| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1damien_ruggerOct 20, 2009 9:31:25 | I am looking at a way to make a paladin have a logically higher AC than a wizard ...
Thinking that an easy fix is to ditch 1 point off of all heavy armor (so chain 5, plate 7) and add Con to AC for all heavy. This means that the heavy classes need to make a sacrifice (speed, Con+Str for most) but get higher AC. Then I boost monster AC attacks by 2 points per tier ... Anyone see a big problem to this house rule, the effect is really just to boost monster attack and tank AC so those tanks can actually tank things rather than having lower AC than the mage ? |
| #2pluisjenOct 20, 2009 10:24:02 | How does a Wizard have more AC then a Paladin? Just having Plate Armor alone puts him at 18, which no Wizard can top. Add a Shield to that, and the Wizard is left in the dust, even with a 20 Int and a serious Feat and ability investment so he can wear Armor. |
| #3slobo777aOct 20, 2009 10:25:09 | Due to the way the game works, Defenders often do want equivalent AC to the other roles. A few points higher won't hurt, but a big difference and monsters will be too much better off taking the bad effects of ignoring marks and heading straight for the easy targets. Simply adding some extra AC points to heavy armour characters probably won't break anything, but I'm not convinced it is a "fix", because I don't see anything broken in the first place. |
| #4crugen-lonOct 20, 2009 13:26:45 |
QFT |
| #5AaronOfBarbariaOct 22, 2009 15:04:10 |
And for another "agreed," response that elaborates: Paladin max AC at 1st level with no feat investment: 20 (plate + shield) Wizard max AC at 1st level with no feat investment: 16 (staff of defense + 20 Intelligence) ...and they both have just as many feats, armor options, and what have you as their level goes up so that at best the Wizard might manage to "catch up," at 28th or 30th level. |
| #6QubeOct 24, 2009 13:28:06 | Wizard max AC at 1st level with no feat investment: 16 (staff of defense + 20 Intelligence) the max AC for a wizard (with feat investment; the works) is currently playing human. with 18+2 on intelligence, staff of defense, leather armor proficiency, and light shield proficiency = 19. At lvl 4 (hide armor + heavy shield +2 lvl) you get 23 - Which is better then the paladin, who can't invest in armor. |
| #7pluisjenOct 26, 2009 8:49:17 | That's investing all feats and requiring 13+ strength 13+ con AND a 20 in Int. Personally, I think that Wizard deserves the higher AC, I doubt he'll have anything useful to add other then it. |
| #8Johnathan_VagabondOct 26, 2009 10:31:24 | A staff wizard won't mind bumping Con, and since there are other feats that require 13 Str that the wizard might like (silly), it's not that big of an investment. |
| #9tylara67Oct 26, 2009 11:09:56 | But it is still an investment, and a lot of feats besides. Whereas the paladin has zero investment beyond choosing the paladin class. Someone who invests heavily in AC should have a higher AC than someone who doesn't, regardless of whether one is a defender and one isn't, or whether one wears heavy armor and the other doesn't. |
| #10Johnathan_VagabondOct 26, 2009 11:26:08 | Correct me if I'm wrong, but at Heroic it's not a matter of choice. There aren't any Heavy Armor feats for someone who already has plate to invest in. Even at Paragon the selection is relatively slim (for plate, night abysmal). |
| #11tylara67Oct 26, 2009 11:52:29 |
True, but there are other choices the paladin can make to improve his survivability. And the wizard will suffer in plenty of other areas for having invested so heavily in AC. |
| #12undraveOct 26, 2009 13:14:00 | While the Controller at the back tries to match the Paladin's AC, the Paladin can become a BETTER defender: add damage to his Divine Challenge, pick a better weapon, increase his accuracy, take toughness or durable, increase his use of Lay on Hands (and other), multiclass into fighter or cleric, pick a domain feat, pick a channel Divinity feat (the ones for the Raven Queen, Melora and Bahamut are pretty good) etc etc.
|
| #13Neutronium_DragonOct 27, 2009 10:11:24 | > Anyone see a big problem to this house rule, I foresee a lot of rageblood barbarians and earthstrength wardens taking Chain Armor Proficiency... The use of "tank" gives me the impression that a point above needs to be reiterated: heavy armor is not a 'defender' armor type (there are light armor defenders too), and defenders are not 'tanks' who are expected to be the only ones with superior/meaningful armor. |
| #14Janx_14Oct 27, 2009 13:49:40 | This houserule just doesnt turn out well.
Firs of all, any class currently in heavy with con secondary just got a considerable AC buff, most classes in light with con secondary will instantly go to chain, and then you have the paladin who's con tertiary at best, who will actually likely have LESS AC than most the people in chain. So in effect: Your goal is to make paladins the AC king. This fails, as fighters, and any class with con secondary will rapidly surpass them. Heck, with a few feats the Vestige/Infernal warlock just became the AC king. Most classes relying on a balance of secondary stats, just had con gain massive plusses. The wrath/malediction invoker's summons now have higher HP and defences than the Perserving. The shaman now with 1 feat goes from being poopy AC to in the top-tier, probably still beating the paladin. This still doesn't stop a Int/con wizard with a staff from going to chain and having higher AC than the paladin. They could have +3 con, get chain which with your rules would net them 18 AC at level 1, +1 from staff of defence for 19, which, with your rules, a paladin with maybe +2 con since its not a secondary even, would have 19, tying, and thats without stat bump from leveling, where a paladin will likely buff Stength/Cha or Wis, while the wizard buffs int/con. The wizard could also take more feats to get up to scale, beating the paladin by 2. They can also both get shields for +2 AC, although the paladin gets it easier, but the same can be said with the current paladin and mage AC situations. |