Miffed and concerned by mundane equipment prices for heavy armor and composite bows


Advice


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am rather miffed and concerned by mundane equipment prices for heavy armor and composite bows. 15 gp happens to be a shockingly low amount for certain builds. Splint mail costs 13 gp, a composite shortbow costs 14 gp, a composite longbow costs 20 gp, and full plate costs a staggering 30 gp. Maybe this makes sense from a realism standpoint, but it is gruesome from a player quality of life perspective.

Magic weapon and magic armor costs quickly become exactly the same, so a magic club has the same price tag the same as a magic composite longbow, and magic padded armor runs for the same gold as magic full plate; ergo, the mundane armor and weapon costs are strangely only relevant at the lowest of levels. Some characters have no issues here (e.g. monks, rogues, spellcasters), whereas heavy-armor-users (e.g. fighters and champions) and shortbow- or longbow-users might just find themselves either taking loans from their party, or settling for a weaker starting equipment loadout. It is not actually possible for a champion, for instance, to start with splint mail, a steel shield, and a weapon without loans. Any heavy-armor-users starting at 1st level with Dexterity 10, planning for full plate's cap of +0, will find themselves hit and critically hit more often until they can finally afford that sweet 30 gp full plate.

Essentially, I do not see why this has to be no big deal for some builds, whereas it has to be a big deal for others. A crossbow ranger does not run into any starting funds trouble at all, nor does a rogue, but if a champion wants to have good offense and defense, they are going to have it a little rough to start off? And if they start with Dexterity modifier +0 due to planning for full plate, they are going to take a bit of a beating before then? And similarly, if the crossbow ranger wants to be a bow-slinger instead, they have to deal with a regular bow to start with? And again, this is, bizarrely, only a problem at the lowest of levels. Why do the lowest of levels have to deal with this?

To look at it another way:

• 6th-level crossbow ranger: Magic striking crossbow +1 (4th-level, 100 gp), magic leather armor +1 (5th-level, 160 gp)
• 6th-level thief rogue: Magic striking finesse weapon +1 (4th-level, 100 gp), magic leather armor +1 (5th-level, 160 gp)
• 6th-level composite bow ranger: Magic striking composite bow +1 (4th-level, 100 gp), magic leather armor +1 (5th-level, 160 gp)
• 6th-level champion: Magic striking one-handed weapon +1 (4th-level, 100 gp), magic full plate +1 (5th-level, 160 gp)
All of them are paying the same for their basic weapons and armor.

• 1st-level crossbow ranger: Crossbow (8 gp), 100 bolts (1 gp), leather armor (1 gp)
• 1st-level thief rogue: Finesse weapon (~1 to 2 gp), leather armor 2 gp
• 1st-level composite bow ranger: A composite bow already threatens to run the bank
• 1st-level champion: One-handed weapon (~1 to 2 gp), and... heavy armor and a steel shield alone will already break the bank
All this seems to do is arbitrarily break the bank of certain weapon and armor choices.

Liberty's Edge

14 people marked this as a favorite.

It is not intended that starting characters have heavy armor or a composite longbow, nor do they need them at 1st level. Both are more powerful than the alternatives and their price point is thus higher.

This was true in PF1 as well, for that matter.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Composite Weapons have been statistically better in every conceivable way for almost 25 years now, the same goes for Full Plate.

You're not supposed to have them at level 1.


Why? What makes heavy armor overpowered at 1st level, but not at a tiny bit higher level?

What makes composite bows inappropriately strong for 1st-level characters, but not just a little higher than 1st?

I do not care how things worked in Pathfinder 1e. I have no attachment whatsoever to that game, and I am trying to study Pathfinder 2e on its own merits, because it is an entirely different system. "It worked that way in Pathfinder 1e, too" is a meaningless argument.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

They are more expensive by dint of that fact, they offer more AC (Damage avoidance) or do more damage on a hit (+1/2 Str to damage) than their cheaper counterparts.

They're meant to be non-magical upgrade equipment after you've done one or two cool things before you end up spending money on enchantments and other high fantasy stuff. Besides that, I have nothing nice to say other than to simply restate that they're more expensive because they are more powerful.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
It is not intended that starting characters have heavy armor or a composite longbow, nor do they need them at 1st level. Both are more powerful than the alternatives and their price point is thus higher.

I could go with weapons being just more expensive for better versions, armor is a bit worrying to me: a heavy armor build that's low on dex is starting behind in AC JUST because it's a heavy armor build... Most heavy armor builds are going to have to wear medium at start and that leave putting more dex in than you might want or being 2-3 points behind, meaning being hit and crit that much easier.

Deadmanwalking wrote:
This was true in PF1 as well, for that matter.

Sure but I'm not sure why it couldn't be better in a new version especially if the armor types are meant to be competitive vs each other.

Themetricsystem wrote:
They are more expensive by dint of that fact, they offer more AC (Damage avoidance)

But they don't as you have to take dex cap into account. In fact, specing for heavy ends up with you starting out with less AC than someone with good dex and leather.


Full plate is something I can maybe, kind of, somewhat understand, though it is still on the jankier side due to characters planning for that Dexterity modifier cap +0 roughing it out at the lowest levels.

But splint mail? Half plate? Are those really so much better than other armor choices that they should be denied at 1st level, to characters who are already gaining heavy armor proficiency from their class?

Are composite bows somehow overpowered at 1st level, but fine at later levels? Is 1d6+1 damage from a composite shortbow supposed to be notably impressive over a crossbow ranger's Precision shots? I am a little doubtful that Pathfinder 2e is aiming for realism with weapon selection. I do not understand why bows could not just all be composite, effectively; it would not seem to break the balance at all, particularly given their relatively low damage.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
I could go with weapons being just more expensive for better versions, armor is a bit worrying to me: a heavy armor build that's low on dex is starting behind in AC JUST because it's a heavy armor build... Most heavy armor builds are going to have to wear medium at start and that leave putting more dex in than you might want or being 2-3 points behind, meaning being hit and crit that much easier.

Eh. With Dex 12, there's Medium Armor that will get you as much AC as anyone without Heavy (+4 AC/+1 Max Dex Mod is a listed armor...Chain Mail if only 6 GP). Only at Dex 10 are you really suffering, and even then only to the extent of -1 AC.

graystone wrote:
Sure but I'm not sure why it couldn't be better in a new version especially if the armor types are meant to be competitive vs each other.

Fair enough, but it is in fact a lot better. Only Dex 10 characters are inconvenienced at all.

graystone wrote:
But they don't as you have to take dex cap into account. In fact, specing for heavy ends up with you starting out with less AC than someone with good dex and leather.

Only if you spec for Plate very specifically. All other Heavy Armor makes a Dex of 12 useful, as does some Medium Armor.


At 1st level, short of loans, a champion is not actually getting anything out of their heavy armor proficiency if they also want to use a shield. This would seem to undermine the point of the champion being a defense-heavy class.

This issue mysteriously vanishes just one or two levels higher.

Liberty's Edge

Colette Brunel wrote:

Full plate is something I can maybe, kind of, somewhat understand, though it is still on the jankier side due to characters planning for that Dexterity modifier cap +0 roughing it out at the lowest levels.

But splint mail? Half plate? Are those really so much better than other armor choices that they should be denied at 1st level, to characters who are already gaining heavy armor proficiency from their class?

They are +1 AC over all other armor, and in a system where every +1 matters. They are flatly superior. Being flatly more expensive is entirely reasonable.

Colette Brunel wrote:
Are composite bows somehow overpowered at 1st level, but fine at later levels? Is 1d6+1 damage from a composite shortbow supposed to be notably impressive over a crossbow ranger's Precision shots?

Well, over the course of a round, at 1st level, the DPR of a crossbow is 7.2 vs. AC 17 while the DPR of an archer with a longbow is 7.425 if they were using Composite, that would rise to 9.075.

So, yes, that's a huge DPR boost. At 2nd level a crossbow user can get Hunter's Aim to help out the comparison...but not at 1st.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Only at Dex 10 are you really suffering, and even then only to the extent of -1 AC.

That's exactly what I'm looking at: If you're going for heavy, it seems odd to shoot for a higher dex that you'll eventually be unable to use.

Deadmanwalking wrote:
Eh. With Dex 12, there's Medium Armor that will get you as much AC as anyone without Heavy (+4 AC/+1 Max Dex Mod is a listed armor...Chain Mail if only 6 GP).

I'm figuring in the whole medium spread as we don't have a character to back anything up to know what other costs the character has: 15 gp can go in no time and things get worse the cheaper you go in medium.

The only pro I can see to heavy would be harder to damage/destroy but sundering doesn't seem like a focus of this edition.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
They are +1 AC over all other armor, and in a system where every +1 matters. They are flatly superior. Being flatly more expensive is entirely reasonable.

Fighters and champions have heavy armor proficiency as a class feature.

I do not see why a champion should be told, "Sorry, but unlike other class builds in this game, you are not allowed to make full use of your class features at 1st level."

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Well, over the course of a round, at 1st level, the DPR of a crossbow is 7.2 vs. AC 17 while the DPR of an archer with a longbow is 7.425 if they were using Composite, that would rise to 9.075.

So, yes, that's a huge DPR boost. At 2nd level a crossbow user can get Hunter's Aim to help out the comparison...but not at 1st.

I am comparing crossbow rangers to bow rangers here. So what we are really looking at is crossbow Precision vs. composite shortbow Flurry.

1st-level ranger. Attack bonus is 1 level + 2 trained + 4 ability modifier = +7. The average AC of a 1st-level monster is 17. On a MAPless attack, that is a 50% regular hit chance and a 5% critical hit chance.

The battle assumption is that the ranger opens combat with a Stride to get into a good position, because it is ofttimes a better idea than shooting from the starting spot. After the Stride, it is a Hunt Prey, and then some attacking. Given the rest of the party's efforts, the 1st-level monster is likely down by the end of the first round, so the ranger has to Hunt Prey against a different 1st-level monster during the second round. The first two rounds of any given battle are the most important, so those will be used to tally damage.

The composite shortbow deals 1d6+1 damage, average 4.5. On a critical, 2d6+2+1d10 damage, average 14.5. With Hunted Shot and Flurry, the composite shortbow is attacking at +7/+4 in the first round, and +7/+4/+1 in the second round.
First round, Stride, Hunt Prey, Hunted Shot: (0.5 × 4.5) + (0.05 × 14.5) + (0.35 × 4.5) + (0.05 × 14.5) = 5.275
Second round, Hunt Prey, Hunted Shot, Strike, Strike: (0.5 × 4.5) + (0.05 × 14.5) + (0.35 × 4.5) + (0.05 × 14.5) + (0.2 × 4.5) + (0.05 × 14.5) = 6.9
Total for first two rounds: 12.175

The crossbow with Crossbow Ace deals 1d10+2 damage, average 7.5. On a critical, 2d10+4 damage, average 15. The first time in the round that the crossbow hits is an extra 1d8 damage, average 4.5; on a critical hit, 2d8 damage, average 9.
First round, Stride, Hunt Prey, Strike: (0.5 × 12) + (0.05 × 24) = 7.2
Second round, Interact to reload, Hunt Prey, Strike: (0.5 × 12) + (0.05 × 24) = 7.2
Total for first two rounds: 14.4

The crossbow is better in this scenario, and it frees up having to invest in Strength. Additionally, against higher-level and thus higher-AC monsters (which rangers are supposed to excel at more aptly, given that their Hunt Prey mechanic works best with only a single big enemy on the field), Flurry is naturally worth less due to more whiffing attacks, whereas Precision is more valuable.

Unless I bungled up my math here along the way, it would seem that the crossbow is more valuable even at 1st level.


graystone wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
Only at Dex 10 are you really suffering, and even then only to the extent of -1 AC.

That's exactly what I'm looking at: If you're going for heavy, it seems odd to shoot for a higher dex that you'll eventually be unable to use.

Start with chain, go to splint. Same dex cap, +1 AC for the transition.

While the armor table is rather weird to my mind (effectively there are only 6 armors, and there isn't any real point in buying the more expensive version of the same AC/dex cap, and no point in wearing an armor you don't have the strength for), there is a major advantage to it:

Unlike the playtest you aren't obliged to max dex for most characters (monks aside). Sepllcasters have a hard time without tossing a general feat at it, but most characters can kick off the game at AC 17 or 18 without any trouble.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
it seems odd to shoot for a higher dex that you'll eventually be unable to use.

If Dex only applied to your AC, sure...

But it ups various skills and Reflex as well. And yes, Bulwark makes that Ref boost redundant against damage spells, but there are other Ref-targeting effects as well.


Like, I've built a 5th level Full Plate Fighter and was still tempted to bump Dex. I only didn't because I needed ths stat boosts elsewhere.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

To experience the joy of being a first level character using what meager equipment one can scrape together all-the-while looking forward to their first couple adventures paying off to subsequently experience the joy of finally obtaining ample equipment?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Colette Brunel wrote:
I do not see why a champion should be told, "Sorry, but unlike other class builds in this game, you are not allowed to make full use of your class features at 1st level."

Patience, Grasshopper.

You can't have everything, all at once.
Why is it so inconceivable that your character will have to go slumming it with a breastplate or chainmail for a few adventures before graduating to his target equipment? Isn't part of the game, part of roleplaying, giving your character concrete goals that he wants to achieve inside the game world?

If anything, full plate armor is listed at an unrealistically low price in the PF2 CRB. One could argue that it has been listed at an artificially low price for the express reason of making it more accessible to characters.


When I used to run games in previous editions, I would just say to players "Pick a basic weapon, basic armor, and some adventuring gear," and it never really lead to anything out of hand.

That said, I no longer do things that way, mostly because now my players feel more accomplished when they get their hands on their desired gear (and attaching a story to acquiring it). I think if the OP is really that upset about this, it isn't a hard change to make as a GM. It's really not even THAT much a hard sell to your GM if you're a player who really wants to have full-plate at level 1.


Edge93 wrote:
graystone wrote:
it seems odd to shoot for a higher dex that you'll eventually be unable to use.

If Dex only applied to your AC, sure...

But it ups various skills and Reflex as well. And yes, Bulwark makes that Ref boost redundant against damage spells, but there are other Ref-targeting effects as well.

I'm looking at it in a vacuum: if I'm looking at armor and dex, I have no need for dex FOR AC. I might want dex for something else, but that's not really part of what I'm talking about: my default heavy armor build wouldn't have a need for dex but that's not saying that I might not make a specific heavy armor build sometime that might want some but I'd have to REALLY NEED that dex.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
graystone wrote:
Edge93 wrote:
graystone wrote:
it seems odd to shoot for a higher dex that you'll eventually be unable to use.

If Dex only applied to your AC, sure...

But it ups various skills and Reflex as well. And yes, Bulwark makes that Ref boost redundant against damage spells, but there are other Ref-targeting effects as well.
I'm looking at it in a vacuum:

That kinda sums up the problem. The game isnt in a vacuum, so looking at things in a vacuum doesn't always work. (Honestly IMO it -often- doesn't, but that's a different discussion)


Yeah, but what is the point of looking at it that way if it doesn't actually exist in a vacuum?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wheldrake wrote:

Patience, Grasshopper.

You can't have everything, all at once.
Why is it so inconceivable that your character will have to go slumming it with a breastplate or chainmail for a few adventures before graduating to his target equipment? Isn't part of the game, part of roleplaying, giving your character concrete goals that he wants to achieve inside the game world?

If this applied to all class builds? Sure.

But this does not, in fact, apply to all class builds. Some class builds (e.g. champions) have to deal with a starting funds problem, while others (e.g. rogues, crossbow rangers) do not.


Edge93 wrote:
graystone wrote:
Edge93 wrote:
graystone wrote:
it seems odd to shoot for a higher dex that you'll eventually be unable to use.

If Dex only applied to your AC, sure...

But it ups various skills and Reflex as well. And yes, Bulwark makes that Ref boost redundant against damage spells, but there are other Ref-targeting effects as well.
I'm looking at it in a vacuum:
That kinda sums up the problem. The game isnt in a vacuum, so looking at things in a vacuum doesn't always work. (Honestly IMO it -often- doesn't, but that's a different discussion)

I think I explained myself quite well: the vacuum works 100% fine for me, UNLESS I have a specific build in mind that needs it. Otherwise, I don't. Otherwise we have to bring EVERY other aspect into play like would I want that dex or wis for saves? Int or cha for skills? You either narrow the focus or it's fairly meaningless unless we're looking at a specific build.

Or to put it another way, If I was making a heavy armor character, I'm not looking for various skills and Reflex as a default. [this is out of the vacuum]. It takes a special build for me to care about them that is non-standard for a heavy armor character.

Secondly, if you're going to ignore the part were I explain what I meant, you're really debating dishonestly.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Colette Brunel wrote:
This issue mysteriously vanishes just one or two levels higher.

There's nothing mysterious about characters with more money being able to afford things that characters with less money can't.


I'm wondering how many people, for whom dex is not their primary stat, are going to put on studded leather with less than 16 dex and 12 strength.

Most classes don't optimize their armor class at level 1, I figure.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Colette Brunel wrote:
Wheldrake wrote:

Patience, Grasshopper.

You can't have everything, all at once.
Why is it so inconceivable that your character will have to go slumming it with a breastplate or chainmail for a few adventures before graduating to his target equipment? Isn't part of the game, part of roleplaying, giving your character concrete goals that he wants to achieve inside the game world?

If this applied to all class builds? Sure.

But this does not, in fact, apply to all class builds. Some class builds (e.g. champions) have to deal with a starting funds problem, while others (e.g. rogues, crossbow rangers) do not.

not all starts or ends must be equal, merely fun, and I think finding or buying some new set of armor you couldn't afford before, can be fun.


Squiggit wrote:
There's nothing mysterious about characters with more money being able to afford things that characters with less money can't.

It is, when it really is endemic only to certain class builds, and even then, at the lowest of levels, before magic item prices equalize everything.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Colette Brunel wrote:
Wheldrake wrote:

Patience, Grasshopper.

You can't have everything, all at once.
Why is it so inconceivable that your character will have to go slumming it with a breastplate or chainmail for a few adventures before graduating to his target equipment? Isn't part of the game, part of roleplaying, giving your character concrete goals that he wants to achieve inside the game world?

If this applied to all class builds? Sure.

But this does not, in fact, apply to all class builds. Some class builds (e.g. champions) have to deal with a starting funds problem, while others (e.g. rogues, crossbow rangers) do not.

Is it only now that some folks are realizing that all options in the game do not have the same value? Some options are objectively "better" than others, others worse (from certain points of view).

One could argue that all first-level PCs have a "starting funds problem" since there are so many cool beans in the CRB that they can't have.

This hypothetical champion will simply have to be patient to fully realize his "class build".

Dark Archive

I am miffed about the argument that certain fighting styles have to automatically be better than others and even when they are in some cases, that is still not good enough. Heavy armor is already the best category of AC boosting armor, and full plate is objectively the best out.

At level one, with an investment of one ability boost to dexterity (and the obvious boosts to strength; otherwise why wear the armor), characters can get heavy armor with a +1 in AC (which protects against attacks and criticals) compared to other armor types without a shield or an equal AC to characters in other armors categories without the dexterity boost. These same characters can also get a shield (+2 AC) and weapon with the rest of their money, being the most competent defensively and as adequately competent offensively as other martials, but sacrificing other items to be combat specialists.

At level 2, with some experience and money on their belts, these heavy armor focused characters can get, without any investment into dexterity whatsoever, the same boost to AC as other heavy armor-wearing characters with the addition of +3 to reflex saves against damage. That’s the equivalent of three ability boosts that every other character has to invest to protect against things like fireball. This alone should put full plate at the same or even a higher cost than most low level magic items.

As for composite bows, their monetary value are reflective of opportunity cost. A bow is meant to be used at range with the purpose of avoiding engagement in damage provoking actions, such as fighting in the front line next to a troll with a cleaver. Therefore, archers don’t have to sacrifice actions moving into position or the coin needed to buy top-notch armor. With protection (most of the time) from dangers and the ability to strike from afar, it makes sense from a gaming point of view that bows aren’t as damaging without a suitable investment.

As for the argument that every other class gets everything they want, that is completely untrue. A rogue with the vision of having the right tools and skills for any situation quickly runs out of money before even getting a quarter of the way through his list. Even an elven rogue I have come up with using class and ancestry description has trouble: someone who wants to keep those close to him living as long as possible, someone who takes random fancies to completion, and someone who is roguish and ready for many situations. For this character, I take the rogue starting set with their theives’ tools, but I lack the funds to get everything that defines my character, having to choose between a ranged weapon, a healer’s kit, artisan tools, or a disguise kit. Of course, I will have to pick those up when I have the coin available, but I would also start facing trouble with bulk because strength is not my forte, something that a heavy-armor user would not have to worry about.

tldr: This is a game of choices, and like with feats, classes, or ancestries, equipment is a choice based on roles of characters, as even the rogue cannot get everything s/he wants.


My general logic here is that champions and fighters have heavy armor proficiency built into their class. It is effectively a class feature, and something that deserves immediate benefit, right from the start. Champions and fighters can wear splint mail (13 gp) and swing around a two-handed weapon (~1 to 2 gp), which can work out fine, though it does mean no shield for a champion.

A composite bow is not necessarily stronger than a crossbow for a ranger. The price tag suggests that, for a ranger, a composite bow is a much stronger weapon at lower levels, but that does not seem to be the case.

What makes heavy armor (and full plate especially) and composite bows so negligible a benefit at later levels that they cost no more than any other items, whereas they suffer from large price tags at lower levels, before magic armor and magic weapons are available? Are they overpowered to have only at the lowest of levels, and fine before then? I am doubtful that that is the case.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would say just make them cheaper at your table? This is sounding more like a molehill than a mountain. Like, some people enjoy that choice when making a character.

Dark Archive

Colette Brunel wrote:

My general logic here is that champions and fighters have heavy armor proficiency built into their class. It is effectively a class feature, and something that deserves immediate benefit, right from the start. Champions and fighters can wear splint mail (13 gp) and swing around a two-handed weapon (~1 to 2 gp), which can work out fine, though it does mean no shield for a champion.

A composite bow is not necessarily stronger than a crossbow for a ranger. The price tag suggests that, for a ranger, a composite bow is a much stronger weapon at lower levels, but that does not seem to be the case.

What makes heavy armor (and full plate especially) and composite bows so negligible a benefit at later levels that they cost no more than any other items, whereas they suffer from large price tags at lower levels, before magic armor and magic weapons are available? Are they overpowered to have only at the lowest of levels, and fine before then? I am doubtful that that is the case.

Just the same, a plethora of skills is something built into the rogue, and they also do not get every single items that can get the max benefit from those skills. And a champion can get a shield, a weapon, and heavy armor for less than every item a rogue could use to make full use of his/her number of skill proficiencies.

Composite bows are stronger than crossbows for the ability to get extra damage from strength without the investment of a feat, a feat that could be spent on an animal companion or for multiple shots on a single enemy.

I don’t have the exact answers for later levels, but my guess is that it is for simplification and/or the assumption that characters will be using the same armor and weapons at later levels as they had been until then, as magic weapons and armor are the same cost as their runes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ruzza wrote:
I would say just make them cheaper at your table? This is sounding more like a molehill than a mountain. Like, some people enjoy that choice when making a character.

I'd add a crude plate variant that is to heavy armor what hide/scale is to medium armor. Going from +2 AC/+3 DEX cap (light) to +3 AC/+2 DEX cap (medium) resulted in armor that was roughly the same cost. That is Hide/Scale cost about the same as Studded/Chain Shirt. A Crude Plate with +5 AC/+0 DEX cap (heavy) should, using a similar progression, cost 5-7 gp, -3 check, -10 ft., 18 Strength, 3 Bulk, Plate.

That way you don't mess with relative effectiveness of builds.


graystone wrote:
Edge93 wrote:
graystone wrote:
Edge93 wrote:
graystone wrote:
it seems odd to shoot for a higher dex that you'll eventually be unable to use.

If Dex only applied to your AC, sure...

But it ups various skills and Reflex as well. And yes, Bulwark makes that Ref boost redundant against damage spells, but there are other Ref-targeting effects as well.
I'm looking at it in a vacuum:
That kinda sums up the problem. The game isnt in a vacuum, so looking at things in a vacuum doesn't always work. (Honestly IMO it -often- doesn't, but that's a different discussion)

I think I explained myself quite well: the vacuum works 100% fine for me, UNLESS I have a specific build in mind that needs it. Otherwise, I don't. Otherwise we have to bring EVERY other aspect into play like would I want that dex or wis for saves? Int or cha for skills? You either narrow the focus or it's fairly meaningless unless we're looking at a specific build.

Or to put it another way, If I was making a heavy armor character, I'm not looking for various skills and Reflex as a default. [this is out of the vacuum]. It takes a special build for me to care about them that is non-standard for a heavy armor character.

Secondly, if you're going to ignore the part were I explain what I meant, you're really debating dishonestly.

My apologies, I actually didn't really understand from your explanation. It makes more sense now.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Advice / Miffed and concerned by mundane equipment prices for heavy armor and composite bows All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.