Touch AC, oh Glorious Touch AC [Archive] - Wizards Community

Touch AC, oh Glorious Touch AC [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
BruceLeeroy
03-08-07, 09:58 PM So, with a few nifty feats (Shield Specialization, Shield Ward) you can add your Shield AC to your touch AC. I think I remember seeing on the CharOp boards a mention of a feat that allows you to add your regular Armor bonus to touch. Anyone know what that feat is, or what sourcebook it's from?
Moon-Lancer
03-08-07, 10:12 PM in races of stone you can get exotic armor i think that lets you add to touch ac.
wonlee76
03-08-07, 10:34 PM In Races of Stone there is a Psionic Feat that lets your armor apply to your touch AC as long as you have your psionic focus up.
BruceLeeroy
03-08-07, 10:38 PM Oh, psionics. Pshaw.
Jaxgaret
03-09-07, 01:58 AM Oh, psionics. Pshaw.

:heehee
endofdreams
03-09-07, 07:52 AM I know that wilders get to add their charisma bonus to their touch AC.

I see a nice potential in stacking the psionic abilities.

*Mutters about pesky warlocks*
ClementWillowbreaker
03-09-07, 01:15 PM Also note that no sane DM would allow that PHBII feat as is, since Lords of Madness has one that only gives you shield AC to touch, and no other benefits (no other prerequisites, either, but Shield Specialization isn't that bad of a feat).
foxtail
03-09-07, 01:22 PM In Races of Stone there is a Psionic Feat that lets your armor apply to your touch AC as long as you have your psionic focus up.

The feat is called Deflective Armor; it has the prereqs of Heavy Armor Optimization and a certain BAB (don't have the book in front of me right now, I think it's +6).
Banatine
03-09-07, 01:31 PM Also note that no sane DM would allow that PHBII feat as is, since Lords of Madness has one that only gives you shield AC to touch, and no other benefits (no other prerequisites, either, but Shield Specialization isn't that bad of a feat).

:confused:

Shield ward only gives you your shield bonus to touch AC, and no other benefits.
DarknessEternal
03-09-07, 01:31 PM Also note that no sane DM would allow that PHBII feat as is, since Lords of Madness has one that only gives you shield AC to touch, and no other benefits (no other prerequisites, either, but Shield Specialization isn't that bad of a feat).

Yeah, because no feat is clearly superior to any other feat? Catch up with life already.
ClementWillowbreaker
03-09-07, 01:36 PM Shield ward only gives you your shield bonus to touch AC, and no other benefits.

Actually, it also grants bonuses to resisting bullrush, disarm, grapple, overrun, and trip. Considering this varies from +2 to +4, and is easily improved with the cheapest kind of magic armor bonus, along with your touch, you can see why this feat blows the Lords of Madness feat out of the water. One feat might be better than the next, but considering that the LoM feat was worth taking, this one is crazy. It would be good to take without the touch AC bonus. Not amazing, but ok. One more feat prerequisite and I might accept it (or you could just take the LoM one along with a nefted Shield Ward).
CrimsonDeath
03-09-07, 07:14 PM in races of stone you can get exotic armor i think that lets you add to touch ac.
Gnome Twistcloth, but only if you have the exotic armor proficiency feat for it. (The only reason to take the feat; since the armor has no max dex and no check penalty, there's very little reason not to wear it without the feat.)

I know that wilders get to add their charisma bonus to their touch AC.

I see a nice potential in stacking the psionic abilities.

*Mutters about pesky warlocks*
To a limit of their total AC. Deflective Armor wouldn't stack (unless you have natural armor).
Wraithwin
03-09-07, 07:36 PM Actually, it also grants bonuses to resisting bullrush, disarm, grapple, overrun, and trip. Considering this varies from +2 to +4, and is easily improved with the cheapest kind of magic armor bonus, along with your touch, you can see why this feat blows the Lords of Madness feat out of the water. One feat might be better than the next, but considering that the LoM feat was worth taking, this one is crazy. It would be good to take without the touch AC bonus. Not amazing, but ok. One more feat prerequisite and I might accept it (or you could just take the LoM one along with a nefted Shield Ward).

A character only gets so many feats, y'know. Considering your average character in your average game may see 12th level if they're lucky... that's a total of 5 feats (6 if human). A pre-requisite feat makes up for the bonuses in all honesty.

If you can use a shield but need to put most of your feats elsewhere, then go with the one from LoM. If you want to focus on shield defense, go Shield Ward. It's pretty simple really. To anybody other than a warrior, the pre-requisite feat is cumbersome. Knights and Crusaders (maybe even Warblades and Duskblades) will want it, but none of them get any bonus feats to put towards it.

By adding a feat requirment, it's pretty much saying;
"Here you can have this nice ability and save your second feat for something that fits you more, or you can invest a feat in this slightly useful one and take the other feat later. If you do that, we'll give you a bonus!"

Your stance against it is almost like saying that Great Cleave shouldn't allow you to hit more than one extra target, because Cleave only lets you hit one extra (I know that the prior requires the latter, but it's a good verbal reference). By adding a pre-requisite feat, you justify that little extra. If you add another required feat for Shield Ward, you should add one for the LoM feat as well.

A better examply might be: It's like saying "I'm only 20, but my brother's 21. We both play sports equally well but he has an extra year, so he can buy alcohol. I have one less year and can't buy alcohol. He should need another year before he can buy it."
ClementWillowbreaker
03-09-07, 10:53 PM I am not saying that a feat with prerequisites shouldn't be better than one without. I just think this given feat chain is overpowered, given the existence of Parrying Shield as a good stand-alone feat.

Now that I consider the feats carefully, maybe Shield Specialization sucks enough to warrant a kick-ass Shield Ward. Which just transforms Parrying Shield from an ok-feat to an instance of bad design and replication of material by different authors. Either way, the situation is upsetting to me. There is no fighting the power creep, after all (but since it is sword-and-boarding, can we really call it "power"?)

As a side note, your sense of scale does not reflect a lot of players, as well as the general tone of 3.5 supplements, where most of the insane power comes from lvl10+ play.
Wraithwin
03-10-07, 12:45 AM I think you're mistaken on "my sense of scale" - or at least misunderstood my statement. I know full well where the large power comes into gaming, but the fact of the matter is that most games end or are abandoned before they reach or exceed character level 12. This is a statistical thing.

There aren't many GMs that actually run games past 12th level considering just how many GMs there are, and even fewer who do one worth playing. :) Most of the bad ones don't know the boards exist (a pro for us, con for them).

Those numbers aside, tell me this;
In all perfect honesty, without fluffing it to support either side, how many player do you actually know who will waste a feat on something that gives a bonus vs Bullrush and Trip when the feat is not a prerequisite for a better feat or a Prestige Class? And I mean a feat that only gives bonuses to defending against it, not actually doing it. Be honest now - there aren't many at all.

I personally don't know anybody who would unless it was a requirement for another. There are simply too many other feats that are more appealing or just plain better. This feat basically finds a reason to reward a player with bonuses they would never actually bother trying to get otherwise.

The bonuses from Shield Ward are very good indeed, but they're bonuses that anybody else simply shrugs aside. Seriously, I can't think of anybody off the top of my head that thinks a defensive bonus vs Bullrush, Trip and Disarm is actually all that great compared to say... The one shield thing from Heroes of Battle that simply lets you negate one arrow attack a round. Or Great Cleave. Or even Sunder. I know people who wouldn't even second-thought taking sunder before something that gave the bonuses mentioned above.

Most people just don't think those checks are relevant enough to spend a feat on, and as such, they really don't care that it gives that bonus. In fact, the 2 players I've ran for that had it kept forgetting to add their bonus from it. I'm afraid you might be among the minority on this one, far as thinking it's overpowered... or even all that spectacular. Most people think of it as an average 2nd tier feat. :cool:

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
BruceLeeroy 03-08-07, 09:58 PM	So, with a few nifty feats (Shield Specialization, Shield Ward) you can add your Shield AC to your touch AC. I think I remember seeing on the CharOp boards a mention of a feat that allows you to add your regular Armor bonus to touch. Anyone know what that feat is, or what sourcebook it's from?
Moon-Lancer 03-08-07, 10:12 PM	in races of stone you can get exotic armor i think that lets you add to touch ac.
wonlee76 03-08-07, 10:34 PM	In Races of Stone there is a Psionic Feat that lets your armor apply to your touch AC as long as you have your psionic focus up.
BruceLeeroy 03-08-07, 10:38 PM	Oh, psionics. Pshaw.
Jaxgaret 03-09-07, 01:58 AM	Oh, psionics. Pshaw. :heehee
endofdreams 03-09-07, 07:52 AM	I know that wilders get to add their charisma bonus to their touch AC. I see a nice potential in stacking the psionic abilities. Mutters about pesky warlocks
ClementWillowbreaker 03-09-07, 01:15 PM	Also note that no sane DM would allow that PHBII feat as is, since Lords of Madness has one that only gives you shield AC to touch, and no other benefits (no other prerequisites, either, but Shield Specialization isn't that bad of a feat).
foxtail 03-09-07, 01:22 PM	In Races of Stone there is a Psionic Feat that lets your armor apply to your touch AC as long as you have your psionic focus up. The feat is called Deflective Armor; it has the prereqs of Heavy Armor Optimization and a certain BAB (don't have the book in front of me right now, I think it's +6).
Banatine 03-09-07, 01:31 PM	Also note that no sane DM would allow that PHBII feat as is, since Lords of Madness has one that only gives you shield AC to touch, and no other benefits (no other prerequisites, either, but Shield Specialization isn't that bad of a feat). :confused: Shield ward only gives you your shield bonus to touch AC, and no other benefits.
DarknessEternal 03-09-07, 01:31 PM	Also note that no sane DM would allow that PHBII feat as is, since Lords of Madness has one that only gives you shield AC to touch, and no other benefits (no other prerequisites, either, but Shield Specialization isn't that bad of a feat). Yeah, because no feat is clearly superior to any other feat? Catch up with life already.
ClementWillowbreaker 03-09-07, 01:36 PM	Shield ward only gives you your shield bonus to touch AC, and no other benefits. Actually, it also grants bonuses to resisting bullrush, disarm, grapple, overrun, and trip. Considering this varies from +2 to +4, and is easily improved with the cheapest kind of magic armor bonus, along with your touch, you can see why this feat blows the Lords of Madness feat out of the water. One feat might be better than the next, but considering that the LoM feat was worth taking, this one is crazy. It would be good to take without the touch AC bonus. Not amazing, but ok. One more feat prerequisite and I might accept it (or you could just take the LoM one along with a nefted Shield Ward).
CrimsonDeath 03-09-07, 07:14 PM	in races of stone you can get exotic armor i think that lets you add to touch ac. Gnome Twistcloth, but only if you have the exotic armor proficiency feat for it. (The only reason to take the feat; since the armor has no max dex and no check penalty, there's very little reason not to wear it without the feat.) I know that wilders get to add their charisma bonus to their touch AC. I see a nice potential in stacking the psionic abilities. Mutters about pesky warlocks To a limit of their total AC. Deflective Armor wouldn't stack (unless you have natural armor).
Wraithwin 03-09-07, 07:36 PM	Actually, it also grants bonuses to resisting bullrush, disarm, grapple, overrun, and trip. Considering this varies from +2 to +4, and is easily improved with the cheapest kind of magic armor bonus, along with your touch, you can see why this feat blows the Lords of Madness feat out of the water. One feat might be better than the next, but considering that the LoM feat was worth taking, this one is crazy. It would be good to take without the touch AC bonus. Not amazing, but ok. One more feat prerequisite and I might accept it (or you could just take the LoM one along with a nefted Shield Ward). A character only gets so many feats, y'know. Considering your average character in your average game may see 12th level if they're lucky... that's a total of 5 feats (6 if human). A pre-requisite feat makes up for the bonuses in all honesty. If you can use a shield but need to put most of your feats elsewhere, then go with the one from LoM. If you want to focus on shield defense, go Shield Ward. It's pretty simple really. To anybody other than a warrior, the pre-requisite feat is cumbersome. Knights and Crusaders (maybe even Warblades and Duskblades) will want it, but none of them get any bonus feats to put towards it. By adding a feat requirment, it's pretty much saying; "Here you can have this nice ability and save your second feat for something that fits you more, or you can invest a feat in this slightly useful one and take the other feat later. If you do that, we'll give you a bonus!" Your stance against it is almost like saying that Great Cleave shouldn't allow you to hit more than one extra target, because Cleave only lets you hit one extra (I know that the prior requires the latter, but it's a good verbal reference). By adding a pre-requisite feat, you justify that little extra. If you add another required feat for Shield Ward, you should add one for the LoM feat as well. A better examply might be: It's like saying "I'm only 20, but my brother's 21. We both play sports equally well but he has an extra year, so he can buy alcohol. I have one less year and can't buy alcohol. He should need another year before he can buy it."
ClementWillowbreaker 03-09-07, 10:53 PM	I am not saying that a feat with prerequisites shouldn't be better than one without. I just think this given feat chain is overpowered, given the existence of Parrying Shield as a good stand-alone feat. Now that I consider the feats carefully, maybe Shield Specialization sucks enough to warrant a kick-ass Shield Ward. Which just transforms Parrying Shield from an ok-feat to an instance of bad design and replication of material by different authors. Either way, the situation is upsetting to me. There is no fighting the power creep, after all (but since it is sword-and-boarding, can we really call it "power"?) As a side note, your sense of scale does not reflect a lot of players, as well as the general tone of 3.5 supplements, where most of the insane power comes from lvl10+ play.
Wraithwin 03-10-07, 12:45 AM	I think you're mistaken on "my sense of scale" - or at least misunderstood my statement. I know full well where the large power comes into gaming, but the fact of the matter is that most games end or are abandoned before they reach or exceed character level 12. This is a statistical thing. There aren't many GMs that actually run games past 12th level considering just how many GMs there are, and even fewer who do one worth playing. :) Most of the bad ones don't know the boards exist (a pro for us, con for them). Those numbers aside, tell me this; In all perfect honesty, without fluffing it to support either side, how many player do you actually know who will waste a feat on something that gives a bonus vs Bullrush and Trip when the feat is not a prerequisite for a better feat or a Prestige Class? And I mean a feat that only gives bonuses to defending against it, not actually doing it. Be honest now - there aren't many at all. I personally don't know anybody who would unless it was a requirement for another. There are simply too many other feats that are more appealing or just plain better. This feat basically finds a reason to reward a player with bonuses they would never actually bother trying to get otherwise. The bonuses from Shield Ward are very good indeed, but they're bonuses that anybody else simply shrugs aside. Seriously, I can't think of anybody off the top of my head that thinks a defensive bonus vs Bullrush, Trip and Disarm is actually all that great compared to say... The one shield thing from Heroes of Battle that simply lets you negate one arrow attack a round. Or Great Cleave. Or even Sunder. I know people who wouldn't even second-thought taking sunder before something that gave the bonuses mentioned above. Most people just don't think those checks are relevant enough to spend a feat on, and as such, they really don't care that it gives that bonus. In fact, the 2 players I've ran for that had it kept forgetting to add their bonus from it. I'm afraid you might be among the minority on this one, far as thinking it's overpowered... or even all that spectacular. Most people think of it as an average 2nd tier feat. :cool: