AC and ability score scaling


General Discussion


2 people marked this as a favorite.

AC:
I made a chart of expected AC by level for different armor and dexterity set ups. All armors have a armor bonus + max dex bonus limit of +7, this creates an odd system.

Heavier armors have a large bonus and a max dex that is achievable at low levels, so a character that uses heavier armor's AC bonus will be higher than a character that uses lighter armor's AC. But as you level and gain boosts to four stats the lighter armors catch up at different rates, eventually all armor styles max dex bonus can be reached and all give an equivalent AC bonus.

I find it very odd that heavier armor characters have an advantage at lower levels that goes away as characters level. It seems like if a character concept has higher AC than another character concept, it should keep that advantage for all levels. It doesn't make sense to me for heavy armor characters to have a higher AC at low levels, but to lose that advantage as you level. They should always a consistent difference with different armor types, wither that's +0, or +2 or whatever.

Stat boosts:
Stat boosts being only +1 past 18 has its own problems. One being a character has no advantage for having an odd stat, so at those levels the bonus is completely wasted. If you were playing a character from levels 5-9 it makes no sense to put the boost to make a 19, it's trading power now for power when you're levels 10-14. Levels take a long time, and its no fun to have to sacrifice for something that would be a long way away. It also means a character created for a specific range of levels (5-9, 10-14, 15-19) will definitely have an advantage from not wasting stat points on odd scores. This also encourages building a character for a specific level range: a halfling cleric could start with dex 14 wis 18 cha 16 turning into dex 16 wis 19 cha 18, but starting dex 16 wis 16 cha 16 turning into dex 18 wis 18 cha 18 is unequivocally better.

A reason I think they want to have this is to lesson the penalty of not having an 18 in your primary score, but this just means that the penalty is as if stat boosts were always +2 at levels (1-4,10-14,20) and didn't exist at all at levels (5-9,15-19). Having a different penalty depending on the levels doesn't seem like a nice balance.

Having stat boosts be always +2 doesn't seem to cause problems to me, along with removing the +2 item at level 14, it changes the max stat bonus from +7 to +8 and makes the gaining of stat boosts more smooth (starting 16 can go from +4 to +6 from levels 14 to 15).

Chart:
Spreadsheet with chart here.

Primary is an attack based off an ability score starting at 18 and using a stat item at 14. Secondary is an attack based off an ability score starting at 16. Dex 18 means starting with dex 18 and using every boost, along with a stat booster at level 14. Dex 16 means starting with dex 16 and using every boost. Dex 14 means starting with dex 14 and boosting to dex 18. Bonus is the bonus without level or proficiency.

Suggested Changes:
On sheet 2 is a suggested change: All stat boosts give +2 and have all armors start as bonus+max dex = 5, and every five levels use new materials to increase max dex bonus or increase AC bonus.

Medium or heavy armors could either have the same max bonus as light armors, have a slightly higher bonus like +1, or have some small DR like resist 2 all.

This change would also have the nice effect of to-hit bonuses and AC bonuses increasing at the same rate, instead of to-hit starting lower than heavy armor but increasing faster (scaling similarly to unarmored Dex 18 AC). This would keep a consistent feel of combat if creatures stats were built as PCs or scaled the same way.

Example materials:

Level 5 materials:
Low grade darkwood: increase light armor not made of metal's max dex bonus by 1.
Low grade mitheral: increase metal armor's max dex bonus by 1.
Low grade adamantium: increase metal armor's AC and TAC bonus by 1.

Level 10 materials:
Mid grade darkwood: increase light armor not made of metal's max dex bonus by 2.
Mid grade mitheral: increase metal armor's max dex bonus by 2.
Mid grade adamantium: increase metal armor's AC and TAC bonus by 2.

Level 15 materials:
High grade darkwood: increase light armor not made of metal's max dex bonus by 3.
High grade mitheral: increase metal armor's max dex bonus by 3.
High grade adamantium: increase metal armor's AC and TAC bonus by 3.

Level 20 materials:
True grade darkwood: increase light armor not made of metal's max dex bonus by 4.
True grade mitheral: increase metal armor's max dex bonus by 4.
True grade adamantium: increase metal armor's AC and TAC bonus by 4.

Side note:
Also heavy armors are not affordable at level 1, so medium armor characters with high dex will have the highest just for that level.

Summary:
Medium/heavy armors have higher AC at low levels but not at high levels. Having all armors scale the same way and all stat boost giving +2 would make a better system.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
citricking wrote:


Stat boosts:
Stat boosts being only +1 past 18 has its own problems. One being a character has no advantage for having an odd stat, so at those levels the bonus is completely wasted. If you were playing a character from levels 5-9 it makes no sense to put the boost to make a 19, it's trading power now for power when you're levels 10-14. Levels take a long time, and its no fun to have to sacrifice for something that would be a long way away. It also means a character created for a specific range of levels (5-9, 10-14, 15-19) will definitely have an advantage from not wasting stat points on odd scores. This also encourages building a character for a specific level range: a halfling cleric could start with dex 14 wis 18 cha 16 turning into dex 16 wis 19 cha 18, but starting dex 16 wis 16 cha 16 turning into dex 18 wis 18 cha 18 is unequivocally better.

I think the best solution to this would be requiring that you spend 2 stat boosts in order to bump 18 to 20 at the levels you get boosts.

That way it's still a significant sacrifice to do it, but you can still gain immediate benefits.

I do think that classes like Fighter/Wizard/Cleric will always take their primary again, but some of the classes (or some of the levels you get AB at) might not.

Also probably less likely for classes that plan to Multiclass (which usually have heavy Ability Score requirements.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm in agreement that with the elimination of item boosts to stats beyond a +2, Stat boosts by level should grant +2 even above 18 instead of only +1 above 18.

I'm also in agreement that all armors giving the same AC bonus if you meet the maximum dexterity is... kind of stupid considering the penalties for wearing heavy armor vs how easy it is to get a 16 dexterity. This results in making medium armor nearly universally a better option outside of Paladin and Fighter, who have superior proficiency bonus to heavy armor. It's relatively easy to get a 16 or 18 dexterity through level up boosts OR items, meaning medium armor gives you that +7 AC total without the penalties of heavy armor. Paladins getting legendary proficiency with only heavy armor means that for pure AC Paladins get more from Heavy armor than medium (a one point difference). The same is true of fighters, who gain master proficiency in heavy armor but not medium. Again, there is a one point advantage to wearing heavy armor, which is not at all significant given how much this system ultimately relies on the d20 roll anyways.

Liberty's Edge

Midnightoker wrote:
citricking wrote:


...

.I think the best solution to this would be requiring that you spend 2 stat boosts in order to bump 18 to 20 at the levels you get boosts.

...

Can you do that? I thought it had to be four different stats. I got the impression that the developers were trying to limit the "INT 42 wizard".


Does your assessment take into account that fighters and Paladins get increased proficiency bonus with heavy armors that they don't get with light? I think your analysis is why that is the case.


Unicore wrote:

Does your assessment take into account that fighters and Paladins get increased proficiency bonus with heavy armors that they don't get with light? I think your analysis is why that is the case.

I hope that is not the case, that would mean proficiency increases would be limited to heavy armor only, to give it an advantage. I feel that's rather limiting, that would mean having a character with a better proficiency in light or medium armor would disrupt the balance. That really limits what future character concepts they could have.

There's a good chance you're right and that's why they only have fighters and paladins being good with heavy armor, but I really hope not.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

So, this is an issue. Like with all issues, we need to identify a cause to have a solution.
The issue is that armour choice feels forced and needlessly skewed towards Light armour (normally studded leather), and medium armour has only penalties in comparison. Heavy armour has a lot more penalties and is only viable for those two classes that get specific bonuses to it (and reduce the penalties, too). Heavy armour prices make it a hard fit for early levels, but stats increase mean that Dex is never really low at mid-high levels, so there's never really a "sweet spot" and it's basically only there to trigger Paladin Fortitude boosts.
What is the cause?
There are a lot of new tools in P2 that could be used to amplify choice. Weapon traits have (mostly) added variety to the weapon table by shifting various bonuses, but armour traits seem to only add penalties. The difference between AC and TAC bonuses could increase combination but in reality TAC is very low. The penalties themselves play a role, but there is no real tradeoff (then again, they are easy to remove).
Let's work it in reverse, and please, follow me for a minute. Here's what I'm thinking could be done:

- make it so that armour quality no longer reduces penalties. Don't kill me, keep reading.
- add new armour traits, including some that reduce penalties, that scale based on quality. More on this later. Oh, and Clumsy is awful.
- normalise spell attacks to normalise TAC. Currently, AC is high, TAC is low, martials attack AC with their primary stat, casters attack TAC with their second or third stat. Give casters touch attack based on spell roll, and TAC is suddenly allowed to be a couple points higher.If you are worried about Alchemist, give him a better proficiency with bombs. It's not so hard. He already has enough issues.
- work the armour table by moving around AC, TAC, penalties, and properties. With so many moving parts, it's definitely possible to create multiple options within the same armour proficiency tier, and to gear different weapons for different situations and purposes. Some will give better AC, some better TAC, some will fit different styles. Cmon.

Let's try a draft:

Starting with Light armour, we'll ask first what the idea of light armour is. To me, light armour is not very protective, and relies on the wearer's ability to dodge. It's light, allows for good movement, and mostly fitting for those characters that rely on nimbleness and stealth.
So:
Padded Armour: little more than a thick shirt, it gives the highest flexibility but is unlikely to last long.
AC+1, TAC+0, max dex +6. Fragile.

Leather: just a little thicker than padded, it covers your body more but starts pinching at the elbows.
AC+1, TAC+1, max dex +5. Fragile.

Studded Leather: let's skip on the existence of the studs. This covers you pretty well but also limits your movements, but certainly not your ability to climb and push.
AC+1, TAC+2, max dex +5, -1 penalty. Lightweight.

Chain Shirt: we are getting into metal. This one is a bit heavier, but the links make it really easy to move... and clink around.
AC+2, TAC +2, max dex +4, -1 penalty. Flexible, Noisy.

Off from the start, once could say "But Studded is still the best!" and it's kinda true. However, studded leather is only lightweight (see end post), which means for a professional rogue, it'll limit Acrobatics and Thievery in a way that Chain Shirt does not. On the other hand, Chain Shirt limits Athletics. Both limit Stealth, making Leather a risky but attractive option as long as nothing damages it. And finally, for those who managed to increase their Dexterity to great levels, Padded Armour offers the best AC of the light armour world.

I realise there is little wiggle room in Light Armour because of the very low penalties and high Dex, so why don't we try with Medium?

Medium armour is usually heavier, limited to the upper body, but more solid than Light armour. It gives decent protection without getting to the point of encasing yourself in a can.

Hide: usually fulfilling the "savage barbarian" fantasy, this is a rough collection of thick hides and pelts that protect the wearer... up to a point. You'll get the pun soon.
AC+2, TAC +1, max dex +4, -2 penalty. Impervious (B,S), Medium.

Scale mail: made of tiny little metal plates joined together, a scale mail is flexible and tough, definitely a useful protection.
AC+3, TAC+2, max dex +4, -2 penalty. Flexible, Impervious (P), Medium.

Chain mail: a more covering, more sturdy version of chain shirt, chain mail is great to protect your body from cuts and slashes but more restricting.
AC+3, TAC+3, max dex +3, -2 penalty. Flexible, Impervious (S), Medium, Noisy.

Breastplate: a single piece of armour that covers the chest, breastplate is usually pretty light and covers your vitals, but leaves your limbs vulnerable.
AC+4, TAC+4, max dex +3, -3 penalty. Lightweight, Medium.

Here we have a selection of different approaches. Hide follows the idea that low AC isn't a big deal as long as you can take the hits. Breastplate, on the opposite end, keeps your AC high in all situations but provides no protection. Chain mail is slightly behind on AC but can help against Slashing, a very common damage type. Scale helps stealthier/mobile characters. If you can imagine playing different characters with different armours and feeling satisfied that you made the best choice each time, the system is working.

Lastly, Heavy armour is the top of the line, toughest of the tough, ultimate defence tin can fashion choice. *slaps plate* This bad boy can fit so much knighthood in it. Have a look.

Splint mail: this armour is covered in tiny plates in horizontal rows. It combines flexibility with protection, and is the top of the line agile protection family. Still weighs a ton.
AC+5, TAC+4, max dex +2, -3 penalty. Flexible, Heavy, Impervious (S), Noisy.

Half plate: lacking the proper weight distribution that distinguishes full plate, this armour allows for a bit more mobility, but leaves some points exposed to a good stabber.
AC+6, TAC+5, max dex +2, -4 penalty, Heavy, Impervious (B,S).

Full plate: a full covering armour with straps and harnesses distributing the weight, this armour is light enough on the body that it can be used almost effortlessly... Just not for pinching coins. Also, no additional level, but still hella expensive.
AC+6, TAC+6, max dex +1, -5 penalty. Lightweight, Heavy, Impervious (B,P,S).

Oh my, full plate isn't the best? What have I done? Heresy! Burn him! Burn him! ...more seriously, the general Impervious still makes it one of the best choices in all cases, especially with the lightweight trait. Half plate is more aimed at someone who does not want to risk critical hits, but exposes you to sneak attacks and the like, and splint is our run of the mill "I'd still like to pretend I can be agile" low penalty armour. Note how all heavy armours protect against Slashing, nudging the DPR calculations I have seen lately a bit away from the previous results.

Finally, while I kept the AC range the same (with Half Plate being the outlier on AC+8), there is definite reasons for picking medium or heavy armour. An alternative approach could keep the old TAC approach and see some more benefits for Heavy armour, but it gets a little weird because most armour improvement would make sense against physical, not magical, so balancing it is tricky. Maybe someone will have better ideas.

Traits:
We used these, but there wasn't an actual explanation. Here it comes:

Flexible: The armour's penalty to Dex-based checks is reduced by one. The penalty is reduced by two if the armour is master quality and by three if it is legendary.

Fragile: If Fragile armour takes a Dent, it's automatically broken. This armour cannot be made Sturdy unless it is of Master or better quality.

Heavy: Heavy armour reduces a character's Speed by -5ft on all Move actions.*

Impervious: This armour grants a Resistance value to the listed damage of 1. The Resistance is increased to 3 if the armour is master quality and to 5 if it is legendary.

Lightweight: This armour's penalty to Str-based checks is reduced by one. The penalty is reduced by two if the armour is master quality and by three if it is legendary.

Medium: Medium armour reduces a character's Speed by -5ft on all Move action past the first taken in a round.*

Noisy: This armour's penalty on Stealth checks can never be reduced by the Flexible trait. If the armour is Master quality or better, reduce the Stealth penalty by one, to a minimum of -1.

*Fighters and Paladins should reduce these by scaling Heavy to Medium and Medium to only affect third and subsequent moves. keeping the same speed reduction from P1 when the move of everyone went down doesn't feel feasible. Also, let the poor sod who decided to play an archer get better armour proficiency.

Clearly, numbers can be tweaked and this is just an example draft. It's what I think could be done. A direction. But I think P2 has the potential and the tools to make something like this work.

Thank you all for your time, and always use protection.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Theconiel wrote:
Midnightoker wrote:
citricking wrote:


...

.I think the best solution to this would be requiring that you spend 2 stat boosts in order to bump 18 to 20 at the levels you get boosts.

...

Can you do that? I thought it had to be four different stats. I got the impression that the developers were trying to limit the "INT 42 wizard".

No you cannot right now, that's my point though, allowing it to one ability score once per level (spend two boosts and the other two have to go to two separate below 18 scores) would allow for higher single ability scores at a cost.

At max level you can only achieve a 24 this way via the raw score and it costs you +6 to your other scores. With multiclassing being so ability dependent I think this makes SAD classes happy while also compensating for more MAD builds with the additional +6 to separate scores.


Ediwir wrote:
Medium: Medium armour reduces a character's Speed by -5ft on all Move action past the first taken in a round.*

Just a small thing, but I feel it would work better if it reduced speed on just the first action instead. I think it would be easier to remember, and be a better penalty.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Heavy armor does have it's advantage under the current system. Having dex 12 gives you:
Better HP and fort saves.
More trained skills and access to more skill feats
Higher will saves, perception bonus and initiative bonus.
More resonance.

Conversely high dex gives you better reflex saves and that's it.

Whether those advantages are enough to justify using heavy armor I don't know. But they do exist.


oh I like your idea, makes it more fun then just seeing where you fall on the proficiency/dex chart.


They keep it pretty tight, a 20th-level Fighter (+20) with a 12 Str (+1) in full plate (+6) and Legendary Proficiency (+3) has an AC of 40.

A 20th-level Monk (+20) with a 22 Dex (+6) and Legendary Proficiency (+3) has an AC of 39.

AC 20 and 19, respectively, without the +Level.


citricking wrote:
Unicore wrote:

Does your assessment take into account that fighters and Paladins get increased proficiency bonus with heavy armors that they don't get with light? I think your analysis is why that is the case.

I hope that is not the case, that would mean proficiency increases would be limited to heavy armor only, to give it an advantage. I feel that's rather limiting, that would mean having a character with a better proficiency in light or medium armor would disrupt the balance. That really limits what future character concepts they could have.

There's a good chance you're right and that's why they only have fighters and paladins being good with heavy armor, but I really hope not.

Armor proficiencies gate a couple of archetype things maybe, but those archetype things are trained vs untrained, unless the feat is specifically related to that kind of armor usage, so the upper scale of armor proficiencies isn't limiting any character concepts. Unlike many other proficiencies, Armor is just a numbers gate.

I say "just" but as the single most targeted defense, every plus one is a massive deal since it will also affect how often your character gets hit critically.

With Armor, balance does not equal same proficiency, it equals AC and the opportunity costs for having that AC.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Unicore wrote:
citricking wrote:
Unicore wrote:

Does your assessment take into account that fighters and Paladins get increased proficiency bonus with heavy armors that they don't get with light? I think your analysis is why that is the case.

I hope that is not the case, that would mean proficiency increases would be limited to heavy armor only, to give it an advantage. I feel that's rather limiting, that would mean having a character with a better proficiency in light or medium armor would disrupt the balance. That really limits what future character concepts they could have.

There's a good chance you're right and that's why they only have fighters and paladins being good with heavy armor, but I really hope not.

Armor proficiencies gate a couple of archetype things maybe, but those archetype things are trained vs untrained, unless the feat is specifically related to that kind of armor usage, so the upper scale of armor proficiencies isn't limiting any character concepts. Unlike many other proficiencies, Armor is just a numbers gate.

I say "just" but as the single most targeted defense, every plus one is a massive deal since it will also affect how often your character gets hit critically.

With Armor, balance does not equal same proficiency, it equals AC and the opportunity costs for having that AC.

I don't understand what you're saying.

At high levels medium armor is just way better than heavy armor. But the only things keeping characters in heavy armor are the fighter and paladin class features.

Do you like that system? Wouldn't you rather have the armors balanced against each other, and not need class features. If you want to make a non heavy armor fighter or paladin those class features are wasted, I think those concepts should be supported and not required to waste class features.


citricking wrote:
Unicore wrote:
citricking wrote:
Unicore wrote:

Does your assessment take into account that fighters and Paladins get increased proficiency bonus with heavy armors that they don't get with light? I think your analysis is why that is the case.

I hope that is not the case, that would mean proficiency increases would be limited to heavy armor only, to give it an advantage. I feel that's rather limiting, that would mean having a character with a better proficiency in light or medium armor would disrupt the balance. That really limits what future character concepts they could have.

There's a good chance you're right and that's why they only have fighters and paladins being good with heavy armor, but I really hope not.

Armor proficiencies gate a couple of archetype things maybe, but those archetype things are trained vs untrained, unless the feat is specifically related to that kind of armor usage, so the upper scale of armor proficiencies isn't limiting any character concepts. Unlike many other proficiencies, Armor is just a numbers gate.

I say "just" but as the single most targeted defense, every plus one is a massive deal since it will also affect how often your character gets hit critically.

With Armor, balance does not equal same proficiency, it equals AC and the opportunity costs for having that AC.

I don't understand what you're saying.

At high levels medium armor is just way better than heavy armor. But the only things keeping characters in heavy armor are the fighter and paladin class features.

Do you like that system? Wouldn't you rather have the armors balanced against each other, and not need class features. If you want to make a non heavy armor fighter or paladin those class features are wasted, I think those concepts should be supported and not required to waste class features.

I think you have an interesting point about the concept of "wasted class feature."

A huge part of the success of PF1's introduction of archetypes was the ability to trade out features that felt sub optimal to your character concept for ones that made your character better at the things you wanted to specialize in.

Making characters that traded out niche things you never used was fun and certainly a huge advantage when you found something cool to take in its place.

It also makes absolute specialization something very difficult to monitor and makes forward expansion and game balance difficult because every character eventually gets access to every slightly different way to do the same basic thing, and some of those ways will prove better than others.

To answer your question, I like that medium armor is the best default armor for characters than don't specialize in armored combat. For characters not dedicating class and feat resources to getting higher than trained in Armor Proficiency, I like that Light Armor is best if you are max increasing Dex, then Medium is best if you can spare about half of your leveling up attribute resources to Dex, and then Heavy is the, well, you completely dumped Dex so there is still a way to not have a critically low AC. I really like that Mobility is now a part of the value of dexterity as an attribute, and how they accomplished it by making it the gate for which armor is best for you. This is part of why Dex to damage doesn't need to be a universal thing for dexterity based characters to be good in combat.

jumping back to the "wasted class feature" I think the flexibility of PF1 may be shaping our expectations too much as far as what a class based system can allow.

Choosing to Increase Dex instead of STR (or alongside STR) as a martial should have rewards, and does for the fighter, the paladin, without being the only way to build a character. RIght now it does, because Light Armor becomes the best Armor if you start with an 18 Dex (for fighter, 16 for Paladin) and plan to keep it maxed out. It doesn't require increased proficiency to be so. Giving Dex based fighters and paladins something extra for going Dex (increased proficiency) penalizes those who don't go that path because they will never have the same Armor value.

In this case the class features that make Heavy Armor work for fighters and Paladins is linked to the way the attribute system works. The class features that non-Dex fighters and Paladins get to benefit from doesn't make them get more from the class overall, it just balances out the otherwise obvious fact that all other things being equal having a higher Dex is a better choice.

Modularity is very difficult when some things like attributes just affect more aspects of the game than others. You either end up having to go a route like 4e where Primary Attribute determines almost everything about your character, or you have to pad certain choices to make sure that those characters can be viable.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Unicore wrote:
Giving Dex based fighters and paladins something extra for going Dex (increased proficiency) penalizes those who don't go that path because they will never have the same Armor value.

I'm not sure what you mean by this? If they go heavy armor they will have same armor value. They will have less acp and movement, because lighter armors are generally better, but armor value will be the same.

I see what you saying though, it does appear dex and str paladins and fighters are relatively balanced against each other currently, both having benefits and drawbacks because of heavy armor getting increased proficiency.

But that's just comparing them against their own class, if you compare them against other classes they lose ground, as the other class gain a benefit those levels but the paladin/fighter don't.


citricking wrote:


Unicore wrote:
Giving Dex based fighters and paladins something extra for going Dex (increased proficiency) penalizes those who don't go that path because they will never have the same Armor value.

I'm not sure what you mean by this? If they go heavy armor they will have same armor value. They will have less acp and movement, because lighter armors are generally better, but armor value will be the same.

This is my point. Same AC without penalty is a better deal. Especially when the penalty is a movement penalty that can be crushing to characters using melee weapons.

citricking wrote:


I see what you saying though, it does appear dex and str paladins and fighters are relatively balanced against each other currently, both having benefits and drawbacks because of heavy armor getting increased proficiency.

But that's just comparing them against their own class, if you compare them against other classes they lose ground, as the other class gain a benefit those levels but the paladin/fighter don't.

No matter what armor choice (as long as it matches their max Dex value) Paladins will be the highest AC characters in the game. That is their design goal an it works because of those features. The thing they get in comparison to all other classes is having the highest AC if they want it (with multiple paths to get it).

Fighters get Legendary Weapon proficiency and they get it pretty quickly compared to other legendary proficiencies. Their AC stays at the next highest level (behind the paladin while their attack abilities are unparalleled, making them most likely to get critical hits and giving them plenty to make them special in comparison to all the other classes.

You are certainly not making a sub-optimal character (in comparison to other classes) by raising Dex and Str and wearing light armor as a fighter.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

But as an Archer fighter you still have dead levels at 11 and 17. It feels bad to get nothing while other classes improve. You can't just say that doesn't matter because your other class features are good.


Conceptually I have no problem with Heavy armour not being the best armour for all classes, but fighters and Paladins being able to exploit it for the best results. I also have no conceptual issue with all armour giving the same bonus when adding in max dex bonus. Being hit more often but mitigating more of the hit squares with being fleet of foot so your are harder to hit but your armour mitigates those its far less.

This variance to armour has been pretty constant in many systems over the years and I am not convinced that it is a problem that medium is the superior choice for most melee characters.

I also don't find it a huge problem that the fighter with its best chance to crit class is slower in heavy armour. Games also juxtipose the idea of a slow hard hitting brick vs the quick but less damaging fineese archtype.

If you have an expectation that light, medium, heavy means okay, better, best then the current mechanics appear problematic. If you don't have that linear scaling in mind with regards to armour and you see viable options for heavy armour being the best protection for some builds, while medium is better in most cases and light best in specialized builds, you see a balanced concept in principle.

This isn't to say things are perfect as is, but rather the ideas behind the mechanics are balanced but we may need to tweak things to get it right.

Re stats

If some feats were gated via high odd stat values then you don't get "dead" zones for stat increases as you can buy feats during this period to give a sense of progression. Feeling there is a value for a high odd stat eliminates the sarcifice power now for power later issue, because you need that odd value stat to buy that neat feat you want to build your character. And there is a tradition in the d20 systems of gating feats with an odd stat value.


citricking wrote:
But as an Archer fighter you still have dead levels at 11 and 17. It feels bad to get nothing while other classes improve. You can't just say that doesn't matter because your other class features are good.

Agreed. These should be class feats (12th level and 18th level respectively) and have these levels just be an extra 10th level feat and an extra 16th level feat.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion / AC and ability score scaling All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Pathfinder Playtest General Discussion