Under the Aid Another option in combat, one can make an attack roll vs. AC 10 to grant an ally a +2 bonus to AC. From the SRD:
You make an attack roll against AC 10. If you succeed, your friend gains either a +2 bonus on his next attack roll against that opponent or a +2 bonus to AC against that opponent’s next attack (your choice), as long as that attack comes before the beginning of your next turn. Multiple characters can aid the same friend, and similar bonuses stack.
My question arises concerning how that AC bonus affectgs certain attacks. Specifically, does that +2 AC bonus apply to touch attacks? Obviously it would apply to a regular attack, but the situation came up in a recent game where touch attacks were being made. My gut instinct is that the AC bonus would apply to a touch attack, but I would like some feedback from the community. Thanks in advance!
Under the Aid Another option in combat, one can make an attack roll vs. AC 10 to grant an ally a +2 bonus to AC. From the SRD:
You make an attack roll against AC 10. If you succeed, your friend gains either a +2 bonus on his next attack roll against that opponent or a +2 bonus to AC against that opponent�s next attack (your choice), as long as that attack comes before the beginning of your next turn. Multiple characters can aid the same friend, and similar bonuses stack.
My question arises concerning how that AC bonus affectgs certain attacks. Specifically, does that +2 AC bonus apply to touch attacks? Obviously it would apply to a regular attack, but the situation came up in a recent game where touch attacks were being made. My gut instinct is that the AC bonus would apply to a touch attack, but I would like some feedback from the community. Thanks in advance!
I don't see anything in the description that would imply that the bonus is some how limited depending on what kind of an attack is taking place. I'd think that this would give a +2 to touch attack AC. Not that it will be enough to make the touch attack actually miss or anything...
I don't see anything in the description that would imply that the bonus is some how limited depending on what kind of an attack is taking place. I'd think that this would give a +2 to touch attack AC.
I agree that that the +2 should be a bonus against any attack, touch or otherwise, unless the rule states otherwise. I like to translate the rules into what it’s describing, in game. I think of the aiding character as interposing himself or in some other way distracting the attacker. Functionally it would be similar to (but not the same as) cover and/or flanking.
Not that it will be enough to make the touch attack actually miss or anything...
I’m not sure why. The +2 could very well be enough to cause the touch attack roll to fail. You only have to miss it by 1, after all.
|
The bonus seems to be untyped, so I think it would stack. Also, from an in-game point of view, it makes sense to me that several people attacking and weaving and overall distracting you would cause more problems than just one person doing that.
So I think it should stack. Also, that skeleton idea is really cool... It makes those little undead seem worthwhile.
Any thoughts on whether or not Aid Another bonuses would stack?
From the SRD, Multiple characters can aid the same friend, and similar bonuses stack.
Based on that sentence it seems clear that both skeletons could aid to give a +4 total AC bonus. In fact, if the cleric had six skeletons surrounding him, theoretically they could all aid to give him a +12 AC bonus. Of course, each one would have to hit AC 10 each round to give a contiual bonus, so his actual AC could fluctuate significantly from round to round. :) I suppose I would add an upper limit on the bonus too, based on the maximum number of creatures that could be adjacent to the aided person, but that would be purely house rule.
Thanks all for the responses; I appreciate the ideas.
|
|
It's important to note here that the skeletons have to be surrounding the target (let's call him Fighter Bob) engaging the Cleric in melee, not just the cleric. Also, aid another only applies to one target at a time, so if the 6 skeletons were surrounding Fighter Bob along with the Cleric, they could provide +12 to the Cleric's AC against Fighter Bob only. So if Ranger Fred were to sneak around and get in behind the Cleric, he would be able to strike him without worrying about the ridiculous +12 AC bonus.
Still a cool tactic.
I’m not sure why. The +2 could very well be enough to cause the touch attack roll to fail. You only have to miss it by 1, after all.
Its not a totally serous statement. More a reflection of the fact that, by about mid levels, the chances of missing a touch attack are very uncommon. Its exceedingly difficult to raise a touch AC above 16 or 17. Generally if you can make a touch attack you will hit. It just gets worse as well, by the lower rungs of high level, your touch AC will be around 20 and you'll face opponents that commonly have around +20 to hit with their touch attack.
Its not a totally serous statement. More a reflection of the fact that, by about mid levels, the chances of missing a touch attack are very uncommon. Its exceedingly difficult to raise a touch AC above 16 or 17. Generally if you can make a touch attack you will hit. It just gets worse as well, by the lower rungs of high level, your touch AC will be around 20 and you'll face opponents that commonly have around +20 to hit with their touch attack.
I’m not sure why. The +2 could very well be enough to cause the touch attack roll to fail. You only have to miss it by 1, after all.
I've found this to be a very true observation.
The progression of AC verses Attack Bonus over the course of leveling up is more than a bit skewed in favor of the Attack Bonus. Perhaps this was unintentional.... but I doubt it. D&D, like Baseball, is a lot more fun if you are a good hitter. :-)
-Roth
I've found this to be a very true observation.The progression of AC verses Attack Bonus over the course of leveling up is more than a bit skewed in favor of the Attack Bonus. Perhaps this was unintentional.... but I doubt it. D&D, like Baseball, is a lot more fun if you are a good hitter. :-)
-Roth
If we are talking about touch attacks I agree. If we are not talking about touch attacks I completely disagree and contend that the reverse is true. Its far easier to raise your AC then your Attack Bonus. On the most basic level that is because there are more easily accessible reasonably priced ways of upping your AC compared to upping your attack bonus.
Fundementally we are comparing BAB, and the enhancement bonus of your weapon to the enhancement bonus to your armour, the enhancement bonus to your shield, enhancements to your deflection (from a ring of protection) and enhancement bonus to natural armour (from an amulet of natural armour).
Your can raise your attack with strength or feats but there are comparable ways to raise AC with dexterity and feats.
Thus your likely to see more increases in AC then attack. That said I found that this issue eased after around 10th level. BAB bonus to monsters simply went through the roof as so many monsters had 20+ HD and monster ACs don't really rise all that quickly. In those cases where a PC fighter of 15th goes toe to toe with an NPC fighter of about the same level they can't hit each other very well at all but that does not come up all that often.