My group enjoys grittier more serious gameplay. As such we use Wound and Vigor along with Armor as DR. To counter act the loss of AC I implemented a Class Defense Bonus system. We have been doing it this way for months and it has worked great. Only 1 small hickup occasionally, and thats with Touch AC. Touch ACs are now marginally higher than in a typical game. To compensate for this we have just started granting touch attacks a +6 Circumstance bonus, but I dont feel as if that is a solid way to fix the problem.
Id like to get some ideas and opinions from the gaming community
Wait! Can you define "marginally higher"? A +6 bonus to offset something means the something is a lot more than marginal in my book! In fact, I don't understand much of anything you described. Can you link Wound and Vigor? (At least that looks like something from Unchained...) What's your Class Defense Bonus system?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The math of touch attacks is kind of broken anyway.
First off:
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/other-rules/wounds-and-vigor
I do believe the Wound and Vigor Rules originated in Ultimate Combat
I actually have this made into a small table in a word document so it doesnt exactly copy over very well, I shall try my best
Class has No Armor Proficiency or All Armor Proficiency = A
Class has Light Armor Proficiency or Light & Medium Armor Proficiency = B
For Each additional base class beyond the First, you subtract 2 From the Defense Bonus.
Level A B
1st +3 +3
2nd +4 +4
4th +4 +5
5th +5 +5
6th +5 +6
8th +6 +7
10th +6 +8
11th +7 +8
12th +7 +9
14th +8 +10
16th +8 +11
17th +9 +11
18th +9 +12
20th +10 +13
New Feat
Armor Compatibility
Prerequisite: Heavy Armor Proficiency
Effect: You are trained to shrug of blows rather than relying on agility to dodge them. Your Class Defense Bonus stacks with the equipment bonus provided by armor.
Armor as DR: You gain half your Armors DR Bonus as an Equipment Bonus to Defense.
Class defense bonus represents your ability to avoid attacks, so as a group we decided it makes sense that it also applies to Touch Defense. This really takes away from the Benefit of being able to make Touch Attacks in the first place.
I think the Wound and Vigor system is a misguided way to increase grittiness. "Wounds and vigor" are already implemented in the base game.
Wanna make it grittier? Make resting harder, make combat maneuvers easier, and make spells have more disadvantages.
Well like I said, my group has used this for a while, and they really enjoy it. But thats not what I came here asking about in the first place, so I digress
|
Ok two suggestions:
1)
Split the bonus down the middle as "dodge" and "natural armor" bonus - half of this will apply against touch AC, and half against flat AC. You may want to reconfigure the maths to always yield an even number:
"A": +2 bonus at 1st level, +2 at 4th/8th/12th/16th/20th (max +12)
"B": +2 bonus at 1st level, +2 at 5th/10th/15th/20th (max +10)
2)
The bonus does not add to touch attacks unless the character is a Monk (you can add a clause to the "AC Bonus" class feature of Monks).
+
Shield bonuses to AC apply against both touch and flat attacks.
Cheers.
I actually have this made into a small table in a word document so it doesnt exactly copy over very well, I shall try my best
Class has No Armor Proficiency or All Armor Proficiency = A
Class has Light Armor Proficiency or Light & Medium Armor Proficiency = B
For Each additional base class beyond the First, you subtract 2 From the Defense Bonus.Level A B
1st +3 +3
2nd +4 +4
4th +4 +5
5th +5 +5
6th +5 +6
8th +6 +7
10th +6 +8
11th +7 +8
12th +7 +9
14th +8 +10
16th +8 +11
17th +9 +11
18th +9 +12
20th +10 +13New Feat
Armor Compatibility
Prerequisite: Heavy Armor Proficiency
Effect: You are trained to shrug of blows rather than relying on agility to dodge them. Your Class Defense Bonus stacks with the equipment bonus provided by armor.
Armor as DR: You gain half your Armors DR Bonus as an Equipment Bonus to Defense.
I'm struggling here, I admit it openly. First you provide a table that seems to give a lighter benefit (every other row) to both wizards and fighters than to bards. Second, it's not much lighter. Wizards, bards, and fighters all learn to defend themselves at about the same rate? I guess the difference is that the fighter can burn a feat to race ahead by adding in half of their armor? (While the other classes, apparently, can run around naked or in chain mail, it makes no difference?)
What have I gotten wrong here?
rainzax, are you saying that something flagged as a "dodge" bonus only applies vs. a touch attack if the character is a monk? Certainly, the "NA" bonus won't apply for anyone, so most folks would only get their standard AC?
I'm sorry to be so dense.
Class Defense Bonus = BAB x 0.5
What this stacks with or does not is something we could argue for ages. A mechanic like this would benefit from a reexamination of AC in general.
|
|
bitter lily,
The general idea for #1 is that characters get "faster" (dodge) and "tougher" (natural armor) as they gain levels to compensate for the Wounds and Vigor variant rule.
So, a 1st level character has a +1 dodge bonus and a +1 natural armor bonus, all of which stacks with his or her bonuses from DX, armor, class features, and feats.
Make sense?
All Wounds & Vigor does, it seems to me, is to adopt a Champions style of HP. Vigor is easily replenished and Vigor damage won't kill you. Wounds is like D&D hit points, only you get precious few of them. I still don't understand, I'm afraid, how that requires any kind of alterations to AC. Now, Armor as DR might well necessitate it. I've never experienced either in PF, so I can't evaluate this system. Maybe I should just show myself out.
But I'm nonetheless struggling to understand what the OP is proposing. Wizards & Fighters get equally faster and tougher? And Bards slightly more so? Huh?
I guess the point of the feat is that with Armor as DR, this adds it back into AC -- for fighters who burn the feat slot.
|
|
I'm not poking at the OP's intentions - the players like the game and that means they are in a good place. The fact that I don't like Wounds and Vigor alternate rule is irrelevant in my view to responding to this thread.
What I see is someone who adopted a subsystem that, for the most part, they like, with one single wrinkle to iron out: making touch attacks work better as part of that system.
To answer your question, I think the "A" and "B" split is roughly:
A
Monks and Full-BAB martials
B
Everyone else
...
It's also important to understand that while armor ACs are lower, armor provides DR as part of a second subsystem the OP is using. So, while a Wizard and Cleric might enjoy the same AC bonus from BDB, the latter will probably have armor-provided DR that the former won't have.
...
A second point I think is worth making is instead of worrying about how the "realism" justifies the "mechanics," it might be better to focus on the mechanics (re-balancing touch attacks) and then insert the in-game justification as almost an after-thought.
I'm not poking at the OP's choice of subsystems at all. {I love Champions!} But this custom system... I just don't understand the mechanics of it. To class wizards and fighters together but not with bards made no sense to me; why would you want mechanics to do that? Now, classing monks and fighters together does. But that's not what the OP said:
"Class has No Armor Proficiency or All Armor Proficiency = A
Class has Light Armor Proficiency or Light & Medium Armor Proficiency = B."
And the point apparently is to give everyone the same AC in the end, since the ones who can only be lightly armored (and not benefit from the new feat) are the ones who get the benefit from his chart. Does the OP want, in fact, flat ACs across all classes? {It's hard to think about how it affects touch attacks without understanding it in general.}
Full Casters have the low progression because the general idea is that they arent gonna be mixing it up in melee that often.
Martial Classes like the fighter have this lower progression as well because the idea is that they are taught less about Dodging an attack, and more of just making sure their armor absorbs the blow (hence the feat, and the subrule for it in games using DR as armor).
Bards arent full casters, they have a variety of skills, so they have some knowledge of combat even if the most common role of them is support casting.
Monks, as were mentioned, are in the lower progression even though youd normally expect them to have the higher, but it is balanced out with their AC Class bonus and the ability to add their Wisdom modifier.
Thanks for your thinking, Leonhem. It does sound like you like the idea of everyone having a similar AC bonus that scales remarkably as targets level, indeed far faster than a touch attack can climb.
There is such a thing as a glancing blow, you know. Just because a character is used to protecting themselves from blows that hurt doesn't mean they're skilled at defense against light touches. For instance, they may be prepared to throw up an arm to ward off a strike -- but a hit against an arm counts for touch attacks! So one answer would be to say that only half of your Class Defense bonus counts for Touch AC. (Call the other half natural armor as rainzax suggests or anything else you like.) Even then, I'd love to see a feat something like this...
Accurate Touch
You are skilled at catching foes unawares with your melee or ranged touch attacks.
Prerequisite: BAB 1, Weapon Focus (unarmed strike) for touch attacks or Weapon Focus (ray) for ranged touch attacks.
Benefit: Choose one type of touch attack that you have Weapon Focus for. You gain a circumstance bonus of half of your character level when making that type of touch attack.
Special: This feat may be taken twice; the second time, it applies to the other type of touch attack.
~~~
An option I like even better would be to put in place a feat tree for the defenders, and the rule that you collect NO Class Defense toward touch AC without a feat. Some possibilities (thrown out as pure draft)...
High-Strung Defenses
You are so good at defending yourself, you routinely dodge falling leaves.
Prerequisites: Int 13, Combat Expertise
Benefit: You may add one-half of your Class Defense bonus to your Touch AC.
Normal: Your Class Defense bonus only counts as when you can count armor or natural armor bonuses towards your AC.
Improved High-Strung Defenses
No one can lay so much as a finger on you without your permission.
Prerequisites: Int 13, Combat Expertise, High-Strung Defenses
Benefit: You may add your entire Class Defense bonus to your Touch AC.
Note that I'm not fond of a feat tax on casters, if targets are getting such a huge AC boost (at minimum half character level) for free! But putting in place all three feats would be an option to explore.
@Leonhem It sounds like we have been in a few of these discussions together previously! <chuckle>
Here is the combination I use at my table that is very similar to what you are suggesting:
B) Armor & Natural Armor bonuses translate directly to DR, becoming Armor DR / -. Most other bonuses such as Dex, dodge, luck, etc. translate to AC bonuses.
C) Enhancement bonuses are DR for Heavy Armors but AC to light armors, medium armors go 50 / 50 with odd numbers going in favor of player / DM discretion based on armor description flavor.
D) Shield bonuses were AC. Shield Enhancement bonus were AC.
E) + 6 bonus to touch AC seemed about right at my table too, but then much like the CMB rules these were combat options we rarely played with anyway so it was never much of an issue.
Alternative:
1) Crit multipliers are replaced entirely to reflect an attack that not only hits, but does direct Wound point damage bypassing Vigor with no additional multiplier to damage dealt.
Adjustments will need to be made to the Threat Range / Crit multiplier to normalize weapon values between the two. "Better" / more powerful weapons under this system would simply be ones with a higher Threat value. Low threat / high crit weapons would be adjusted to assume a x3 crit = a + 1 to threat, and x4 = + 2 to threat range.
2) Armor DR / - specifically protects against Wound point damage. This applies to both normal combat (when Vigor points are exhausted) and against crits. Armor is thus an effective defense against the deadly crits of the Wound & Vigor system.
NOTE: I believe it was D20 Star Wars Saga that first used this idea.
Alternative 2: Grim - n - Gritty 3.3 BY KENNETH S. HOOD (latest version was 4.0, however we found version 3.3 was closer to our vision). Versions of this can be found online with a simple google search.
The WOUNDS & VIGOR system is actually much older than Ultimate Combat and was around in previous versions of the game, but that is when Pathfinder introduced it as a "canon" D20 optional rules variant (as best I can recall at least).
The class defense bonus chart above is used instead of a 1/2 BAB conversion, or variant based on REF Saves, because it better aligns with the idea of classes which use heavy armor, vs those with higher Ref Saves. Basically meaning that those with heavy armor and high HP have a worse AC bonus, while those with higher Ref Saves and "evasion" abilities are harder to hit but are typically more seriously hurt when such an attack makes contact. The classic Fighter vs Rogue comparison.
This is further expanded upon with Armor as DR and thus synergize well together.
For a full break down of the rules that we ultimately implemented feel free to check out our COMBAT OVERHAUL and our alternate rules on DEATH &
DYING. Bare in mind these rules were designed for a low magic / Gritty environment and are still being updated on a regular basis.
@ bitter lily
Here is a piece we played with for a while on the topic of a glancing blow:
Lets say the fighter is wielding a sword 1d8 + 10 with all bonuses added in. This means their damage range is actually 11 - 18 with an average of 15. Thus if the attack roll hits their AC exactly it would result in damage of 15. For every point higher it would add one point of damage up to the weapon's potential full damage at 18 points, for every point below the AC it would subtract 1 point of damage. Less than damage 11 would of course indicate a true miss.
Armor as DR (and similar rules and effects) would off set such numbers as normal.
Ultimately my players liked the different d20 hit + damage dice rolls and as this allowed for easier conversion to printed materials already in circulation we never went full bore with this variant rule. As a DM however I secretly used the mechanic for years as it allowed for a much faster combat round with only one roll for both hit and damage.
That's an interesting rule. I started all of this madness playing The Fantasy Trip, where the better (sadly, lower) your attack roll was, the more damage you did. I've come to appreciate systems where higher is always better, but I still like the idea of linking a great (but non-crit) attack roll to better damage.
What I was talking about with "glancing blow," though, had to do with Touch attacks. I remember a scene from a David Weber novel vividly, even though most of the setting has frayed from my mind.
The scene I remember so vividly starts after a bomb has left her severely injured. She drags herself into court, accuses the man she believes responsible, and demands trial by combat -- a duel to the death. Everyone is shocked because of her severe injuries, and urges her to declare a champion or hold the duel later, after she has healed. She calmly refuses, knowing she'll win.
The duel begins. She ignores the peripheral blows he rains upon her, takes minor cuts, protects her vitals -- and waits. He in turn is so concerned with not letting her get in even a peripheral strike that he eventually gives her an opening. With one thrust of her sword, she kills him.
THAT is the difference between training for AC and Touch AC. If the accused had been a magus, of course, she'd have had to consider asking for a champion!
@Lazlo - I used that very same table for a while. But it always bothered me that the People who could also wear strong armors also got the highest bonus. What I use now is based off of the Wheel of Time d20 system.
@Lily I like those feats, and I am running them by my group for opinions.
@Lazlo - I used that very same table for a while. But it always bothered me that the People who could also wear strong armors also got the highest bonus. What I use now is based off of the Wheel of Time d20 system.
Why? It sounds logical.
Well my reasoning is better put into words in the Armor Compatability feat, " You are trained to shrug of blows rather than relying on agility to dodge them. "
@Lazlo - I used that very same table for a while. But it always bothered me that the People who could also wear strong armors also got the highest bonus. What I use now is based off of the Wheel of Time d20 system.
CRAP!! You are correct, this is the wrong Class Defense Bonus chart! The chart I was trying to reference definitely did not put fighters and paladins at the highest AC bonus. Rather it had Rogues @ best, cleric / medium armors at 2nd, fighters / heavy armor @ 3rd, and mages / cloth wearers @ worse.
Ah that does sound similar to what I have. Only with more tables
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2toe2?Level-based-defense-bonus-feed-back-welco me#1
Here is the original article I wrote on this some time back.
I'm in the process of rewriting that original article to clean it up and make it more user friendly (including an actual HTML table!). Will try to post it up later today or tomorrow.
Those are quite interesting Lazlo
Thanks, in my humble opinion the Class Defense Bonus really only works well with Armor as DR rules. It allows for a balance of Hard to Hit vs Hard to Damage. It also works great with the Wounds and Vigor system although I opted not to use that system myself. I did however look at it VERY closely before making that decision.
My players and I attempted to use Armor as DR, and after 1 session it was obvious you practically need a class defense bonus to make the system work well.
Wound and Vigor we turned to using when my players kept asking "Well how hurt does he look?" or some variation. Now I can tell them its either a graze (vigor) or a direct hit (wound) without having to stop and think of how to give detail without revealing to much
Eridanus published some Gritter rulebooks that we plan to use for a Game of Thrones game. Dont have to cut it off at E6 if the Mountain can still kill you with a single swing at any level.
Have you checked out the Grim - n - Gritty rules by Ken Hood? I spoke to him recently via email to see if I could talk him into working with me on the D20 Low Magic but he declined. On the other hand his work on GnG (particularly the 3.3 version) was truly exceptional and blends well with the work I'm already doing.
So here is the updated rewrite on my Class Defense Bonus & Armor as DR rules used in my LCM Ruleset. Unfortunately the Paizo forums would not take the HTML coding to set up an actual chart, which I must admit was somewhat disappointing after I went through the trouble of learning how to create one. /sigh Oh well, pressing on.
Please note these rules are intended for a low magic environment (specifically written for the LCM Ruleset) where the majority of races and classes allowed have been restricted to those found in the core rule book (with 4 exceptions). You may also notice that multi-classed characters (Fighter 10 / Rogue 10) tend to suffer somewhat under this system when compared to where they would be if they were single classed characters for their Class Defense Bonus to AC. This is not an oversight and is comparable to the way a Mage 10 / Fighter 10 would not get their full compliment of spells nor fighter bonus feats.
A note on Monster conversions under this variant: as both a DM, and the one who wrote this conversion, I tend to not get overly hung up on the monster conversions. You can spend weeks converting things while setting up an encounter, but at the end of a day your players (and you) will simply not care if your math conversion was off by a point or two one way or the other.
Class Defense Bonus & Armor as DR
The Class Defense Bonus rewards classes which are lightly armored making them much harder to hit. However when they are actually struck, they tend to be more seriously injured due to their lower hit points and lack of Armor DR. Heavily armored characters on the other hand, are hit much more frequently but suffer less from the injury due to higher HP and greater DR from their armors.
The defense bonus applies to Armor Class, and stacks with all other bonuses to AC, including the character’s shield bonus, dodge bonus, luck bonus, a Monk’s class bonus, the fighting defensively combat maneuver and so forth.
Like bonuses from Dodge, a class defense bonus improves a character’s AC against touch attacks, but not against flat footed AC.
Table: Defense Bonus by Class & Level
1. Use column A for cloth wearers (mage, sorcerer, etc)
2. Use column B for heavy armor types (fighter, paladin, and cavalier).
3. Use column C for medium armor (barbarian, monk, cleric, ranger, & druid).
4. Use column D for light armor (rogue, bard, etc)
Level A1 B2 C3 D4
1st + 2 + 3 + 4 + 6
2nd + 2 + 3 + 4 + 6
3rd + 3 + 4 + 5 + 7
4th + 3 + 4 + 5 + 7
5th + 3 + 4 + 5 + 7
6th + 4 + 5 + 6 + 8
7th + 4 + 5 + 6 + 8
8th + 4 + 5 + 6 + 8
9th + 5 + 6 + 7 + 9
10th + 5 + 6 + 7 + 9
11th + 5 + 6 + 7 + 9
12th + 6 + 7 + 8 + 10
13th + 6 + 7 + 8 + 10
14th + 6 + 7 + 8 + 10
15th + 7 + 8 + 9 + 11
16th + 7 + 8 + 9 + 11
17th + 7 + 8 + 9 + 11
18th + 8 + 9 + 10 + 12
19th + 8 + 9 + 10 + 12
20th + 8 + 9 + 10 + 12
UNDERSTANDING THE CHART:
Category A) Cloth Armor users, have the worse category as they are simply bad at physical combat.
Category B) Heavy Armor users, rely on their Armor DR and higher HP to mitigate injury. These classes are less worried about avoiding the hit, and more capable of simply surviving it.
Category C) Medium Armor users, and those who tend to be “light / fast warrior” types like the barbarian, ranger, & monk.
Category D) Light Armor users, for those who have lower HP and exclusively use light armors. These classes are the opposite of warriors in that they rely on their ability not to get hit at all.
Armor categories are changed by any archetypes, feats or multi-classing which grant access to heavier armor proficiency as it reflects the trade off the character is choosing to make between harder to hit and resisting more damage. For classes whose Armor Type changes as they level (such as the Magus) adjust their chart at the appropriate levels to reflect their heavier armor classification.
THE MULTICLASS DEFENSIVE BONUS
For a multiclass character, the bonuses across different armor categories are tracked separately depending on what is currently being worn. For example, Bob the 2nd Level Fighter gains a level of rogue (becoming a 2nd-level Fighter/1st-level rogue), and is wearing studded leather. His defense bonus to AC increases to + 6 to reflect his skills in the light armor fighting style favored by rogues at 1st level. Should the character later don full plate armor his armor class would be + 4 due to his proficiency as a 2nd level fighter. But why would his AC go DOWN with the heavier armor? Because Bob just picked up 9 points of DR which is more than enough to protect him from most blows.
MONSTER DEFENSE BONUS
When calculating a monster’s defense bonus to AC divide their Natural Armor in half and allocate 1/2 to DR and 1/2 to AC as a bonus. Such as Natural Armor 10 would convert to Armor DR 5 / – and AC bonus of + 5. Treat their level as equal to their HD, and their armor type as one which is comparable to their armor rating. IE; DR 5 would be comparable to chainmail, DR 7+ would be heavy armor, etc.
If the creature possesses no Class Levels but is listed as wearing specific armor, treat them as having class proficiency with the armor listed and their HD as their level, unless their description indicates a Natural Armor bonus higher. In which case base AC / DR as noted above.
If a creature possess Class Levels, use their armor proficiency per normal to determine their Defensive Bonus.
When fighting magical creatures difficult to hit with normal weapons the LCM Ruleset assumes their ADR /- becomes ADR / magic. Due to the volume of monsters in print a conversion for this rule has not been attempted outside of individual game sessions. As the LCM Ruleset is a low magic environment however such a conversion has been less necessary.
Armor as DR
The value of armor being physically worn (or any natural armor) translates directly to Armor Damage Reduction / -. Enhancement bonuses to armor add directly to its Armor DR value for heavy armor, and AC for light armor. Medium is split 50/50 alternating between the two values of AC & DR. An example would be Studded Leather Armor (ADR 3 / -) and Full Plate (ADR 9/-).
Creatures with natural armor may not stack additional worn armors on top in order to create very high DR values. Armor DR does however stack with class features such as from a Barbarian or Fighter class abilities. Spells which grant DR need to be reviewed closely by the DM to avoid the creation of characters that can’t be harmed by anything. NOTE: within the low magic context of an LCM campaign this will be less of an issue than in standard Pathfinder campaigns.
How to overcome high DR values?
The following effects completely bypass Armor DR: Confirmed Critical Hits, Challenging Called Shots (Ultimate Combat), and a successful Bushwhacking attack. Likewise a Helpless Defender does not benefit from Armor DR nor Class Defense bonus, and a prone defender is reduced to 1/2 their normal Armor DR. Additionally the high DR character is still just as vulnerable to normal hazards such as being poisoned, set on fire, drowning, CMD attacks (grapple, bullrush, trip, etc).
-------------------------
Well, there you have it. I hope you like it. I'm pretty please with how it came together and feel it is well balanced as much as can be within the limitation of the D20 framework.
Additional rules such as the Wounds & Vigor system work well with this variant, as do the rules for Grim - n - Gritty by Ken Hood.
Personal suggestion: If you opt for the Grim n Gritty rules by Ken Hood (which I HIGHLY recommend) see if you can find the 3.3 version of those rules as they are much closer to my own conversions. With his 4.0 version he went with a system of opposed skill checks which could end a fight in one round. While this sounds both realistic and "gritty" it also has the problem of allowing a 1st level kobold to straight up murder your level 20 paladin in one shot. The novelty of that at the gaming table ends the first time it takes out one of your players who has spent months leveling that toon. Sorta funny in a way as your players will likely never see it as a problem as long as they are the ones benefiting from it.
Here is a question for you: Do you feel there is enough of a difference between the heavy vs light armor at the high end of the Class Defense Bonus table? The table itself is a direct port from the one found at http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/defenseBonus.htm which has been around since some time in 3.5. However looking at it now, I'm wondering if it doesn't need to be updated a bit. After all, given my conversion it should be pretty damned hard for a non-full BAB combatant to actually hit a core class rogue at level 20. Comparably however the Rogue is only seeing a + 4 AC over the Fighter.
I have actually yet to have a high level game while using Class Defense bonuses. Though hopefully when I reach the end of my current Kingmaker game I will have some more insight on that
Leonhem, where is your group on this?
Could you make the question more specific?
With the Defensive chart I posted above, is there enough of a difference between the "fast fighter" and the "tough fighter" (Rogue vs Fighter) in the likelihood that the Rogue will be hit at all. Bare in mind they are assumed to be avoiding damage vs simply trying to soak damage.
You said that you were asking your group for opinions on feats. Or maybe you've gone with a different solution?
@Lazlo I think the table looks fine. Too big of differences between tiers and you increase the chance of finding unbalanced situations. Too little, and then theres practically no point of having tiers. I think you have struck a good balance.
@Lily They do seem to be for the addition of these feats
Great! Should there be an additional prereq on the Improved High-Strung Defenses? BAB x?
I personally wouldnt add a BAB prerequisite.