Post/Author/DateTime	Post
smaugfrost 12-31-04, 12:20 AM	First, wanted to thank everyone for words on high AC problem I was having. Advice given was thankfully and gleefully (he heh heh) accepted. Big Pet Peeve Time: Fortification= too powerful an armour enhancement for +1 to +5? I think so. No creature seems to possess a property like this which makes them immune to all sneak attack damage and every critical in existence. For only 36,000 gold it falls within the approachable grasp of PCs everywhere. I received a complaint from a player who told me that as long as a chance Vorpal weapon could be encountered, he would go for Fortification. Better that than death right? I think Fortification is BROKEN!!! Check these comparisons: Vorpal Weapon (+6 minimum) 72,000 gold -no effect on the following: multi headed, legendary, constructs, ethereal, undead, oozes, plants, aberrations, regenerators and the list goes on. Alot of monsters are simply not affected. -only works on a nat 20 (followed by reroll) meaning threat range is limited regardless of weapon type. Yes, I was surprised by this but go ahead and read the description in DMG. You end up with a weapon property which may work 5% of the time (or less) and only on about 30-40% of creatures. That seems balanced to me for a +5 enhancement. Fortification Armour (+6 minimum) 36,000 gold -100% negation of all criticals and sneak attack damage therby eliminating a primary class feature of rogues and assassins as well as blackguards. -100% negation of all weapon criticals properties in all sourcebooks. -100% negation of all monster critical properties in all sourcebooks. -also Barbarian class feature null and void (uncanny dodge) which barbarians have to wait a while to aquire. -with new rules: constructs can be given this effect. Does that cancel out +5 Mace of Smiting? -100% of Epic weapons critical effects knocked out of commission also. Does this seem balanced to anyone out there?
Telperion 12-31-04, 12:56 AM	You do know that you can fudge the numbers all you like, right? If fortification seems too powerful, and the cost is bugging you, then how about trippling it? Does 108000 gp sound better for that Fortified Armor? Keep in mind that weapons are considerably more expensive for the single reason that they are offensive tools, while a armor simply protects you from harm. A fortified armor may do so quite well against a rogue, but when you run into a creature that deals lots of damage without ever critting then that fortification enhancement isn't worth much, is it now? Golems hit hard. Purple Worms swallow their opponents. Oozes melt their opponents. There are hoards of creatures that don't care about critical hits. There some that depend on them, but you don't have to use those all the time. Just enough to make the player feel that his fortified armor is worth something, and then you can hit the party with something that will cause them to retreat while screaming for help :devil:.
alecthemad 12-31-04, 01:00 AM	I personally don't like fortification. I don't hate it but I dislike it. I will never give it out as treasure but if the players can make it then they are welcome to it.
fireangel37 12-31-04, 01:08 AM	Plenty of monsters and creatures exists with immunity to critical hits (and all monsters immune to critical hits are also immune to sneak attack damage). These include: Constructs Elementals Oozes Plants Swarms Undead PCs have a few options, depending on their world and the allowed books. Warshaper level 1 is a common one for druids, changlings, and just about anyone else who can get it. Not to mention that barbarians are generally impossible to sneak attack (well, it's possible, but the rogue has to be 4 levels higher).
Nuke 12-31-04, 02:01 AM	Fortification is specifically added to armor and shields. I don't quite understand what you mean about applying it to constructs .. or why you would even if you could. They're already immune to criticals and sneak attacks anyway. And how does it make make a Uncanny Dodge null and void? You can still be caught flat-footed with fortified armor, as well as flanked, so I don't see what you mean by that either. It's a pretty expensive enchantment (+5 for heavy). If a player wants to spend that much to avoid crits and sneak attacks, then I just don't really see a problem with it.
Ualaa 12-31-04, 03:15 AM	A minor point. The property Vorpal or Fortification can be applied to a weapon or piece or armor respectively that does not have +1 to attack or AC. Basically, you can have a magical sword without a bonus to attack or damage, but with the property of Vorpal. If this sword happens to be a Scimitar, it will threaten a critical on a natural 18-20 assuming that is a high enough number to hit the opponent; a confirmed natural 18 would remove your opponents head. The same is true of armor/shield enchantments. Nothing says an item with a +3 function needs to be enchanted with a +1 or greater bonus. The armor could have a +3 function and no other bonuses very easily; although I'd imagine many/most would indeed have a numerical bonus in addition to the function.
Dragonspirit 12-31-04, 04:35 AM	I thought an item had to have a +1 modifier before you could add things to it Ualaa? Anyhow - Heavy fortification is awesome. Medium and Light really aren't worth it though. I personally think you should have to have the respective armor type to apply it (any type for heavy armor, medium or light for medium armor, and only light for light armor). Otherwise though, I don't see a glaring problem with it. In any event though, it's your campaign. You're the boss. So, if you think it's unbalanced scrap it from the list (just try to let your players know in advance of character creation if possible).
penchant 12-31-04, 04:42 AM	I hate coming to a thread, seeing the obvious answers to it and as i read down the posts having one point after another ticked off my list until I get to "post reply" at the bottom, I have nothing witty or intelligent left to say. So in light of that I shall only say this: PBPBPBPBPBPBPBPBPBPBTTT!!!!!:pbbbtt:
Cantankerous 12-31-04, 05:27 AM	Hi Ualaa, Basically, you can have a magical sword without a bonus to attack or damage, but with the property of Vorpal. If this sword happens to be a Scimitar, it will threaten a critical on a natural 18-20 assuming that is a high enough number to hit the opponent; a confirmed natural 18 would remove your opponents head. I'm afraid that is incorrect. According to the SRD: This potent and feared ability allows the weapon to sever the heads of those it strikes. Upon a roll of natural 20 (followed by a successful roll to confirm the critical hit), the weapon severs the opponent’s head (if it has one) from its body. Some creatures, such as many aberrations and all oozes, have no heads. Others, such as golems and undead creatures other than vampires, are not affected by the loss of their heads. Most other creatures, however, die when their heads are cut off. A vorpal weapon must be a slashing weapon. (If you roll this property randomly for an inappropriate weapon, reroll.) While our original poster failed to note that it is not ALL Abberations, et al, that get this saving grace, but rather ones whom loosing their head doesn't matter to, nor that in the 90% plus cases of other beings where it DOES matter, that decapitation equlas instant death, irregardless of how many hit points they have, neither is it true that the natural critical threat range of the weapon is what determines the Vorpal strike ability. If it IS a scimitar, and you roll an 18, if this is backed up by another roll that is enough to hit, then you do normal critcal damage, not the Vorpal effect. Personally I don't think that Fortification is broken at all, but the PC's in my game aren't filthy rich either, so 35,000 gp is nothing that they would sneeze at. One did go out and spend the extra three thousand gold to get his masterwork chain shirt Fortified, but the group's resident Cleric, who does run around in Full Plate, doesn't have the cash to float it. There is an NPC who has bet his Vorpal Battle Axe against one of the PC's lands and fortified manor house, since both are worth roughly the same amount ;) about whether or not a particular Druidic society in the game has been infiltrated or not... if the PC looses this bet, his wife will probably have HIS head over it. No one likes loosing their home to a bet. ;) Isshia
evangelion1010 12-31-04, 12:35 PM	As a rogue, it is a very annoying property to overcome, but i realize that they can't be good at everything. They do have to rely on the party sometimes, as anyone in any party should. Its annoying that an enchantment can completely negate the core feature of a class, along with a good portion of other percision damage. Its essentially the ultimate anti-dex fighter enchantment. I think fortification should be split up into two seperate parts, the critical immunity and the sneak attack/percision damage immunity.... Critical hits, which should be easier to avoid, and sneak attack/percision damage which should be harder to avoid. +2 for crit immunity, +4 for sneak attack. Its slightly biased by the character i play, but i believe that criticals are an annoying and unfortunate part of play that can kill a character too easily. Not that sneak attack can't, but...
fireangel37 12-31-04, 01:19 PM	Critical hits and sneak attacks are inherently tied together, though. I can't think of a single creature or ability which grants immunity to one but not the other (sneak attack specifically states its uselessness against critical immune creatures). Not everyone is effective against everyone else. Mages have trouble with high SR and energy resistant characters/creatures. Fighters have trouble with complicated to defeat DRs (any "and" DR, for instance). Rogues have trouble with critical immunity. No matter how useless a rogue's sneak attack might be during a game, the rogue still has all sorts of other benefits that make it worth playing.
Kintara 12-31-04, 01:36 PM	A minor point. The property Vorpal or Fortification can be applied to a weapon or piece or armor respectively that does not have +1 to attack or AC. Basically, you can have a magical sword without a bonus to attack or damage, but with the property of Vorpal. If this sword happens to be a Scimitar, it will threaten a critical on a natural 18-20 assuming that is a high enough number to hit the opponent; a confirmed natural 18 would remove your opponents head. The same is true of armor/shield enchantments. Nothing says an item with a +3 function needs to be enchanted with a +1 or greater bonus. The armor could have a +3 function and no other bonuses very easily; although I'd imagine many/most would indeed have a numerical bonus in addition to the function.That's entirely wrong. This is from Magic Items I, Creating Magic Weapons: A magic weapon must have at least a +1 enhancement bonus to have any of the abilities listed on Table: Melee Weapon Special Abilities or Table Ranged Weapon Special Abilities. It says the same thing for armor. I also dare you to find a magic weapon that doesn't have a +x, but does have an ability like Keen or Vorpal.
scott644 12-31-04, 02:41 PM	Um, there's a serious balancing factor here I haven't seen mentioned: Where are you going to find a 13th level (minimum) arcane spellcaster? They're not exceptionally common. Further, this caster has to have Limited Wish in their spell list. How many wizards or sorcerers will take such an expensive spell? Of course, we could go with the 17th level cleric and use Miracle - this is even more uncommon. Frankly, the odds of such a caster being available to make it are slim - especially one with the right level, feats, and spell selection, who will have the inclination to handle this for the PC's. Consequently, these items would be very few and far between, and restricted to the most powerful characters in a (non-epic) game. It's no big deal.
Lordofthebean 12-31-04, 06:15 PM	Fortification seems like a perfectly sensible property to me, considering that most monsters don't rely on criticals to defeat a party. Also, because the PCs most vulnerable to crits and SAs (sorcs and wizards) have trouble wearing armor, it doesn't prove that much of a problem.
Kainy 12-31-04, 06:34 PM	Yeah, no monster has any ability that makes it totally immune to criticals, sneak attack, and precision-based damage! They have types that confer those abilities - as well as several other benefits (extra HP, immunity to poison/disease, immunity to several fort save effects...) Vorpal's a crappy ability, due to its unreliability. I would never take it. Fortification isn't really all that great, unless you fight nothing but dex-fighters and rogues. I'd rather have a +5 special ability armor than a +1 heavy fort armor. But you nerf whatever you like. You're the DM and that means you're god. Your power trip will be great fun, as your imaginary players do exactly as you wish, and your plots work every time, and they never come up with a creative solution you weren't prepared for. Sit at the head of your table, behind your screen, and cackle at all the players who have left you because you're frightened of normal game progression to the point where you want to play a different game than your players, because you, as DM, might not win. Since killing the players is, of course, winning. :rolleyes:
Lord Stigius 12-31-04, 06:51 PM	No creature seems to possess a property like this which makes them immune to all sneak attack damage and every critical in existence. What about undead, constructs, plats, and oozes? For only 36,000 gold it falls within the approachable grasp of PCs everywhere. Do you have magic shops with eveyr requested item available at PC's call? I received a complaint from a player who told me that as long as a chance Vorpal weapon could be encountered, he would go for Fortification. Better that than death right? So what's wrong here? It's similar to obtaining Protection from Fire when red dragons are about. I think Fortification is BROKEN!!! Check these comparisons: Vorpal Weapon (+6 minimum) 72,000 gold -no effect on the following: multi headed, legendary, constructs, ethereal, undead, oozes, plants, aberrations, regenerators and the list goes on. Alot of monsters are simply not affected. -only works on a nat 20 (followed by reroll) meaning threat range is limited regardless of weapon type. Yes, I was surprised by this but go ahead and read the description in DMG. You end up with a weapon property which may work 5% of the time (or less) and only on about 30-40% of creatures. That seems balanced to me for a +5 enhancement. So far you have only proven that vorpal is weak under 3,5, which I agree. Now, I would go with holy +4 over vorpal +1 any time (except when playing evil PC), but it's my private opinion, nobody is forced to heed it. -100% negation of all criticals and sneak attack damage therby eliminating a primary class feature of rogues and assassins as well as blackguards. You are not going to face rogues and assasins all the time. Unless in a ver specific campaigh (wipe out the thievery in a big city, or some such), you are going to face opponents relying mostly on sneak attack in less than 10% encounters, and even then they usually form only a part of the enemy forces. Sneak attack is not the primary class ability of blackguards. Creatures capable of dealing massiwe damage on criticals are capable of dealing massive damage without criticals too. True, one wearing fortified armor may stand longer, but it is still not an easy win. -100% negation of all weapon criticals properties in all sourcebooks. -100% negation of all monster critical properties in all sourcebooks. -also Barbarian class feature null and void (uncanny dodge) which barbarians have to wait a while to aquire. Only assuming all barbarians wear hevy fortification armor, which I assume not. -100% of Epic weapons critical effects knocked out of commission also. Enhancement eqivalent to +5 is pretty much close to epic. Nonepic Ring of evasion, for example, counters Ref-based epic spells. What is so wrong with non-epic means being able to counter an epic ability? Does this seem balanced to anyone out there? I've seen lots of people houserule that light armors can get only light fortification, medium ones - medium fortification, and only the heavy ones - full 100%. (Some folks do it even without realizing it's a houserule). I use it myself, though mostly as the means of boosting the usefulness of heavy armors. Other than that, no, I haven't seen anybody complain about that (maybe a lone munchkin player with Power Critical, Whirlwind Attcak, Keen scythe and a bizzare combination of 5 crit-related PrCs, but I do not pity that kind.)
Requiem, First Rebirth 12-31-04, 07:52 PM	You know, as DM you can start your campaign by mentioning that this realm is losing it's magic. Then whenever a player says "I enchant my +1 longsword w/ vorpal." You can say "no you don't."
DM Zoc 12-31-04, 08:10 PM	Compare the magic armor to the normal armor. +1 Heavy Fortification armor will make negate all damage 5% of the time, and half of the damage (the critical half) whenever a crit is rolled (about 20% of the time). +5 armor will negate all damage 25% of the time, and is 11,000 GP cheaper.
NateNate 12-31-04, 08:31 PM	I think people give Fortification more credit than it deserves. It grants a 25-100% chance of ignoring extra damage from a critical hit or a sneak attack, but it doesn't make the character immune to crits or sneak attacks. They can still be critted on or sneak attacked; it just won't deal any extra damage. Compare this to Construct, Undead, Elemental, Plant, and Ooze: Immune to Crits, Sneak Attacks, Stunning, Death from Massive Damage, Death Attacks, Ability Damage, and anything else negated by immunity to crits, such as the Swashbuckler's Insightful Strike. Compared to the Immune to Crits racial feature, Fortification just sucks. Also note that it only negates additional weapon damage; a Flaming Burst Scythe still deals +3d10 Fire damage, since it isn't additional weapon damage. An Assassin's Death Attack will still work on the character, because they can still deliver a successful Sneak Attack, even if the extra damage is negated. For the cost of a +5 Enhancement, I'd say its not too good for the price.
smaugfrost 01-01-05, 03:29 AM	... or simply were not bothered to read the entire thread I posted. I never stated a desire to slay my characters in a campaign setting, I had no desire to Nerf anything, and I certainly am aware of rules in game to establish magical item creation. I was aware of the minimum +1 enhancement needed to implement vorpal or fortification, and was not planning on discussing that point. Fact: Vorpal sword will cost 36,000 gold and Fortification will cost 72,000 gold. Sorry folks. Before I am accused of nerfing a system, get the rules correct yourselves. You few know who you are. Those that submitted the correct rulings, I salute you!!! You are more helpful then you know. Secondly: Cancelling out all extra damage without removing sneak attacks or criticals? Huh? What? What exactly remains of a critical or sneak attack once all added damage is nullified? It was my understanding that all criticals and sneak attacks were effectively eliminated by succesful use of the Fortification property. Now, I will say one final thing on this topic since I thought this was supposed to be a thread of advice and not ridicule of my DMing style. Fortification: It will not simply eliminate effectiveness of rogues and assassins, it will eliminate effectiveness of all critical properties everywhere... Epic or otherwise. Monsters in three manuals rely on criticals as should DMs to keep fights thrilling and maintain the suspension of disbelief that an actual death could result from a fight of equal CR to a party, not to kill off party members as I have been accused of. I ask you DMs out there one thing: If your party had fighters or monks or rogues and every fight involved a cancellation of all crits delivered and all precision damage dealt and all hard earned weapons properties nullified, are you telling me your players would not get upset? Same thing, different perspective. What I was thinking was a select item or items designed as to cancel out specific effects: a collar of vorpal protection an amulet heart shield of skewering protection a necklace of preternatural reaction granting protection of sneak attack damage. Would not these items grant the protections desired without compromising all? Any thoughts or ideas? I simply feel that this fortification at 100% is an epic level enhancement. I really like the idea submitted that it could be split out over precision and critical damage. Kudos. Incidentally, I realize +5 is only a step below epic, however it is also 1,800,000 gold away from epic. (200,000 gold leaps to 2,000,000 thanks to the tenfold epic cost modifier.) I am not seeking to rewrite the DMG or 3.5 rules. I am an old school gamer who has seen the nerf stick applied liberally through 3.0 and 3.5 to long standing props which have existed since I was a youngster in the 70's. Example: I cheered as Harm made it untouched into 3.0. I shuddered as Harm was then dismantled in 3.5. Is there not a desire among gamers to share the thrilling experiences of high adventure and deadly enemies locked in mortal struggle? Have none of you experienced a similar sense of loss from certain additions? Perhaps it is my age, but I feel that not all old school is bad. Its really academic at this point, but I was looking for constructive criticism and have received a large measure. You folks know who you are as well and I thank you.
Cold Napalm 01-01-05, 05:34 AM	Umm I think your confused...fortification negates SA and crit DAMAGE...not property of. So a burst weapon would still go off on a crit...just like it would againt an ooze. You just would not do the x2-4 extra weapon damage. Quite frankly, I have seen VERY few people take fortification at all and those that do never get it beyond the 25% since that one is cheap. +5 enchantment means 5 more things that the armor CAN'T do. Same with vorpal. Let's see a +1 vorpal sword that will insta kill 5% or less...or a +1 flaming sonic frost shocking corrisive sword that does an extra 5d6 every hit. I'd take the constant damage every time over vorpal. Hell, I'd much rather have a spellstoring vicious wrathful healing sword over vorpal...wouldn't you?
Telperion 01-02-05, 01:49 AM	I took a look around the Rules of the Game articles, and found this little bit: If the attacker cannot meet either of these two conditions, no sneak attack is possible. If the attacker can meet at least one of these conditions, a sneak attack is possible, provided that something else doesn't intrude and spoil the sneak attack. Several things can kill a sneak attack, even if the attacker sets up the attack properly: Ranged attacks can be sneak attacks only if the range is 30 feet or less. The attacker must use a weapon optimally to make a sneak attack. If the attacker takes the -4 penalty to deal nonlethal damage, no sneak attack is possible. (A weapon that normally deals nonlethal damage, such as a sap, can be used in a sneak attack; however, you deal nonlethal damage if you do so.) Sneak attacks are possible only against living creatures that have discernible anatomies. Undead, constructs, oozes, plants, and incorporeal creatures are not subject to sneak attacks, and creatures that are not subject to critical hits are not subject to sneak attacks also. Sneak attacks require a clear view of the target. Any degree of concealment -- even concealment from fog (a lousy 20% miss chance) foils sneak attacks. Sneak attacks are possible only when the attacker can reach the target's vital spots. If you're limited to beating the foe about the ankles, you can't make sneak attacks against him. So, if Sneak Attacks are your only problem there are certainly cheaper ways of getting immunity to those than going with Fortification.
buzzbomber 01-02-05, 05:42 AM	You want to change Fortification in your campaign, that's fine, but as mentioned, simple spells such as blur cancel out sneak attack, so basically, most of the cost comes from the crit immunity. But if you are sure yoy want to change the cost, IMHO A better way to do it than "Heavy Fortification is 72000gp..." would be to give an enhancement bonus. Sorry for being off topic, but I didn't think harm was destroyed in 3.5, I've seen an level 24 fighter fail his will save to go down to 3hp via the harm spell. You'd think his hp would count for something over a commoner who might not lose anything. Just another opinion, though.
Venom of the Yuan Ti 01-02-05, 10:14 AM	Fortification Armour (+6 minimum) 36,000 gold -100% negation of all criticals and sneak attack damage therby eliminating a primary class feature of rogues and assassins as well as blackguards. -100% negation of all weapon criticals properties in all sourcebooks. -100% negation of all monster critical properties in all sourcebooks. -also Barbarian class feature null and void (uncanny dodge) which barbarians have to wait a while to aquire. -with new rules: constructs can be given this effect. Does that cancel out +5 Mace of Smiting? -100% of Epic weapons critical effects knocked out of commission also. Does this seem balanced to anyone out there? Firstly a burst weapon (these are what you are aiming at with the critical effect thing right?) will do extra damadge anyway, seeing as they do it IF A CRITICAL WOULD HAVE HAPPENED. That is in the players handbook and at least 2 FAQs. Secondly, I would rather a sute of +5 full plate and some extra gold for a better weapon than +1 heavy fortified full plate. Why? Because, assuming a monster with +15 on attacks, not too high for the cost of the armour for a melee monster, and asuming I have no shield or Dex bonus, or any other defencive items (ie I am thick) that shifts the chanses of it hitting me from 80% to 60%, and crits are relativley rare, and there are cheaper ways to avoid being sneak attacked.
zioth 01-02-05, 02:40 PM	Like others said, sneak attack is easy to counter with spells like blur. You, however, seem to be much more concerned with critical hits, so I'll stick with that. How good is a critical hit? Let's start with a basic case. You have a +0 STR modifier, a d8 attack and a crit range of 20. To keep things simple, assume you always hit and you always confirm criticals. Your average non-critical damage on a d8 is 4.5. Multiply that by 19 and add 9 (the damage on a crit), and divide by 20. Now your average damage is 4.725. That's an increase of one fifth of a hit point. Now take a more realistic case. You're a fighter with Improved Crit, wielding a d10 weapon with a 20x3 crit range (18-20 and 20x3 are effectively the same). You have a STR modifier of +5, and Weapon Specialization. Now your average non-crit damage is 5.5+5+2=12.5, and your crit damage is 3x12.5=37.5. Average damage = (12.5x18 + 37.5x2)/20 = 15. How good is Fortification? So if you're up against this fighter who always hits and always confirms, your fortification armor is going to protect you against two and a half points of damage per attack, which is about 20% of the total damage. Say your +1 armor bonus takes effect, making the fighter miss 5% of the time. Damage = (1x0 + 19x12.5)/20 = 11.875. Now put on your +5 armor (which is cheaper than Greater Fortification). Now, damage = (5x0 + 13x12.5 + 2x(5x12.5+15x37.5)/20)/20 = 11.25. So in this special case, the cheaper +5 armor is about 1% better than the Fortification armor. Against some enemies, Fortification will be better than +5. Against others, it will be worse. Personally, I'd take the +5 since it's effective more often and it's cheaper. For that matter, I'd rather just grab +6 Gloves of Dexterity for the same price and get +3 AC against normal attacks _and_ touch attacks. Note that the Invulnerability enchantment is only +3, and it saves you 5 points of damage per non-magical attack, which is twice what Fortification does. A polymorph spell can easily make you immune to criticals and sneak attacks (polymorph into an elemental), and is available long before characters can afford Greater Fortification. Mirror Image can get you an 87.5% miss chance. There are tons of spells and magic items which make me not want to bother with Fortification. In my opinion, the only time Fortification becomes significant is when you get into really high levels, and can afford a +10 item. a +4 Full Plate of Greater Fortification is pretty useful... but then again, so are a lot of 100,000gp items. EDIT: I'll throw in another critical hit case just for fun: You have a high AC, so the fighter above is only going to hit you on a 15 or higher. That becomes 16 or higher because of the +1 enhancement on your Fortification armor. Now his average damage is (15x0 + 3x12.5 + 2x37.5)/20 = 5.625. Fortification reduces that to (15x0 + 5x12.5)/20 = 3.125 Put on your +5 armor instead. Now the fighter can only hit you on a natural 20. The new damage is (19x0 + 1x37.5)/20 = 1.875. Actually, since this fighter will only confirm on another natural 20, the damage is only 0.6875 on average. So if you have a high-AC character, Fortification becomes almost useless compared to +5.
Lord Stigius 01-02-05, 03:12 PM	smaugfrost I ask you DMs out there one thing: If your party had fighters or monks or rogues and every fight involved a cancellation of all crits delivered and all precision damage dealt and all hard earned weapons properties nullified, are you telling me your players would not get upset? Same thing, different perspective. I still fail to understand your premise. As I understand from the quote above, you are worried about the PCs encounterin opponents with Heavy Fortification every fight? The only thing I may say is that such premise is... uhm.... very unrealistic to say the least. Really, I assume you said that just for the argument's sake. Otherwise, if that really does happen in a campaign... I'm afraid the campaign has some issues far more serious that the "brokeness" of a particular ability, be it Fortification or anything else. As others have already pointed, Fortification is far from negating all crit-related abilities. Also, where's Fortification, there's brilliant energy weapon, and wherever is armor, there are touch attacks, grapple and trip attacks. I stand by my opinion: I haven't seen anybody complain about that (maybe a lone munchkin player with Power Critical, Whirlwind Attcak, Keen scythe and a bizzare combination of 5 crit-related PrCs, but I do not pity that kind.) I did not mean that you are one of the above, if you took such an immpresion from my words, blame on my not-too-perfect English. :embarrass I just wanted to say that in my years of gaming and DMing I haven't meet any player complaining about his rogue or crit-loving heavy-hitter encountering from time to time the enemy with Fortification. Just like the fireball-loving mage did not complain about meetig devils or others fire-immue creatures. The problem lies in number, I guess. From time to time everything is OK. If a party rogue encounters opponents immune to Sneak Attack every fight, it's probably the faulty DMing, not the immunity itself. If the player chooses Heavy Fortification, he should feel he has received his dearly bought prize. The DM is still far from being unable to challenge him :schemes: Of course, removing some ability from game is quite OK, but it's best done before the campaign begins (for example, common vorpal + no fortification = higher mortality rate, no one feels safe due to high HP, which may add some tension to the game). Hovever, after you have progressed so far in the game, removing something may be seen by a player (especially the one planning to take it) as an attempt to screw him. Of course, broken things do happen (myself being in the camp that thinks 3,0 Harm was one of them), and it's the DM's prerogative to fix them. But my whole post was an attempt to prove that Fortification is not broken.
zioth 01-02-05, 03:46 PM	Now to show that I'm really crazy. I came up with a mathematical proof that, accounting only for critical hits, +5 armor is always better than Fortification: Premices * Enemy hits on X or higher. * Enemy does Y damage on average. * Crit range is 19-20x3 (improved critical). This is the best possible normal crit range, since x3 adds as much average damage as 18-20, but hits more often (when the attacker can't hit on an 18 or 19). Basics Average critical damage, accounting for failed confirmation: AVG_CRIT = (Y(X-1) + 3Y(20-(X-1)))/20 Average damage with no armor: AVG_DMG = (0(X-1) + Y(20-(X-1)-2) + 2(AVG_CRIT))/20 AVG_DMG = (0(X-1) + Y(20-(X-1)-2) + 2(Y(X-1) + 3Y(20-(X-1)))/20)/20 = (Y(19-X) + 2Y((X-1) + 3(21-X)/20))/20 = (Y(19-X) + 2Y(62-2X)/20)/20 = Y((19-X) + (31-X)/5)/20 = Y(25.2 - 1.2X)/20 = Y(1.26 - 0.06X) Fortification Average damage with +1 Fortification armor: AVG_DMG = (0(X-1+1) + Y(20-(X-1+1)))/20 = Y(1 - 0.05X) +5 enhancement Average damage with +5 armor: AVG_DMG = Y(1.26 - 0.06(X+5)) = Y(0.96 - 0.06X) Results Fort-armor damage - +5-armor damage: DIFF = Y(1 - 0.05X) - Y(0.96 - 0.06X) = Y(0.04 + 0.01X) Note that the result is always positive. That means that the damage done against Fortification armor will always be greater than the damage done against +5 armor.