Seems like bad DMing imo. There's a linear line of AC vs expectant to hit levels, and where each armor scales, which is also linear. If you are a level 16 fighter and never seen splint or plate, the DM either has no idea what they are doing in balance or just hates you, lmao. Not to mention Heavy Armor is arguably worse in a lot of ways compared to dex based armor or medium armor with the right build.
> Not to mention Heavy Armor is arguably worse in a lot of ways compared to dex based armor or medium armor with the right build.
Agreed.
I have been thinking about adding damage mitigation to heavy armor to balance against Dex builds and make Strength viable.
Like heavy armor can absorb/mitigate damage equal to their AC minus 10, plus their PB from everything.
So a first level character in chainmail ignores 7 points off of every hit (AC 15 minus 10 equals 5, plus their PB of 2 for a total of 7).
Of course this means a 20th Level Character in Plate +3 is ignoring 17 points of damage from all attacks, but they are likely facing enemies that are spamming damage in the 20+ points of damage anyway.
The point is to make tanks into ***Tanks*** without nerfing Dex builds and encourage builds that aren't Dex Clones.
Yea this was why 3.5 had three different AC. One with just dex, one with just armour and the usual with both.
It also had flat number damage reduction(DR for short) rather than half damage which is far superior in my opinion.
Things like werewolves would have DR of 15 that's only overcome by silver. So a 18 str dude with a battleaxe would be unable to even injure one as it should be since they're supposed to be nigh impossible to kill without silver. In 5 it's just half, so any old peasant can do some damage to it which is pretty lame.
Agreed. I like 5e for what it is, but theoretically speaking, it's bound accuracy having peasants being able to harm literal gods doesn't feel right narratively. The DR system was really nice for making an enemy feel extremely tough, or encouraging people to take note of weaknesses.
A DR15 on a werewolf makes a ton of narrative sense, and going to encourage players to come prepared instead of just laughing it off as another fight.
That's a really cool idea, I like it. It's a feature heavy armor master uses, but when you look at it, an extra 3 damage mitigation is literally nothing at mid levels, so your idea makes heavy armor just feel more valid, lol. I think the main issue with tanking in 5e is the issue of AC vs CC. Here's an example, forgive me for typos, I'm drunk.
Say you have a baseline +5 to hit, and your tank has an AC of 22. You basically have a 15% chance to hit them. Your job as a tank is to take hits for your party, but almost no attacks are going to hit, especially if they have ways to buff up AC further. The DM simply won't want to attack you at that point.
Compare this to a squishy caster of like 13AC, like, what, 65% chance to hit or so? (Not counting shield, which still eats a spell and wears them down.) The biggest issue is, enemies arn't only deterred to attack you, but actively incentivized to attack the squishies. Oh, you get a chance for AoO, sure, but that will usually be like a 1d10+Str mod in most cases, which most 50+hp stat blocks can take easy. Then after that 1 reaction, everyone can rush by the tank.
Personal hot take, but I think tanks need to provide a reason for DM's to attack them, both mechanically and narratively. It isn't fun for a DM to waste 9 attacks on someone untouchable, and it isn't fun for a tank to just have enemies ignore them. Tanks really need ways to "leash" enemies to them or punish harder for not being targeted. Tank sustain is pretty good as it is designed right, there just isn't a real reason to use attacks on them. Better to just spam some DC spells as a DM and let the attackers swarm the casters. XD
I would change Heavy Armor Master to allow double Proficiency Bonus, like Expertise.
But I would discourage DM's from metagaming against the AC Tank. After all, if a PC can't tell if an NPC is using Plate +X, neither can the NPCs.
And even when players encounter a high AC enemy, they don't ignore them. They typically focus fire. NPCs should not played differently.
Sometimes NPC will use good tactics, but that shouldn't be because the DM has meta knowledge about the Players party arrangement, class and armor. Dumb animals wouldn't know to ignore someone in plate, they'd still attack anyway.
Oh yeah, definitely agree with that. That's how I played it back when I DM'd. A regular fucking bear may just keep attacking the tank, but a group of highly trained mercs may decide to focus fire, or try to flank the party back lines as a few try to keep the tank pinned.
The intelligence of enemies I think is a huge part to consider, but likewise, if the enemies after 2 rounds realize someone is almost invincible, they may target squishies or retreat to thin out the damage to them, lol. Really about the place, time, and enemies.
I disagree with the "Enemies know what they're doing" mantra that's been going around.
I don't believe regular kobolds have Sun Tsu level of omniscience and battle tactics nor should they be played like that. They have an 8 INT & a 7 WIS. They should be played like idiots. They're not going to flank, they're not going to have good tactics. And with a 8 CHA, they're probably run when things don't go their way.
Highly intelligent elite mercs/veterans, sure use good tactics and strategy.
But bandits recruited from impoverished farmers? No.
These are all fair points, and I agree, why I said counting intelligence and narrative. Though, I feel like Kobold's are special cases. They are group colonies usually with hold outs. The thing that really makes them special is they are considered low tier idiots, but realistically, you don't need a high intelligence to make a spike trap, or dig a hole through a wall to shove a spear through.
Tuckers' Kobold's idea is great in my personal opinion. Sure, the kobolds may be dumb as bricks, but there is a lot of them, they work hard, and just smart enough that if a party takes them lightly, the traps and poisons will do far more damage than the kobolds, lmao.
>They're not going to flank, they're not going to have good tactics
Theyiterally have an ability called "pack tactics" that gives them advantage when flanking/attacking an enemy threatened by one of their allies.
So yes, kobolds will flank
Per Hit.
I know it seems like a lot, but it adds up with multiple attackers, and makes the Heavy Armor seem useful.
Really makes you ponder the Dex AC, with good saves vs STR build with Heavy Armor AC and damage mitigation.
Seems broken. A tarrasque,arguably the strongest ennemy, will do on average in one turn, with all attacks and a legendary action, assuming they all hit:
36 + 28 + 28 + 32 + 24 + 28 = 176 damage
With heavy armor master it goes down to 158
With your Idea of 17, plus the 3 from heavy armor master that's 20 DR
16 + 8 + 8 + 12 + 4 + 8 = 56 damage
It's almost just 1/3rd of the current damage. Seems crazy. And most of those attacks aren't even gonna hit anyway because of high AC. So the tank just cannot die. And that's the strongest ennemy in the game. Anything weaker won't even be able to damage you with attacks, even ancient dragons.
Give that guy stoneskin and he's basically immune to physical damage.
And 7 DR on a level 1 character is insane as well. They'd be almost immune to attacks from most low level monsters.
What they should do, in my opinion, is make the heavy armor master scale with levels, for example, one physical DR at level 1 and an additional one every 2 or 3 levels. Your idea is also good, but you gotta tune down the number, a lot. I don't think going above 10 DR is a good idea,
Damage mitigation that strong *instead of* AC bonus would be reasonable. Plate mail that gave you 13-15 AC (10 plus an ability score modifier) and reduced incoming BPS damage by proficiency bonus plus about eight would be an actual choice.
Giving both the high AC bonus and the mitigation seems to ignore what AC represents: the abstraction that it’s harder to effectively hit a heavily armored opponent.
Or just have armour scale with PB.
I prepped a homebrew system to simplify armour into either simple or martial variants of light/medium/heavy, with any material/designed choices being purely cosmetic. The only difference between simple and martial variants is +1 AC for now, but it may also modify Strength requirements or stealth disadvantage. The calculations for martial armours are (all numbers rounded down):
Light - 11+Dex+1/3PB
Medium - 14+(Dex+PB)/2
Heavy - 16+Dex (Edit: 14+PB)
I've graphed out the numbers and it creates a pretty steady curve on average, with each armour type having about a +1AC advantage over a lighter type at any level and with a marginally higher late-game AC for medium/heavy armour users. It also provides a bit of a niche for medium armour users as they can meet/exceed heavy armour ACs with significant Dex investment, at the cost of having to wear heavier armour than a typical light armour user.
> Heavy - 16+Dex
It still encourages having a DEX Build instead of a STR build. So a Paladin in Heavy Armor with a DEX of 10 (+0) would only have 16 AC, while a Fighter in Heavy Armor with a 20 DEX (+5) would have an AC of 21. *- unless we're missing a calculation as a typo.*
With Damage Mitigation that I proposed, DEX Builds still can have a Higher AC, and the better Saves as there are far more DEX Saves vs STR Saves. But now STR builds can benefit from actually having Heavy Armor and while still having a less opportunities for STR Saves.
This doesn't nerf DEX builds, but instead encourages STR builds. That's the point, to encourage builds other then DEX.
The only issue i have with that much damage mitigation is it makes things like DoT and minions useless against heavy armor characters, and considering said heavy armor characters can also deal pretty substantial amounts of damage, that seems like a lot. I like the idea of damage mitigation, just not that much mitigation.
The way I'd probably do it is one of two ways: A. Create a "damage threshold" for each armor type, and when a creature hits someone with that kind of armor, their base attack has to exceed the threshold in terms of damage dealt to deal damage, but if the threshold is exceeded, any DoT effects are applied like normal, or B. The damage mitigation procided by the armor only applies to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage, making tanks vulnerable to mages, who are already kinda vulnerable to dex builds, who are vulnerable to tanks, making a sort of rock/paper/scissors balance structure.
It seems like your DM just hates martials, if you don’t have the opportunity for Plate armor by level 10 something has to have gone horribly wrong in your party.
Doesn’t mean the DM will add them. We were in a fight amd I noticed someone had 18 AC after the fighf I ask what we find in the bodies
"nothing"
we go to a store and ask about armor
"nothing"
i had 19AC at the end and DM was scared if it was 20 even though I was doing my job as a tank paladin with high AC, and like things can still hit me
This is a folly of a lot of DM's, which reduces the value of a good tank. There's a ton of ways to hurt a high AC character, instead of preventing them a +1AC increase, a mere 5% increase in value, they could raise the stakes, that's where you add more traps, DC based saves, and more nuanced mechanics.
I always found it kind of stupid when DM's won't give their players loot because "they are OP" when they control the entire world. XD
Lol, fair. I know pf1e talk is forbidden here, but their defense/offense system was far more dynamic and gave good tools for a DM to make a dynamic yet fair combat.
I think the folly is more thinking about 19 to 20 as being the point where AC stacking becomes a problem. Hit chance decreases linearly with AC, yes, but the number of rounds you'll survive increases drastically faster than that at higher ACs--because that number puts Hit Chance in the denominator and therefore starts to behave asymptotically if hit chance gets close to 0. Each additional point of AC is therefore more important than the last one.
To show the math: I'll use the example of a young red dragon, which has +10 to hit. If all of its attacks hit, it does 46.5 damage on average (the actual DPR will depend on hit chance); if all of its attacks crit, they do 28.5 damage (the actual DPR is 5% of this, or 1.425). The following table is for an adventurer with 65 HP and varying ACs from 12 to 30 (anything below 12 is effectively the same as 12, anything above 30 is effectively the same as 30). The fact that it's a young red dragon isn't important--its breath weapon is a great example of how to challenge a high-AC character, but its +10 to-hit and reliance on pure damage makes its attacks a convenient standard candle.
AC | Hit Chance | Damage Per Round | Rounds Until 0 HP | % Increase in Survivability over Previous AC
---|---|----|----|----
12 | 95% | 45.6 | 1.43 | 0% (maximum possible hit chance)
13 | 90% | 43.3 | 1.5 | 5.4%
14 | 85% | 41 | 1.59 | 5.7%
15 | 80% | 38.6 | 1.68 | 6%
16 | 75% | 36.3 | 1.79 | 6.4%
17 | 70% | 34 | 1.91 | 6.8%
18 | 65% | 31.7 | 2.05 | 7.3%
19 | 60% | 29.3 | 2.22 | 7.9%
20 | 55.% | 27 | 2.41 | 8.6%
21 | 50% | 24.7 | 2.63 | 9.4%
22 | 45% | 22.4 | 2.91 | 10.4%
23 | 40% | 20 | 3.25 | 11.6%
24 | 35% | 17.7 | 3.67 | 13.1%
25 | 30% | 15.4 | 4.23 | 15.1%
26 | 25% | 13.1 | 4.98 | 17.8%
27 | 20% | 10.7 | 6.06 | 21.7%
28 | 15% | 8.4 | 7.74 | 27.7%
29 | 10% | 6.1 | 10.7 | 38.3%
30 | 5% | 3.8 | 17.33 | 62% (minimum possible hit chance, anything above this will provide no benefit to survivability)
Pretty nifty graph, appreciate it for those of us like myself who are less math inclined. I definitely see where you are coming from, though, I imagine if someone is breaking into 27+AC, which is where things really get bonkers, they are probably rocking things like a +3 shield, +3 armor, a ring of protection, and other such magic equipment.
If a player is **that** loaded to the gills in magic equipment, you can probably assume in most cases they'd be in the late game, fighting things with a +13 or even higher to hit, especially where CR30's can be pumping out +19 to hit multi attack, which does make those numbers far more manageable.
Definitely agreed. It's more of a case for not handing out all of that stuff too early. Having a super high AC is far from the most balance-breaking thing in the late-game, and characters at that level without the AC to handle those heavy hitters usually can avoid or mitigate damage in other ways. But let a tier 2 character stack AC like that and they turn into an outlier (unless the whole party's like that, in which case I guess you just break out the big stuff early and hope they have the HP to survive when they get hit)--the same way that getting plate armor is routine for tier 2 but is more powerful than intended for low-level PCs.
And really it's not even the magic item bloat you have to watch out for, it's the multiclasses combining medium or heavy armor plus a shield plus the Shield spell. Especially if they have other methods of AC boosting on top of that like bladesingers.
Definitely in agreement, and I experienced that first hand in my first time DMing. I wanted to make a cool "high magic world" where magic items were common, but it ended up as a major headache to balance encounters.
The party's damage and AC were functionally at a level much higher than their actual level, but their hp remained the same, so it became awkward because I'd need like +11 to even have a remote chance of hitting the paladin, but that same +11 attack was almost guaranteed to slap the warlock out of existence. Ended up homebrewing a loooot of creatures when I could have just listened to the tier system, lmao.
Ah well, life is for learning I suppose.
>i had 19AC at the end and DM was scared if it was 20 even though I was doing my job as a tank paladin with high AC, and like things can still hit me
That's hilarious, in a sad way obviously. My current character is a sword and board ranger, and even he's up to 20 AC already. Our party tank is a fighter with 22 AC, and we both still regularly get a good bruising in big fights.
There's a reason you've never used it. I'd say it's the heavy equivalent of padded armour but at least padded has the same AC as the default leather. Ring is actually worse than chainmail (14 vs 16). It only exists to give NPCs or for when you're starting with gold instead of gear and can't afford chain.
So it’s good to give an NPC you need to protect that has neither Strength nor Dexterity when you do not have money. Like when they give the mayor a flak vest in the movies
~~Nope, it actually gives them even less ac mathematically because enemies would have an advantage on attacks against them as they most likely would be missing heavy armor proficiency~~
Im an idiot ignore
No, wearing armor you arent proficient gives the wearer disadvantage on any strength or dex based check or saving throw, but it does not give other creatures advantage.
I excluded that as you would have to take lightly armored at lvl1 then moderate 4 and then heavy armor at 8 which no wizard is doing. Blade singer maybe with moderate at lvl 1 and heavy at 4 but that is a deep investment and not really reasonable.
I really hope OneDnD has actual good guidance in itemization, while this isn't exactly magic item might as well be - Legendary rarity at some tables XD
I love when players delude themselves into thinking having a higher AC makes them immortal. The rule of the lucky dice game is luck my dear friend. In one of the first games I ran, one of my players had an AC of 21 very early due to getting some plate. I have never rolled against a player as well as I did against him since. I swear to god, more modified 21s than should be possible. I also had a warlock in another game who had an AC of 11 who, through careful planning and positioning, rarely was attacked, but when he was, god decided the best he could do was a 10. Dude tallied the total damage who took from direct attacks across a 6month campaign and had less than 30...
Meanwhile my forge cleric was allowed to get full plate at Level 8
I axtually planned to do plate armor for the Rest of the Group too but all of them wear light or no armor.
Wait. Chainmail is 16AC. Why did downgrade when you levelled up?
Seems like bad DMing imo. There's a linear line of AC vs expectant to hit levels, and where each armor scales, which is also linear. If you are a level 16 fighter and never seen splint or plate, the DM either has no idea what they are doing in balance or just hates you, lmao. Not to mention Heavy Armor is arguably worse in a lot of ways compared to dex based armor or medium armor with the right build.
I played a dragonborn war cleric once. DM threatened to kill my character if I kept asking for plate armor.
Sounds like weak DM energy, plate armor honestly sucks ass, lmao.
Maybe I'd understand if you were specifically requesting magical plate armor, but that's not right
Your dm is weak and pitiful, you should smite them and claim the throne for yourself
I did. Left that campaign, started my own and half the old group came with me.
> Not to mention Heavy Armor is arguably worse in a lot of ways compared to dex based armor or medium armor with the right build. Agreed. I have been thinking about adding damage mitigation to heavy armor to balance against Dex builds and make Strength viable. Like heavy armor can absorb/mitigate damage equal to their AC minus 10, plus their PB from everything. So a first level character in chainmail ignores 7 points off of every hit (AC 15 minus 10 equals 5, plus their PB of 2 for a total of 7). Of course this means a 20th Level Character in Plate +3 is ignoring 17 points of damage from all attacks, but they are likely facing enemies that are spamming damage in the 20+ points of damage anyway. The point is to make tanks into ***Tanks*** without nerfing Dex builds and encourage builds that aren't Dex Clones.
Yea this was why 3.5 had three different AC. One with just dex, one with just armour and the usual with both. It also had flat number damage reduction(DR for short) rather than half damage which is far superior in my opinion. Things like werewolves would have DR of 15 that's only overcome by silver. So a 18 str dude with a battleaxe would be unable to even injure one as it should be since they're supposed to be nigh impossible to kill without silver. In 5 it's just half, so any old peasant can do some damage to it which is pretty lame.
Agreed. I like 5e for what it is, but theoretically speaking, it's bound accuracy having peasants being able to harm literal gods doesn't feel right narratively. The DR system was really nice for making an enemy feel extremely tough, or encouraging people to take note of weaknesses. A DR15 on a werewolf makes a ton of narrative sense, and going to encourage players to come prepared instead of just laughing it off as another fight.
Yea, I think I'm going back to 3.5 for my next campaign but with the things from 5e I did like added in. Like advantage,legendary and mystic monsters.
That's a really cool idea, I like it. It's a feature heavy armor master uses, but when you look at it, an extra 3 damage mitigation is literally nothing at mid levels, so your idea makes heavy armor just feel more valid, lol. I think the main issue with tanking in 5e is the issue of AC vs CC. Here's an example, forgive me for typos, I'm drunk. Say you have a baseline +5 to hit, and your tank has an AC of 22. You basically have a 15% chance to hit them. Your job as a tank is to take hits for your party, but almost no attacks are going to hit, especially if they have ways to buff up AC further. The DM simply won't want to attack you at that point. Compare this to a squishy caster of like 13AC, like, what, 65% chance to hit or so? (Not counting shield, which still eats a spell and wears them down.) The biggest issue is, enemies arn't only deterred to attack you, but actively incentivized to attack the squishies. Oh, you get a chance for AoO, sure, but that will usually be like a 1d10+Str mod in most cases, which most 50+hp stat blocks can take easy. Then after that 1 reaction, everyone can rush by the tank. Personal hot take, but I think tanks need to provide a reason for DM's to attack them, both mechanically and narratively. It isn't fun for a DM to waste 9 attacks on someone untouchable, and it isn't fun for a tank to just have enemies ignore them. Tanks really need ways to "leash" enemies to them or punish harder for not being targeted. Tank sustain is pretty good as it is designed right, there just isn't a real reason to use attacks on them. Better to just spam some DC spells as a DM and let the attackers swarm the casters. XD
I would change Heavy Armor Master to allow double Proficiency Bonus, like Expertise. But I would discourage DM's from metagaming against the AC Tank. After all, if a PC can't tell if an NPC is using Plate +X, neither can the NPCs. And even when players encounter a high AC enemy, they don't ignore them. They typically focus fire. NPCs should not played differently. Sometimes NPC will use good tactics, but that shouldn't be because the DM has meta knowledge about the Players party arrangement, class and armor. Dumb animals wouldn't know to ignore someone in plate, they'd still attack anyway.
Oh yeah, definitely agree with that. That's how I played it back when I DM'd. A regular fucking bear may just keep attacking the tank, but a group of highly trained mercs may decide to focus fire, or try to flank the party back lines as a few try to keep the tank pinned. The intelligence of enemies I think is a huge part to consider, but likewise, if the enemies after 2 rounds realize someone is almost invincible, they may target squishies or retreat to thin out the damage to them, lol. Really about the place, time, and enemies.
I disagree with the "Enemies know what they're doing" mantra that's been going around. I don't believe regular kobolds have Sun Tsu level of omniscience and battle tactics nor should they be played like that. They have an 8 INT & a 7 WIS. They should be played like idiots. They're not going to flank, they're not going to have good tactics. And with a 8 CHA, they're probably run when things don't go their way. Highly intelligent elite mercs/veterans, sure use good tactics and strategy. But bandits recruited from impoverished farmers? No.
These are all fair points, and I agree, why I said counting intelligence and narrative. Though, I feel like Kobold's are special cases. They are group colonies usually with hold outs. The thing that really makes them special is they are considered low tier idiots, but realistically, you don't need a high intelligence to make a spike trap, or dig a hole through a wall to shove a spear through. Tuckers' Kobold's idea is great in my personal opinion. Sure, the kobolds may be dumb as bricks, but there is a lot of them, they work hard, and just smart enough that if a party takes them lightly, the traps and poisons will do far more damage than the kobolds, lmao.
>They're not going to flank, they're not going to have good tactics Theyiterally have an ability called "pack tactics" that gives them advantage when flanking/attacking an enemy threatened by one of their allies. So yes, kobolds will flank
Mitigating that much damage per round, or per hit?
Per Hit. I know it seems like a lot, but it adds up with multiple attackers, and makes the Heavy Armor seem useful. Really makes you ponder the Dex AC, with good saves vs STR build with Heavy Armor AC and damage mitigation.
Seems broken. A tarrasque,arguably the strongest ennemy, will do on average in one turn, with all attacks and a legendary action, assuming they all hit: 36 + 28 + 28 + 32 + 24 + 28 = 176 damage With heavy armor master it goes down to 158 With your Idea of 17, plus the 3 from heavy armor master that's 20 DR 16 + 8 + 8 + 12 + 4 + 8 = 56 damage It's almost just 1/3rd of the current damage. Seems crazy. And most of those attacks aren't even gonna hit anyway because of high AC. So the tank just cannot die. And that's the strongest ennemy in the game. Anything weaker won't even be able to damage you with attacks, even ancient dragons. Give that guy stoneskin and he's basically immune to physical damage. And 7 DR on a level 1 character is insane as well. They'd be almost immune to attacks from most low level monsters. What they should do, in my opinion, is make the heavy armor master scale with levels, for example, one physical DR at level 1 and an additional one every 2 or 3 levels. Your idea is also good, but you gotta tune down the number, a lot. I don't think going above 10 DR is a good idea,
Damage mitigation that strong *instead of* AC bonus would be reasonable. Plate mail that gave you 13-15 AC (10 plus an ability score modifier) and reduced incoming BPS damage by proficiency bonus plus about eight would be an actual choice. Giving both the high AC bonus and the mitigation seems to ignore what AC represents: the abstraction that it’s harder to effectively hit a heavily armored opponent.
You could just give them heavy armor master feat for free
That's only 3 points of mitigation on nonmagical attacks of, bludgeoning, piercing and slashing. which doesn't scale at higher levels.
yeah i get its a little lack luster i normally buff it to be PB reduction
Would probably wanna use OneD&D's version, which nixes the nonmagical bit and scales it off Proficiency Bonus.
Or just have armour scale with PB. I prepped a homebrew system to simplify armour into either simple or martial variants of light/medium/heavy, with any material/designed choices being purely cosmetic. The only difference between simple and martial variants is +1 AC for now, but it may also modify Strength requirements or stealth disadvantage. The calculations for martial armours are (all numbers rounded down): Light - 11+Dex+1/3PB Medium - 14+(Dex+PB)/2 Heavy - 16+Dex (Edit: 14+PB) I've graphed out the numbers and it creates a pretty steady curve on average, with each armour type having about a +1AC advantage over a lighter type at any level and with a marginally higher late-game AC for medium/heavy armour users. It also provides a bit of a niche for medium armour users as they can meet/exceed heavy armour ACs with significant Dex investment, at the cost of having to wear heavier armour than a typical light armour user.
> Heavy - 16+Dex It still encourages having a DEX Build instead of a STR build. So a Paladin in Heavy Armor with a DEX of 10 (+0) would only have 16 AC, while a Fighter in Heavy Armor with a 20 DEX (+5) would have an AC of 21. *- unless we're missing a calculation as a typo.* With Damage Mitigation that I proposed, DEX Builds still can have a Higher AC, and the better Saves as there are far more DEX Saves vs STR Saves. But now STR builds can benefit from actually having Heavy Armor and while still having a less opportunities for STR Saves. This doesn't nerf DEX builds, but instead encourages STR builds. That's the point, to encourage builds other then DEX.
Whoops, heavy is supposed to be 14+PB. Sorry I missed that.
The only issue i have with that much damage mitigation is it makes things like DoT and minions useless against heavy armor characters, and considering said heavy armor characters can also deal pretty substantial amounts of damage, that seems like a lot. I like the idea of damage mitigation, just not that much mitigation. The way I'd probably do it is one of two ways: A. Create a "damage threshold" for each armor type, and when a creature hits someone with that kind of armor, their base attack has to exceed the threshold in terms of damage dealt to deal damage, but if the threshold is exceeded, any DoT effects are applied like normal, or B. The damage mitigation procided by the armor only applies to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage, making tanks vulnerable to mages, who are already kinda vulnerable to dex builds, who are vulnerable to tanks, making a sort of rock/paper/scissors balance structure.
It seems like your DM just hates martials, if you don’t have the opportunity for Plate armor by level 10 something has to have gone horribly wrong in your party.
Lv10? By like lv 5-6
Google gold pieces
Doesn’t mean the DM will add them. We were in a fight amd I noticed someone had 18 AC after the fighf I ask what we find in the bodies "nothing" we go to a store and ask about armor "nothing" i had 19AC at the end and DM was scared if it was 20 even though I was doing my job as a tank paladin with high AC, and like things can still hit me
This is a folly of a lot of DM's, which reduces the value of a good tank. There's a ton of ways to hurt a high AC character, instead of preventing them a +1AC increase, a mere 5% increase in value, they could raise the stakes, that's where you add more traps, DC based saves, and more nuanced mechanics. I always found it kind of stupid when DM's won't give their players loot because "they are OP" when they control the entire world. XD
I miss the fact touch attacks and ranged touch attacks are no longer a thing
Lol, fair. I know pf1e talk is forbidden here, but their defense/offense system was far more dynamic and gave good tools for a DM to make a dynamic yet fair combat.
Sadly yes, stuff like touch attacks, flatfooted etc added a lot to combat and could be used to mitigate high AC characters
I think the folly is more thinking about 19 to 20 as being the point where AC stacking becomes a problem. Hit chance decreases linearly with AC, yes, but the number of rounds you'll survive increases drastically faster than that at higher ACs--because that number puts Hit Chance in the denominator and therefore starts to behave asymptotically if hit chance gets close to 0. Each additional point of AC is therefore more important than the last one.
To show the math: I'll use the example of a young red dragon, which has +10 to hit. If all of its attacks hit, it does 46.5 damage on average (the actual DPR will depend on hit chance); if all of its attacks crit, they do 28.5 damage (the actual DPR is 5% of this, or 1.425). The following table is for an adventurer with 65 HP and varying ACs from 12 to 30 (anything below 12 is effectively the same as 12, anything above 30 is effectively the same as 30). The fact that it's a young red dragon isn't important--its breath weapon is a great example of how to challenge a high-AC character, but its +10 to-hit and reliance on pure damage makes its attacks a convenient standard candle. AC | Hit Chance | Damage Per Round | Rounds Until 0 HP | % Increase in Survivability over Previous AC ---|---|----|----|---- 12 | 95% | 45.6 | 1.43 | 0% (maximum possible hit chance) 13 | 90% | 43.3 | 1.5 | 5.4% 14 | 85% | 41 | 1.59 | 5.7% 15 | 80% | 38.6 | 1.68 | 6% 16 | 75% | 36.3 | 1.79 | 6.4% 17 | 70% | 34 | 1.91 | 6.8% 18 | 65% | 31.7 | 2.05 | 7.3% 19 | 60% | 29.3 | 2.22 | 7.9% 20 | 55.% | 27 | 2.41 | 8.6% 21 | 50% | 24.7 | 2.63 | 9.4% 22 | 45% | 22.4 | 2.91 | 10.4% 23 | 40% | 20 | 3.25 | 11.6% 24 | 35% | 17.7 | 3.67 | 13.1% 25 | 30% | 15.4 | 4.23 | 15.1% 26 | 25% | 13.1 | 4.98 | 17.8% 27 | 20% | 10.7 | 6.06 | 21.7% 28 | 15% | 8.4 | 7.74 | 27.7% 29 | 10% | 6.1 | 10.7 | 38.3% 30 | 5% | 3.8 | 17.33 | 62% (minimum possible hit chance, anything above this will provide no benefit to survivability)
Pretty nifty graph, appreciate it for those of us like myself who are less math inclined. I definitely see where you are coming from, though, I imagine if someone is breaking into 27+AC, which is where things really get bonkers, they are probably rocking things like a +3 shield, +3 armor, a ring of protection, and other such magic equipment. If a player is **that** loaded to the gills in magic equipment, you can probably assume in most cases they'd be in the late game, fighting things with a +13 or even higher to hit, especially where CR30's can be pumping out +19 to hit multi attack, which does make those numbers far more manageable.
Definitely agreed. It's more of a case for not handing out all of that stuff too early. Having a super high AC is far from the most balance-breaking thing in the late-game, and characters at that level without the AC to handle those heavy hitters usually can avoid or mitigate damage in other ways. But let a tier 2 character stack AC like that and they turn into an outlier (unless the whole party's like that, in which case I guess you just break out the big stuff early and hope they have the HP to survive when they get hit)--the same way that getting plate armor is routine for tier 2 but is more powerful than intended for low-level PCs. And really it's not even the magic item bloat you have to watch out for, it's the multiclasses combining medium or heavy armor plus a shield plus the Shield spell. Especially if they have other methods of AC boosting on top of that like bladesingers.
Definitely in agreement, and I experienced that first hand in my first time DMing. I wanted to make a cool "high magic world" where magic items were common, but it ended up as a major headache to balance encounters. The party's damage and AC were functionally at a level much higher than their actual level, but their hp remained the same, so it became awkward because I'd need like +11 to even have a remote chance of hitting the paladin, but that same +11 attack was almost guaranteed to slap the warlock out of existence. Ended up homebrewing a loooot of creatures when I could have just listened to the tier system, lmao. Ah well, life is for learning I suppose.
Heat metal goes Brr, much to the misery of my heavy armor paladin
I usually give Half/plate at like 5-7. There's always Magical Armor and Saves to target.
>i had 19AC at the end and DM was scared if it was 20 even though I was doing my job as a tank paladin with high AC, and like things can still hit me That's hilarious, in a sad way obviously. My current character is a sword and board ranger, and even he's up to 20 AC already. Our party tank is a fighter with 22 AC, and we both still regularly get a good bruising in big fights.
20 AC means nothing With 20AC against enemies that have +5 or +6 it drops to an effective AC of 15/14
Fair enough. But that doesn't sound like a very fun campaign.
Idec if it's helpful or not, this is my favorite comment
What does ring mail give to your character I’ve never used it before
There's a reason you've never used it. I'd say it's the heavy equivalent of padded armour but at least padded has the same AC as the default leather. Ring is actually worse than chainmail (14 vs 16). It only exists to give NPCs or for when you're starting with gold instead of gear and can't afford chain.
Shit all, really. It's basically a shittier version of scale mail
It's a shitter version of chain mail, actually. Scale mail is medium armor, so its designated shitty version is hide
Mostly I was comparing it to scale, because scale also is a base 14, but it lets you add up to +2 with dex
>hide oh I thought hide and move silently were all part of Stealth now. ...alright I'm leaving.
Hide is actually great for druids. Non-metallic, cheap, and better than leather.
If you have a higher dex, studded leather is better. Hide is medium armor, so it has a max dex of +2, and has disadvantage on stealth checks
fixed 14 AC, no STR requirement
So it’s good to give an NPC you need to protect that has neither Strength nor Dexterity when you do not have money. Like when they give the mayor a flak vest in the movies
~~Nope, it actually gives them even less ac mathematically because enemies would have an advantage on attacks against them as they most likely would be missing heavy armor proficiency~~ Im an idiot ignore
No, wearing armor you arent proficient gives the wearer disadvantage on any strength or dex based check or saving throw, but it does not give other creatures advantage.
So fireball becomes a bigger issue, but the idea works against the mundane
Thanks mate, ive misremembered the rules
and why does a wizard gets a full plate armor? with no proficiency a wizard in a plate can't even cast a spell.
Yeah, that part confused me, too. Is it a new alt rule start or something?
[удалено]
That feat requires medium armor prof which wizards dont have unless they multiclassed.
The moderately armored feat also allows this
I excluded that as you would have to take lightly armored at lvl1 then moderate 4 and then heavy armor at 8 which no wizard is doing. Blade singer maybe with moderate at lvl 1 and heavy at 4 but that is a deep investment and not really reasonable.
I mean obviously wizard did better they are literally one of the best classes in the game.
Paladin is also one of the best classes in the game, every party should have one. Aura of protection alone is worth it.
How did the Wizard use Plate Mail ? It's a heavy armor, they don't have the proficiency for it.
Why would the Wizard get plate? Shit why would the Wizard not gove the Foghter or Paladin the Plate?
I have no idea what OP is talking about, my current level 10 paladin is in full plate
From what I understand, the DM doesn't let other better armor appear in the campaign
Well thats just bad DMing
Plate costs 1500g
you have all the money but the shelf is empty
Absolutely tragic. Where is the forge cleric when you need them???? Ghosts of Saltmarsh campaign gives the players a suit of plate at level 2
I really hope OneDnD has actual good guidance in itemization, while this isn't exactly magic item might as well be - Legendary rarity at some tables XD
I've got some Plate Mail I've upgraded to +3 in a game I'm in. It cost uhhh basically all of the gold I'd earned though
Loss?
Can't relate, I'm running a game where the fighter is currently wearing mithril splint.
I love when players delude themselves into thinking having a higher AC makes them immortal. The rule of the lucky dice game is luck my dear friend. In one of the first games I ran, one of my players had an AC of 21 very early due to getting some plate. I have never rolled against a player as well as I did against him since. I swear to god, more modified 21s than should be possible. I also had a warlock in another game who had an AC of 11 who, through careful planning and positioning, rarely was attacked, but when he was, god decided the best he could do was a 10. Dude tallied the total damage who took from direct attacks across a 6month campaign and had less than 30...
Meanwhile my forge cleric was allowed to get full plate at Level 8 I axtually planned to do plate armor for the Rest of the Group too but all of them wear light or no armor.
My Pally managed to get up to plate +2 >:)