Recent Posts
All the rules in the game that say you lose your Dexterity modifier to AC (such as being flat-footed or blind) explicitly reference Dexterity alone. Does that mean my oracle with the Lore Mystery and the Sidestep ability (which allows him to use Charisma instead of Dexterity on AC and Reflex saves) does NOT lose the Charisma modifier when she would otherwise lose her Dexterity modifier? After all, the rules say she loses her Dexterity modifier, not her Charisma modifier.
Also, does the Charisma modifier to AC have to abide by the maximum dexterity limits of the armor she wears? Does she get to apply her Charisma modifier to her CMD in place of her Dexterity or is my lame, low-Dexterity oracle really susceptible to combat maneuvers?
If this is all true, than oracles make the best tanks in the game (which is good, because they really need someone to throw them a bone).
Odds are good this was intended. I recall James being rather annoyed that the Duelist Int to AC is also limited by the max Dex bonus of armor. It'll give them a nice edge, but since the Lore revelation isn't very combat related to begin with I can't see this as being a problem. Also since it doesn't stack it's probably on par with the Dualist ability.
Odds are good this was intended. I recall James being rather annoyed that the Duelist Int to AC is also limited by the max Dex bonus of armor. It'll give them a nice edge, but since the Lore revelation isn't very combat related to begin with I can't see this as being a problem. Also since it doesn't stack it's probably on par with the Dualist ability.
Doesn't stack with Dexterity you mean?
Following your/my logic, I've ended up with an oracle with dodge, 20 Charisma, +1 full plate, +1 heavy steel shield, and 29 AC...at 5th-level.
As happy as I am to make the character more effective, that still strikes me as little high for his level to me.
Also, does the Charisma modifier to AC have to abide by the maximum dexterity limits of the armor she wears?
According to this point by Josh Frost, the Max Dex limit still applies (at least in PFS games).
No comment on your other questions.
Posted for reference
Sidestep Secret (Su): Your innate understanding of the
universe has granted you preternatural reflexes and
the uncanny ability to step out of danger at the very last
second. Add your Charisma modifier (instead of your
Dexterity modifier) to your Armor Class and all Reflex
saving throws.
Tough call.
Yes, you are using your charisma bonus to AC...
But
You are using it in place of your dexterity bonus, so in essence you charisma is your dex bonus to AC.
I could go either way on this one.
As far as I'm concerned, if you're using Cha in place of Dex, max Dex limits still apply to your Cha bonus, and you lose your Cha bonus to AC when you would lose your Dex bonus to AC. Just follows.
The problem is there is a very subtle difference between "in place of" and "instead of". If the ability was worded as "use charisma in place of dexterity" then you would be absolutely correct.
The problem is there is a very subtle difference between "in place of" and "instead of". If the ability was worded as "use charisma in place of dexterity" then you would be absolutely correct.
No, that's over parsing of the rules. Which frequently leads to the wrong ruling. English isn't that precise a language. Seriously. Judging that big a rules change from the use of "in place of" rather than "instead of" is a pretty wide stretch.
In this rule, as with others, go with what seems most reasonable. Trying to parse rules like a programming language is frought with peril.
I would rule that as counter-intuitive as this may seem, your Charisma modifier is used to determine the value of your Dexterity bonus to AC. Certain limitations and conditions impact the application of your Dexterity bonus but appear not to comment on your modifier.
Thus, Max Dex applies to cap the amount of your Cha modifier can be used. You don't apply your Cha modifier when you're flat-footed. And so on.
Sidestep Secret (Su): Your innate understanding of the universe has granted you preternatural reflexes and the uncanny ability to step out of danger at the very last second. Add your Charisma modifier (instead of your Dexterity modifier) to your Armor Class and all Reflex saving throws.
Maximum Dex Bonus: This number is the maximum Dexterity bonus to AC that this type of armor allows.
Flat-Footed: A character who has not yet acted during a combat is flat-footed, unable to react normally to the situation. A flat-footed character loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) and cannot make attacks of opportunity.
I don't know if that ac is totally out of balance if you're going ac.
A druid4/monk1 can hit ac 27 with 15 point buy.
Stats
Str 10
Dex 17 (2 racial 1 lvl 4) Total 20
Con 10
Int 7
Wis 16
Cha 7
Base ac 10+6 (wildshaped small dex)+3(+1magic shield)+1(+1 armor)+3(wis)+1(size)+3NA(+1wildshape, +2barkskin)
Total of 27
10+6+3+1+3+1+3
Note that I didn't pay out for any other items than +1 armor and shield. That's 2k from the budget, leaving another 8k for rings or stat-boosting belts or headbands.
So it's totally possible that it was intentional to allow you to hit a 29 ac.
The way the ability is worded seems to me that you're not using charisma to fill the dex box for ac and reflex saves. Instead, it looks to me that the wording is saying *put that dex box over there. You're not using it anymore. Use this Cha box instead.
So you'd use it for reflex saves, and add it to your armor class. But since you weren't adding your dex anymore, you'd ignore the max dex bonus.
Also, no cha to your cmb. The ability is too specific to see implying more bonuses than that. Consider it a penalty for having your high ac.
The problem is there is a very subtle difference between "in place of" and "instead of". If the ability was worded as "use charisma in place of dexterity" then you would be absolutely correct.No, that's over parsing of the rules. Which frequently leads to the wrong ruling. English isn't that precise a language. Seriously. Judging that big a rules change from the use of "in place of" rather than "instead of" is a pretty wide stretch.
In this rule, as with others, go with what seems most reasonable. Trying to parse rules like a programming language is frought with peril.
English is as precise as the person using it. Sloppy language use is sloppy language use no matter what language you use. Maybe the writer was being precise and using the term then intended and maybe that were not, you have anything other than a hunch that they really meant to use a different term there? Unless you know something I don't about the writer's intent, I will go with the RAW and not your hunch about what the writer really meant.
Lets look at similar abilities.
Monks add wisdom to AC, this bonus does not go away when the monk loses their dex bonus from being flat footed.
Duelist add int to their AC, this does go away when the duelist is flat footed.
In both cases, the behavior of the bonus with respect to being flatfooted is explicitly stated in the rules, and it works oppositely in each case. There is no default behavior for abilities like this with respect to being flatfooted.
Now, in both cases, there are armor limitations on the abilities. Monks have no limit, but cannot wear armor. Duelists are limited by their max dex of the armor as per the clarification. So there you have a reasonable case that the sidestep ability is restricted by armor.