Mental Armor Class

[azamboni]

Hi to all,

For my new campaign I want to implement a sort of "Mental Armor Class", some attacks will be direct to this instead of normal Armor Class.

As far as I know, adding a totally new Armor Class field could be very "coding"...but I was thinking to some simple workaround, but I don't know if it's possible, or if there are a better way to achieve this (or directly it's impossible).

Suppose that my AC is 14, and my MAC is 18, I can have an effect active on my character where if the type of the attack is "Mental", my normal Armor Class have a +4 bonus.

In the opposite case if my AC is 18 and my MAC is 14, the AC bonus will be negative.

Now...I can't see any Effect able to distinguish types of Attack (except ranged or melee), only distinguish between damages types.

In the wiki page (https://www.fantasygrounds.com/wiki/index.php/5E_Effects) of the effects I've seen the "Custom" tag (IFT: custom(Sworn Enemy); DMG: 3d6 piercing
DISATK)...but I can't locate any indication on how to use it...maybe this could be the right path...

Some of you gurus have some clever idea on how to achieve this, and how to apply this to NPCs also?

[Zacchaeus]

In order to do this you'll need to take the ruleset apart and do some coding to add an extension; you'll need to add a new box and of course all the code wherever that might be to handle all the attacks etc that might be made against the player or NPC. You'll also need to add a new damage type and also you'll need to work out a way of doing damage (I assume that this will be causeing damage).

You can see how the CUSTOM function works in video six of this series (https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?41478-Effects-Videos-for-5E).

You could potentially use the custom function to add a tag onto a player or PC, test for the presence of that tag and then do something if it is. However it will get messy since you'll need to have this test on everything in your campaign.

You don't say what happens when an attack succeeds or what effect being mentally attacked has, but if you want simple then use the 5e mechanics and use, say, Wisdom saving throws or some such and then the advantage/disadvantage rules following a successful or unsuccessful attack

[Spin-Man]

I know it's not what you're looking for, but Intelligence saves are rarely used by anything. You could apply bonuses to Intelligence saves from whatever would normally improve MAC and create abilities that require Int saves instead of attack rolls, with any bonuses to attack instead providing a higher DC. This would provide very similar functionality to what you're looking for with very little work, at the cost of messing with a small handful of spells.

Edit: If you do it this way, the default Save DC should be 12 (11 chances to fail on a d20). This is because of the "meet, not exceed" nature of rolls. An AC of 10 gives an attacker with no bonus 11 chances to hit on a d20. Although it seems intuitive to make the default Save DC 10, this gives your targets an effective +2 AC.

[Nickademus]

It's not the implementation you are looking for, but you might want to check out the Sanity score variant and Madnesses in the DMG. It works like an ability score, not an AC, but it offers a way for characters to protect their minds.

[InnocentSoul]

I am looking for an option for that as well Lordmenta. I have a custom mechanic for basically a type of mental armor class called Willpower, and then mental hit points called Psyche Points. If an attack or a successful CHA based skill check hits the Willpower then they take psychic damage to the Psyche Points. If I think of any way to implement it then I'll let you know. I'm not a coder though, I cannot help much directly.

[LordEntrails]

You could use CoreRPG or MoreCore and create all of the abilities and configured character sheets the way you want, but of course you would then lose all the 5E automation etc.

[azamboni]

Thanks to all for your replies guys!

Looking at the COVER effect for example, implicitly apply some effects to all attacks marked as "Ranged".

I'm wondering if it's possible to add a new category to the attacks...now they are "Melee" and "Ranged" and as far as I know this is the only method to evaluate an attack type.

Adding a new category like "Mental", could allow to copy the COVER condition, but evaluating "Mental" and not "Ranged".

I will try to look at the code in order to see if this is possible and how difficult it is...

N.B. I'm trying to not use the INT Save because the Mental Armor Class will be indipendent to your INT stat...

[Trenloe]

Looking at the COVER effect for example, implicitly apply some effects to all attacks marked as "Ranged".

I'm wondering if it's possible to add a new category to the attacks...now they are "Melee" and "Ranged" and as far as I know this is the only method to evaluate an attack type.

Adding a new category like "Mental", could allow to copy the COVER condition, but evaluating "Mental" and not "Ranged".

I will try to look at the code in order to see if this is possible and how difficult it is...
Look at rangetypes in scripts\data_common.lua in the 5E ruleset. Then work it through from there.

The problem you're going to have is adding a new rangetype to an actual attack.

[epithet]

I think using saving throws is the path of least resistance for what you’re going for. When it comes down to it, a save works just like an attack vs AC, using proficiency instead of equipped armor. Hell, in 4e there were no saves, just attacks vs stats and attacks vs AC.

What you seem to be looking for, as I understand it, is the ability to roll a d20 adding a modifier and comparing it to a DC for success or failure. That is what a standard attack vs armor class is, and it is also exactly what a saving throw is.

[azamboni]

After some days I'm thinking that the best solution (for my case) will be to use a Skill Check...Mental Armor will be noted somewhere for the (N)PCs and a manual comparation of the value will be enough...

Effects and Damages of these types of attacks will be handled with Powers...

Again, thanks to all for your thoughts!

Cheers