is it just me or does it seem like you need either armor or magic items to get a descent AC, i just feel like there isn't enough options to play a character with little to no armor without getting hit every round.
i like the dodge feat but is seems to me like there should be more feats to improve your ac that aren't based on armor.
i am probably alone on this but i just wanted to rant a bit.
p.s. i know the monk gains an ac boos but that's not what i am talking about
is it just me or does it seem like you need either armor or magic items to get a descent AC, i just feel like there isn't enough options to play a character with little to no armor without getting hit every round.
i like the dodge feat but is seems to me like there should be more feats to improve your ac that aren't based on armor.
i am probably alone on this but i just wanted to rant a bit.
p.s. i know the monk gains an ac boos but that's not what i am talking about
I hear what you're saying, but there are other ways to avoid getting hit, several of which are conducive to not wearing armor. Spring Attack, the move/concealment feats, Blur, Mirror Image, reach weapons, readied actions and so on. You can't really go toe-to-toe, but a hit & run strategy is workable if you really try.
Zo
one reason i felt like posting this was i have seen many movies and tv shows where there are heroes who ware little to no armor and it just hit me that you really cant do this in pathfinder.
I believe it was in Green Ronin's Advanced Gamemasters Handbook on page 29 or there abouts where it mentions a Dodge that increases with level according to your class.
Just y 2 cp.
|
one reason i felt like posting this was i have seen many movies and tv shows where there are heroes who ware little to no armor and it just hit me that you really cant do this in pathfinder.
Sure you can...you make a level 10 hero and have them face level 1 mooks like in the movies and TV shows ;) .
lol this is true
I believe it was in Green Ronin's Advanced Gamemasters Handbook on page 29 or there abouts where it mentions a Dodge that increases with level according to your class.
Just y 2 cp.
In my experience seeing this system in play, it can lead to VERY high AC Fighters. Nearly impossible to hit.
honestly what i would like to see are some feats that give you an ac boost while wearing less armor, sort of a dodge feat tree.
If you make a mistake like I did and allow it to add to armor. I think it is supposed to be separate from armor. Such as when the party is resting.
that would work well, like improved dodge, when not wearing armor you gain an additional +2 to ac. or something like that and a few more that require dodge and improved dodge and probable some other prerequisites.
|
that would work well, like improved dodge, when not wearing armor you gain an additional +2 to ac. or something like that and a few more that require dodge and improved dodge and probable some other prerequisites.
i add 1/4 your character to level to AC as a flat, level bonus to AC (so it adds to both flat-footed and touch as well). This does stack with armor, and it allows characters to care a little less about AC boosting magic items. Just be careful with this, cuz if you make AC boosting items common place, AC will get out of hand quick.
also consider rules for say, fighting defensively, and the frequently overlooked feat Combat Expertise. At 4th level, Combat Expertise + Dodge + 4 ranks in Acrobatics + fighting defensively = +6 to AC while wear light or no armor (and a -6 to attack though). That's fairly significant.
that would work well, like improved dodge, when not wearing armor you gain an additional +2 to ac. or something like that and a few more that require dodge and improved dodge and probable some other prerequisites.i add 1/4 your character to level to AC as a flat, level bonus to AC (so it adds to both flat-footed and touch as well). This does stack with armor, and it allows characters to care a little less about AC boosting magic items. Just be careful with this, cuz if you make AC boosting items common place, AC will get out of hand quick.
also consider rules for say, fighting defensively, and the frequently overlooked feat Combat Expertise. At 4th level, Combat Expertise + Dodge + 4 ranks in Acrobatics + fighting defensively = +6 to AC while wear light or no armor (and a -6 to attack though). That's fairly significant.
Maybe that's something to think about - lowering the penalty for combat expertise, fighting defensively, etc. when you're wearing no armor. Like how power attack does for using a weapon 2 handed, but instead of increasing the bonus, decrease the penalty.
Think of it this way. You can invest feat after feat, and all your money into better armor and shield to get your AC to a place where monsters of your level are only hitting 50% of the time. Or you can buy a major cloak of displacement and call it a day :)
Maybe that's something to think about - lowering the penalty for combat expertise, fighting defensively, etc. when you're wearing no armor. Like how power attack does for using a weapon 2 handed, but instead of increasing the bonus, decrease the penalty.that would work well, like improved dodge, when not wearing armor you gain an additional +2 to ac. or something like that and a few more that require dodge and improved dodge and probable some other prerequisites.i add 1/4 your character to level to AC as a flat, level bonus to AC (so it adds to both flat-footed and touch as well). This does stack with armor, and it allows characters to care a little less about AC boosting magic items. Just be careful with this, cuz if you make AC boosting items common place, AC will get out of hand quick.
also consider rules for say, fighting defensively, and the frequently overlooked feat Combat Expertise. At 4th level, Combat Expertise + Dodge + 4 ranks in Acrobatics + fighting defensively = +6 to AC while wear light or no armor (and a -6 to attack though). That's fairly significant.
My feel is that you should get more out of combat expertise if you are using a shield. Like your shield bonus increases by half the dodge bonus, round down. So you get 1.5x benefit out of it, to mirror Power Attack's functionality.
Is this a matter of not wanting to pay for armor or have the weight? Or just a matter of style?
Because I have a player currently running around in "leather armor" that mysteriously has exactly the same stats as a chain shirt (weight, acp, etc). If she wanted to run around in a towel but use the stats of an armor she can both wear and afford I'd allow that too. Plus there's always the glamered enhancement.
Just thought up a small feat chain that might help this, if you like the feats you could allow a fighter to substitute heavy armor proficiency for defensive training or allow it as a monk bonus feat.
Combat Defense
prerequiste : dodge, combat reflexes, BAB +1
Once per round when you an opponent scores a hit in a you can choose to use your CMD instead of your AC, you can not use this ability when flat-footed. This counts against your attacks of opurtunity allowed in a round, when you have used all your attacks of oppurtunity you are allowed in a round you can not use this feat.
Improved Combat Defense
prerequiste : dodge, combat defense, combat reflexes, BAB +6
As Combat Defense, except you can use it up to twice per round.
Combat Defense Mastery
prerequiste : dodge, combat defense, improve combat defense, combat reflexes, BAB +11
As Combat Defense, except you can use it three times per round. In addition, when an opponent attacks and misses by virtue of this feat you can choose to make an attack of oppurtunity against the attacker.
one reason i felt like posting this was i have seen many movies and tv shows where there are heroes who ware little to no armor and it just hit me that you really cant do this in pathfinder.Sure you can...you make a level 10 hero and have them face level 1 mooks like in the movies and TV shows ;) .
Ummm I may be wandering afield but why would a level one fighter/mook have a problem hitting a NAKED ( no armor, no magic) level 10 fighter?
I haven't playtested this but I think an arena fight between 10 level one fighters (leather armor, small shield, hand axe) vs. a 10th level fighter in spiderman underoos will result in a very dead spider fan.
Am I missing something?
~will
I'm also a fan of the lightly armored, swashbuckling type hero but they can be tougher to play for sure. However, I had a halfling fighter who wore only leather armor and had one of the highest ACs in the party (mainly due to a high DEX, but also due to dodge and size modifiers). So it is possible to have high DEX, lightly armored fighters have efficient ACs.
I also favor the design idea that armor doesn't make you harder to hit (improve AC), but rather absorbs damage (DR). This requires a complete game redesign, however, and it's not something I want to take on thank you very much. Still, I do like the idea and would love to see some alternate Pathfinder rules on the subject if they ever get the itch to create them.
Here's a feat I proposed a while back:
Unfettered
Benefit: Whenever you have no armor or natural armor bonus to AC, you gain a +3 circumstance bonus to AC. This bonus increases by +1 for every four levels you possess.
There's more discussion of unarmored ("buck naked") fighters in that same thread.
One thing to make sure of is to not allow the increase to work in addition to armor. Making it count as an armor bonus might not be a bad idea or restricting armor types it can stack with.
this is very true, it doesnt do anything to reduce the difference between armored players and non armored players if they both can gain these bonuses.
this is very true, it doesnt do anything to reduce the difference between armored players and non armored players if they both can gain these bonuses.
It also would be very common for heavy armor sword and board fighters to be near unhittable if you gave them feats that could further increase their ac (something they would certainly have good reason to take).
|
this is very true, it doesnt do anything to reduce the difference between armored players and non armored players if they both can gain these bonuses.
Check out Unearthed Arcana for some good variants for artifacting HP into near misses and the like. It doesn't remove armor from the game, but turns actual hits and HP damage into those minor wounds until you get hit by a big attack. It is more of a cinematic style of play, which I think is what you are going for.
one reason i felt like posting this was i have seen many movies and tv shows where there are heroes who ware little to no armor and it just hit me that you really cant do this in pathfinder.
This has been one of my beefs too. Hit Points are suppose to somewhat account for this, but I never bought CON adding to your ability to dodge.
It is a matter of preference, but armor making you more difficult to hit was always a realism or naturalism breaker for me. In my opinion, armor should absorb damage.
I'd really love to see official rules support for variant rules for class defense bonuses and armor as DR.
Right now, I houserule them in and it does address the lightly- or no-armored character pretty well.
One big part of balancing this equation that I failed to account for when I house ruled an improvement to non tin can AC was wealth.
Characters sink significant portions of thier wealth into armor. If feats allow them to bypass that they can potentially buy magic items that are more powerfull than the feats they gave up for no armor feats.
Dos, third edition Unearthed Arcana had a armor as DR system in it. Might try tracking it down.
I think I had home brewed a variant armor = DR system prior to that system coming out and felt quite proud of myself for having beaten them to the punch. That was some time ago, however, and I don't think I kept using my home brewed system for very long. Thanks for the idea, though!
I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm saying I have yet to see a way for armored and unarmored to be equally viable options. It always seems to come out with one being vastly superior over the other.
[Activate wild spec] Perhaps if one applied something like the armor check penalty to attack rolls and then allowed folks to apply their BAB and other to hit bonuses as bonuses to their AC on a one for one, turn by turn basis? I think this would really encourage light and no armor builds/creatures.
This would make features like the Fighters armor training very useful. One would also need to add feats to reduce the to-hit penalty for armor. Ultimately only specialists would be wearing heavy armor and attacking. Everyone else would be parrying like crazy aka appplying their BAB to AC while trying to get into an advantagous position to attack. This would also make reach weapons and shields more popular which mirrors history a bit more than all the 2wf and double weapon foolishness.[/activate wild spec]
Mind you this does pretty much rewrite the combat system so it may not be useful.
~will
[Activate wild spec] Perhaps if one applied something like the armor check penalty to attack rolls and then allowed folks to apply their BAB and other to hit bonuses as bonuses to their AC on a one for one, turn by turn basis? I think this would really encourage light and no armor builds/creatures.
This would make features like the Fighters armor training very useful. One would also need to add feats to reduce the to-hit penalty for armor. Ultimately only specialists would be wearing heavy armor and attacking. Everyone else would be parrying like crazy aka appplying their BAB to AC while trying to get into an advantagous position to attack. This would also make reach weapons and shields more popular which mirrors history a bit more than all the 2wf and double weapon foolishness.
[/activate wild spec]Mind you this does pretty much rewrite the combat system so it may not be useful.
~willIt also sounds like it is all about penalizing characters for choosing to wear armor unless they invest heavily in specialization in wearing armor.
Right back to my point on "why would anyone wear armor".
A system I'm working on uses armor as DR or "soak" and a dodge skill to oppose actual attack rolls. Makes more sense to me. In the end I feel it should be a matter of style: do you want to have reduced mobility but be able to shake off big hits, or do you want to dodge out of the way more but when an opponent gets lucky you're paste.
With the current system, however, and with the largely medieval europe vibe of PF/3.5, I don't think having any built in AC bonuses is very workable. Again, I think a variant where you get DR from armor is legit and makes more sense from a balance perspective.
|
|
i like the dodge feat but is seems to me like there should be more feats to improve your ac that aren't based on armor.
I'd be fine with a Fighter alternate class feature that allows them to swap out armor proficiencies at 1st level for dodge bonuses to AC.
Drop heavy armor proficiency (and tower shield) and gain +1 dodge bonus to AC whenever not wearing heavy armor or using a tower shield.
Drop medium armor proficiency (and heavy shields) and gain another +1 dodge bonus to AC when not wearing medium or heavy armor or a heavy or tower shield.
Drop light armor proficiency (and light shields) and gain a third and final +1 dodge bonus to AC when not wearing any armor or any shield larger than a buckler.
Purchase the Dodge feat at 1st level, and you could have an unarmored fighter with a buckler and a sword (or a klar, or something else that worked like a buckler) with an AC 15, before Dex bonus.
He's given up +10 worth of armor and shield bonuses for that +3, but it's better than nuthin!
An addendum to the rule could limit the dodge bonuses gained in this manner to no more than his Fighter level, so that the above Fighter would have to wait until 3rd level to get that full AC 15, to prevent someone from dipping a level of Fighter and then going full Monk to get a nice AC buff, but otherwise it should be fairly balanced.
In theory, a non-fighter (paladin, ranger, barbarian) could take these options as well, or even a cleric or druid (lose medium armor and heavy shield for a +1 dodge, or all armor and non-bucklers for a +2) or bard or rogue (losing light armor prof for +1 dodge bonus to AC).
It also sounds like it is all about penalizing characters for choosing to wear armor unless they invest heavily in specialization in wearing armor.
Right back to my point on "why would anyone wear armor".
Well if I were to put real thought into this then I would want the defensive bonus provided by the armor to be larger than the penalty to hit. This would be true across all armor types so there is always a reason to wear armor. Everyone can turn to hit to AC at one for one but wearing armor allows you a better rate of exchange. Exact numbers would take real thought but something like -3 to hit for +7ac for heavy armor might be worth it. Armor also applies vs suprise attacks/most spells where parry does not without magic or feat backup.
This would tend to discourage the nonmartial classes from wearing heavy armor but is that a bad thing?
~will
|
i like the dodge feat but is seems to me like there should be more feats to improve your ac that aren't based on armor.
I'd be fine with a Fighter alternate class feature that allows them to swap out armor proficiencies at 1st level for dodge bonuses to AC.
Drop heavy armor proficiency (and tower shield) and gain +1 dodge bonus to AC whenever not wearing heavy armor or using a tower shield.
Drop medium armor proficiency (and heavy shields) and gain another +1 dodge bonus to AC when not wearing medium or heavy armor or a heavy or tower shield.
Drop light armor proficiency (and light shields) and gain a third and final +1 dodge bonus to AC when not wearing any armor or any shield larger than a buckler.
Purchase the Dodge feat at 1st level, and you could have an unarmored fighter with a buckler and a sword (or a klar, or something else that worked like a buckler) with an AC 15, before Dex bonus.
He's given up +10 worth of armor and shield bonuses for that +3, but it's better than nuthin!
An addendum to the rule could limit the dodge bonuses gained in this manner to no more than his Fighter level, so that the above Fighter would have to wait until 3rd level to get that full AC 15, to prevent someone from dipping a level of Fighter and then going full Monk to get a nice AC buff, but otherwise it should be fairly balanced.
In theory, a non-fighter (paladin, ranger, barbarian) could take these options as well, or even a cleric or druid (lose medium armor and heavy shield for a +1 dodge, or all armor and non-bucklers for a +2) or bard or rogue (losing light armor prof for +1 dodge bonus to AC).
This is an interesting variant, though you could just make a feat that requires dodge and increases your dex by 2 for the purposes of AC and CMD. This would allow it to be limited by armor innately. Maybe allow it to be taken up to X times (like once at 13 dex, again at 15 dex, then 17 and so on).
Or you could swap the armor training feature for monk AC (stacking with monk levels).
Armor should be an advantage. To gain its advantage people accept a number of disadvantages: it changes your appearance, costs gold, takes upkeep, decreases your mobility and requires training.
Conversely, not wearing armor is all positive. None of the above disadvantages. Another path would have to venture some other penalties.
It doesn't sound to me like their automatically should be a path that makes armor obsolete but I'd be curious to hear what people have to say.
How many feats would you give up to be on par with armor's protection?
Sigurd
I remember some systems that used this including the wheel of time setting for dungeons and dragons the rule was that it didn't stack with armor in that system, although some fighter classes got the ability to use some or all of it from there class levels only with armor.
also check out Iron Heroes, which had a similar system but the armor in that game soaked damage.
Armor should be an advantage. To gain its advantage people accept a number of disadvantages: it changes your appearance, costs gold, takes upkeep, decreases your mobility and requires training.
Conversely, not wearing armor is all positive. None of the above disadvantages. Another path would have to venture some other penalties.
It doesn't sound to me like their automatically should be a path that makes armor obsolete but I'd be curious to hear what people have to say.
How many feats would you give up to be on par with armor's protection?
Sigurd
None. Or one, if it were a free feat given to me by my starting character class.
Every class that can currently wear armor gets the appropriate armor proficiency for free. Which means it costs them nothing more than a pittance of gold to strap on their armor.
I would not be willing to give up a feat that they do not have to give up to get an equal AC, just to save a few GP.
And if that's not enough, the real dealbreaker is tht those guys with armor have an option to find or purchase magical armor, raising the AC and maybe gaining other benefits like Fortification, while me, I have lost a feat and cannot improve my AC in that fashion.
So for the cost of a feat and what will eventually be a lower AC when the other guys start wearing magical armor, all I have gained is a bit of gold.
No, even one feat is too many.
... I would not be willing to give up a feat that they do not have to give up to get an equal AC, just to save a few GP....
No, even one feat is too many.
Interesting comment.
But even those 'free feats' make up a considerable focus of the character classes. What focus would you give a class to offer similar protection and how do you keep things balanced between classes?
Something like an ethereal state where the weapons pass through you?
Some sort of replacement hard surface to stop weapons, as armor does?
Some sort of psychic (magic) shield?
You may call them free feats but do you want to change your class to get them? There are trade offs.
Ah, I've gone through the Pathfinder books and as it stands I can't seem to find anything that works like you've asked. And yes, I agree, sometimes the best offense is to not take the hits in the first place!
Perhaps a build off the Dodge Feat, requiring Dex 15, maybe even Fighter Specific, that allows the user to double their Dexterity-Bonus to AC so long as wearing only Padded or Leather armor? Not exactly a fool-proof way to do this, but it does give the advantage to a Weapon Finesse-focused Fighter.
Naturally, this worked best for high-agility fighters, and enabled quite a few 'oriental film' moments with a Fighter who grabbed a Ring of Featherfall and ran around with a Naginata and wearing long flowing robes and the Whirlwind Feat Tree. Not the best tank, but as a Damage-focuses Player, he was able to run rings around most enemies and position himself admirably for flanking attacks with the rest of the party.
Under Pathfinder .... such a Variant Fighter would lose all armor proficiencies and shield proficiencies, gain +2 skill points per level, gain Acrobatics as a Class Skill and replaces Knowledge (Engineering) with a Knowledge skill of his choice, gain Uncanny Dodge at 5th level and Improved Uncanny Dodge at 10th level and an AC Bonus exact;y as the Monk's AC Bonus (Ex) except the Fighter-Variants AC bonus is equal to 2/3rds his Fighter Class Level, rounded down.
YMMV. And I hope it helps out somebody.
|
I spent a year running a 3.5 (and then later in the game converted to PFRPG) swashbuckling and intrigue game using the Class Defense Bonus and Armor As DR rules from Unearthed Arcana/SRD. Since class defense does not stack with armor, and the primary benefit of armor becomes DR, armor classes remained in the same range as normal 3.5/PF, and armor was still a *good* idea...just not a necessity. The only problem was that ranged touch attacks started to be very bad (houseruled out by just not counting class defense against them) and death-by-a-thousand-papercuts strategies became worthless. A proposed, but not yet implemented, houserule in my group was to declare that the successive hits against the same person, by the same person, in the same round, reduced or eliminated the armor DR, so that TWF fighters only had to contend with the full DR on their first hit of the round.
In my case, the whole system was implemented because myself and others in the group didn't like the idea that armor made you hard to hit, liking better the idea that high dex fighters were hard to hit but took more damage, while low dex fighters were easier to hit but the hits counted way less.
is it just me or does it seem like you need either armor or magic items to get a descent AC, i just feel like there isn't enough options to play a character with little to no armor without getting hit every round.
i like the dodge feat but is seems to me like there should be more feats to improve your ac that aren't based on armor.
i am probably alone on this but i just wanted to rant a bit.
D&D has pretty much always been a game in which the majority of your defense is set by gear (potentially magical) and spells. If you wanted a system in which characters had a defense bonus based on their level and/or class, I would consider completely replacing armor bonuses of the main game or at least defining the defense bonus as being non-stackable with armor under most circumstances.
Unearthed Arcana's system may work for you. And it's OGL and can be found on SRD sites... like this one Hypertext d20 SRD
About using armor and defense bonuses together: Star Wars Saga Edition allows defense bonuses and armor to be used together for certain conditions. Soldiers can take talents that allow them to still add half their armor bonus to their defense even when their level-based defense is higher. That might be a good use of a feat in PF if using defense bonuses.
In my case, the whole system was implemented because myself and others in the group didn't like the idea that armor made you hard to hit,
The idea is that armor makes you harder to hit AND injure. I describe 99% of "misses" as attacks deflected or absorbed by the armor/shield/magical defenses of the person wearing it.
I also don't see the need for complicated houserules. Give someone the armor in every way mechanically but then just describe them as wearing something else. Normal clothing, a lighter form of armor whatever. Balance maintained with almost zero work.