|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 7:17AM
#41
|
Date Joined:
Feb 18, 2010
|
The fact that the armour is totally weird in the packet and the wizard's only recourse at lvl 1 is a poxy +2 cover bonus from a spell doesn't help.
Yeh I think the range for player AC is too wide. Right now it would not be uncommon to have a Dwarf with 18 AC and Wizard with 10 AC. With a +1 to hit this is a 20% chance to be hit vs. a 60% chance. This is way to large a gap and doesn't even include the extremes (8 Dex Wizard with 9 AC vs. Dwarf Sorcerer in full armor and Shield Spell with 20 AC).
I think player AC's should be more narrow and have a range of about 4-5.
My fix would be to reduce heavy armor AC by 1 (other than ringmail). And Mountain Dwarves shouldn't get an AC bonus. Give them something else that doesn't mess with accuracy, maybe 1 damage reduction while in heavy armor or something, just not AC.
Dragon Sorcerers should either lose the Shield spell, or only have Medium Armor. Both is too powerful.
Also I would give Wizards some way of increasing AC by a small amount. Perhaps a passive +1 to AC from some magical force they are always emitting. I know some people don't like 'always-on' magic some perhaps some form of spell that doesn't take up too many resources (spell slots, actions etc.).
Like perhaps a Mage Armor spell that gives +1 AC (doesn't stack with armor) for 12-24 hours, and only takes a level 1 slot or maybe it is a cantrip.
*Optional* I would make 18 the maximum for starting abilities, and 20 the maximum after level 1. This makes gaining abiliy scores at higher levels feel more empowering and getting a stat to 20 is a real accomplishment. Also it makes it so the max AC a Dex character can have is the same as a character in heavy armor (15 AC without shield).
These changes would make standard chracter ACs range from 11-16 which is much better IMO. Now the Wizard only gets hit twice as much as the fighter, and you don't have any invincible dwarf sorcerers running around.
Now if the Fighter has twice as much HP as the Wizard he is only 4 times as durable (ignoring damage reduction and Hit Dice heals), which isn't too bad.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 12:15PM
#42
|
Date Joined:
Jan 21, 2004
|
I think a narrowing of armour types might not be a bad thing and allow players to fluff the armour they see their character wearing. However, applying full dex bonus to AC starts to become a problem.
I'm in favour of halving attack bonuses i.e. 16 +1/+3; 18 +2/+4 etc. Maybe we need to apply that to the Dex bonus to AC as well? A rogue in light armour will only be getting a +1 or +2 bonus to AC and a +1 or +2 bonus from dex giving us an AC range of AC11 -14 plus rogue class abilities that help them out. Cap medium armour to +1 dex bonus (AC13-15), and heavy armour to +0 bonus (AC15-16) and the gap becomes so much easier to manage.
Light Armour +1 or +2 plus half dex bonus
Medium +3 or +4 plus max +1 dex bonus
Heavy +5 or +6 max +0 dex bonus.
How does that cost out overall?
Also, could we make the shield spell and counterspell something that a wizard can conjure as a reaction (maybe the Shield spell can work either like parry or cover at the player's choice on a round by round basis similar to fighters)?
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 12:28PM
#43
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2012
|
Light Armour +1 or +2 plus half dex bonus
Medium +3 or +4 plus max +1 dex bonus
Heavy +5 or +6 max +0 dex bonus.
How does that cost out overall?
I'm not crazy about halving dex bonuses. Assuming a rogue or other dex fighter pushes their dex to an average of 18 in character creation (likely), the rogue will have a 15 ac in the 11 AC light armour. 15's a good number I think (I've talked about this at length elsewhere) and even if the rogue ends up having a bit more AC by having a 20 dex out of the gate then it can't really go anywhere from there so it'll be OK. Other than that I like your suggestion. I'm not sure I'm particularly worried about the AC after lvl 5. The armour ranges offered as written sort of even out and the wizard starts to get some better defensive spells to work for them so on the whole it's really just lvls 1-3 that are weird. Also, by then everyone's hp have managed to stack up a bit and the difference is still there but the mob damage shouldn't go up fast enough to make it an issue.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 12:33PM
#44
|
Date Joined:
Jan 21, 2004
|
Light Armour +1 or +2 plus half dex bonus
Medium +3 or +4 plus max +1 dex bonus
Heavy +5 or +6 max +0 dex bonus.
How does that cost out overall?
I'm not crazy about halving dex bonuses. Assuming a rogue or other dex fighter pushes their dex to an average of 18 in character creation (likely), the rogue will have a 15 ac in the 11 AC light armour. 15's a good number I think (I've talked about this at length elsewhere) and even if the rogue ends up having a bit more AC by having a 20 dex out of the gate then it can't really go anywhere from there so it'll be OK.
Other than that I like your suggestion.
I'm not sure I'm particularly worried about the AC after lvl 5. The armour ranges offered as written sort of even out and the wizard starts to get some better defensive spells to work for them so on the whole it's really just lvls 1-3 that are weird. Also, by then everyone's hp have managed to stack up a bit and the difference is still there but the mob damage shouldn't go up fast enough to make it an issue.
The problem is if you don't halve dex bonuses you have to up medium and heavy armours to compete. I'd much rather keep the lid on the AC and give rogues other abilities that reduce damage (like a tumble ability that works like fighter's parrying etc). If Dex is kept low it gives a little more room to manouevre with magic item bonuses and means we don't have to increase monster attack rolls in the current playtest packet.
Basically, a properly bounded system breaks quite quickly if you apply full bonuses to attack rolls and AC.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 12:40PM
#45
|
Date Joined:
Feb 18, 2010
|
Light Armour +1 or +2 plus half dex bonus
Medium +3 or +4 plus max +1 dex bonus
Heavy +5 or +6 max +0 dex bonus.
How does that cost out overall?
I'm not crazy about halving dex bonuses. Assuming a rogue or other dex fighter pushes their dex to an average of 18 in character creation (likely), the rogue will have a 15 ac in the 11 AC light armour. 15's a good number I think (I've talked about this at length elsewhere) and even if the rogue ends up having a bit more AC by having a 20 dex out of the gate then it can't really go anywhere from there so it'll be OK.
Other than that I like your suggestion.
I'm not sure I'm particularly worried about the AC after lvl 5. The armour ranges offered as written sort of even out and the wizard starts to get some better defensive spells to work for them so on the whole it's really just lvls 1-3 that are weird. Also, by then everyone's hp have managed to stack up a bit and the difference is still there but the mob damage shouldn't go up fast enough to make it an issue.
The problem is if you don't halve dex bonuses you have to up medium and heavy armours to compete. I'd much rather keep the lid on the AC and give rogues other abilities that reduce damage (like a tumble ability that works like fighter's parrying etc). If Dex is kept low it gives a little more room to manouevre with magic item bonuses and means we don't have to increase monster attack rolls in the current playtest packet.
Basically, a properly bounded system breaks quite quickly if you apply full bonuses to attack rolls and AC.
If we cap starting stats at 18, then the max AC a Dex class can have is 15, which is the same as a heavy armor class (with the suggested fix of -1 AC to heavy armors).
So I don't really see the need to halve Dex bonus to Armor, plus it makes a 16 in Dex kinda feel kinda useless.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 12:48PM
#46
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2012
|
Hmm well here's another way to put it: I don't think halving the dex mod solves the issue you're describing and actually punishes grittier games where attributes aren't so high. A rogue with a 20 dex in the best non magical armour money can buy will have a 18 AC, 19 with a shield (what dex fighter uses a shield?) If you halve the AC bonus from dex and round down as is the custom, you cap light armour's dex contribution at +2... that's the same as medium armour. So light armour would have to have their values raised by 2 for all types to meet the AC quota, 3 if you want that 19. Anyway the max armour values for medium and heavy armours are 18 and 19 (with shields), respectively, so actually it makes sense. I'd probably adjust it by capping AC contributions from Dex to +4 from light armour and adjusting the base AC upward to reflect that. So leather armour would become 12 AC (dex max +4) and grant your average starting rogue a 15 AC, 16 with a shield which is much closer to the mark. Capping dex contributions lower could allow a higher base, but the differences between light and medium armour stop mattering if you do more I think.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 12:54PM
#47
|
Date Joined:
Aug 25, 2007
|
What's wrong with a 4:1 HP ratio between fighter and wizard? Fighters are generally expected to get in the fray and protect the squishies. Wizards have the cosmos at their fingertips, so hit points should really be one of the least of their worries. Besides, constitution is pretty much worthless even when giving its bonus to maximum HP. I'll give up my con modifier to HP if I can get some sizeable amount of magic resistance in its place.
The problem with HP ratios is that people are looking at them in a vacuum. Sure a Fighter should be able to take 4 times the beating as a Wizard but this isn't the full picture. Combining HP with AC shows a more realistic picture. If a fighter has a 15% to be hit and 4 times the HP of a Wizard that has a 45% chance to be hit then the Fighter can take 12 times the beating the Wizard can. Not the Fighters ability to reduce damage and larger Hit Die heals.
Sure maybe a Fighter should be 5 or 6 times as durable as a wizard, but 15 to 20 times more durable is a bit too much for me.
indeed id the difrence get to extreme you get into the truble that monsters that can challange the high hitpoint characters hitpoint pool.
would probebly bring down the low Hp character to 0 or lower with 1 attack.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 12:55PM
#48
|
Date Joined:
Jan 21, 2004
|
Hmm well here's another way to put it: I don't think halving the dex mod solves the issue you're describing and actually punishes grittier games where attributes aren't so high.
A rogue with a 20 dex in the best non magical armour money can buy will have a 18 AC, 19 with a shield (what dex fighter uses a shield?) If you halve the AC bonus from dex and round down as is the custom, you cap light armour's dex contribution at +2... that's the same as medium armour. So light armour would have to have their values raised by 2 for all types to meet the AC quota, 3 if you want that 19.
Anyway the max armour values for medium and heavy armours are 18 and 19 (with shields), respectively, so actually it makes sense.
I'd probably adjust it by capping AC contributions from Dex to +4 from light armour and adjusting the base AC upward to reflect that. So leather armour would become 12 AC (dex max +4) and grant your average starting rogue a 15 AC, 16 with a shield which is much closer to the mark. Capping dex contributions lower could allow a higher base, but the differences between light and medium armour stop mattering if you do more I think.
It doesn't punish grittier gamers since at worse they will be 2 points lower instead of up to 5 points lower. You don't have the problem of monsters missing too often. You don't have the problem of the dexterity super stat. You still get full bonus to saves, damage, and skills. I think the biggest issue is overcoming high dex lovers' desire to get a juicy mechanical bonus for their high stat. I don't see that as something insurmountable if that high dex opens up other class abilities instead.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 10, 2012 - 1:09PM
#49
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2012
|
I don't really care of dex is a super stat for the classes that want dex. That's sort of the point of having a primary attribute. Maybe class abilities would cut it but we run into that same issue we do with con not contributing to HP which is it makes the attribute kinda lame. The numbers have power. We see that +1 and we go "oooo +1" and it's exciting because we get to see that +1 filter out all over our character sheets. It's good, we should keep some of that. Couple that with the fact that light armour actually does offer the same relative AC as heavy armour and medium armour and a high dex can't be a super stat for medium and heavy armour users and I really don't see the problem. I'm not really sure what the issue is with dex, specifically. I do agree that a rogue should't feel like they absolutely must have an 18 dex to have an AC worht a damn, which is why I suggested raising the values of light armour but placing a cap on the contributions to AC from dex they'll allow. Really, the problem I have with armour is the wizard gets 7/10ths of naff all to protect themselves at lvl 1.
|
|
|
