly; technology. In many tabletop games with the usual high fantasy setting, technology tends to be in a roughly medieval or renaissance stasis. Of course along with this comes the unrealism- many fantasy settings include things like airships or steampunk elements, clockwork robots, and/or magitech that we could explore to be the creative force behind our “advanced” weapons. In some of these cases this is enough, but in others we might just argue that you can add a few mechanical elements to a weapon that normally wouldn't have them (or just wouldn't work at all) to make it more advanced.

Similar to the Dragone Gate Inn example- we can just not be specific. I like the idea of weapons being tested or made of materials that are just extremely good; unique shapes or construction. Maybe a strangely shaped axe head is just better then a regular axe head, but is hard to make and is therefore a more advanced or rare weapon. It probably has a name to signify it, like Crescent Moon Slicing-Axe. It's an Axe that can perform draw cuts as well as a sword, shaped like a crescent moon, and can still chop wood just as well.

Another example involves things from a campaign a friend of mine ran for me many years ago. In that my character (who I think used polearms or a naginata or something) got a new weapon. Basically it was a polearm with a rotating blade which could be flicked out; it was disguised as a walking stick. My DM declared that this weapon could be used to make sneak attacks too; by flicking the end of the staff the blade could spin out and perform a cut the same as an attack. I was dubious and told him it wouldn't work like that; the spinning blade wouldn't have the same force as a blade on the end of a long lever, but he said not to worry about the realism of it and just accept it. I realize now of course I was in the wrong over this, but like I said, there is a leap to accept a fictional universe with different rules. Now I think the concept is pretty interesting; spring loaded or double edged weapons with twice the effectiveness of a normal weapon, or with bonus features like sneak attacks or bonus to-hit from being accurate and capable of hitting many times in a few seconds.

These weapons are created not by magic users or by specific arcane practices, but instead by practiced weapons smiths and ancient warrior philospher kings. It could be the ancient empire who was against evil magic in the setting used these weapons to cut a swathe in the world; a nice backdrop for a Conan-esque barbarian distrustful of magic but still capable of rising above “mundane” equipment through their superior "technology".

Examples of Vagueposting “Advanced Weapons” Table – Roll 1d10

[1] Long iron poles with no ornamentation. Can be squeezed while pointing at something; destroys it. Could be implied to be laser technology in a fantasy world (ala many modules that have crashed spaceships and stuff) or could be some kind of vague “ultra destructive force” that the metal just “has” and can emit through being crafted and handled in some special way.

[2] Deadly Jacks. Little spiked orbs or caltrops that can be thrown. Somehow fly extremely well, perhaps homing in on living things to get their spikes in, link their hooks together to become spiked chains, and totally nullify any motion or actions to escape their grasp. Maybe less of a “weapon” and more of a cruel torture and capture device. Might be designed in such a way that they always land upwards or just conveniently bounce off walls and terrain and flop into the path of oncoming people so they step on them or get hit by them, because you know, you can just forge the angles that way.

[3] Death Butterfly. Better then the Deadly Jacks. Basically imagine an evil weapons made of sharpened super metal and glass; perhaps an elf super weapon. You throw it and it always returns to the user; even if totally unrealistic it just curves around and comes back to your hands unless trapped in a sack of some material it can't cut through. When you throw it cuts off people's heads and stuff, or just punches through their chest even if your throw really shouldn't have the strength to do that with its weight and leverage and stuff; it just “catches the wind” and punches through people.

[4] Thingamajig-Tier gadget device like from Ed, Edd, & Eddy. Basically a cube, sphere, briefcase, etc. that contains a million weapons. By handling the weapon a certain way, it can activate the different weapons and bring them to bare against your enemies. Also; see a Swiss Army Knife but bigger and with weapons; or the like Cube Style.

[5] Da Vinci-tier machines. Also see the game "Besiege" where you build murder weapons. Mostly things like the carts with spinning blades on them or flying machines. These aren't technically hand-held weapons in the ways the others are but in a lot of ways fit the definition better; a weapon the user is protected while using by riding inside and such. But if you like Fighters more heroic then this isn't exactly what you'd use for their ultimate weapons.

[6] Kill glow. Some kind of powered light as a weapon. Not necessarily shot out of things like a laser beam, but moreso a trained form of light or maybe heat/energy/electricity that flies around and kill things from the users hand. It's a weapon, not a spell. Deal with it.

[7] Pop-Out Spear head. Some sort of spear which has a standard looking spearhead, except it has a lot of very fine holes over it. When shoved into someone, the holes erupt out spikes inside, then quickly draw them back in; causing huge internal damage and causing much worse injuries then first assumed. Having the spikes retract adds to believablity of the spear being able to penetrate into people and then be pulled back out without all the spikes catching in their body.

[8] Super Flail. Just a flail with some super heavy element build into the head, or the head+chain being made in some kind of way where it just becomes inherently super powerful. Can bowl into objects with much more force then possible, like knocking through bricks, busting through steel shields, basically being a bit physically unstoppable.

[9] Gas Blower. Could be something like a forge bellows if you want to make it look more genuine to a fantasy world as opposed to a more modern flamethrower looking thing. These weapons use gas sucked up from the earth and soils of mines. You could see flammable gas, freezing gas, confusion/knockout gas, corrosive gas, lightning-attracting gas and so forth. Fantasy version of natural gasses, but put into a weapon for useful fighting. Also could be put into a hollow flask or whatever and thrown as a bomb, but that tends to be a bit different from a "weapon".

[10] Super Duper Sword. Made of super metals, and curved and refined in the special perfect way. It has a specific shape, edge, and was folded over one million times to produce the finest blade possible. Still not magical, or may have some kind of supernatural power based on how it was made, but isn't girly “wizard” magic. Basically it's just a super powerful sword that due to its angles and construction it can cut straight through lesser metals, block blows easily, slide around enemy armors and stuff, is perfectly balanced and just the right weight and speed, etc.

[x] Liquid metal weapon. Kind of cheating and doesn't fit; since these already exist as other magic items. But basically; a lump or metal or handle which morphs the metal of itself into any weapon when it is needed.

[♫] Musical weapons. Lutes or harps that can play music that hurts people. Almost counts as this concept but is a bit too thematic and has some cross over with bards, bardic magic, and so on. Some Wuxia or Chinese Fantasy stuff already has some of this though it isn't really a more “advanced” form of normal weaponry, just a thematic take on people being so good at music they fight with it.

[g] Just Guns. This isn't really an answer- as I mentioned earlier. We're trying not to advance weapons in a real world historical sense- but even people in the day had advanced weapons like repeating crossbows and hand-gunnes that would shape the future of warfare. Fighters could still get a bonus with these despite not fitting a martial theme, because they are weapons.

[?] Hand to Hand. Once again, not really an advanced weapon. But the idea of a fighting school or technique getting so good over time that it starts to be better then physical weapons. Your hand to hand kung fu gets so good that any weapon would just be a detriment in a fight- your special technique can rock anybody way better then a sword or axe could.

Magic Knight Armor Generator

In my games, I like to run a more Iron-Age sort of tech level. Chainmail, scale, and lamellar armor are the most powerful types of standard armor. Anything like platemail would be an incredibly rare, very powerful type of armor only found as semi-magical items. Note: The “Cultural Origin” table can mean the smith, or whoever he was making the armor for.

Instead of granting a +X bonus to AC based on the type of armor, very high quality armor instead sets your AC to a certain level. You can't go above it unless your maximum AC can go higher, and you won't drop below it unless the armor is destroyed or magically nullified. For most of these, they will exceed even a Fighter's maximum AC at 5^th level (AC 17)

Roll once for each category.

Armor Type – 1d4

[1] Brigandine (AC 17)- Heavy jacket with interior plates. Less protective then others.

[2] Piecemeal Suit (AC 18)- Cuirass, pauldrons, graves, connected by chain mail fabric.

[3] Fullplate (AC 19)- Full metal covering with joints. Tight and snug fit.

[4] Oversized (AC 20, Load +1)- Huge metal plates, sometimes fitted with geometric shapes.

Armor Material – 1d8

[1] Dwarf Steel (+1 AC, +1 Load) Extremely heavy, well forged, you'd better be thickly built.

[2] Meteorite (Blocks 1^st level spells) Alloy of metal that falls from the sky. Shimmers oddly.

[3] Sacred Copper (Immune to Corrosion/Acid) Has a greenish tint, strong as ever.

[4] Dark Iron (No stealth penalties) Dark colored metal, forged deep within the Earth.

[5] Spunsteel (-1 Load, +1 to saving throws) Like a cross of metal and fabric, but not chainmail.

[6] Ancient's Bronze (+1 to hit and damage with your attacks) Imbued with martial might.

[7] Megalith Bones (Beasts get -2 morale) Crafted from the remains of a powerful beast.

[8] Mood Metal (Restore 1 hit point per Turn) Blobs of color float along its surface, glows and changes with the user's mood and life aura. Dull gray when not worn.

Cultural Origin – 1d8

[1] Orc (Can be used as 1d6 battering ram weapon on charge) Adorned with spikes.

[2] Dwarf (Repairs cost half) Each part is removable for easy cleaning and repairing.

[3] Lion Man (+1 initiative to wearer) Imbued with fighting courage. Fluffy mane.

[4] Satyr (-1 Load, Immune to Entangling Roots) Made for a half goat person; no greaves since they have hooves. Any ability related to the Boots or Feet is done with long spurs instead.

[5] Draconian (Immune to Fire damage) Internal bands of conductive metal, radiates heat.

[6] Triton (No swimming penalty, buoyant) Texture of scales, gill slits in neckbrace. Rustproof.

[7] Giant (Size modding, +2 to saves vs tripping) Built for giants who change size all throughout their lives. Can grow or shrink and the armor will morph with you.

[8] Human (Banner adds +1 morale to troops; Banner can only be removed on death) Has a space on the back to fit a banner or standard- flies high over the head of soldiers.

Armor Special Power – 1d12

[1] Cannot be hit by non-magical weapons.

[2] Jump 50% higher and farther.

[3] Run 50% faster.

[4] Undead who touch you must save or be Turned. Once per each creature.

[5] Once per day day can reflect one attack or spell back to an enemy.

[6] Several holsters, sheathes, and compartments. Secretly holds 4 items without encumbrance.

[7] Once per day can conjure mist cloud. Hides you from arrows, move invisibly, etc.

[8] Feet braces can lock in place. If locked down, cannot be shoved from your position.

[9] Passive Waterwalking. You sink if any part but the sabatons touch the water.

[10] Gorget has holes which release steam as an attack by pressing secret switch. Deals 1d4 in a cone. Water tank is in the back; partially refills with sweat over a long battle.

[11] Bang your fist against the chest to reveal an armor gnome. He grumbles and will fix the armor for you, as well as shine it. Extremely reluctant to do anything else for you.

[12] Standing still makes you appear as a statue or armor mannequin. Silences breathing. If you speak in this form, your voice is disembodied and sounds like its coming “from everywhere”.

Armor Design & Appearance – 1d8

[1] Extremely smooth, almost appears sculpted from liquid. Looks like alien technology in a way.

[2] Culturally ornamented. Triton armor has shells, dwarf armor has inscribed tankards, etc.

[3] Holy armor. Made fit to adorn a temple. Prayers and holy symbols all over- golden gilding.

[4] Well worn by years of use, straps replaced. Could have been made that way; as camouflage.

[5] Brutish and spartan. Riveted into shape. Might have been produced in a rush.

[6] Family heirloom. Family Crest on chest. Mask is shaped as an honored ancestor.

[7] Intensely colorful. Many-patterned cloth comprises the outside, matching cape.

[8] It's bare metal of an unusual shade from its alloy composition. Polished with spit.

(Optional) Matching Helmet & Crest Table – 1d8

Roll	Helmet	Crest
1	Mongol Hat	Feathered plume, as tall as a Halfling
2	Frogmouth	Leaf made of gold, welded on
3	Bascinet w/ Triangular Mask	Holy Symbol
4	Sallet	Tiny silver dolphin
5	Legionnaire	Lion's pelt drapped over helmet
6	Conical cap	Long tassel or turban
7	Kettle hat	Spike point
8	Barbute	Horns or Antlers

Battle in the Mind + Alternative Armor Rules Concepts

Battle in the Mind

This is when two warriors face off towards each other, close their eyes, and plan every single move they're about to do against each other. This abstracts combat down to a single die roll; instead of having high level warriors dueling and chipping away at their AC and HP pools for ten rounds or more, this keeps it quick. This is essentially a very parsed down duel system.

When the “battle in the mind” is over, the two warriors rush each other and one will defeat the other in one or two rapid blows. The losing warrior will fall over dead, or with their weapon destroyed/disarmed and dropped to one hit point; spared by the victor. Note: This only works with two combatants, more then that and you'll need to use the regular combat engine.

Both Fighters roll a 1d6- then:

• Add +1 to the Fighter who has the better armor and/or weapons. Unarmed Fighters automatically lose unless their Kung Fu is so good it is equivalent to weapons.
• Add +2 if one Fighter is one higher level then the other. If one Fighter is two or more levels higher, they just automatically win. These are duels between equals, not between novices and masters. Level is by far the most important factor to Fighter power in the mind.
• Add +1 to the Fighter who is younger. You could go by cosmic age here, so technically an elf who is eternally young is still older then an aged human, to give some strength to the underdog, or it could just be who is biologically younger. Youth grants an advantage.
• Add +1 to a Fighter who knows a hidden blade art that would greatly help in this duel that the other does not. Like a sliding technique while fighting on a rocky hillside.
• Subtract -1 to a Fighter who is injuried. Doesn't matter if they're cut up and only have 1 HP left, or if they just took a single scratch, even a single wound is enough to be an advantage. If both Fighters are injured, ignore this.
• Subtract -1 to the Fighter who is angry or vengeful. Emotion and rage lend power, but also leave oneself open. Calmness and an open mind is the pinnacle of fighting skill. The passion of the challenger will grant his opponent a window. If both Fighters are equally inflamed, then ignore this or grant it to the one who is more personally involved.

The Fighter with the higher roll wins. If it is a tie, both Fighters either kill each other or survive with 1 HP and struggle to their feet.

Alternative Armor Rules

Armor is a fun rule to mess with. Most people in the DIY or blogosphere use D&D style armor, the AC vs a to-hit roll. This is a nice system because it speeds up play; no need to roll damage if an attack misses, but can also greatly slow down play because of whiff-fests. Designing the game around a small range of possible AC scores and small modifiers can also help this, which is something I wanted to accomplish by putting in a maximum AC score. I also like AC systems because it gives certain attacks or spells the ability to play around with AC scores- like having magical arrows that never miss bypass AC entirely.

Note: If you haven't read my other blog posts about this before, I give each class a maximum AC. The max AC is reached through stat modifiers, armor, magic items, spells, etc. If you get to the max, you don't need to stack any more armor or magical modifiers. That's the most you can have, and that way combat is snappy and fast. There is still a value in finding or getting better armor though, as you can wear less armor (and therefore have less encumbrance) even at the max AC, or you can stack AC beyond the max which just grants you extra in reserve in case a spell or ability breaks some of your armor like a rust monster.

But not everyone is happy with this solution. Even beyond just having armor be useful for a game, it is also interesting to see what kind of ideas or mechanics armor could be made to have simply on the side of game design, untethered to the idea of a fantasy dungeon crawl.

Armor as DR (damage reduction) is an interesting concept as seen in Into the Odd. It is a relatively common houserule or conversion that I've seen. It goes something like this; instead of a to-hit roll, attacks just hit and armor just reduces the damage of attacks. And attack “misses” when it fails to do enough damage to hurt the wearer. Usually leather grants +1, chain +2, plate +3 or a similar metric. This means against plate, a roll of 6 for a sword would only do 3 damage.

I think this idea is pretty interesting but it makes weaker small weapons unhelpful in almost all circumstances except circumference or class restrictions. It also has the strange idea of the most tough class (Fighter) taking the least damage from hits. D&D style armor already does this by avoiding hits however, it's not unusual at all, just is one of those weird things that makes combat take longer. It's not necessarily bad or anything, just not super common.

Armor as DL (damage limit) isn't a concept I've seen anyone else suggest; but nonetheless I think could be interesting to explore. Consider it in the form of damage dice. Armor “blocks” all damage die that size or higher. Using normal armor tiers; consider leather as a d8, chain as d6, and plate as d4. This means if you tried to use a d10 battleaxe on someone wearing leather, they can't be hit by it. (abstracted as damage or by not being able to make an effective cut). The only way to hit someone wearing plate armor would be to attack them with a dagger or other very small weapon, which fits the idea of d4 weapons still being useful. Arrows of a d6 bow bounce off, but chainmail can still be pierced by them, because it's damage limit is d6. If you aren't wearing armor using this system, you just take the full damage. Of course, there could be special rules for certain weapons like blunt weapons to have anti-armor properties, or perhaps Fighters can use various parts of a weapon- such as Half-Swording to use the point of a sword much like a dagger, this way they can remain flexible. Instead of making it so the weapons are totally ineffective, it could just lower the size of their die to the armor. So using a d10 greatsword is reduced to a d6 sword against chainmail, but you can still use it without difficulty.

The second version of the above is just to limit the points of damage you can take in a physical attack. Using the above but as the point values; such as Leather being 8, Chain being 6, and Plate being 4. This means whenever you take damage from an attack, the maximum points you can take from the attack is equal to the point value or less. This would encourage the use of heavier weapons, at least for dealing the maximum amount of damage every round, but it would have the same effect of DR but backwards. Interestingly, this point idea could be used to make multiple dice attacks still fit under the paradigm; like a 3d6 super slam move is still limited to doing 10 damage to your Rogue or whatever.

Armor as Resource is another method that has been used to give armor more texture and interesting gameplay. In some games, this would equate to armor being used like temporary hit points. I like this concept, as it allows for each piece of armor to be truly useful and valuable, but it also leads to some questions. Does “armor points” restore after each combat? After a long rest? Only when returning to town? Is it described in the fluff as being actual damage dealt to the armor that is reduced as damage is taken, or is it a totally abstract measurement?

Another idea with the above is “shields will be splintered” as a rule, but with armor instead. I really like the concept of doing this, but with specific pieces of armor. And instead of reducing damage by points, it just negates an attack entirely. It also only works with specific attacks- to give armor more usage and more ways to attack foes. For example, if an enemy is trying to bash you with a club, it's more then likely trying to strike you in the head with it. In this case, your helmet would have to save you. One hit you can absorb per combat is fine. Two hits in one combat and the helmet is dinged up, lowering your vision or needing repairs. Three or more and you start taking damage; or it is knocked off on the third hit and you are now vulnerable to getting killed and/or struck unconscious the next time he comes around swinging his club. Shields may be special in that they can absorb any attack, or most forms of attack, and could have their own pool of hit points- if this game is using hit points at all. Platearmor could be the best because of the fact it can take a lot of hits before losing its effectiveness, or because it can take basically any kind of hit, from blunt to piercing to slashing and form many different angles- both of which would be valuable qualities for armor in this concept.

Secondly; combining the above with an AC system sounds pretty doable. Keep AC extremely limited; you only get AC for being high level, weapon bonus, being a specific race, a stat bonus, and with a base of 10. Read “AC as fencing” below. Doing this keeps most enemy chances to hit at roughly 50% depending on modifiers, which makes only half the attacks sent at a character needing to be absorbed by their limited armor and defensive resources.

Armor as a Block is a concept that I don't have a good name for, but it doesn't fit so well for tabletop games. It kind of does though, moreso for a game with some strategy or board game elements. I like to think of this as being able to “block” a certain number of attacks or amounts of damage each round, similar to the armor as resource or armor as DR, but it has a set limit to how much it can take.

For example, chainmail might be able to block 1 “attack” per round. Meaning the first person to attack the armored guy is not effective. But this isn't just people; high level characters could have multiple attacks, so the first attack is not effective but the second is, and so on. High powered armors could block multiple attacks each round, where as weaker armors like leather or improvised armors may do something like have a 50/50 chance to block an attack or something similar.

The idea behind this is armored users require multiple concentrated efforts to take down. The main disadvantage is that you could never defeat certain foes regardless of how good your rolls are depending on the situation. Some platemail wearing beast that takes three attacks to even scratch for a whole round needs to be focused on by the entire party, and when only two characters are left they are now faced with an impossible challenge. The same applies for the players though, so as long as a heavy armored guy doesn't wade into a huge group of goblins they won't get hurt from one or two griffon claw swipes. I like the idea but it would be hard to balance, difficult to add granularity due to high jumps in power, and could make the players accuse the GM of focus fire or favortism since, logically, most enemies would need to artificially focused on the fighter with heavy armor to take them down. Of course this armor concept might just be for player-character armor, and monsters use a traditional AC vs a d20 + modifiers roll the players are used to, which could work for its own game. There is no reason to assume players and monsters are running on the same combat engine, so why not?

Edit: Instead of armor blocking one attack, it could block one die of damage each round instead. Perhaps it blocks the largest single die the enemy has, or blocks the highest die of up to a limit (based on the armor level) If you have multiple attacks, or throw out multiple damage die per hit, it would fit well. You could also consider having weapons do multiple dice worth of damage, if such a thing was built into the core of the game.

Armor as Fencing

The above concepts of armor apply specifically to armor as an item, or as a piece of equipment. They do not, however, necessarily correlate to what AC is or how you get it. I've seen ideas for AC to be based on fencing and self-defense techniques; which are based on character class, Dex modifier, level, and the like. This concept I feel is strong. I can't take credit for this because I've read it on the blogosphere somewhere before at least once, plus Anonymous posters on various internet forums have also posted a similar idea.

It could be something like thus; Fighters get the most basic AC from deflection skill, Rogues and Semi-Fighters like Clerics and Paladins get less, and Magicians/Sages get the least. The idea is that if you are armed with a weapon, you can deflect and dodge incoming blows. This certainly adds to the feeling of Fighters being highly skilled warriors, and Fights can be more based on characters wearing robes or dueling on the sides of a mountain and the like, over people in knightly armor trudging around. This could be a sort of “Base” AC based on your class, then it advances upwards as you level up. Here's a rough table outline; probably not the final figures.

LVL	Fighter AC	Rogue AC	Sage AC
1	12	11	10
2	13	11	10
3	13	12	10
4	14	12	11
5	14	12	11
6	15	13	11
7	15	13	11
8	16	13	12
9	16	14	12
10	17	14	12

The problem with this idea is twofold. Firstly, it would greatly slow down character strength, especially against high ranking monsters with high +to hit for their attacks. In normal D&D you can usually buy the best armor pretty early on, but with this system you have to slowly build up. The second is based on the above suggestions and ideas for armor; What does armor exactly do? What should it do? If your AC is mostly based on your personal skill and level, your character wouldn't need or want to wear much armor. That is unless armor is really powerful- armor as temporary hit points or a flat number of blocked “attacks” that hit could be really good depending on the action economy and damage numbers of a game. You'd also have to unteach everything your players already know. In fact, in this kind of system, wearing really heavy armor might reduce your AC, given that you can't see or deflect blows as well. Instead, your armor would have to help you soak damage, so you'd be more of a tank.

You also probably want to have at least some benefit to wearing armor, especially magic armor. You could also say that the above is your AC, but characters could still have an AC “cap” as in my homebrew system, so you wear armor until you grow out of it. Big boys don't need armor, they just deflect everything. Which I think is kind of cooler.