Armor Class range for parties


Doomsday Dawn Player Feedback


I'm curious what kind of Armor Class characters are having in the play test. Starting with part 2 our group made a commitment to high AC to lower damage, and limit the need for healing.

Part 2: Our ACs ranged from 19 to 21 without conditional or circumstantial modifiers

Part 3: Our ACs ranged from 23 to 26 without modifiers.

I'm wondering how those might compare to groups who had a harder time.

Liberty's Edge

Those are mostly correct for my group as well, though we actually have a Paladin in +2 Full Plate with an AC of 27 in Part 3.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Those are mostly correct for my group as well, though we actually have a Paladin in +2 Full Plate with an AC of 27 in Part 3.

Hmmm: +2 full plate is AC+8, dex for +1 and level for +7. I'm adding that to be 26. Where is he getting the extra +1?

Edit: nevermind I got it: armored fortitude. Nice AC.


My Paladin for part 3 also had 27 AC, or 29 when he raises his shield. So far, I've only gotten hit once via a crit that was only a hit.

My other teammates have 23 and 25 AC respectively, one is a greatsword wielding Cleric MC Fighter and the other is a Sword and Shield Wizard MC Fighter.

Our 4th party member is a Bard. I don't know what his AC is because he hasn't been hit yet.


I'll exclude part 1 & 2 concidering those adventures were played before everyone gained unarmored proficiency and in general i want to say most of those characters were not as optimized aswell at least from memory; simular to yours in part 3 onwards people typically are recommending an optimized AC score.

Part 3(lvl 7): 24/25/25/26; without shields which 3 of the 4 had.
Part 4(lvl 9): 28/28/28/(26-27); Without shield cantrip or parry for the first two. I don't think the later two have anything of the sort after not utilising anything like it in the 1.5 combats we managed to get done today.

The reason its 26-27 for one of the AC's is because a 25 missed but 27 was a hit thusfar so it could be either and i have no access to the sheet presently.


My part 2 party had 19-21 (still had someone go down in that one fight, you know the one).

My part 3 party has 23-24 (and one 26). They haven't died yet but the night is young.


My group has had the same range for parts 1-3 as well. Looking at part 3's characters on our group web site, they range from 23 to 27 -- My Alchemist has the lowest at 23, and even though I took fighter multiclass, I sacrificed armor for lack of skill penalties and for speed.

Chapter 1 (with errata) - 14 to 16
Chapter 2 (with 1.1 errata) - 19 to 21
Chapter 3 (with 1.2 errata) - 23 to 27 (highest is a paladin with +2 armor)


Snickersnax wrote:

I'm curious what kind of Armor Class characters are having in the play test. Starting with part 2 our group made a commitment to high AC to lower damage, and limit the need for healing.

Part 2: Our ACs ranged from 19 to 21 without conditional or circumstantial modifiers

Part 3: Our ACs ranged from 23 to 26 without modifiers.

I'm wondering how those might compare to groups who had a harder time.

Its pretty easy to worth out:

Expected AC is level + 7(armour bonus plus DEX) + magic armour bonus + any additional ranks in defence + shield if used.

Apart from Monks most characters can buy heavier armour type with feats. The maximum AC that you can get for armour for light, medium or heavy plus DEX bonus is 7.

There are a few exceptions Monks can't wear armour and are stuck with lower AC. Some people will choose to not optimise their AC. Eventually when DEX can get over 18 it is possible to get a bit higher AC in light armour.

AC is important in this game because of critical hits. If a monster is critting you on numbers much least than a natural 20 you are in for a world of pain.

Experienced min-maxers will always have maximum AC, though they may or may not want a shield.

Sadly a lot of the Animal Form type spells fall behind the curve and are basically useless in combat. Sucks to be a wild order druid.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gortle wrote:
There are a few exceptions Monks can't wear armour and are stuck with lower AC.

This is actually only true at very low levels, or for non-Dex Monks. They get Expert in unarmored (eventually more than that), and by higher levels, Bracers of Armor are within a point of Light armor.

It's still a bit of a problem for the first few levels and for non-Dex Monks, mind you, but it's worth noting that not all Monks suffer from it forever.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Gortle wrote:
There are a few exceptions Monks can't wear armour and are stuck with lower AC.

This is actually only true at very low levels, or for non-Dex Monks. They get Expert in unarmored (eventually more than that), and by higher levels, Bracers of Armor are within a point of Light armor.

It's still a bit of a problem for the first few levels and for non-Dex Monks, mind you, but it's worth noting that not all Monks suffer from it forever.

It is the same for non-Dex Druids. (I am playing one, with high Strength and high Wisdom, and as good as no Dex. It is viable, it is fun, but I get constantly critted.)


Schwarzer Schatten wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Gortle wrote:
There are a few exceptions Monks can't wear armour and are stuck with lower AC.

This is actually only true at very low levels, or for non-Dex Monks. They get Expert in unarmored (eventually more than that), and by higher levels, Bracers of Armor are within a point of Light armor.

It's still a bit of a problem for the first few levels and for non-Dex Monks, mind you, but it's worth noting that not all Monks suffer from it forever.

It is the same for non-Dex Druids. (I am playing one, with high Strength and high Wisdom, and as good as no Dex. It is viable, it is fun, but I get constantly critted.)

The 1st level monk is a melee specialist. With 18 DEX and Expert in unarmed, they are 2 points of AC behind a Fighter or Paladin in heavy armour with 12 DEX. 2 points of AC is important, it equates to about 20% more damage suffered. Good luck surviving.

No they don't catch up, the other melee characters get ranks in defensive skills as well.

No one I know would touch a monk with these rules.

A Wild Druid needs Strength so will probably have hide armour and 2 points of DEX. He has the same AC as the monk but has options and is not just a melee specialist. HE doesn't really need to max his wisdom. Personally I started my Druid with 3 points in DEX at first level.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Gortle wrote:
The 1st level monk is a melee specialist. With 18 DEX and Expert in unarmed, they are 2 points of AC behind a Fighter or Paladin in heavy armour with 12 DEX. 2 points of AC is important, it equates to about 20% more damage suffered. Good luck surviving.

This is not precisely true. A 1st level character with Dex 12 and Heavy Armor actually only has AC 17 at 1st level (1 Level + 1 Dex + 5 Armor). A 1st level Monk meanwhile, has AC 16 (1 Level + 1 Expert + 4 Dex). That's low, but only one point behind. They are two points behind someone with Dex 16 and a Breastplate, but that changes at 2nd level.

Speaking of which, by 2nd level, the Heavy Armor guy can get Full Plate and be at AC 19, the same as the Breastplate guy has, but the Monk can have Bracers of Armor and AC 18.

They stay about one point of AC behind most levels until 10th level or so, when they catch up simply because that's when Dex goes to 20. At 10th level, a Fighter in Heavy Armor has AC 29 (10 Level + 7 total Armor and Dex + 2 Magic), while a Monk also has AC 29 (10 Level +5 Dex +3 Bracers +1 Expert). A Paladin is a bit ahead, but Paladin is ahead of everyone, so being behind them is hardly an issue.

Now at 11th, the Fighter pulls ahead again by a point, but only until 13th, where the Monk goes back to being equal and stays that way from then on.

And all that is comparing them to Fighter. Nobody else has the bump Fighters get at 11th, meaning that Dex-based Monks just equal them by 10th and pull flatly ahead by 13th.

And the 'behind until 10th' thing is not unique to Monks, it's universal to those wearing light armor of any sort. Monks are just kinda stuck with Light Armor, something few other Classes that engage in martial combat can say (though Rogues can).

In short, Monks are precisely equal to those in Light Armor from 2nd to 12th level (minus one or two individual levels when Bracers lag a tad...they catch up eventually), and then pull ahead of all others in Light.

Gortle wrote:
No they don't catch up, the other melee characters get ranks in defensive skills as well.

Only Paladins and Fighters. They're right on par with Rogues, who are also a melee Class in most cases. I'm not saying their AC is quite high enough, but it's not as bad as you're making it out to be.

Gortle wrote:
No one I know would touch a monk with these rules.

Okay, here I'd like to step back and note something: I think Monks need to have more AC. By about a point, maybe two for Str Monks. Personally, I think that's true of light armor in general to some degree.

But people can and will play Monks. There are ways around a 1 AC disparity, Monks are great at hit and run stuff to limit the amount of attacks they receive, and the new Ki Rush power is a ridiculous defensive buff both for hit and run stuff, and just as importantly for the miss chance.

Gortle wrote:
A Wild Druid needs Strength so will probably have hide armour and 2 points of DEX. He has the same AC as the monk but has options and is not just a melee specialist. HE doesn't really need to max his wisdom. Personally I started my Druid with 3 points in DEX at first level.

Druid doesn't get an AC boost at 2nd level, though, something Monk does.


Gortle wrote:
Schwarzer Schatten wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Gortle wrote:
There are a few exceptions Monks can't wear armour and are stuck with lower AC.

This is actually only true at very low levels, or for non-Dex Monks. They get Expert in unarmored (eventually more than that), and by higher levels, Bracers of Armor are within a point of Light armor.

It's still a bit of a problem for the first few levels and for non-Dex Monks, mind you, but it's worth noting that not all Monks suffer from it forever.

It is the same for non-Dex Druids. (I am playing one, with high Strength and high Wisdom, and as good as no Dex. It is viable, it is fun, but I get constantly critted.)

The 1st level monk is a melee specialist. With 18 DEX and Expert in unarmed, they are 2 points of AC behind a Fighter or Paladin in heavy armour with 12 DEX. 2 points of AC is important, it equates to about 20% more damage suffered. Good luck surviving.

No they don't catch up, the other melee characters get ranks in defensive skills as well.

No one I know would touch a monk with these rules.

A Wild Druid needs Strength so will probably have hide armour and 2 points of DEX. He has the same AC as the monk but has options and is not just a melee specialist. HE doesn't really need to max his wisdom. Personally I started my Druid with 3 points in DEX at first level.

In my case it wasn't a Wild Druid, but a Storm Druid, wo really needs max Wisdom. He can shoot his lightnings 9x a day on lvl 10, but I wanted to be able to deal some damage with a weapon as well, so I took strength. I had not really enough spell slots to prepare something other than Heal (this was pre-healing-circle). And to have high Constitution is needed for any character regardless of his class, especially with a class with only 8 hp per level.

I started with Str 16 Dex 12 Con 12 Int 10 Wis 18 Cha 10, putting my attribute boosts every 5 levels in all but int and charisma.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Gortle wrote:
There are a few exceptions Monks can't wear armour and are stuck with lower AC.

This is actually only true at very low levels, or for non-Dex Monks. They get Expert in unarmored (eventually more than that), and by higher levels, Bracers of Armor are within a point of Light armor.

It's still a bit of a problem for the first few levels and for non-Dex Monks, mind you, but it's worth noting that not all Monks suffer from it forever.

Worth noting, barring shield use a Monk can eventually out-AC a freaking Paladin.

At 20th level.

Paladin, 10 base, 20 level, 12 armor+dex+potency, 3 legendary, AC 45.

Monk, 10 base, 20 level, 6 bracers of armor, 7 Dex, 3 legendary, AC 46.

Dex +7 and no dex cap on Mage Armor lets them break the Dex+armor=7 limit. XD


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Gortle wrote:
The 1st level monk is a melee specialist. With 18 DEX and Expert in unarmed, they are 2 points of AC behind a Fighter or Paladin in heavy armour with 12 DEX. 2 points of AC is important, it equates to about 20% more damage suffered. Good luck surviving.

This is not precisely true. A 1st level character with Dex 12 and Heavy Armor actually only has AC 17 at 1st level (1 Level + 1 Dex + 5 Armor). A 1st level Monk meanwhile, has AC 16 (1 Level + 1 Expert + 4 Dex). That's low, but only one point behind. They are two points behind someone with Dex 16 and a Breastplate, but that changes at 2nd level.

Surely you could work out that I was taking the best armour for 6 Armour at level 1, sorry OK thats a level 2 item. But they could just have another point of DEX which a fighter can easily do. Clearly 2 points behind.

Most fighters will start at 18STR/16CON/14DEX, though some may prefer higher DEX and start in medium armour

Deadmanwalking wrote:


Speaking of which, by 2nd level, the Heavy Armor guy can get Full Plate and be at AC 19, the same as the Breastplate guy has, but the Monk can have Bracers of Armor and AC 18.

Now you are just not comparing apples to apples - if you start talking about Bracers of Armour you have to start talking about Magic Armour as well. Medium Armour comes out the nextlevel as the Bracers and is good enough for our comparison.

Also they provide rules for transfering runes. I really don't see why the rune will stay on the medium armour and not move to the heavy armour for just 10% of the cost anyway. Limiting the heavy armour to one level higher in the treasure table is only going to stick if GM is very tight.

Deadmanwalking wrote:


They stay about one point of AC behind most levels until 10th level or so, when they catch up simply because that's when Dex goes to 20.

Considering a Fighter with the best possible defense, the best monk is

2 behind at level 1
1 behind at level 2
2 behind at level 3-6
3 behind at level 7
2 behind at level 8-9
1 behind at level 10
and it gets a bit messy after that as the various classes get their extra rank in defense at different level, but monks get theirs at 13 and 17.
But mostly levels 10-14 Monks are only one behind.
After level 14 a Monk finally will draw level with their Potent item in DEX.
And at level 20 they will get one ahead. Well that was not worth the wait.

Deadmanwalking wrote:


And the 'behind until 10th' thing is not unique to Monks, it's universal to those wearing light armor of any sort. Monks are just kinda stuck with Light Armor, something few other Classes that engage in martial combat can say (though Rogues can).

In short, Monks are precisely equal to those in Light Armor from 2nd to 12th level (minus one or two individual levels when Bracers lag a tad...they catch up eventually), and then pull ahead of all others in Light.

Rogues and Rangers have specific ranged attacks they are an optional melee class. Monks are forced into melee otherwise they are no better than a cleric with a bow. Yes I know that Monks can easily use ranged weapons, but they have no support for it. They should be compared to Paladins and Fighters.

Sorry Monks suck badly.


I mean, my play experience hasn't supported Monks sucking. I GMed Heroes of Undarin, our party had a Monk, Fighter, and Paladin, among other things. The Monk was EASILY the most effective member of the party. Between his mobility, Flurry of Blows being awesome, Dragon Roar, and his accuracy being only 1 point behind the Fighter, he caused ridiculous amounts of havoc in a lot of the fights.

Yeah, at 18 Dex with Bracers of Armor his AC was notably lower than the Expert-armored Fighter and Paladin (3 points below their base AC, 5 below their shield raised/stance-taken ACs), but honestly we rarely noticed. Even when enemies tried to put some focus on him as he was often the largest threat, he had plenty of endurance to tough it out. He was sometimes roughed up notably after a fight but he only needed in-battle healing once or twice in the entire module. MAYBE three times but I don't think so.

That is to say, his AC was hurting but he more than made up for it in other ways, and he had more than enough endurance to keep the AC deficit from being his undoing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Honestly, my defensive fix for monks probably wouldn't be their AC directly, though I think bracers could be brought in line with armor for item level purposes.

My big thing is I wish they got an evasion mechanic at 7th level-- being able to choose which save goes to master at 7th is cool, but not so cool to offset losing the success = critical success thing, which feels especially notable as they had some of the best saves in PF1.


Yeah, I wish they had swapped the 11th level "Master saves treat success as critical success" bit for another ability and just made it so that as a general rule Master in a save grants Evasion or equivalent and Legendary grants Improved Evasion or equivalent. It might give Monks a reason to put a save to Legendary at 15th instead of upping a second save to Master.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gortle wrote:

Surely you could work out that I was taking the best armour for 6 Armour at level 1, sorry OK thats a level 2 item. But they could just have another point of DEX which a fighter can easily do. Clearly 2 points behind.

Most fighters will start at 18STR/16CON/14DEX, though some may prefer higher DEX and start in medium armour

You were the one who specified Dex 12...and indeed, Dex 12 is a totally viable build, just one that's a point of AC behind at 1st level.

Gortle wrote:
Now you are just not comparing apples to apples - if you start talking about Bracers of Armour you have to start talking about Magic Armour as well. Medium Armour comes out the nextlevel as the Bracers and is good enough for our comparison.

+1 Bracers are precisely a 2nd level item, and thus the same level as Full Plate. Which is what you asked me to compare them to.

And yes, armor pulls ahead again at 3rd level. And that's even a problem I've noted before, but again, that's more a problem with Bracers of Armor than the Monk, and applies only at certain highly specific levels rather than being a general issue.

Gortle wrote:
Also they provide rules for transfering runes. I really don't see why the rune will stay on the medium armour and not move to the heavy armour for just 10% of the cost anyway. Limiting the heavy armour to one level higher in the treasure table is only going to stick if GM is very tight.

It matters basically only at 2nd level, and I never said otherwise.

Gortle wrote:

2 behind at level 1

1 behind at level 2
2 behind at level 3-6
3 behind at level 7
2 behind at level 8-9
1 behind at level 10
and it gets a bit messy after that as the various classes get their extra rank in defense at different level, but monks get theirs at 13 and 17.
But mostly levels 10-14 Monks are only one behind.
After level 14 a Monk finally will draw level with their Potent item in DEX.
And at level 20 they will get one ahead. Well that was not worth the wait.

Er...no.

The actual progression is as follows (assuming everyone gets on-level as opposed to below level items...below level items just adjust what level we're talking about rather than how many levels Monks are behind X amount):

2 behind at 1 (16 vs. 18)
1 behind at 2 (18 vs. 19)
2 behind at 3 (19 vs. 21...Armor upgrades a level before Bracers)
1 behind at 4-6 (21 vs. 22 at 4th...this is when the Bracers upgrade)
2 behind at 7 (24 vs 26...this is the Armor kicking in before the Bracers again)
1 behind at 8-9
Catch up at 10th. Then like you say it gets a tad weird for a few levels, and at 13+ Monks are never behind again and ahead a bit at 20th.

Paladins are more ahead than that, but that's their whole thing, mechanically.

Gortle wrote:
Rogues and Rangers have specific ranged attacks they are an optional melee class. Monks are forced into melee otherwise they are no better than a cleric with a bow. Yes I know that Monks can easily use ranged weapons, but they have no support for it. They should be compared to Paladins and Fighters.

Rogues have basically no way to Sneak Attack at range. They are, practically speaking, an obligate melee Class. Rangers have a ranged build, but their melee build is supposed to be viable. And indeed is viable AC-wise.

Gortle wrote:
Sorry Monks suck badly.

Monks should almost certainly get an AC buff, at least at some levels, in order to be as melee capable as others but they remain viable even without it, and we're talking a +1 or so at some levels rather than a blanket +2.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

It's also an interesting comparison because with AoOs being more rare, the extra mobility monks have can help a LOT.

A fighter probably has a 20ft movement speed. If he wants to make two attacks, he needs to already be close to his opponent, and he's ending his turn in melee reach meaning he suffers a full attack.

A 3rd level monk almost certainly has a movement speed of 35 feet, possibly even 40. Certainly 40 by 6th level.

That means the monk can walk up to any enemy on the battlefield, hit them twice, and then walk away. Far enough away that the enemy would likely have to spend two actions catching the monk, meaning they only get at best a single attack (and if the monk has a fighter or champion friend, the enemy is probably going to suffer an AoO for it, meaning most enemies are likely to just attack the fighter instead).

Hard to measure how much AC that level of mobility is worth. I was originally thinking monks needed more AC, too, but they are actually staggeringly effective glass cannons.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The more I think about it, the more I think dropping Bracers of Armor to the same level as Armor Potency Runes and giving something specifically to non-Dex Monks would solve the problem sufficiently.


Deadmanwalking wrote:

Hmmh not sure what I was counting here. But I'll just agree with your maths and go with Monks are at least 1 and sometimes 2 points of AC behind before level 10.

To me that is a huge problem. But then I like shields in this system as well.

Deadmanwalking wrote:
Rogues have basically no way to Sneak Attack at range. They are, practically speaking, an obligate melee Class. Rangers have a ranged build, but their melee build is supposed to be viable. And indeed is viable AC-wise.

You are not trying hard enough with your Rogue build. For sure the melee Rogue build is simplier and effective but a ranged build is viable. I know that ranged weapons don't help with flanking or benefit from other peoples flanking however

a) Surprise Attack works
b) Stealth works
c) Dread Striker works with Frightened which you can get via Intimidation, or spells, and other classes features like Dragons Roar :)
d) Invisibility is fairly easy to get eventually.
e) Fighters get Brutish Shove, and its a good level 1 option even if there isn't a rogue around.
f) Sly Striker from level 8 gives you half value even if your target isn't flat footed.
g) Instant Opening which is way down at level 14

Thats hardly a complete list. Most parties cooperate and help each other. Our Rogue had Sneak Attack with a bow more often than not.

Rangers have a numbers of options. I played one in the level 4 module and wasn't impressed. But they certainly have specific ranged options. Which a monk does not in his standard class features.

Deadmanwalking wrote:


Monks should almost certainly get an AC buff, at least at some levels, in order to be as melee capable as others but they remain viable even without it, and we're talking a +1 or so at some levels rather than a blanket +2.

Well I think they need at least 1 point of AC to be viable. The STR based monk just doesn't seem viable at all.

Monks are a fair bit behind the Fighter in damage output as it is. You have to consider a Fighter with no shield will be wielding a d12 weapon, or a d10 weapon with reach. if you are looking at the Crane Stance you should be comparing it to a fighter with a d8 weapon.


MaxAstro wrote:

It's also an interesting comparison because with AoOs being more rare, the extra mobility monks have can help a LOT.

A fighter probably has a 20ft movement speed. If he wants to make two attacks, he needs to already be close to his opponent, and he's ending his turn in melee reach meaning he suffers a full attack.

A 3rd level monk almost certainly has a movement speed of 35 feet, possibly even 40. Certainly 40 by 6th level.

That means the monk can walk up to any enemy on the battlefield, hit them twice, and then walk away. Far enough away that the enemy would likely have to spend two actions catching the monk, meaning they only get at best a single attack (and if the monk has a fighter or champion friend, the enemy is probably going to suffer an AoO for it, meaning most enemies are likely to just attack the fighter instead).

Hard to measure how much AC that level of mobility is worth. I was originally thinking monks needed more AC, too, but they are actually staggeringly effective glass cannons.

We didn't have mobility problems with any of our non monks. Many of the characters availed themselves of the various feats to get +5" move. Most had longstrider cast on them - 8 hours as a level 2 spell from a wand. It is one of the few long term buffs. So it was extremely rare for anyone to have a mobility problem. Even the heavy armour PCs where typically movement 30". Of course in this scenario the monk is faster still. Then there are mounts.

I think beween us we might have done a double move only a couple of times in combat in the entire playtest so far.

Your tactic is sound, but its easier to do by retrograding with ranged weapons. Its also only going to work for one round in these modules unless the GM is being kind, because other PCs are slower and we have generally been at fixed points.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Why does it work only one round? Unless the party is surrounded, a fixed point is even better - the monk can just end every turn with the whole party between them and the monsters. Monks should love hallway combat, as long as they have a fighter or paladin buddy.

Or maybe it's a looser formation and the monsters decide to chase the monk. That's fine, too. Since they are almost certainly slower than you, most likely you can just run back and forth from end to end of the combat each turn - you get more attacks than the monsters do, guaranteed. If the monsters are really dumb enough to chase you, you might be getting three attacks to their one, even.

I don't disagree that the Str-monk has perhaps dangerously low AC. However, I do disagree that their AC needs to be as high as a less mobile character.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gortle wrote:

Hmmh not sure what I was counting here. But I'll just agree with your maths and go with Monks are at least 1 and sometimes 2 points of AC behind before level 10.

To me that is a huge problem. But then I like shields in this system as well.

Oh, it's definitely a weakness of the Class. I even agree that -2 AC is a problem. I'm not sure -1 AC is a problem so much as a weakness, and all Classes have weaknesses of one sort or another.

Gortle wrote:
You are not trying hard enough with your Rogue build.

There are certainly ways to make an effective ranged Rogue, but it's hardly the norm, nor are melee Rogues weak or ineffective.

Gortle wrote:
Rangers have a numbers of options. I played one in the level 4 module and wasn't impressed. But they certainly have specific ranged options. Which a monk does not in his standard class features.

Sure...but my point was that a Class having ranged options means nothing for an individual character. A melee Ranger should be a viable character, and is indeed such a character in terms of AC (their offense has issues).

Monk should probably have a bit better AC, but not because it lacks a ranged option, the two are utterly unrelated.

Gortle wrote:
Well I think they need at least 1 point of AC to be viable. The STR based monk just doesn't seem viable at all.

I actually strongly agree that Str Monks have...issues. And as I noted above, my solution would be reducing the level of Bracers of Armor and adding some defensive bonus to the Str Monk.

Gortle wrote:
Monks are a fair bit behind the Fighter in damage output as it is. You have to consider a Fighter with no shield will be wielding a d12 weapon, or a d10 weapon with reach. if you are looking at the Crane Stance you should be comparing it to a fighter with a d8 weapon.

Per attack? Yes. In practice? I'm less certain, and it depends on circumstances. They can either manage 4 attacks per turn, or do hit and run options to vastly increase how favorable their damage exchange rate is (which could result in them having a better exchange rate with a foe than a Fighter, even with less damage).


MaxAstro wrote:

Why does it work only one round? Unless the party is surrounded, a fixed point is even better - the monk can just end every turn with the whole party between them and the monsters. Monks should love hallway combat, as long as they have a fighter or paladin buddy.

Or maybe it's a looser formation and the monsters decide to chase the monk. That's fine, too. Since they are almost certainly slower than you, most likely you can just run back and forth from end to end of the combat each turn - you get more attacks than the monsters do, guaranteed. If the monsters are really dumb enough to chase you, you might be getting three attacks to their one, even.

Because although the monk may be safe after one round the monsters can simply attack the rest of the party. Keeping one party member safe while the rest are in danger is of limited value. Its not substantially different to hiding in the rear rank with a bow.

In these modules there is often not the room to retrograde. Very often we were facing a group of monsters from different directions or had innocents to protect.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

To me what you are saying reads as "monks can't tank".

I think that's intentional - the class seems to be intended more as a striker role than a tank.

You wouldn't expect the wizard to be on the front lines taking melee attacks; I don't see why the monk should be expected to be either. If anything, the roll of "melee striker who does hit-and-run" is well supported by the genre fiction but has always been frustratingly hard to build in play, so I'm happy to see monks go that direction.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Playtest Feedback / Doomsday Dawn Player Feedback / Armor Class range for parties All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Doomsday Dawn Player Feedback