|
I think this is generally played as 'Just use your Charisma mod instead of your Dexterity mod for these calculations across the board' so you:
- Get your Cha bonus to your touch AC
- Have your Cha bonus subject to the 'Dex cap' limitation of your armor, and
- Lose your Cha bonus when you are flat-footed
Touch AC is basically your standard AC minus the armor, shield, and natural armor bonuses.
That Dex mod instead of Cha mod is none of those things, so it should still apply to Touch AC.
I think since it says; "when calculating your AC" and Touch AC is an AC, it shouldn't need a clarification or a ruling. I agree your GM is wrong.
You should probably just link this thread to your GM. Both common sense and the fact that Touch and Flat-Footed are both ACs should clearly indicate you get your Charisma to it all.
|
Armor Class
Your Armor Class (AC) represents how hard it is for opponents to land a solid, damaging blow on you. It’s the attack roll result that an opponent needs to achieve to hit you. Your AC is equal to the following:
10 + armor bonus + shield bonus + Dexterity modifier + other modifiers
Note that armor limits your Dexterity bonus, so if you’re wearing armor, you might not be able to apply your whole Dexterity bonus to your AC (see Table 6–6). Sometimes you can’t use your Dexterity bonus (if you have one). If you can’t react to a blow, you can’t use your Dexterity bonus to AC. If you don’t have a Dexterity bonus, your AC does not change.
Touch Attacks: Some attacks completely disregard armor, including shields and natural armor—the aggressor need only touch a foe for such an attack to take full effect. In these cases, the attacker makes a touch attack roll (either ranged or melee). When you are the target of a touch attack, your AC doesn’t include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus. All other modifiers, such as your size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and def lection bonus (if any) apply normally. Some creatures have the ability to make incorporeal touch attacks.
Sidestep Secret (Su): Your innate understanding of the universe has granted you preternatural reflexes and the uncanny ability to step out of danger at the very last second. Add your Charisma modifier (instead of your Dexterity modifier) to your Armor Class and all Reflex saving throws. Your armor's maximum Dexterity bonus applies to your Charisma instead of your Dexterity.
So, let's make a breakdown of how it works:
1) Your AC is
10 + armor bonus + shield bonus + Dexterity modifier + other modifiers
Note the "other modifiers", they include anything that is not an armor bonus, shield bonus or Dexterity bonus
2) Touch Attacks remove armor and shiel bonuses, it becomes:
10 + Dexterity modifier + other modifiers
The other modifiers stay, as Touch attack makes a non-inclusive list. "Such as" say clearly that they are making a non-inclusive list.
3) Sidestep Secret replace Dexterity with Charisma.
your normal ac became: 10 + armor bonus + shield bonus + Charisma modifier + other modifiers
touch AC becames: 10 + Charisma modifier + other modifiers
Your GM ruling that your Charisma modifier doesn't replace the dexterity simply move it in the "other modifiers", that are still part of your touch AC.
Actually his ruling would give you a better Flat-footed AC, as considering the Charisma modifiers as a separate AC bonus means and not a substitute for Dexterity means that you retain it when flat-footed.
More than doing a breakdown of how it works I don't know how we can convince him.
have you tried bribing him?
|
To summarize - point him at the following rule:
Touch Attacks: When you are the target of a touch attack, your AC doesn’t include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus. All other modifiers, such as your size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and deflection bonus (if any) apply normally.
With emphasis on the phrase "all other modifiers."
He said that he has precedence from the Monk. Where it specifically mentions that the Wis bonus applies to touch and Flat-Footed. But I responded to that by saying that is an entirely different bonus that still applies to flat footed so they have to specifically mention it.
1} The monk's Wisdom bonus to AC does not replace their Dexterity bonus to AC. It's a different ability with a different mechanic and purpose.
2} Comparing wording in the monk class, which was mostly copy & pasted from D&D 3.0e to an Oracle ability written by completely different people a decade later isn't useful.
3} Specifically calling out touch AC isn't required since Core documents what AC - and touch AC - are, and the Oracle ability says it replaces one of the components of those calculations.
4} From a design standpoint, complicating this by table-ruling "add your Charisma modifier (instead of your Dexterity modifier) to your Armor Class" means "add your Charisma modifier (instead of your Dexterity modifier) to your Armor Class except when it's your touch AC except we're not going to write that down because you should just know that by reading the monk rules" is complexity for no reason. It is inelegant and punishes the player for taking an option. Frankly it would be - by far - most sensible to also have the oracle ability apply to CMD calculation.
5} Pathfinder's rules precedence follows a "specific overrides general" format. The general rules of how AC works are in Core. The specific rules for monk override those general rules, changing some of them. The specific rules for the oracle ability override those general rules, changing some of them. The specific rules for monk do not override the specific rules for the oracle ability. The oracle ability works the way the oracle ability works, as written. That some other ability is written differently is not a factor.
I doubt any of this is going to help. It kind of sounds like your GM has it firmly in their mind that this ability doesn't work the way it clearly (to everyone but them) says it does. If they're open to explanation, debate, and discussion, the more than a half-dozen points (and "votes") in this thread should suffice.
Best of luck.
Touch AC is defined by what doesn't get included, not by what does. If the bonus isn't armor, shield, or natural armor, it gets added.
The best I can do is the duelist canny defense FAQ.
Duelist--Canny Defense: Is this ability limited by my armor's maximum Dexterity?
A duelist adds her Int bonus to her AC (not to her Dex bonus to AC). She loses that Int-based AC bonus under any situation where she's denied her Dex bonus to AC.
Her Int-based bonus to AC ignores the max Dex limitation of armor because the Int-based bonus to AC is not a Dex bonus.
(This Int bonus to AC applies to the character's touch AC.)
Duelist doesn't specifically call out adding int to touch AC, but it's ruled as applying to it in the FAQ. I didn't see anything closer that was official.
Frankly it would be - by far - most sensible to also have the oracle ability apply to CMD calculation.
For that one, we have specific rules and even a FAQ disallowing Cha in place of Dex from Sidestep Secret from applying to CMD. CMD adds most of the typed bonuses to AC -- but Cha instead of Dex is an untyped bonus not listed. The Nature's Whispers revelation of the Nature mystery, in contrast, specifically does have different wording that mentions CMD but not Reflex saves.
But in the time leading up to that FAQ, nobody seems to have suggested that Cha for Dex for AC should ever not apply to Touch AC.
The GM might be concerned with the oracle's AC becoming too high. It could help to point out that the oracle doesn't gain Cha to AC when flat-footed - or when feinted.
|
|
The GM might be concerned with the oracle's AC becoming too high.
Compared to what? An archer build that will pump up dexterity? A Rogue that will pump up dexterity?
The Charisma bonus to Ac is still capped by the armor worn, an Oracle proficiency is limited to medium armors and probably even a mithral armor will limit his maximum bonus, so at high levels, it is not convenient to use armor.
I'd think the lore oracle has a slight edge over Dex based martials when it comes to AC. She has innate access to shields (some Dex martials don't), is less dependent on other ability scores (opposed to Dex martials who wade into melee or need Str for their bow damage) and can augment her AC further with some low level (but scaling) spells.
If the GM thinks the "invulnerable" oracle will "destroy their encounters", the player has a problem, no matter how we assess the situation. And if it's an emotionally loaded problem, it should be adressed on an emotional level ("no, it's not as bad as it looks, here are tools for you to stay in control"). Sober rules discussion only achieves something as long as the receiving person is currently free from strong emotions.
|
|
If the GM thinks the "invulnerable" oracle will "destroy their encounters", the player has a problem, no matter how we assess the situation.
I agree, the "overpowered" whatever, if it is a preconception of the GM, is a problem for the player.
"Overpowered", for me, isn't a preconception, when playing, if one of the PCs is extremely superior to the other player with the equivalent function when playing, but generally a few points of AC don't make someone "extremely" superior. Especially when the class of that character has only one good save.