My comment was mainly about tanks, and an investigator is going to have trouble maintaining a high attack bonus consistently. They can burn their inspiration pool up pretty quickly trying to do that, but its not something you have much of.
I'm honestly not familiar enough with the class to pooh-pooh it properly though: what can you do (threat wise) as an investigator to make that High AC relevant to hit you over anyone else?
While not as deadly as a vivisectionist alchemist investigators are better at hitting opponents than alchemists thanks to studied combat. In terms of offense they're around the level of bards. Not a super damage dealer on their own, but far from useless in the fray.
That said they do have a trick that might draw a the attention of the enemy if used a lot, they can use Aid Another as a move action or if inspiration is used a swift action, meaning with a trait most races can add a +6 or +9 to attack/ac, add +3 to both attack and ac, ect.
|
Should be doable as Investigator.
[10]
[19] mithral breastplate +3 (armor/enhancement to armor)
[20] jingasa (luck)
[22] mutagen (natural armor)
[26] dex14+cat's grace (dex)
[31] barkskin CL 12 (enhancement to natural armor)
[35] potion of shield of faith CL 12 (recycle with Alchemical Allocation) (deflection)
[39] extract of shield (shield)
[40] dusty rose prism ioun stone (insight)This certainly doesn't break the bank. Altogether it's just a bit over 20K.
That's actually pretty respectable to run 30AC, even if the extra 10 really assumes 3 rounds of pre-buffing for 40AC, but at least its available.
My comment was mainly about tanks, and an investigator is going to have trouble maintaining a high attack bonus consistently. They can burn their inspiration pool up pretty quickly trying to do that, but its not something you have much of.
I'm honestly not familiar enough with the class to pooh-pooh it properly though: what can you do (threat wise) as an investigator to make that High AC relevant to hit you over anyone else?
Well, if I extrapolated from my level 8 PFS investigator, levelled to 12;
BAB +8/+3
Strength 16, Mutagen +4, Belt +2, Monstrous Physique II (Vouivre) +4 => +8
Size -1
+1 evil outsider bane longspear [+1/+3] or natural attack
Studied Combat +6
Heroism +2
Power Attack -3
---
spear: +18/+13 to hit (+20/+15 against evil outsiders)
natural: +17 primary / +12 secondary
Damage is also enough to get attention;
Strength 26 => +8 1H / +12 2H / +4 secondary natural
Weapon: {Spear 1+2d6(+2+2d6 vs. evil outsiders), Bite 3d6, 2 Wings 1d8} OR {Bite 3d6, 2 Claws 2d6, 2 Wings 1d8}
Studied Combat: +6
Power Attack {2H +9, 1H primary natural: +6, secondary natural: +3}
So a longspear routine is:
Longspear +18/+13 (2d6+28, 20/x3)
And it operates at 20ft reach, or 25 with Longarm.
And an all-natural routine is:
Bite +17 (3d6+20 plus grab) 2 Claws +17 (2d6+20) 2 Wings +12 (1d8+13)
.
I could probably squeeze out more, and a full martial should be able to trump it. But I don't think I need to hang my head in shame, and the big reach of the longspear combined with combat reflexes also gives me enough power projection that enemies can't really afford to ignore me.
There are multiple "defenses" in Pathfinder. A group of enemies that only targets your best is almost destined to fail.
AC
Touch AC
CMD
Will Save
Reflex Save
Fort SaveIt is very hard to protect all of these areas. If you have a high AC character, chances are (but not guaranteed) that your will save is low. Always try to target the weakest defense.
My advice to your GM would be to try enchantment on you, a charm person or perhaps a suggestion.
A dex based magus or monk can have high defenses in all areas.
how are we defining 'high defense'?
I consider 50% hit/defense rate to be relevant, so 10 less is 'irrelevant' and 10 more is 'maxxed out' for at level encounters, 15-20 more is fully maxxed out for effectively any boss you might face up to CR +3.
Judging by the monster guidelines for at level encounters (ignoring bosses) those numbers would be at level 12:
level 12 relevancy mark:
AC 31
with FF and Touch ACs being lower, maybe 21? that might be a bit off...
Fort +11
Reflex +11
Will +11
To hit +17
Spell penetration +13
Will save DC 21
Reflex save DC 20
Fort save DC 24
This is complicated slightly by iterative attacks however: so an AC of 21 might still be 'relevant' compared to the third iterative in a chain, for example: but I think it's a good ballpark for discussion.
It conveniently also puts your own third iterative 10 below the relevancy mark for attack bonus, which is nice and neat :)
There's always going to be a high watermark creature here and there too, which breaks these rules, but that just makes life interesting :) If you wanted to truly make all encounters (CR+3 'bosses' too) unable to hit your AC, you'd need to look at something at level 12 like 51AC plus anything needed to offset any AC debuffs/penalties.
But that's super high ballpark, lvl 12 party facing a CR15 ancient white dragon etc, and its exactly the type of encounter where people would probably be using lots of consumables :P
Conveniently this number is exactly 20 above the relevancy mark, in this case, read into that what you will :P
@Ascaphalus - Your attack bonus looked a little low for 12th level, but when I check my archived character sheets for 12th level I see that only my Mythic Viking was much higher (and that mostly because he’s a Mythic)
@Snowlilly - I think that 4 levels of Paladin with Oath of Vengeance can make pretty much any Cha based PC a defensive superstar (at least in games where the DM will still run Evil foes)
@Obbu - I'm not sure if I understand what you're trying to say, so let me paraphrase it as a question. Would you say that AC 31 is "decent" for 12th level, AC 21 "sucks", and AC 41 is "great"? Would you consider aiming for AC = Level+20 to be very reasonable? Does AC = Level+30 seem unreasonable to you or just very focused on defending attacks on AC? As you mentioned, buffs and debuffs can affect this stuff a lot. I have PC who had AC 32 at 12th level but was considered nearly unhittable since he intimidates and sickens most foes, trips any who are susceptible to it, and often uses dirty tricks like entangle.
@Snowlilly - I think that 4 levels of Paladin with Oath of Vengeance can make pretty much any Cha based PC a defensive superstar (at least in games where the DM will still run Evil foes)
Paladins tend to be very tough, but also tend to have low touch ACs.
I've been requested not to play paladins anymore.
|
Ahh yes. Never bring 3PP to an AP. They cause problems. The GM needs to alter the module to accommodate you.Dex-based, poor fort save. Yep, targeting pretty much anything other than AC could be potentially disastrous for your character, depending on what you've done to shore up those other defenses.Ya, that was basically my response :) he was running a module and after a few fights where I cheerfully tanked 5 mooks and then a boss character with lots of attacks at a low bonus he was a little put-out with me.
The 3pp content is a problem but it's not really THAT big of a deal. Witches can force the reroll on more than just attack rolls all day as well.
As for the characters AC, well that's the easiest part to deal with.
This is a Dex based build so it focuses on dex bonuses, Dodge Bonuses and feats/abilities that lets you add some other stat or number to it's Dex/Dodge bonus. It's effectively a Kensai Magus with no spells and has the same weakness that class has.
Darkness
Turn off the lights and this character becomes easy as pie to take out. Remember in darkness (or deeper darkness if the race has darkvision) the character is blinded which gives these penalties:
A blinded creature loses its Dexterity modifier to AC (if positive) and takes a –2 penalty to AC.
Dodge Bonuses
Dodge bonuses represent actively avoiding blows. Any situation that denies you your Dexterity bonus also denies you dodge bonuses.
All the Dex bonuses go away, all the dodge bonuses go away, his Combat Insight class ability goes away, his Deadly Insight ability goes away, half of his (probable) defensive items and feats stop working.
Usually this builds AC drops down to +13 (base 10 -2 from blindness +3 from ring or bracers +2 light armor)
At this level of play even with the roll 2x take lowest most opponents should have a much better than average chance to hit.
Literally if you just turn the lights out when fighting this build it becomes a non-issue to defeat it.
[edit]Now if you are dealing with a build that has darkvision or Blindsight that has all this then you just invest in a single feat and kill the target with that. Improved Feint destroys this build as well though you need a second mook in the fight to beat it. Slightly harder but not enough to actually matter.
High AC is easy to build. Being truly hard to kill is very difficult to build. I managed a pretty unkillable bastard once with a dwarven defender who had an AC in the 40s, a CMD in the 50s, DR 13/-, and his minimum save (against magic) was around +12. This was around level 13.
Of course my greatest weakness was absolutely crap mobility at this level.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Obbu - I'm not sure if I understand what you're trying to say, so let me paraphrase it as a question. Would you say that AC 31 is "decent" for 12th level, AC 21 "sucks", and AC 41 is "great"? Would you consider aiming for AC = Level+20 to be very reasonable? Does AC = Level+30 seem unreasonable to you or just very focused on defending attacks on AC? As you mentioned, buffs and debuffs can affect this stuff a lot. I have PC who had AC 32 at 12th level but was considered nearly un-hittable since he intimidates and sickens most foes, trips any who are susceptible to it, and often uses dirty tricks like entangle.
Ignoring buffs and debuffs, they are relevant but they complicate the argument, and I'm trying to make a guideline here.
Per Monster Creation the attack bonus for a CR12 monster with High attack (Accurate Bruiser, not necessarily high damage) is +21.
The AC number I listed will allow you to be missed 50% of the time by their first iterative attack. The other numbers I listed have a similar effect, either 50% defense success, or 50% offense success vs the average monster at that level. Whether you think 50% chance is 'good', 'average' or 'sub-par' depends a lot on other aspects of your character design. Having a 'relevant' AC at level 1 is ridiculously easy, but very dangerous, as your health pool is pitiful.
If the monster uses natural attacks, most of the attacks will be high like this: if they use iteratives, they will be -5/-10 etc.
The AC = Lvl +20 is too hard to apply to all levels, especially level 1, where you are lucky to have over 20.
Loose Relevance Guideline:
If you want a guideline for every level, looking at Pathfinder Bestiary with statistics I think its more meaningful to say:
10+1.75 AC per level
(depending on how defensive you want to be, this would range from 1.5 to 2.0)
1.75 Attack Bonus per level
(depending on whether you are full or 3/4, and whether you want to rely upon iteratives/natural attacks etc, again ranging from 1.5 to 2.0)
3 CMB per level
3 CMD per level
1 reflex per level
1 will per level
1 fortitude per level
2 stealth per level
+1 spell penetration per level (this is actually covered by caster level)
10+1.2 Save DC per level
with the -10 irrelevant, +10 maxxed, and +15/+20 untouchable by bosses caveats, as they all focus around D20 rolls with a bonus.
Caveats:
- You do not need all of these stats to be relevant, depending on your class role (spell penetration is not much use to a martial tank). They are simply numbers to gauge if your stat is going to help you out at a particular level.
- These numbers are NOT exact, but they give you a smooth curve to refer to at a given level, and they avoid using fractions too much. Just remember that this is simplistic math, and that monster offenses/defenses fluctuate around the norm for the level, and also arent a 100% even growth.
- Some monsters have a lower attack bonuses than others (whether because they are less martially competent, have high damage to compensate or whatever), VS these your AC is far more relevant: using the level 12 example, the low attack is 6 lower than the high, which is used for these numbers. So, total irrelevancy is usually 5 to 10 lower than the irrelevant mark, as it is possible to be facing a horde of CR-1 wizards who have no spells prepared, and are hitting you with books: but that is an edge case scenario.
- 3/4 classes like rogues and investigators can pile on some extra damage per hit, via sneak attack/studied combat/studied strike and so on to generally balance out lower to hit bonus.
- Custom built NPCs will often be slightly higher at a certain task (spotting your stealth, if they are focused on perception for example).
- CMB vs CMD is very loose, the numbers are for creatures that don't have things like +10 CMD vs trip or trip immunity and so on.
- Spell penetration relevance is covered by caster level alone, as noted. However, considering that Spell Resistance is usually in addition to other defenses (saves etc), if your DC is relevant, and your SR is relevant, you'll have only a 25% chance of success at landing that spell on a spell-resistant target, for example. As a quick rule, raise the relevancy numbers both by 4 in that case, and you'll have about 49% success rate.
For the GM perspective:
a CR=APL bruiser (easy fight) should still have a 50/50 chance of hitting these relevance marks (first iterative, or most natural attacks). In my example of the ancient white dragon, a CR+3 boss should have a 50/50 chance of hitting the 'maxxed' value (relevant+10). If they manage relevant +20, I will be very surprised (and I would request a detailed build + gear) if they have not let another aspect of their character slip.
Characters SHOULD get to use their strengths, a high AC character should be a 'hard target' in melee, to deter repeated attacks (both in the sense of iteratives, and after the monster realizes the PC is super-hard-to-hit). But there are plenty of other ways to harass a PC in particular, and unless they are forcing your hand with high damage, area control, positioning (which you have more control of than they do), or some other method of threat, their AC is an attack deterrent, not an I-win-button.
Meta-gaming wise, as a GM there are two ways to attack encounters: how can I win completely, and how can I have a small victory in draining the party's resources by enough that they feel it.
Obviously, if your PCs constrain themselves to not meta-gaming and only take actions in character, then you should consider this yourself for your creatures.
But I believe that meta-gaming as a GM is OK Provided you aren't being too mean-spirited about it. I like the idea of making 1/3 of encounters where a build struggles, 1/3 where they shine, and 1/3 where they get by OK. Obviously you have 4~ players to work with, so that's never going to hold exactly true, but it bears keeping in mind.
Know your party's weaknesses: that means getting their sheets and jotting down their defense numbers.
If a character is skyrocketing way above any of the relevant numbers, they are usually letting something else slide, sometimes this is other defenses, sometimes it's just a low health pool hidden by across-the-board high defenses, sometimes their offense sucks. Sometimes they aren't mobile enough.
If their offense sucks, then you can waltz around them and hit other party members, then gang up on them last. If their attack bonus is low enough that they're almost guaranteed to miss, provoke like a madman to get to the squishy behind them. Consider a monster with DR sometimes, which will be un-damagable if their offense is sub-par.
If one defense (saves, touch AC etc) is lower, make sure you target that in some manner, in some combats at least. Overrun/Trip/grapple them if their CMD doesn't match their AC. Hold person, Charm, Fear, color spray. Ray spells and nets vs touch AC.
If their defenses rock, but they have a small health pool, there are ways around that too: spell resistance can be avoided by many conjuration spells, magic missiles don't miss, many evocation spells do damage on a successful save.
If they arent mobile enough: ranged attacks, flying creatures and so on become big challenges. Formation fighting tactics/terrain/reach might be useful too.
Above all: Don't do this every fight, but do it often enough that the character feels challenged. If they have drastically low defenses in one area, try to walk the line between punishing them and encouraging them to plug the hole.
As a side musing, if you wanted to talk 'strict' averages, depending on how often you fight CR-1/CR=APL/CR+1/CR+2/CR+3, you might want to treat your level as one higher for calculating.
ie. AC = 10+(1.75*(CL+1))
@Devilkiller - I've realised I didn't address your question directly enough, so my method of defining if an AC is good would be:
Work out the relevance number, then add:
-10 irrelevant
mooks hit on a 2
+0 relevant
50% mitigation vs average monster, any points above are relevant vs bosses
+5 good, you are now tanky
75% mitigation vs average monster, 25% (or more) mitigation against bosses
+10 fantastic: however requires control to keep tanking mooks
Effectively immune against average monster barring 20s, 50% mitigation vs bosses. Providing enough threat to get normal monsters to attack you becomes close to impossible: battlefield control may be necessary to do this at this stage.
+15-20 godly: nothing will attack you unless you force the issue
Effectively immune against bosses attacks, barring 20s. They will need to debuff your defense, or target a separate defense that is lower. Boss probably will not attack your AC at all, so AC tanking becomes a problem.
I should stress that this is very loose math again though :P You can probably apply it and come up short/over in many places.
If you are trying to be a dedicated AC tank, I'd suggest the sweet spot is +5, and definitely get some area control (step up, stand still, pin down, stem the tide, no escape etc) once you have more than +5, if not before, as monsters will start seeking easier prey. If you want more for a boss fight, buffs can bring that extra +5/+10.
If you are trying to avoid being attacked entirely, then +10 will give you that vs mooks, and good mitigation vs bosses.
These numbers also give good starting points for working out what combat expertise or mobility will do for you: +6 and mobility will make mooks need 20s to AoO against you, for example.
With combat expertise, you might want to get +5, than try to eke out +4 more to hit, which can be traded for defense against a boss, if it starts eating your face: this means that your AC isn't working against you VS mooks, and you get some offense when its not turned on.
|
|
@Ascaphalus - Your attack bonus looked a little low for 12th level, but when I check my archived character sheets for 12th level I see that only my Mythic Viking was much higher (and that mostly because he’s a Mythic)
It's not growing a whole lot between level 8 and 12, and I'm worried about that. But then I haven't really factored in an improvement in gear.
The general idea about investigators in combat is pretty simple;
1) The alchemy spell list is amazing. It contains most of the best long-term buffs.
2) Studied combat gives you +1/2 to hit and damage per level. On top op a 3/4 BAB chassis that puts you on equal footing with full BAB classes.
In Age of Worms, one PC was a dwarf tank, axe and board. He was immobile, basically invulnerable with a 55/60 AC. He learned the bad side of this, as he only dealt some 1d8+10 or so damage per hit. The monsters cheerfully ignored him.
In Age of Worms, one PC was a dwarf tank, axe and board. He was immobile, basically invulnerable with a 55/60 AC. He learned the bad side of this, as he only dealt some 1d8+10 or so damage per hit. The monsters cheerfully ignored him.
You didn't find 5 foot corridors to use to your advantage and lure your enemies there? Or does that AP just not have those?
The end of it did not.
I think Obbu’s system looks pretty reasonable though it doesn’t seem to directly address the question of how much AC is “too much”. That’s probably a tough question to answer though, especially since you'd have to think about whether to take buffs and debuffs into account. In some games I play in we frequently debuff an enemy's attack rolls by -8 (Evil Eye -4, shaken -2, sickened -2) all the way up to -14 (prone -4, entangled -2). In one game initially powerful melee opponents often find themselves writhing on the ground getting beat to death by a Witch.
@snowlilly - Touch AC being so difficult to defend is one thing I don’t like about touch attacks. Luckily a lot of the stuff which makes touch or incorporeal touch attacks is Evil, so Smite Evil helped me a lot there. Fighting defensively can work well too since a lot of touchers have mediocre to low AC.
@Sissyl - That's a really high AC. Sacrificing a point or two of AC to buy items like Deliquescent Gloves and a Bane Baldric might have helped boost damage a bit. Power Attack probably would have been worthwhile too.
Just realised relevant CMB should be about 2 per level, not 3 per level in my calculations at lvl 12. By CR20-23, it's about 2.5 per level.
As a GM I never worry about too high of an AC. When you focus on AC you do at the expense of offense. That means less damage out put and more opportunities for the bad guys to hit the high AC as they last longer. If you have heavy hitter in the group that easier to hit the bad guys are best to deal with that threat first anyways and ignore the turtle.
DarknessTurn off the lights and this character becomes easy as pie to take out. Remember in darkness (or deeper darkness if the race has darkvision) the character is blinded which gives these penalties:
A blinded creature loses its Dexterity modifier to AC (if positive) and takes a –2 penalty to AC.
Dodge Bonuses
Dodge bonuses represent actively avoiding blows. Any situation that denies you your Dexterity bonus also denies you dodge bonuses.All the Dex bonuses go away, all the dodge bonuses go away, his Combat Insight class ability goes away, his Deadly Insight ability goes away, half of his (probable) defensive items and feats stop working.
Usually this builds AC drops down to +13 (base 10 -2 from blindness +3 from ring or bracers +2 light armor)
At this level of play even with the roll 2x take lowest most opponents should have a much better than average chance to hit.Literally if you just turn the lights out...
That is going to work 2-3 times max before the player picks up Blindfighting. The feat can be obtained by slotting an incandescent blue sphere into a wayfinder.
It's good to toss in once in a while, along with invisible opponents, but don't start using it constantly. It's not worth countering if rare, mandatory to counter if it becomes commonplace.
A magus build I posted for an unrelated discussion. Meets all the defensive benchmarks while keeping decent (but not min/maxed) damage. The only number that falls short is CMB, which the character would not be using.
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2t843?Survivors-of-Hell#26
The character has been optimized for a specific scenario, so certain choices are not normal (enduring blade, no Fly/Haste). Blind Fighting is a feat specifically taken to eliminate penalties from darkness / invisible opponents.
|
|
One thing I've been doing as a DM is using Mobs. The PC's are at a high enough level that the average Mook cannot hurt them. Mobs on the other hand do Automatic Damage like Swarms so they ignore AC when they attack. Even a CR 5 mob does 4d6 damage a turn and that can add up after a while. I do house rule that when a mob is at 1/2 HP it does 1/2 damage as it makes sense that if their numbers are reduced its not as effective at doing damage. It was actually pretty effective when I threw 4 30 goblin mobs at a party and they left the group heavily damaged by the end of the fight.
|
|
DarknessTurn off the lights and this character becomes easy as pie to take out. Remember in darkness (or deeper darkness if the race has darkvision) the character is blinded which gives these penalties:
A blinded creature loses its Dexterity modifier to AC (if positive) and takes a –2 penalty to AC.
Dodge Bonuses
Dodge bonuses represent actively avoiding blows. Any situation that denies you your Dexterity bonus also denies you dodge bonuses.All the Dex bonuses go away, all the dodge bonuses go away, his Combat Insight class ability goes away, his Deadly Insight ability goes away, half of his (probable) defensive items and feats stop working.
Usually this builds AC drops down to +13 (base 10 -2 from blindness +3 from ring or bracers +2 light armor)
At this level of play even with the roll 2x take lowest most opponents should have a much better than average chance to hit.Literally if you just turn the lights out...
That is going to work 2-3 times max before the player picks up Blindfighting. The feat can be obtained by slotting an incandescent blue sphere into a wayfinder.
It's good to toss in once in a while, along with invisible opponents, but don't start using it constantly. It's not worth countering if rare, mandatory to counter if it becomes commonplace.
A magus build I posted for an unrelated discussion. Meets all the defensive benchmarks while keeping decent (but not min/maxed) damage. The only number that falls short is CMB, which the character would not be using.
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2t843?Survivors-of-Hell#26
The character has been optimized for a specific scenario, so certain choices are not normal (enduring blade, no Fly/Haste). Blind Fighting is a feat specifically taken to eliminate penalties from darkness / invisible opponents.
And Blidfight doesn't help with this. If you go back and read the feat you'll see it only prevents you from losing your Dex bonus vs. invisible opponents. It does nothing against fighting in the dark.
An invisible attacker gets no advantages related to hitting you in melee. That is, you don't lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class, and the attacker doesn't get the usual +2 bonus for being invisible.As long as the character can't see they lose their dex bonus. There are no ways to remove the penalties from blindness.
DarknessTurn off the lights and this character becomes easy as pie to take out. Remember in darkness (or deeper darkness if the race has darkvision) the character is blinded which gives these penalties:
A blinded creature loses its Dexterity modifier to AC (if positive) and takes a –2 penalty to AC.
Dodge Bonuses
Dodge bonuses represent actively avoiding blows. Any situation that denies you your Dexterity bonus also denies you dodge bonuses.All the Dex bonuses go away, all the dodge bonuses go away, his Combat Insight class ability goes away, his Deadly Insight ability goes away, half of his (probable) defensive items and feats stop working.
Usually this builds AC drops down to +13 (base 10 -2 from blindness +3 from ring or bracers +2 light armor)
At this level of play even with the roll 2x take lowest most opponents should have a much better than average chance to hit.Literally if you just turn the lights out...
That is going to work 2-3 times max before the player picks up Blindfighting. The feat can be obtained by slotting an incandescent blue sphere into a wayfinder.
It's good to toss in once in a while, along with invisible opponents, but don't start using it constantly. It's not worth countering if rare, mandatory to counter if it becomes commonplace.
A magus build I posted for an unrelated discussion. Meets all the defensive benchmarks while keeping decent (but not min/maxed) damage. The only number that falls short is CMB, which the character would not be using.
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2t843?Survivors-of-Hell#26
The character has been optimized for a specific scenario, so certain choices are not normal (enduring blade, no Fly/Haste). Blind Fighting is a feat specifically taken to eliminate penalties from darkness / invisible opponents.
I think Obbu’s system looks pretty reasonable though it doesn’t seem to directly address the question of how much AC is “too much”.
As a magus, I don't consider more AC to be "Too Much" until most opponents need a 25+ to hit. I rarely get this unless the party has a debuff focused witch.
I hate loosing Mirror Images when opponents roll a 19.
And Blidfight doesn't help with this. If you go back and read the feat you'll see it only prevents you from losing your Dex bonus vs. invisible opponents. It does nothing against fighting in the dark.
An invisible attacker gets no advantages related to hitting you in melee. That is, you don't lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class, and the attacker doesn't get the usual +2 bonus for being invisible.As long as the character can't see they lose their dex bonus. There are no ways to remove the penalties from blindness.
If you can point out the difference between fighting a visually undetectable opponent (how the invisible condition is defined by RAW) and an fighting an invisible opponent I'll listen. The argument has been ongoing in many threads for years now with no FAQ.
It's trivial to break the game in a dozen ways if you parse the rules narrowly enough without applying common sense. Ever seen an entire party dump all their gold into one massively enchanted weapon, then pass it amongst themselves as a free action while fighting? Every player gets full benefit of the weapon while attacking.
|
|
And Blidfight doesn't help with this. If you go back and read the feat you'll see it only prevents you from losing your Dex bonus vs. invisible opponents. It does nothing against fighting in the dark.
An invisible attacker gets no advantages related to hitting you in melee. That is, you don't lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class, and the attacker doesn't get the usual +2 bonus for being invisible.As long as the character can't see they lose their dex bonus. There are no ways to remove the penalties from blindness.
If you can point out the difference between fighting a visually undetectable opponent (how the invisible condition is defined by RAW) and an fighting an invisible opponent I'll listen. The argument has been ongoing in many threads for years now with no FAQ.
** spoiler omitted **
It's not a matter of a difference between the two conditions it's going by what the feat SAYS.
It specifies, as I quoted, invisible attackers don't get a bonus against you. Invisible is a specific game term and has a set definition. This feat says it affects that defined game term. Blindness is a different but also defined game term and this feat doesn't mention it, therefore it doesn't affect it.Thematically an invisible person can be detected by seeing their footprints in sand/dirt/water as they move or seeing them brush against something or just seeing them exhale and finding them. Total darkness or blindness prevent you from even seeing that which is why this feat doesn't protect you while in complete darkness.
If you and your GM don't want the feat to work that way for your games that's great, but in RAW games or under a different GM house rules like that probably won't fly.
It's not a matter of a difference between the two conditions it's going by what the feat SAYS.
It specifies, as I quoted, invisible attackers don't get a bonus against you. Invisible is a specific game term and has a set definition. This feat says it affects that defined game term. Blindness is a different but also defined game term and this feat doesn't mention it, therefore it doesn't affect it.Thematically an invisible person can be detected by seeing their footprints in sand/dirt/water as they move or seeing them brush against something or just seeing them exhale and finding them. Total darkness or blindness prevent you from even seeing that which is why this feat doesn't protect you while in complete darkness.
If you and your GM don't want the feat to work that way for your games that's great, but in RAW games or under a different GM house rules like that probably won't fly.
Invisible is defined in the conditions (RAW) as visually undetectable.
Characters with total concealment are visually undetectable.Invisible opponents are specifically addressed under the rules for total concealment.
|
|
It's not a matter of a difference between the two conditions it's going by what the feat SAYS.
It specifies, as I quoted, invisible attackers don't get a bonus against you. Invisible is a specific game term and has a set definition. This feat says it affects that defined game term. Blindness is a different but also defined game term and this feat doesn't mention it, therefore it doesn't affect it.Thematically an invisible person can be detected by seeing their footprints in sand/dirt/water as they move or seeing them brush against something or just seeing them exhale and finding them. Total darkness or blindness prevent you from even seeing that which is why this feat doesn't protect you while in complete darkness.
If you and your GM don't want the feat to work that way for your games that's great, but in RAW games or under a different GM house rules like that probably won't fly.
Invisible is defined in the conditions (RAW) as visually undetectable.
Characters with total concealment are visually undetectable.
Blinded is defined as The creature cannot see. This is what darkness inflicts on the target.
This is different then invisible which states this object as visually undetectable but everything else is visible.
Blinded is defined as The creature cannot see. This is what darkness inflicts on the target.
This is different then invisible which states this object as visually undetectable but everything else is visible.
You should probably point that out the whoever wrote the RAW for concealment, since they treat darkness and invisible in the same manner.
The only difference is the movement restrictions for darkness, which blindfighting removes.
|
|
Blinded is defined as The creature cannot see. This is what darkness inflicts on the target.
This is different then invisible which states this object as visually undetectable but everything else is visible.
You should probably point that out the whoever wrote the RAW for concealment, since they treat darkness and invisible in the same manner.
The only difference is the movement restrictions for darkness, which blindfighting removes.
Ok, I now see where the confusion is coming from.
YOU are debating how you think the feat works based on other rules in the game.
I'M debating how the feat says it works and using that to fit it into the game.
Remember the invisibility & concealment rules are general rules for the pathfinder system. The Blindfighting rules are SPECIFIC rules for how this feat works and per the core rules definition SPECIFIC rules trump GENERAL rules.
Are you trying to convince us that the feat BLIND-fighting doesn't help when you're blind?
There's plenty of precedent for the fact that just because something makes absolutely no sense on its face doesn't mean the rules aren't written that way.
|
|
Are you trying to convince us that the feat BLIND-fighting doesn't help when you're blind?There's plenty of precedent for the fact that just because something makes absolutely no sense on its face doesn't mean the rules aren't written that way.
Yup. The real issue is the name of the feat doesn't match what it does, like so many other feats out there.
This feat functions as an anti-concealment/anti-invisibility feat, that's the main benefit of it. It specifically states what it works on (invisibility) and the only thing it does against invisibility is not require you to make an acrobatics check to move at full speed.Nothing else.
I'm of the crowd that blind fight should work fully for darkness/blindness, however I agree that the RAW does not say this.
I've put up a FAQ request thread over in the rules forum, both because I'm interested, and I think we could probably derail this thread if we dwell on it here :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If discussing potential shortcomings in RPG products is considered "disrespectful" it seems like that might make it tough for the folks writing them to get honest and potentially useful feedback.
Anyhow, the Misfortune hex affects one enemy, allows a saving throw. Unlike Evil Eye it doesn't do anything if the enemy makes the save, and even if they fail you'd have to spend a Move action each round to extend the duration with Cackle. Unless I'm mistaken the 3pp Combat Precognition ability affects everybody attacking you, allows no saving throw, and lasts for multiple rounds (at least if you have a Wisdom bonus) without any further actions on your part. I think that the 3pp ability sounds better than Misfortune in terms of defending attacks on AC.
I feel like Mirror Image might be a more fitting example. Usually it costs a standard action to deploy, but the Magus can pop it out quickly with Spell Combat. Of course that means that the Magus isn't casting some other spell, but if you're focused on defense then Mirror Image can be pretty powerful (especially if you already have a high AC)
In the campaign I'm playing in, my DM complained that my AC was too high and I was rendering mooks worthless. I looked up some alternative attack modes he could drop into modules easily.
I notice that this is a topic that DMs complain about a bit on the forums so I figured I'd put up a blog post with what I found.
Let me ask you two questions: One; Is your DM incredibly new to tabletop RPGs? If so, then this is just a learning experience for him. He's learning the hard way that some adjustment is always required when fashioning adventures for PC's. Nature of the beast.
Second; Are you, by comparison to your DM, a very experienced player? If so, min-maxing the s&&+ out of your character while your newbie DM is struggling to make things fun, it's just a douchebag move. Don't break the game, just because you can.In light of that, this is what you need to do. Tell your DM to stop whining. He had access to the same information you did. He had to finalize your character. If he didn't understand what he was reading, then that's on him. No reason to penalize you for it. If he really has a problem with your character, just drop a Tarrasque on the party and be done with it. Yes, it's a serious dick move, but it wipes out the party and allows everyone a clean slate (I've had DM's do this because players were starting to get too big for their britches. "I am the DM. I am god, I say you die.") That pretty much ends the debate. If he says an attack hits, f@&% what the dice say, you take a sword to the ribs. Why? He's the DM. That's his choice.