|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I've looked through the forums for the answer to this question and while there are some distinct opinions, I've never seen a definitive solution. Perhaps this should be a FAQ. As someone who Judges Open Play PFS scenarios, I want to be sure I'm treating this right as some Fighter PCs (I have not yet, because I'd hadn't thought about it until the other day when I was rereading the traits) are using it to up their Touch AC.
First lets look at the rules in General:
(per the Faction Guide)
Your time spent fighting and studying the greatest warriors of the society has taught you new defensive skills while wearing armor.
Benefit: You gain a +1 trait bonus to Armor Class when wearing medium or heavy armor.
---------------------------------
Ok, the first thing I want to note is the type of bonus: it is specifically a trait bonus. That means it stacks with any other bonus that is not a trait bonus.
Secondly, lets look at what it is a bonus to: Armor Class. This is specifically not an armor bonus and it is specifically a bump to Armor Class, not to the Armor Bonus.
Now let's take a look at Armor Class:
(per the Core Rulebook)
Your Armor Class (AC) represents how hard it is for opponents to land a solid, damaging blow on you. It's the attack roll result that an opponent needs to achieve to hit you. Your AC is equal to the following:
10 + armor bonus + shield bonus + Dexterity modifier + other modifiers
Note that armor limits your Dexterity bonus, so if you're wearing armor, you might not be able to apply your whole Dexterity bonus to your AC (see Table: Armor and Shields).
Sometimes you can't use your Dexterity bonus (if you have one). If you can't react to a blow, you can't use your Dexterity bonus to AC. If you don't have a Dexterity bonus, your AC does not change.
Other Modifiers: Many other factors modify your AC.
Enhancement Bonuses: Enhancement bonuses apply to your armor to increase the armor bonus it provides.
Deflection Bonus: Magical deflection effects ward off attacks and improve your AC.
Natural Armor: If your race has a tough hide, scales, or thick skin you receive a bonus to your AC.
Dodge Bonuses: Dodge bonuses represent actively avoiding blows. Any situation that denies you your Dexterity bonus also denies you dodge bonuses. (Wearing armor, however, does not limit these bonuses the way it limits a Dexterity bonus to AC.) Unlike most sorts of bonuses, dodge bonuses stack with each other.
--------------------------------------
Ok, so here we have Armor Class and Armor Bonus being two separate things. In fact, the Core Rulebook defines Armor Class to be made up of several types of bonus, and even lists a few of the potential modifiers outside of Armor, Dex and Shield: Enhancement, Deflection, Natural and Dodge.
Yet it doesn't list all of them, and we know from certain spells and wondrous items, that there are such things as Sacred, Profane, Morale and Luck Bonuses that apply to Armor Class.
So what about Touch Armor Class?
Again, lets go to the Core Rulebook
-------------------------------------
So we see that touch attacks per the core rulebook ignores, Armor Bonus, shield bonus or natural amor bonus. The language is clear, it does not say, "modifiers, such as..." or "modifiers like...." It specifically states the three type of Armor Class bonuses touch attacks ignore.
Now some might point out that it does include a list of modifiers it doesn't ignore, however, the list is preceded by the phrase "All other modifiers, such as..." making it clear that this is not the definitive list.
If it was the definitive list, this luck, morale and sacred/profane bonuses would not apply to Touch AC without a specific line in their rulebook entry about how these bonuses apply to Touch AC.
Therefore, RAW, a trait bonus to AC should apply to all forms of AC, Full, Touch and Flat, meaning that Defender of the Society should apply, RAW, to Touch and Flat. Also meaning that I should allow Fighters at my table to count it in their Touch AC calculations.
---------------------------------------
Now, that being said, I understand there is a huge difference between RAW and RAI. And I will concede the point immediately, that common sense seems to dictate that this wasn't intended to give Fighters a higher Touch Bonus (though I do not know the minds of the Devs, perhaps it was intended exactly as written and our preconceived notions of what a Fighter can and cannot do in Armor are what is inhibiting our interpretation of the rule). And if you wish not to allow this in your home game by all means, continue to do as you have always done. The intent of this thread is solely to interpret the rule as it should be enforced in Society Play.
I agree with your RAW reading about the Touch AC.
Touch attack says "All other modifiers...apply normally". In the middle of that, it lists a few of them but includes "such as" to indicate that it's not the full list. This is quite clear: for Touch AC, ignore armor, shield, and natural armor, and apply "all other modifiers".
Is there a difference between RAW and RAI here? While we can never really know, we can break it down a little, but it's long so I will hide it:
What is Touch AC? This is the AC anyone needs to hit when a tiny scratch or a even a grazing shot will have full effect on you, or when they have an ability (e.g. Incorporeal) to attack right through your hardened defenses as if they weren't there. Either way, it's the thick, hard, solid stuff that doesn't matter in your Touch AC - hard armor, thick scales, solid shields.
"Defender of the Society". What does that mean? Does it mean he modifies his armor to be thicker and stronger? Does it mean he grows hard scales on his skin? Does it mean he swats aside some attacks with his off-hand? I doubt it mean any of those things. It probably (yes, I know, but I said this was discussing RAI) means being defensive, avoiding blows, getting out of the way of attacks.
If that's the case, then this trait is not Armor, Shield, or Natural Armor. It's more like a dodge or a DEX mod than anything else. If that's how the trait is interpreted.
Let me suggest an alternative. What if the trait said:
Your time spent studying the craft of the greatest armor smiths of the society has taught you new ways to improve your armor.
Benefit: You gain a +1 trait bonus to Armor Class when wearing medium or heavy armor.
If it said that, I would probably have a hard time rationalizing that the RAI wants to apply this trait to Touch AC. But it doesn't. It says that you practice and study great warriors - that's training and education on combat styles, not armorsmithing technique, so it must be, RAI, that this trait is avoidance rather than penetration.
Hence, I suggest the RAI clearly supports applying the trait to Touch AC.
Having said all that about RAI, I could see an argument for disallowing this trait on Flat-footed AC for the same reason Dex and Dodge are ignored, but that would not be RAW since neither the trait itself nor any reading of the AC rules says this trait is not applied when Flat-footed.
I interpret the RAI for the trait bonus from Defender of the Society as applying to flat-footed AC but not touch AC.
Benefit: You gain a +1 trait bonus to Armor Class when wearing medium or heavy armor.
If the defensive skills gained by the trait were from avoiding attacks, it would be a dodge bonus similar to the dueling cloak adept trait. If it were a modification or improvement of the armor itself, it would be an enhancement bonus or worded as a trait bonus to armor (something similar to how barkskin is worded to provide a bonus to a bonus).
Instead, the trait bonus seems to be provided for using an item (medium or heavy armor) better than the average fighter. The defender of the Society knows how to take a blow at angles that optimize his armor's effectiveness.
RAW for PFS? I'd chalk it up to table variance and wouldn't sweat to much if I had different GMs ruling different things for my trait.
It is worded the same as Dodge which surely applies to touch AC.
You gain a +1 dodge bonus to your AC. A condition that makes you lose your Dex bonus to AC also makes you lose the benefits of this feat.
Whether its a good idea to have a trait better than a feat (I'd trade the armour restriction for it applying when flat footed any day) is another issue.
No, it's not a good idea to have a trait be better than a feat, since there is a feat that lets you gain two traits - ergo, a trait should be about half as good as a feat. If every trait was equal to a feat, then nobody would ever take feats, they would always just take "Additional Traits" and gain essentially two feats for the price of one.
That would be bad balance.
The fact that this trait is at least as good, maybe better, than a feat is a bid sign of power creep.
Dodge is still used to qualify for other feats, so there's that. Defender of the Society is a good trait, but taking it means you can't take other good combat traits such as reactionary and accelerated drinker. The perceived issue with traits being almost as good as a feat is remedied by the fact that you can only have one trait from each category.
Defender of the Society is a very good trait, but is balanced by being class restricted.
That's not balance, not unless it's restricted from the classes who need it most.
OK, fine, you won't see any monks with it. Big deal. If fighters, arguably the one class most in need of high AC, can take a trait that increases their AC, then this trait is available suddenly becomes THE ONE crunchy trait that every fighter needs and saying it's balanced because other classes that don't need it as much can't have it doesn't really apply.
Defender of the Society is a very good trait, but is balanced by being class restricted.That's not balance, not unless it's restricted from the classes who need it most.
OK, fine, you won't see any monks with it. Big deal. If fighters, arguably the one class most in need of high AC, can take a trait that increases their AC, then this trait is available suddenly becomes THE ONE crunchy trait that every fighter needs and saying it's balanced because other classes that don't need it as much can't have it doesn't really apply.
Medium or Heavy armor is pretty restricting, IMO, especially since most of the fighter archetypes trade out armor training. Anyone who takes this trait and is not a plain vanilla fighter is going to have reduced movement for most of their career.
Armor check penalty and encumbrance are also big issues at lower levels. Mithral medium armor starts at 4000 gp, heavy at 8K, so you're offsetting the weight until at least level 6. At that point, you've probably already invested in +1 to your armor, so you also incur the cost of swapping out armor.
Whether its a good idea to have a trait better than a feat (I'd trade the armour restriction for it applying when flat footed any day) is another issue.
Obviously it's not a good idea, but the sad fact is that there already lots of traits that are outright better than a feat or do things no feat can actually do. Along with other traits that are completely useless. And the fact that traits are placed in categories seemingly at random with no rhyme or reason as to why (why is one trait to reduce metamagic cost by 1 level in Magic and another in Regional? Why does paying lip service to Torag make you better at not being caught offguard in a fight than combat training?) but then also impose hard caps of only one trait per (their completely arbitrary) catergory...
Traits are so ridiculously screwed up and unbalanced, it is just astounding.
|
The irony never ceases to amaze me.
People scream AC sucks, don't invest in it.
next day...
OMG something raises AC, it's overpowered, nerf it.
I don't think anyone is saying to nerf the trait, per se. I think it is a question of disparity between what this trait is intended to do versus what it actually allows, especially considering that traits are supposed to be half as strong as feats. There are feats that provide bonuses to AC, but generally have situations in which the extra bonus would not apply (Dodge - denied Dex, Shield Focus - touch attacks). Conversely, this trait, as it is written, provides a flat, across the board, bonus to AC that is never lost--the character could be paralyzed and prone, but would still receive the AC bonus from the trait.
Personally, I think this trait should affect armor in the way that the Shield Focus feat affects shields: it increases the armor bonus of medium or heavy armor. This, I believe, fits the intent of the trait.
|
|
And I will concede the point immediately, that common sense seems to dictate that this wasn't intended to give Fighters a higher Touch BonusI am extremely curious what progression of thoughts led to this idea.
Well actually it was the result of a misread and the preconceived notion that medium and heavy armor are bad for Touch AC, hence, why when DM_blake posted his, I realized the error of my immediate concession, but it was too late to edit.