Better AC [Archive] - Wizards Community - Pages Merged by Solauren

Better AC [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Ashanti
04-05-06, 04:59 AM In my game I allow bonuses to AC stack with less aggrevation. This means all the shield bonuses stacking with natural armour bonuses stacking with worn armour, enhancement, deflection etc.

Shield bonuses count towards touch AC, (using the Net Book of Feats can give pretty high shield bonuses- off the top of my head +8 is not too hard to get).

I built a 20th fighter based on the npc template in the DMG with an AC of something like 51.

Given that this uses a lot of feats (Master of Armour, Master of Sheileds etc- From the Net Book) can anyone see a problem with letting fighters get these admittedly high ACs?.
starfire311
04-05-06, 09:41 AM I am not sure what you mean by "stacking with less aggrevation" I don't recall less aggrevation being a type.

Do you meant hat you allow multiple enahncements of the same type to stack. So for example, I have improved two Weapon defense granting a +2 shield bonus, Shield spell granting a +4 shield bonus and a +5 animated shield granting a +7 shield bonues. That they all stack granting a +13 shield bonus. This seems rather ludacrious, but whatever floats your boat.
Bulletproof_Condom
04-05-06, 02:04 PM You might consider making attack bonuses easier to get to balance it out, say by reducing the cost of magic weapons or by making Combat Prowess a nonepic feat.

This is D&D; you can do whatever you want, just make sure you're able to spot and deal with any problems it creates.
starfire311
04-05-06, 05:30 PM Words.

I am so jealous of you ... I love the monicker bullet proof condom and ever since I saw it I ahve been trying to think about where to use it:)
lostone
04-06-06, 09:24 AM You might consider making attack bonuses easier to get to balance it out, say by reducing the cost of magic weapons or by making Combat Prowess a nonepic feat.

This is D&D; you can do whatever you want, just make sure you're able to spot and deal with any problems it creates.I'll second that. Even using the RAW (rules as written) stacking rules there are many high AC builds on the CO boards (Example: 152 AC by level 20 by the rules, untouchable by any CR 20 monster (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=305263)). Your house rule would probably triple any achievable AC, which can already be untouchably high by the RAW. Your rule really isn't needed, but if it works for your group, that's your business.
Lucan_Desmond
04-06-06, 04:01 PM What he said.

Someone pointed out to me once (when I said that 40+ AC was really high) taht some combination of monk/duelist/iajustu master (something like that, I don't use oriental stuff) could easily get into the 70s or 80s for AC. Keeping things from stacking is pretty much the only way to keep your PCs in line when it comes to normal combat. If their ACs get too high you'll have to send more magic-users after them... which will lead to them finding ways to ignore magic damage... and then you just can't stop them... and they have no fear, start goofing off, game falls apart. Thats a really extreme example, but I've seen it happen. Someone ignores a seemingly harmless rule and suddenly characters have to be magically transported to "The Realm of the Roaming Tarraques" before they can do any more damage to the game.

Also, from personal experience as a person who always plays the fighter/mage: Don't let bonus' to AC stack! I know I would love it if my +2 Mithral Shirt and +2 Mithral Shield stacked with my mage armor and shield spells... thats a +18 before ANYTHING else.

Just my 2 cents.
Later,
Des
Ashanti
04-07-06, 08:39 AM We play with the core books and hardly ever use prestige classes so funky high AC builds are not really up our street.

My group found that BAB tends to out strip AC eventually. I was wondering if having AC to match would upset the balance of play to any degree.
starfire311
04-07-06, 03:41 PM My group found that BAB tends to out strip AC eventually. I was wondering if having AC to match would upset the balance of play to any degree.

this is absolutly correct, and IMO how it should be... sure that 1st attack my be an auto hit, but what about the 2nd, 3rd and 4th.... what good is having 4 attacks if only the 1st one has a chance of hitting. If you need to roll a 10 to hit with the 1st attack, then you will need a 15 with the 2nd and 20s with the 3rd and 4th, might is well not even have them then.

Now if you need a 5 to hit with the 1st one then you need a 10 with the 2nd, 15 with the 3rd and 20 with the 4th... those extra attacks mean something then.
kelvinaw273
04-08-06, 07:02 AM ... if you have maxed out your feats in high AC, your attacks and damage will suffer. As a result, a character whose AC cannot be touched still has some big disadvantages that canbe gotten around: use area attacks, ranged touch, or tactics to reduce AC such as flanking and Aid Another.
Hugin
04-12-06, 08:07 PM If you're looking to increase AC in a lower-than-average magic campaign, one way is to use an AC bonus which equals half the character's BAB. Since the characters don't receive the usual flood of magical aids, we have used this rule to represent their martial training in "not being hit" (which is why it is based off of BAB).

Maybe my group is odd, but we all thought it incredibly strange that a character could learn to hit with great accuracy, and yet still get hit by a pot thrown by an upset bar wench just as easily as anybody else! :rolleyes:

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Ashanti 04-05-06, 04:59 AM	In my game I allow bonuses to AC stack with less aggrevation. This means all the shield bonuses stacking with natural armour bonuses stacking with worn armour, enhancement, deflection etc. Shield bonuses count towards touch AC, (using the Net Book of Feats can give pretty high shield bonuses- off the top of my head +8 is not too hard to get). I built a 20th fighter based on the npc template in the DMG with an AC of something like 51. Given that this uses a lot of feats (Master of Armour, Master of Sheileds etc- From the Net Book) can anyone see a problem with letting fighters get these admittedly high ACs?.
starfire311 04-05-06, 09:41 AM	I am not sure what you mean by "stacking with less aggrevation" I don't recall less aggrevation being a type. Do you meant hat you allow multiple enahncements of the same type to stack. So for example, I have improved two Weapon defense granting a +2 shield bonus, Shield spell granting a +4 shield bonus and a +5 animated shield granting a +7 shield bonues. That they all stack granting a +13 shield bonus. This seems rather ludacrious, but whatever floats your boat.
Bulletproof_Condom 04-05-06, 02:04 PM	You might consider making attack bonuses easier to get to balance it out, say by reducing the cost of magic weapons or by making Combat Prowess a nonepic feat. This is D&D; you can do whatever you want, just make sure you're able to spot and deal with any problems it creates.
starfire311 04-05-06, 05:30 PM	Words. I am so jealous of you ... I love the monicker bullet proof condom and ever since I saw it I ahve been trying to think about where to use it:)
lostone 04-06-06, 09:24 AM	You might consider making attack bonuses easier to get to balance it out, say by reducing the cost of magic weapons or by making Combat Prowess a nonepic feat. This is D&D; you can do whatever you want, just make sure you're able to spot and deal with any problems it creates.I'll second that. Even using the RAW (rules as written) stacking rules there are many high AC builds on the CO boards (Example: 152 AC by level 20 by the rules, untouchable by any CR 20 monster (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=305263)). Your house rule would probably triple any achievable AC, which can already be untouchably high by the RAW. Your rule really isn't needed, but if it works for your group, that's your business.
Lucan_Desmond 04-06-06, 04:01 PM	What he said. Someone pointed out to me once (when I said that 40+ AC was really high) taht some combination of monk/duelist/iajustu master (something like that, I don't use oriental stuff) could easily get into the 70s or 80s for AC. Keeping things from stacking is pretty much the only way to keep your PCs in line when it comes to normal combat. If their ACs get too high you'll have to send more magic-users after them... which will lead to them finding ways to ignore magic damage... and then you just can't stop them... and they have no fear, start goofing off, game falls apart. Thats a really extreme example, but I've seen it happen. Someone ignores a seemingly harmless rule and suddenly characters have to be magically transported to "The Realm of the Roaming Tarraques" before they can do any more damage to the game. Also, from personal experience as a person who always plays the fighter/mage: Don't let bonus' to AC stack! I know I would love it if my +2 Mithral Shirt and +2 Mithral Shield stacked with my mage armor and shield spells... thats a +18 before ANYTHING else. Just my 2 cents. Later, Des
Ashanti 04-07-06, 08:39 AM	We play with the core books and hardly ever use prestige classes so funky high AC builds are not really up our street. My group found that BAB tends to out strip AC eventually. I was wondering if having AC to match would upset the balance of play to any degree.
starfire311 04-07-06, 03:41 PM	My group found that BAB tends to out strip AC eventually. I was wondering if having AC to match would upset the balance of play to any degree. this is absolutly correct, and IMO how it should be... sure that 1st attack my be an auto hit, but what about the 2nd, 3rd and 4th.... what good is having 4 attacks if only the 1st one has a chance of hitting. If you need to roll a 10 to hit with the 1st attack, then you will need a 15 with the 2nd and 20s with the 3rd and 4th, might is well not even have them then. Now if you need a 5 to hit with the 1st one then you need a 10 with the 2nd, 15 with the 3rd and 20 with the 4th... those extra attacks mean something then.
kelvinaw273 04-08-06, 07:02 AM	... if you have maxed out your feats in high AC, your attacks and damage will suffer. As a result, a character whose AC cannot be touched still has some big disadvantages that canbe gotten around: use area attacks, ranged touch, or tactics to reduce AC such as flanking and Aid Another.
Hugin 04-12-06, 08:07 PM	If you're looking to increase AC in a lower-than-average magic campaign, one way is to use an AC bonus which equals half the character's BAB. Since the characters don't receive the usual flood of magical aids, we have used this rule to represent their martial training in "not being hit" (which is why it is based off of BAB). Maybe my group is odd, but we all thought it incredibly strange that a character could learn to hit with great accuracy, and yet still get hit by a pot thrown by an upset bar wench just as easily as anybody else! :rolleyes: