| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After doing a lot of math I have concluded that with enough money the best way to get a high AC is to not wear any armor at all and get a monk's robe.
Everything an armored person can get so can a non armored person can with the following exception.
An armored person has a max dexterity bonus and can not get a bonus to AC from a second stat.
Wearing armor needs a boost. The max dexterity needs to be increase or eliminated for starters as a non armored person does not have one.
Does anyone else have any ideas?
Remove dex caps, remove being slowed. Now instead of heavy armor being equal or inferior always no matter what due to decreased maneuverability + no real gain... it might be worth considering. Even if it did give more AC, slowing still ruins it.
|
Remove dex caps, remove being slowed. Now instead of heavy armor being equal or inferior always no matter what due to decreased maneuverability + no real gain... it might be worth considering. Even if it did give more AC, slowing still ruins it.
I'm all for a penalty to speed for wearing armor being based soley on your carrying capacity. If you don't have the strength to add another 60 pounds of gear without hitting a medium load, you're fine.
I used that rule in my Rise of the Runelords campaign, and not surprisingly, it helped the fighter types do more and have more fun. The Transmuter was still the most 'powerful' character, but this modification only had beneficial effects. I loved it for the NPCs, and I also liked that I seldom had to worry about combining different effects that reduce movmement rate.
Remove dex caps, remove being slowed. Now instead of heavy armor being equal or inferior always no matter what due to decreased maneuverability + no real gain... it might be worth considering. Even if it did give more AC, slowing still ruins it.
Yeah slowing speed is another negative to wearing armor that a non armored has to worried about. I forgot about that, however it is not always the case with light, and mithral medium armor.
Remove dex caps, remove being slowed. Now instead of heavy armor being equal or inferior always no matter what due to decreased maneuverability + no real gain... it might be worth considering. Even if it did give more AC, slowing still ruins it.Yeah slowing speed is another negative to wearing armor that a non armored has to worried about. I forgot about that, however it is not always the case with light, and mithral medium armor.
Which is what you wear exclusively before your stats outgrow it. In other words, maintaining optimal AC is about using the lightest armor possible. Maintaining as much speed as possible is about never using anything above light armor (mithril breastplate = light).
Remove the speed and dex caps and suddenly the heavy armored knight isn't as weak an archetype.
After doing a lot of math I have concluded that with enough money the best way to get a high AC is to not wear any armor at all and get a monk's robe.
Note that the Pathfinder version of the Monk's Robe does not give Wis to AC. And the assumption of infinite money is a bit dubious -- a 1,500 gp suit of full plate is obsolete because you can replace it with 64,000 gp bracers of armor +8?
|
Another alternative to make heavy armor attractive is to make the Fighter Armor Training a function of the base armor value or category rather than a flat bonus, and maybe even remove the speed penalty at higher levels.
Basically say that Armor Training gives +1 for light armor, +1 for medium armor, and +2 for heavy armor.
I suppose I should also mention that Armor Training already improves the max dex, so Heavy Armor is more attractive.
|
Don't forget that the heavy armor melee classes have ways to increase their AC. Fighters get armor training and Paladins have their spells.Lets see the options:
Heavy Armor AC/max Dex
Full Plate 8/+1Medium Armor AC/max Dex
Mithral Full Plate 8/+1
Mithral Full Plate of Speed 8+1/+3
Chain Shirt 4/+4Light Armor AC/max Dex
Mithral Breastplate 5/+3
Celestial Armor 5+3/+8
Elven Chain 5/+4
Mithral Shirt 4/+8I'd like to see more options for heavy and medium armor, otherwise I don't see much of a problem if you can shell out the cash for the good stuff.
I'm really not sure where you're getting these stats from, especially regarding mithral, nor what the "of speed" is supposed to come from because the enchantment does not show up in the beta. Here's some corrected stats for your comparison:
Heavy Armor AC/max Dex
Full Plate 8/+1
Medium Armor AC/max Dex
Mithral Full Plate 8/+3
Light Armor AC/max Dex
Mithral Breastplate 5/+5
Elven Chain 5/+4
Mithral Shirt 4/+6
Chain Shirt 4/+4
Since enhancement bonuses can be added at a 1:1 basis to *any* armor, and this includes the fighter "armor training" bonuses as well as the paladin spell-buffs, those should be left out of calculations. The cost/benefit analysis should rely solely on the ratio of armor gained vs. the penalties applied.
Thus, the difference between Mithral full-plate and a mundane chain shirt is:
AC +3, Max Dex -1, speed reduced as appropriate to character. This is the case no matter which class is comparing the two.
--- Magis
Sorry but I don't think these calculations could be considered accurate.
1: You assume that mythril and other special materials are readily avaliable. They will not always be, and even if they were can low-level PC's avoid them?
2: You assume that Dexteirty is always going to be a high stat. One of the big advantages of armour is that you get a good bonus to armour class even if you have little dexterity.
3: You fail to take into account flat-footed armour class as well. A character with a +20 bonus to AC from dex alone might sound good...until he/she is caught flat-footed. Also, unlike armour, dexterity can be negated through in-battle tactics, such as feinting. Have you ever tried to sunder armour? You'd be better off sundering the target's sword, decreasing armour bonuses to AC is nigh-impossible out with using touch attacks, however theres plenty of tactics to render an opponents dexterity bonus to AC useless.
Mithril is cheap. It may be rare by the random peon's standards, but the random peons aren't wearing a Christmas Tree worth of equipment as their work uniform. You'll have mithril long before you have strong magic items. In fact, mithril chain shirts cost less than +1 non mithril chain shirts. RAW, rarity is by cost. Anything else is a house rule to make yourself right. The flaws with that approach should be obvious.
High dex also means high initiative and such. You get flat footed less that way, because you go first. Also, Uncanny Dodge isn't hard to get, and stats 'naturally' improve with level. (as in you'll have more and more cash lying around to get Dex items and such) Combine that with a 30 foot speed (might be able to catch some of the faster enemies) compared to 20 (better hope they come right at you) and it's easy to see how badly heavier armors fail.
|
Mithril is cheap. It may be rare by the random peon's standards, but the random peons aren't wearing a Christmas Tree worth of equipment as their work uniform. You'll have mithril long before you have strong magic items. In fact, mithril chain shirts cost less than +1 non mithril chain shirts. RAW, rarity is by cost. Anything else is a house rule to make yourself right. The flaws with that approach should be obvious.
High dex also means high initiative and such. You get flat footed less that way, because you go first. Also, Uncanny Dodge isn't hard to get, and stats 'naturally' improve with level. (as in you'll have more and more cash lying around to get Dex items and such) Combine that with a 30 foot speed (might be able to catch some of the faster enemies) compared to 20 (better hope they come right at you) and it's easy to see how badly heavier armors fail.
My players have an ongoing joke "Welcome to the party! Here's your mithral shirt and Heward's Handy Haversack!". Because of the cost, and the benefits, mithral chain shirts (and to a lesser degree, mithral breastplates) are very popular choices, because they give a decent AC bonus, and no speed penalty.
Rarely do I see a character in heavy armor, unless they have a Dex of 10.
I think the Max Dex is a good thing to keep, as well as the existing Armor Check Penalty. But maybe speed can simply be based on encumberance, or the speed penalty could be lessened -- even if movement was slowed by 5 ft, that would be reasonable ...
I will admit I forgot the wisdom bonus to AC, I misread the rewrite.
However this does bring up the fact that the speed reduction is too much. Even my barbarian character eventually went to a set of 8 bracer of armor because his dex got too high, and wanted his full movement.
Well, how about this:
Armored Speed (General)
Prerequisites: Armor Proficiency, base attack bonus +3
Increase your speed while wearing armor you are proficient with by 5, up to your normal speed.And then make it part of Armor Training for Fighters.
How about this, we have no speed penalty because I would rather get a magic item than spend a feat on that. This isn't a unique want that a feat can cover it is a problem of value.
How about no speed penalty if you are proficient with the armor? Maybe not have this covered with mithral?
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Another alternative to make heavy armor attractive is to make the Fighter Armor Training a function of the base armor value or category rather than a flat bonus, and maybe even remove the speed penalty at higher levels.
Basically say that Armor Training gives +1 for light armor, +1 for medium armor, and +2 for heavy armor.
I suppose I should also mention that Armor Training already improves the max dex, so Heavy Armor is more attractive.
One of my beefs with the armor system is that medium armor, as a rule, completely sux.
I would favor:
1. Screw backwards compatibility - get rid of the chain shirt!
2. See #1 above, in case you missed it the first time!
3. If you really can't bring yourself to do #1, then dump padded armor and downgrade the armor bonus for other light armors by 1 (leather +1, studded +2, chain shirt +3).
4. None of this really addresses that medium armor still sucks, but at least it knocks the light armors down a peg. :)
Some honest solutions (besides the above - knock down light armors, and while you're at it adjust the mage armor spell to a +2 armor bonus to AC instead of +4):
1. If you feel we must keep the speed lag for heavier armors, make medium armors -5', heavy armor -10'.
2. Increase the AC bonus for all medium armors by 1.
3. Increase the AC bonus for all heavy armors by 2.
4. Tie shields to armor type.
a. buckler is a type of light armor, +1 to AC.
b. Light shield is a type of medium armor, +2 to AC.
c. Heavy shield is a type of heavy armor, +3 to AC.
d. Tower shield is an exotic type of heavy armor, +6 to AC.
5. Incorporate helmets as a unique piece of armor that can be enchanted separately. That way, an armored warrior could be wearing armor (up to +5), shield (up to +5), and helmet (up to +5). Given the relatively cheap price of armor enhancements to AC vs. miscellaneous magic to give bonuses, you just made the armored option better.
a. There are no 'light armor' helmets (yes, we could argue the point, but game-mechanically speaking we are making a distinction).
b. Open-faced helm is treated as medium armor (so you can use with medium armor proficiency). +1 helmet bonus to AC, -2 Perception penalty if you are not proficient (if you like, proficiency could reduce to -1 instead of eliminate)
c. Great helm is treated as heavy armor (use with HAP). +2 helmet bonus to AC, -4 Perception penalty if you are not proficient. (if you like, proficiency could reduce to -2 instead of eliminate).
Obviously, you could make gradations (mail coif, visored helm, skullcap, etc.) or keep it simple.
6. Add a concept of a "vital AC bonus." The principle of the light-fighter is that he's hard to hit, but once you hit him you're getting metal on skin. The heavy fighter, once you hit the AC, you still have to punch through the metal. (yes, generalization, stay with me)
The concept here is that, once you make hard contact, the heavy fighter is hard to press home the vital strike. So, try this on for size:
Medium armor grants a +X bonus to AC vs. crit confirmation rolls.
Heavy armor grants a +2X bonus to AC vs. crit confirmation rolls.
Light armor/no armor gives you nothing vs. crit confirmation rolls.
Sure, your monk/bladesinger/duelist/prancer/whatever is hard to pin down, but if someone lands a solid blow (crit threat) then it's right in the pancreas and out the other side.
Your dwarven brick fighter, you land solid blow after solid blow but that can of steel prevents you from really getting to the brisket.
Thoughts?
|
|
actually a friend said that there was a show in history channle where they provedthatyou can go all half plate an be dextrous... by using an acrobat moving on it...
either way...
want to solve the problem
give Damage Reduction to armors... even if the fighter is easier to be hit he wills ustain more damage than anyone... that will show the armorless monk :P
So if shields are considered armor, and armor above light still slows you... wouldn't that mean full plate + heavy shield = -20 foot speed? Or even just having a shield slow you in the first place... the last thing SAB needs is a heavy nerf.
Edit: Straight DR is most likely going to be inadequate (too low to matter) especially when baselines such as only 5 points at level 19 are employed (hint: too little, too late). Percentage might work, but given the sheer number of people that had issues with basic adding and subtracting I doubt including more low grade math such as multiplication will be received well.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
So if shields are considered armor, and armor above light still slows you... wouldn't that mean full plate + heavy shield = -20 foot speed? Or even just having a shield slow you in the first place... the last thing SAB needs is a heavy nerf.
Nope. Shields don't affect movement. Never have.
What I meant was that shield proficiency could be rolled into armor prof of the appropriate type. On second thought, though, there's really no reason to do that, since, just by way of historical example, Greek hoplites wore medium armor but either heavy or tower shields, to say nothing of hot-weather-climate cultures that used large shields but little or no armor.
So, with that clarification out of the way:
Thoughts on the rest of the verbiage and concepts?
Edit: Straight DR is most likely going to be inadequate (too low to matter) especially when baselines such as only 5 points at level 19 are employed (hint: too little, too late). Percentage might work, but given the sheer number of people that had issues with basic adding and subtracting I doubt including more low grade math such as multiplication will be received well.
So, don't use those baselines.
Make a new baseline: DR = 1/2 armor bonus for medium and heavy armors. Light armor provides no DR.
Suddenly hide armor (+3 armor bonus, DR 1) has some reason to exist outside of druid circles in a world where studded leather (+3 AB, no DR) also exists. Not much of a reason, perhaps, but let's add this followup rule:
DR = 1/2 armor bonus PLUS enchantment bonus of armor.
Now a suit of +1 hide armor is (+4 AC, DR 2), vs. a chain shirt (+4 AC, no DR).
Full plate (as is) would be DR 4.
I would also suggest that this kind of DR should be:
1. DR/magic for nonmagical armor
2. DR/adamantine for magical armor
3. DR/- for adamantine armor
Should shields count in this argument? Sure, why not? We could perhaps exclude bucklers if we like. Give SAB another point of stacking.
Now our doughty warrior in +5 FP and +5 heavy shield not only gets a +20 AC bonus but also DR 10/adamantine. Which is comparable to or better than what the badass monsters he's fighting at that level (you could easily afford this rig by early double digits if not before - it's only about 52K) will have.
If we implemented the helmet rule, add a +5 great helm (bumping the price to 77K), now we're at +27 AC and DR 13/adamantine.
|
I think DEX should not be limited by armor. Period. But it should be limited by load.
If you are not proficient in the armor type double the effective weight of the armor.
I also think that the encumbrance rules should be rewritten and that armor should simply add to the character encumbrance. Following this guideline:
Light Load: Full Speed, Max Dex Bonus any, Attacks, Str and Dex Based Skill Checks -0, Run x4
Medium Load: 3/4 Speed, Max Dex Bonus 3, Attacks, Str and Dex Based Skill Checks -3, Run x3
Heavy Load: 1/2 Speed, Max Dex 1, Attacks, Str and Dex Based Skill Checks -6, Run x3
Example Strengths
Str Light Medium Heavy
10 33 lb. or less 34–66 lb. 67–100 lb.
15 66 lb. or less 67–133 lb. 134–200 lb.
20 133 lb. or less 134–266 lb. 267–400 lb.
Armor would essentially be:
Light armor
Padded 5 gp +1 5% 10/20 lb.
Leather 10 gp +2 10% 15/30 lb.
Studded leather 25 gp +3 15% 20/40 lb.
Chain shirt 100 gp +4 20% 25/50 lb.
Medium armor
Hide 15 gp +3 20% 25/50 lb.
Scale mail 50 gp +4 25% 30/60 lb.
Chainmail 150 gp +5 30% 40/80 lb.
Breastplate 200 gp +5 25% 30/60 lb.
Heavy armor
Splint mail 200 gp +6 40% 45/90 lb.
Banded mail 250 gp +6 35% 35/70 lb.
Half-plate 600 gp +7 40% 50/100 lb.
Full plate 1,500 gp +8 35% 50/100 lb.
Speed as encumbrance only? Sort of makes me wonder why it was every different.
Fixing the armor ratings to make half plate an option? Sure! Sounds good.
Helmets? Even better.
If Paizo is adamant (no pun intented) about not allowing AC to increase with level, then we need these options as equalizers.
Plus, helmets could just be fun!
|
|
4. Tie shields to armor type.
Actually I think they should be tied and considered weapons and removed completely from the armor table.
Buckler and light shield are simpleHeavy is martial
Tower is exotic
They are already on the weapons tables in 3.5. All you have to do is move their descriptions from the armor table and put them in the weapon descriptions.
I also think that shields could move up in AC value
Buckler +1 shield bonus
Light +2 shield bonus
Heavy +3 shield bonus
Tower +4 shield bonus
I think the tower shield should remove the wonkey cover rules that it has
Instead, I think a shield should apply 1/2 its AC bonus to reflex saves.
Example a +3 heavy shield (+6) would add a +3 to reflex saves.
|
|
One of my beefs with the armor system is that medium armor, as a rule, completely sux.
I would favor:
1. Screw backwards compatibility - get rid of the chain shirt!
I would go one step further and reduce Chain Shirts to +3 AC and have a Light Armor version of Hide (+3) or Bone (+3) and a Medium Armor version of Hide (+4) called something else (Scaled Hide or Gorgon Hide or something).
Ideally, Light Armors should range from +1 to +3 Armor Bonus, Medium Armors +4 to +6 and Heavy Armors +7 to +9.
Fighters, and only Fighters, should get some sort of class-based Armor Optimization that gives them a +1 bonus to AC when wearing Light Armor, +2 bonus when wearing Medium Armor and +3 bonus when wearing Heavy Armor. A Fighter in Fullplate is going to end up with +3 AC over a Cleric wearing Fullplate, and a Fighter wearing a Chain Shirt is still going to have a +1 AC over a Rogue wearing a Chain Shirt.
5. Incorporate helmets as a unique piece of armor that can be enchanted separately. That way, an armored warrior could be wearing armor (up to +5), shield (up to +5), and helmet (up to +5). Given the relatively cheap price of armor enhancements to AC vs. miscellaneous magic to give bonuses, you just made the armored option better.
Adopting some elements of the Piecemeal Armor rules from the 1E Oriental Adventures, or items like the Dastana (from the 3E Arms & Equipment Guide) or the Armored Kilt (from the Pathfinder Campaign Setting) might allow for some fine-tuning of 'shirt' style armors.
Note that the stacking and type restrictions might have to be tweaked, if you want to have a helmet (or dastana or armored kilt, or whatever) be enchanted seperately. Personally, I think that might be excessive, as a character might enchant X number of 'armor pieces' to +1 for a tiny fraction of the cost of enchanting a single breastplate to +X.
I'd rather just leave it an 'armor bonus' and only the strongest magical enhancement to the armor bonus to AC would apply for the various armor pieces. (But still stack with any enhancement to the *shield* bonus to AC, for those using shields.)
Armorless AC:
Paladin 2/Monk 1/Sorcerer x/Abjurant Champion 5
Dex: 34
Cha: 34
Feat:
Ascetic Mage (CA)
Armor Build up:
Default: 10
Dex: 12
Cha: 12
Enhancement: 5
Armor (Mage Armor, 9th): 17
Natural: 5
Deflection: 5
Shield: 9
--------------------
Total: 75 AC
Using the spell creation rules from Epic PHB, one could create their own 9th level spell using the armor seed. This spell would give +12 armor bonus, just as mage armor does, but with a 24 hour duration and a 1 minute casting time.
This build is broken. Very, very broken. However, it doesn't take a whole lot to be extremely powerful. Build upon the fact that you have high level sorcerer spells, Charisma to saves, Evasion, Abjurant Champion abilities, and if you take Persistent spell you can make shield last all day.
Anyhow, in short I concur that armor needs additional help. Dex fighters are my favorite because they aren't limited like str fighters are.
Lose 3 CLs + Sorcerer base = no 9th level spells until epic. Combine that with the fact that a simple illusion or two will protect you about as reliably for a much lower cost... not broken. Just a big number.
I'm also not sure why pointing out low DR was countered with... low DR. As if it were a counterpoint. Eh.
Lose 3 CLs + Sorcerer base = no 9th level spells until epic. Combine that with the fact that a simple illusion or two will protect you about as reliably for a much lower cost... not broken. Just a big number.
I'm also not sure why pointing out low DR was countered with... low DR. As if it were a counterpoint. Eh.
Campaign this was tested in was 22nd level.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Lose 3 CLs + Sorcerer base = no 9th level spells until epic. Combine that with the fact that a simple illusion or two will protect you about as reliably for a much lower cost... not broken. Just a big number.
I'm also not sure why pointing out low DR was countered with... low DR. As if it were a counterpoint. Eh.
Perhaps it's because you forgot what you yourself said.
You posited that DR5/- at 20th level was "Eh." On that point, I'd mostly agree. Nice, but nothing to write home about.
I posited DR availability at low levels. A 1st/2nd level character could easily have DR5/magic, at a level when DR/magic means something.
A middling level character could (5-10) could easily have DR6-8/adamantine at a level when adamantine weapons are rare.
A mid-high level character (11-15) could easily have DR10-13/- at a level when everything else in the game has DR, so why not the poor fighter.
I probably could have added that the PF "Armor Training" rule for fighters could/should (with this DR rule) also add to DR, so a 15th level fighter with heavy armor would have DR17/-. He goes up against CR/brute enemy with 6 attacks per round, with up to 112 points of damage ignored. Plus another 112 points from the 6 attacks per round of the dragon's mate.
Perhaps that doesn't seem significant to you.
It may be that in your experience of RLT gameplay all rockets automatically hit and no one has force fields, so hit points are functionally irrelevant and therefore so is DR since all it does is screen hit points, because all meaningful attacks are SoD/S and then coup de grace once the target is helpless. Or it may be that, given the posit that the fighter is a pointless obstacle, no one ever targets the fighter anyway, so DR is irrelevant because it never comes up. If that tactic always works for you, then by all means enjoy.
For other games, wherein opponents from low to high level have operant defenses and wherein a variety of tactics is required for success, or where fighters are enabled (either by their own devices or the assistance of allies) to engage the enemy, hit points do matter and DR does matter.
I would agree with you that DR5/- is low at high levels, though I don't agree that it is useless.
But that wasn't what I proposed in counterpoint to your statement. I proposed low DR at LOW levels, building up to moderate/higher DR at medium and higher levels.
Just out of curiosity, since your style is sometimes more in line of critique than solution and in this case a comparison would be helpful, what in your mind would qualify as sufficient DR to be meaningful?
|
|
Lose 3 CLs + Sorcerer base = no 9th level spells until epic. Combine that with the fact that a simple illusion or two will protect you about as reliably for a much lower cost... not broken. Just a big number.
I'm also not sure why pointing out low DR was countered with... low DR. As if it were a counterpoint. Eh.
actually i would give dices for DR
1d3 to 1d6 for light armors1d6 to 1d10 medium armors
1d10 to 2d6 for heavy armor
you say light armored people is rarely hit... this will keep fighters and paladins more time in the front
People complained about PA being too much math. Adding one more roll to every hit isn't going to go well (and I'd agree with their complaints, since adding that roll is unnecessary).
The big question sounds better than it did the first time as DR low teens is actually enough to matter against foes not like the Hydra (lots of low damage attacks, most have smaller numbers of better attacks). It seemed like another DR 1-5 at high levels which doesn't matter, or that it was taking away something else and therefore irrelevant or worse.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
People complained about PA being too much math. Adding one more roll to every hit isn't going to go well (and I'd agree with their complaints, since adding that roll is unnecessary).
The big question sounds better than it did the first time as DR low teens is actually enough to matter against foes not like the Hydra (lots of low damage attacks, most have smaller numbers of better attacks). It seemed like another DR 1-5 at high levels which doesn't matter, or that it was taking away something else and therefore irrelevant or worse.
Naw, if you haven't guessed by now I'm all about powering up the martial classes and gimping back the casters. No need to give the fighter a poke in the eye while you're trying to make him more kewl.
Shoot, on top of the rest I think shields should count for your touch AC (including whatever enhancement bonus it possesses). Unlike armor or a helmet, which you're wearing, I could see a rationale that a shield is 'held object' like a weapon, so therefore hitting the held object is not the same as hitting the person. You could also say that the shield provides its AC bonus as a sort of 'active defense' (yeah, I know, it doesn't hold water, since you still get your shield bonus when you're flat-footed, but you could conceive it that way and rewrite the rule to follow if you like).
So, any targeted effect that hits your shield doesn't actually hit YOU. We already allow the principle with the tower shield (which provides cover). Why not? It would certainly provide at least one good reason for SAB fighters.
As for DR... I think from a game design perspective DR sometimes seems far better than it is in real game play. "Oh, you can't give low-level characters DR, then they can sit there and get hit by a hundred arrows and not die." Rrright...
Sure, big DR = win if you're up against lots of weenie attacks, but if you're up against lots of weenie attacks you probably win anyway. That's what crits are for, and special attacks. Honestly, you don't get that massive number of weenie attacks in most combats. Every now and then, but you know what, it's okay for the heavy armor fighter to kick some ass when circumstances happen to best suit (pun intended) his level of armory. That's not a bug, that's a feature! Even if it were a bug, that, to me, is an acceptable loss in the course of making DR matter in more kinds of fights.
One thing did occur to me, though, a bit of a corner case: I would probably allow swarms to ignore DR from armor, shields, and helmets.
|
|
Armorless AC:
Paladin 2/Monk 1/Sorcerer x/Abjurant Champion 5
'
Pathfinder doesn't have to account for Abjurant Champion or Ascetic Mage, since they aren't OGL and won't be usable. Probably not for theoretical Epic Spell Seeds either (not that it matters if an Epic character has ridiculous stats, since that's kind of the *point* of being Epic). These are pretty much non-issues.
The main Core-applicable issue here, and one that Pathfinder hasn't addressed in the Beta, is that a single level 'dip' of Monk can grant a high-Wisdom character a disproportionately large plus to his AC.
On the other hand, since that Wisdom bonus-equivalent-bonus to unarmored AC requires the character to forfeit the use of armor, which Wisdom-focused classes (Clerics, Paladins and, to a much lesser extent, Druids) get a decent amount of benefit from, it isn't terribly unbalanced, either, as the Cleric could wear just Fullplate (which he could also have magically enhanced up to +5, and pair with a similarly-enhanced Shield) and not sacrifice a level of spellcasting or his 20th level Clerical Domain abilities (which can be pretty sexy, depending on the Domains he has chosen, such as Gate, Miracle or Shapechange as a Spell-like Ability).
A level of Monk, strapped onto a Paladin or Cleric at very low levels *might* be worth it (doubtful, since Wisdom won't exceed 20 at character generation, even with the Pathfinder extra bonuses, and a chain shirt / heavy shield will give him 1 extra point of AC right at 1st level over that optimized Wis-build, without requiring that he dump his entire point-buy into Wisdom *and* lose a level of Clerical effectiveness), but those 1st level Monk abilities would quickly get outstripped, and end up being a stone around the neck at higher levels, when the Cleric/Paladin would rather have the magical enhancements that can be put on +5 Fullplate and +5 Hvy Shield, in addition to a +19 Armor/Shield bonus to AC, instead of the +13 he could get from putting all five of his Ability Score increases into Wisdom, buying five Tomes of Understanding *and* wearing a +6 Periapt.
Straight Cleric (or Paladin) 20 wins the AC war over Monk 1 / Cleric (or Paladin) 19, which is as it should be. Single-classing for the win. With Boots of Speed, he might even be able to get out of the way of a pregnant hippopotamus as well. :)
Jury remains unconvinced however that a *Druid* 19/Monk 1 build wouldn't have a better AC than a Druid 20. Druid armor is teh suq, and lost when they Wild Shape anyway, which a Monkly wisdom bonus to AC would *greatly* help alleviate... Plus, the fun of Pouncing on someone with a claw/claw/bite/rake routine and firing off Stunning Fist (er, Stunning Paw?) in the first hit, followed by a Flurry of, uh, Talons?, would be funny.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Jury remains unconvinced however that a *Druid* 19/Monk 1 build wouldn't have a better AC than a Druid 20. Druid armor is teh suq, and lost when they Wild Shape anyway, which a Monkly wisdom bonus to AC would *greatly* help alleviate... Plus, the fun of Pouncing on someone with a claw/claw/bite/rake routine and firing off Stunning Fist (er, Stunning Paw?) in the first hit, followed by a Flurry of, uh, Talons?, would be funny.
Monk/druid is good. Tempting to even go Monk2 for evasion, saves, and bonus feat, if you believe those are worth it.
But you can get around the whole problem buy buying darkwood wild full plate and a wild heavy wooden shield. Sure it's pricey (+3 enhancement cost), but AC that goes with you into any wild shape form is nice. Besides, when you're wild-shaped you don't have to worry about max dex, AC penalty, weight, or even whether you can use both hands because it all merges with your form. You can max it out for +5 on both items for about 143K as a +20 armor/shield bonus that travels into WS. If money is a little tight just get +1 wild of each for a pittance (about 35K total) and +12 armor/shield bonus in wild shape.
To match even the cheap version, our monk/druid would need a 34 Wisdom (keeping it in wild shape, which would most likely take a periapt with a non-SRD wilding clasp).
Here's the real corner case, though: Say we have a druid/monk wearing the aforementioned wild armor. In armor, his monk AC bonus doesn't apply.
Now he wild shapes into a [vicious whatever] and his wild armor merges with his form. Does his monk AC bonus activate now? He's still getting the armor/shield bonus from the wild armor and shield, but he's not technically wearing armor any more. You be the judge...
Stuff melds into your form, right in core. Animal Druid can just take it off, shift, put it on.
Stuff melds into your form, right in core. Animal Druid can just take it off, shift, put it on.Well, have someone else put it on him. Unless he has hands... :)
I can get an object around my neck without using hands or anything else. I'd say the Druid can too. Though it would be easier if someone else did it.
Speed as Encumbrance only:
Exactly, it doesn't make any sense to give characters two separate overlapping penalties based on armor type AND load. I would be sympathetic to the Medium Encumbrance Speed being changed to only -5', though the Medium Run multiplier should then be reduced to match the Heavy one .
Armor Check Penalty (STR/DEX skills, as well as Arcane Failure), DOES make a certain sense to track separately/on top off Speed/Load Encumbrance... As well, Arcane Failure (besides converting to d20) should be based on the Armor/Load Check Penalty, not Armor TYPE: In the current scenario, as long as no ARMOR is being worn, a character carrying a donkey on their back can cast Somatic Spells without any problem! Equally, even though Armor Training/ Masterwork Armor reduces the Dexerity Skill Check penalties, it doesn't help the Arcane Failure for Somatic Spells at all, which doesn't make much sense.
Something I'd just like to point out.
In Pathfinder, armor check penalties apply to all dex and str skills. So the guy in full plate takes a -6 to Ride.
You have negated the Knight in Shining Armor. In Golarian, knights walk everywhere because they cannot ride their horses.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I can get an object around my neck without using hands or anything else. I'd say the Druid can too. Though it would be easier if someone else did it.Stuff melds into your form, right in core. Animal Druid can just take it off, shift, put it on.Well, have someone else put it on him. Unless he has hands... :)
It's a doable task, if tricky, especially if you WS into something big. Make sure you have a dire bear-sized collar before you go. Heaven forbid you turn into a fire elemental. That could be interesting for your equipment.
Anyway, it's all giggles and amusement. Hence the emoticon.
Of course, it does provide another use for Leadership. "Hey, you, sidekick. Come put on my stuff!"
Honestly, though, I think a lot of Druidzilla could be easily knocked down a good bit by the simple elimination of the Natural Spell feat.
Druids could always cast spells in WS. They just had to use Silent Spell (unless they turned into an elemental, since they can talk) and Still Spell. Plus Eschew Materials for your ordinary components. Why did there need to be a feat that gave them 1-2 levels of free metamagic on all their spells?
If druids had to spend slots 1-2 levels higher for every spell they cast in WS, and for that matter had to prepare them AS metamagicked spells or have them be unusable in WS, that would go a long way towards toning down the druid.
They'd still be plenty kick-butt, but they'd have to pay the cost to be the boss, so to speak.
If we must keep "Natural Spell" in the game, make it an effect that you can use once each time you WS; essentially, you get one spell you can cast without components. Call it converting a prepared spell into an SLA if that makes the verbiage nicer.
I thought Wild Shape got nerfed to be a utility thing. Which means now the Druid is only one melee and a spellcaster at the same time (Oh noes!) rather than two and one.
Edit: Wait, ACP applies to all str and dex skills even if you are proficient? Why did heavy armor get a further nerf again?
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I thought Wild Shape got nerfed to be a utility thing. Which means now the Druid is only one melee and a spellcaster at the same time (Oh noes!) rather than two and one.
Edit: Wait, ACP applies to all str and dex skills even if you are proficient? Why did heavy armor get a further nerf again?
I haven't read over the PF Beta WS rules yet so I don't know for sure. Still, it had a long way to go in nerfage from the heights of SRD, so I don't know that whatever nerfs were sufficient. I'll have to look into it.
Edit: Having read it, no, it's not just utility. It's restricted to a specific subset of bonuses that remain fairly constant across creature type - it's more of a uniform buff plus gaining a subset of creature abilities, rather than being wholly dependent on the monster's stat block for its cheats - but it still kicks a good bit of butt. It's cheaterrificness is now based more on the druid's level than the ability to find the perfect cheater form to change into in the Monster Manual 47. Also, druids can go elemental (and be able to talk and gesture) as early as 6th level now (small elemental).
As for the wild armor thing, I think it would create less game-mechanical weirdness (like the above plate/shield-armored monk/druid using evasion and monk AC bonus on top of heavy armor/shield) if the wild enchantment just morphed the armor to fit your new form, whatever it might be, instead of "melding into you" while still giving you the bonus.
As to the second: ACP has always applied to skills even if you're proficient.
The diff is that if you're not proficient, ACP also applies to your attack rolls.
Another place where the wild-shaping druid in darkwood wild full plate gets a free win: druids are not proficient in heavy armor, so a druid wearing it should suffer ACP to skills and attack rolls. If the wild armor melds, he suffers no penalties cuz he's not "wearing" the armor any more. Triple bleah.
There is a lesser property somewhere that just melds it. It's only +2 or something. Maybe +1? I dunno.
Anyways I thought ACP only applied to some stuff, but it applies to more if not proficient and also applies to attacks, whatever. Then again, non light armors were such an obvious trap I just avoided them and light armors don't really have a check penalty. So I could just be thinking of something else.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
There is a lesser property somewhere that just melds it. It's only +2 or something. Maybe +1? I dunno.
Could be right. I don't have all the books memorized so I'm sure there's a property out there somewhere that does that. Still, the ability to wear armor in mutant forms (more to the point, ANY mutant form, and to switch in between) is pretty swanky. I'd probably still cost it at +3 because of all the juice that shapechanging usually provides (including, most relevantly to armor, the fact that you usually get a natural natural armor bonus (i.e., one that you could buff still further with barkskin) in the bargain), but you might be able to argue me down to +2.
Anyways I thought ACP only applied to some stuff, but it applies to more if not proficient and also applies to attacks, whatever. Then again, non light armors were such an obvious trap I just avoided them and light armors don't really have a check penalty. So I could just be thinking of something else.
Indeed, who cares if you're a wizard with no proficiency in shields. You want some relatively cheap magic AC, just buy a mithril buckler.
I actually thought Ride was specifically excluded from the ACP game, but maybe that was a 3.0 rule (or an SRD one)... checks PH.
Ah, in the PH/SRD they tagged specific skills as ACP skills. Ride was NOT one of them. In PF Beta they tried to simplify and just said "all Str/Dex skills" but did not put in an exclusion for Ride.
This is presumably an oversight. Hopefully they'll correct it.
I knew I wasn't imagining things. Anyways, don't have my book in front of me but I think PF nerfed all the shapeshifting stuff hard. No natural natural, or at least not as easy as +8 from a 2nd level spell, 10 minutes/level. It gets worse if you're an Outsider.
From all the ideas I have had a chance to read so far here are the following I like.
Add helmets, all being medium armor only.
eliminate speed reduction for trained users.
Eliminate max dex sounds good as you can only get soo much bonus from dex bonus to ac any way.
increasing shield AC also sounds good, but anyone can use a shield with no problem when it becomes animated.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
From all the ideas I have had a chance to read so far here are the following I like.
Add helmets, all being medium armor only.
eliminate speed reduction for trained users.
Eliminate max dex sounds good as you can only get soo much bonus from dex bonus to ac any way.
increasing shield AC also sounds good, but anyone can use a shield with no problem when it becomes animated.
The mechanical advantage is obvious, but count me in the camp that has always found the animated shield concept a little on the ick side. Just doesn't sit right with us crusty oldsters.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I knew I wasn't imagining things. Anyways, don't have my book in front of me but I think PF nerfed all the shapeshifting stuff hard. No natural natural, or at least not as easy as +8 from a 2nd level spell, 10 minutes/level. It gets worse if you're an Outsider.
Oh, they nerfed it, certainly, so some of the more heinous cheats are curbed, but it still does just fine. F'rex, our 6th level druid can become a:
Small air elemental - +2 Dex, +2 NA, darkvision 60, fly 60 (perfect), and whirlwind.
Small earth elemental - +2 Str, +4 NA, DV 60, push, earth glide. (no mention of reduced speed like a regular earth elemental)
Small fire elemental - +2 Dex, +2 NA, DV 60, burn, fire resistance 20, cold vulnerable, and +10' to your land movement rate
Small water elemental - +2 Con, +4 NA, DV 60, swim 60, vortex.
You still can talk, and the cheaterous movement abilities for 1 hr/lvl are really where it's at. It doesn't stipulate that you get the bonuses for being a Small creature. It doesn't say you don't either. There's a point of ambiguity in the rules.
You could also become an animal size T to L
Tiny - +4 Dex, -2 Str, +1 NA
Small - +2 Dex, +1 NA
Medium - +2 Str, +2 NA
Large - +4 Str, -2 Dex, +4 NA
And any of the following that your creature type can do: climb 60, fly 60 (good), swim 60, DV 60, LLV, scent, Ipv Grab, Pounce, Trip.
Those forms subsume beast shape I and II and elemental body I. Anyway, the point is they have regularized and homogenized the shapechanging to the point where the base set of bonuses provided by the shapechange (or WS) is fairly uniform across creature types. You aren't going to get a super-crazy AC bonus just by wild-shaping into a Chelaxian Diamondsnake with +20 natural armor bonus.
But, you still will get very long-lasting, non-dispellable (it's supernatural) stat, NA, and movement buffs, all of which make it game-mechanically undesirable for you to ever be in your natural form if you can possibly avoid it. That's the part that I think I find distasteful about the combination of WS + goofy equipment like the wild armor + my mortal enemy, Natural Spell: If you EVER see a human druid of 5th level and up, he's either asleep or in an antimagic field, because there ain't no way in heck or high water he ever wants to be caught out of wild shape. Well, unless he's trying to pick up girls in a bar or something.
I guess I feel like WS should be a TOOL for a druid to use, not his natural form.
Maybe if the ability lasted 1 minute per level like the shapechanging spells do, instead of an hour per level, it would seem less annoying. But, maybe it's must me...
I just wanted to point out that Max Dex does *NOT* apply to Initiative or anything other than to AC.
This restriction doesn’t affect any other
Dexterity-related abilities.
Same in 3.5 (and 3.0 I believe).
I also want to say that I feel the "nerf" of the monk's belt/robe to clarify that non-monks do not get their Wisdom bonus to AC *would* be wholly sufficient to reduce the abuse of it. Taking a level in a class (with an alignment requirement - though you wouldn't have to keep it) is far bigger a commitment than buying a magic item.
However, without any multi-classing xp penalties, there is no permanent penalty other than the "lost" level, and that draws it back up.
I think making it a Duelist like bonus (limited by level) would be too harsh to first/second level monks, even at a limit of twice your level. However perhaps under "Ex-Monks" they could put such a limit in. Twice level would be sufficient. 2 levels of monk for +4 AC isn't all that worthwhile, and more levels than that is commitment enough to earn the bonus.
It doesn't, but who is going to cripple themselves with the current heavy armor if they have half a say in the matter?