Quote from: rgrove0172;1009328I always thought that was sort of assumed? But point taken.

Nah, it goes back to the original poster of the Viking Hat screed: there are a lot of gamers -- whether metagamers or just wannabe alpha geeks -- who demand not only that everything be in a defined slot with defined numbers, but that they know what those numbers are.

For my part, a player who whinged that he shouldn't have been able to hit a foe with X die roll, if he persisted beyond a droll "Yet you did all the same," might provoke me to a "Fine, fine, you didn't scratch his paint.  He's in your face and about to kill you, happy?"

If I had players that stupid.  Which I don't.

I know running 4e D&D I don't much like it that monster armour & weapons are unrelated to their AC and damage. I prefer games where by default chainmail gives AC 5 (etc).

That said, I don't expect players to argue with me re Orc AC & damage. They should go with what I describe the orc as wearing.

Quote from: Cave Bear;1009300Haven't you ever read Aristotle's Poetics?
Both character and plot must be consistent and develop in ways that conform to the laws of probability.
What you've done is basically a deus ex machina.

Yup. In the player's defense, now he has no idea what any armor, or even equipment is capable of. An opponent with plate mail and a battle axe could be as effective as a guy in cloth armor wielding a dagger, or vice versa. A player needs information in order to make decisions and that kind of information is now removed from the game.

Well, OD&D assumes that armor class is armor class, so if an orc has chainmail it's because I want him to have chainmail.

Chainmail is chainmail; I wouldn't vary it depending on who wears it.

YM, as always, MV.

But it sounds to me like the player was "chainmail is fucking chainmail, not Schroedinger's Armor," which is a position I personally agree with.  But I'm an armor fetishist.

Quote from: saskganesh;1009326I think you messed up. Just say it was chainmail yeah, but you made a mistake, so you'll let the melee results stand. Moving on...

OR, if you really need to save Face:

Say it was chainmail, but that Orc had a really shitty dex. No wonder he was easier to hit!

Number one.  The ref shouldn't need to save face.

Quote from: rgrove0172;1009328I always thought that was sort of assumed? But point taken.

No, it's not assumed in all games.

Quote from: S'mon;1009336I know running 4e D&D I don't much like it that monster armour & weapons are unrelated to their AC and damage.

...seriously?

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1009340Number one.  The ref shouldn't need to save face.

Well ya, if you make a mistake, you should own it. Game on. It happens. Convoluted explanations of a fuck up are just a dodge.

I certainly wouldn't fret and handwring about it, and start a thread online so that strangers could comment and try to solve mistakes of the past and the lost hope of wasted table time.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1009342...seriously?

  Something of an exaggeration. Baseline weapon damage tends to be set by weapon, and ceteris paribus, armor class will vary by armor. But both can be affected by level, ability scores, special abilities, etc., and when providing monster stats, 4E doesn't usually break out how much is contributed by what.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1009338Yup. In the player's defense, now he has no idea what any armor, or even equipment is capable of. An opponent with plate mail and a battle axe could be as effective as a guy in cloth armor wielding a dagger, or vice versa. A player needs information in order to make decisions and that kind of information is now removed from the game.

Yeah, a 2 modifier to the AC has removed all consistency from the game. All is lost, all is lost.

Quote from: saskganesh;1009344Well ya, if you make a mistake, you should own it. Game on. It happens. Convoluted explanations of a fuck up are just a dodge.

I certainly wouldn't fret and handwring about it, and start a thread online so that strangers could comment and try to solve mistakes of the past and the lost hope of wasted table time.

what mistake? I intended the damn orc have a lower AC. It was a conscious decision. THe GM can make up his critters any way he likes, or so Ive always been told.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1009342...seriously?

Yeah; in 4e a monster AC and damage are determined by its Level & Role, a typical monster AC is 14+Level and its average damage is 8+Level. Heavy armour and big weapons may be signs the monster has good AC & damage, but not reliably. There's a knight NPC Halvath Cormarrin in Threats to the Nentir Vale who wears plate but has a crap AC because his role is Brute not Soldier.

4e is the only edition that does this; 5e went back to "plate & shield is AC 20" which I think works a lot better in assisting immersion.

Quote from: rgrove0172;1009354what mistake? I intended the damn orc have a lower AC. It was a conscious decision. THe GM can make up his critters any way he likes, or so Ive always been told.

But... seriously... why not just give him worse armor to make a lower AC?

But I repeat, I'm an armor fetishist.

You, original poster, as the game master, may design the orc any way you like, however, there are two possibilities here:

1. You have designed something that is at variance with the rules as written because you want that particular outcome.  In that case, to my way of thinking, should be some description that explains the variation, should the player pop up with exactly the dialogue you offer in the original post.  The time to offer that explanation is during combat as it may affect player decisions and tactics.  

So, "the orc has chainmail, to be sure, but as you examine it more closely, it has links that are missing, bits that are torn and exposed, a lot of damage and rust.  Sure, it is chainmail, and you could fix it up, but at the moment it is a sad case, and oh by the way, the value as treasure is also diminished."

On the whole though life is easier all round when one doesn't do that too often.  SO AC 11 orc has leather armor and leather armored orc has AC 11 and AC 14 orc has chainmail and chainmail armored orc has AC 14 if that is the way the rules are written.

2. An honest mistake has been made, in which 11 was written for chainmail when 14 was originally intended.  In this case, to my way of thinking, any mistakes I make on behalf of the players stay on behalf of the players; I am not going to walk them back, and I will try to fix any mistakes I make against the players, though that is harder.

Quote from: rgrove0172;1009352Yeah, a 2 modifier to the AC has removed all consistency from the game. All is lost, all is lost.

If you didn't want opinions, why did you ask for them?