PDA

View Full Version : AC competition



flamberg
09-02-2008, 12:29 AM
Does it not seem strange to you that a twf ranger in a robe can achieve a 70+ ac if he is rolled and geared out right, but a fighter with all the latest and greatest shield and armor that is out there can only get into the 60's buffed. We are severly neglecting the tank now a days In pen and paper their was never a ranger that could out ac a fighter in full gear. Hey Dev's wake up from wonderland and smell the coffee. My main toon is a level 16 fighter that has some very nice gear but you all have made a subclass able to out damage me out defend me with just a fewer hitpoints than I do. Something is wrong here give the fighters some love please.:eek:

Guildmaster_Kadish
09-02-2008, 12:32 AM
In pen and paper their was never a ranger that could out ac a fighter in full gear.

Oh really...

flamberg
09-02-2008, 12:38 AM
I am an old pen and paper player loved the ranger maybe in the 3.5 rules they can but in 2 edition they could never maybe thats why dont play 3.5 pen and paper. I guess that ranger is moving faster than anyone else can swing a sword lol. I am forgetting the kung fu era. Will have to look up the rules on that just to see.

nbhs275
09-02-2008, 12:44 AM
Does it not seem strange to you that a twf ranger in a robe can achieve a 70+ ac if he is rolled and geared out right, but a fighter with all the latest and greatest shield and armor that is out there can only get into the 60's buffed. We are severly neglecting the tank now a days In pen and paper their was never a ranger that could out ac a fighter in full gear. Hey Dev's wake up from wonderland and smell the coffee. My main toon is a level 16 fighter that has some very nice gear but you all have made a subclass able to out damage me out defend me with just a fewer hitpoints than I do. Something is wrong here give the fighters some love please.:eek:

ok...in 3.5 you can create characters with enough Str to life a tavern or deal 70+ d6 a round. The game is as balanced as the DM makes it, and right now our DMs gave the high Dex crowd a very very strong toy, without giving the S&B ppl out there one too.

Guildmaster_Kadish
09-02-2008, 12:44 AM
I am an old pen and paper player loved the ranger maybe in the 3.5 rules they can but in 2 edition they could never maybe thats why dont play 3.5 pen and paper. I guess that ranger is moving faster than anyone else can swing a sword lol. I am forgetting the kung fu era. Will have to look up the rules on that just to see.

Well, since DDO is based on 3.5, not 2nd Edition...

The gap has widened with the "Monty Haul" loot drops in DDO, but Ranger/Monks could get pretty ridiculous AC in PnP as well. However, the DM could always balance things out the way he thought, which unfortunately isn't the case in DDO.

nbhs275
09-02-2008, 12:50 AM
Well, since DDO is based on 3.5, not 2nd Edition...

The gap has widened with the "Monty Haul" loot drops in DDO, but Ranger/Monks could get pretty ridiculous AC in PnP as well. However, the DM could always balance things out the way he thought, which unfortunately isn't the case in DDO.

hehe yep. That fighter gets too much AC...time for a fight with a rust monster or a spellcaster or 4...

flamberg
09-02-2008, 12:52 AM
i agree game based on 3.5 not 2nd edition (slaps self for being silly) Dude I would rather have a wall in front of me than a piece a cloth when someone is shooting arrows swinging swords or those big nasty maces that want to bash your head in. That is where the term tank is coming from. The new tank a guy wearing robe or outfit with two raipers and some bracers that decided to study for a short term in diff areas. We can sit and make one build so uber as to make all the other build obsolete. What I am trying to say is we need to even playing fields a bit. This used to be done by limiting how many subclasses extra xp for certain classes but in this game there is none of that so they need to even playing field a little.

Missing_Minds
09-02-2008, 08:54 AM
Does it not seem strange to you that a twf ranger in a robe can achieve a 70+ ac if he is rolled and geared out right, but a fighter with all the latest and greatest shield and armor that is out there can only get into the 60's buffed. We are severly neglecting the tank now a days In pen and paper their was never a ranger that could out ac a fighter in full gear. Hey Dev's wake up from wonderland and smell the coffee. My main toon is a level 16 fighter that has some very nice gear but you all have made a subclass able to out damage me out defend me with just a fewer hitpoints than I do. Something is wrong here give the fighters some love please.:eek:

*snicker* then you never figured out how to pull it off. In PnP once you hit the high levels, and had a decent DM/world that allowed for such, oh yes, many a dex build could easily out do fully decked out armor wearers. Then again as you consider rangers to be a subclass, maybe that is why.


Dude I would rather have a wall in front of me than a piece a cloth when someone is shooting arrows swinging swords or those big nasty maces that want to bash your head in.

The wall you speak of there would give you a concealment bonus. Something that Tower shields should do, but do not in this game. (they should give you the equivalent of displacement, 50/50, but only from one direction.)

BTW, the idea of a tank is an armored thing that can take a beating. Being a dex build means you are not there to take the hit. Think about Kargon. Punch him in the face, he'll just take it and well... I'm not certain after that but it won't be pretty. Then take his pal. Chances are his pal will just move his head so he won't be hit at all. It seems though his pal has a hard time with fireballs given how much he dies in the shroud.

(Sorry, you two, but I had to. :) )

Dracolich
09-02-2008, 09:13 AM
This is why AC is so confusing to people. They assume AC means not getting hit. It doesnt it means not taking damage. A person wearing Full Plate is less manuverable then the cloth wearing person. However the person getting hit wearing the cloth would and should take more damage. Thus the DR system in Unearthed Arcana should be implimented. Although in DDO with damage output of enemies being astronomical the DR 4 or 5 whatever FP is would not really ammount to much. FP is meant to absorb the damage trying to be dealt not help you get out of the way.

I guess my interperitation is open to interperitation :D. That is to say it isnt right and they should give tanks a damage mitigation line in their action points to help keep them a very viable group addon rather then every group having 2 tempests and no armor wearing folk.

BurnerD
09-02-2008, 09:17 AM
Maybe Fighters need a DR enhancement line or feat that is only applicable when wearing heavy armor?

Garth_of_Sarlona
09-02-2008, 09:19 AM
AC for rangers is largely based on stats (e.g. DEX) which are hugely inflated in DDO compared with PnP.

AC on fighters is largely based on items (e.g. MFP) which are capped at PnP limits (+5)

Garth

Gennerik
09-02-2008, 09:32 AM
We need our Fighter's Dodge enhancement back. Given the revamp of the enhancements since then, maybe make it a level 5 enhancement that adds a +1 dodge bonus to AC.

Fighter's Dodge I
2 AP
Level 5 Fighter
Add +1 Dodge bonus to your AC

Fighter's Dodge II
2 AP
Level 10 Fighter
Add +1 Dodge bonus to your AC (Total of +2)

Fighter's Dodge III
2 AP
Level 15 Fighter
Add +1 Dodge bonus to your AC (Total of +3)

Fighter's Dodge IV
2 AP
Level 20 Fighter
Add +1 Dodge bonus to your AC (Total of +4)

Since most people don't take Fighter past level 2 if they splash it, or level 14 if they happen to be Tempest Fighters, only people that really stick with Fighter get the maximum Benefit. Though I doubt the enhancement costs would be added like the above, it would be nice to see some change from 1,2,3,4 or 2,4,6 for the enhancement lines, given that there is so much more flexibility that could be allowed. This could at least help Fighters maintain some sort of AC bonus a possibly close the gap between AC classes that aren't (Fighter) and those that aren't meant to be but are.

Deathseeker
09-02-2008, 09:50 AM
We need our Fighter's Dodge enhancement back. Given the revamp of the enhancements since then, maybe make it a level 5 enhancement that adds a +1 dodge bonus to AC.

Fighter's Dodge I
2 AP
Level 5 Fighter
Add +1 Dodge bonus to your AC

Fighter's Dodge II
2 AP
Level 10 Fighter
Add +1 Dodge bonus to your AC (Total of +2)

Fighter's Dodge III
2 AP
Level 15 Fighter
Add +1 Dodge bonus to your AC (Total of +3)

Fighter's Dodge IV
2 AP
Level 20 Fighter
Add +1 Dodge bonus to your AC (Total of +4)

Since most people don't take Fighter past level 2 if they splash it, or level 14 if they happen to be Tempest Fighters, only people that really stick with Fighter get the maximum Benefit. Though I doubt the enhancement costs would be added like the above, it would be nice to see some change from 1,2,3,4 or 2,4,6 for the enhancement lines, given that there is so much more flexibility that could be allowed. This could at least help Fighters maintain some sort of AC bonus a possibly close the gap between AC classes that aren't (Fighter) and those that aren't meant to be but are.

I think this is great and needed to address the Fighter lack of love, but doesn't help with the TWF vs S&B imbalance. But I'm all for it!

Additionally, I'd like to see something that brings S&B back into favor. SHIELD CRAFTING WILL MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE!!! That's one major mistake I think they made...allowing +4 AC insight bonus on a weapon but not a shield. I'm confident they'll address that.

I'd also like to see crafting on shields that allows an increase to blocking DR, and maybe even a STACKABLE standing DR.

For Fighter love specifically, add in the melee alacrity (something like a 10% stackable haste) feat with a high level min ftr level requirement (maybe 11 or 12).

If I could get a crafted mithral tower shield with a +4 ac insight bonus, +3 to blocking DR, some type of guard on it, melee alacrity and fighter's dodge but with a higher min ftr level requirement, then we'd be all set with the S&B coming back strong!


The big problem with all of this? We need more challenging high level quests. Or at least make the reward higher for running something on elite (named loot has really hurt the game...we need more high level random loot other than a w/p). But that's for another thread....

Samadhi
09-02-2008, 09:58 AM
Just because the TWF can get higher AC - doesn't make them a better intimitank.

Currently, shield blocking DR is more effective than AC when intimidating. Since your TWF is not using a shield (or for more generic dex builds - not using a tower shield's superior DR), the result is that your armor intimitank still does a stronger job.

My 2 cp.

Impaqt
09-02-2008, 10:08 AM
Most of these Rediculous AC TWF characters rarely hit the 70's... I can also get into the 70's on my Heavy tank..... it takes a lot o buffs and raid gear, but the AC is there.

Aspenor
09-02-2008, 10:09 AM
Just because the TWF can get higher AC - doesn't make them a better intimitank.

Currently, shield blocking DR is more effective than AC when intimidating. Since your TWF is not using a shield (or for more generic dex builds - not using a tower shield's superior DR), the result is that your armor intimitank still does a stronger job.

My 2 cp.

DING DING DING

We have a winner people.

Give this guy a gold star.

Naso24
09-02-2008, 10:15 AM
I wouldn't mind seeing a shield fighting feat that gets in a shield bash or 2 in the attack sequence, without slowing the primary hand or losing AC. Think of Gladiator and 300. The shield is used for more than just blocking hits.

rimble
09-02-2008, 10:26 AM
Just because the TWF can get higher AC - doesn't make them a better intimitank.

Currently, shield blocking DR is more effective than AC when intimidating. Since your TWF is not using a shield (or for more generic dex builds - not using a tower shield's superior DR), the result is that your armor intimitank still does a stronger job.

It seems to me that a TWFer can easily fall into that mode of defensive intimitanking--in the few fights it really matters--with shield blocking when necessary, especially with Lorikk's Champion (15DR Heavy Shield). He'd still have comparable AC, and fairly comparable DR, but potentially up to 9 less DR versus a Dwarven character with full Shield Mastery Feats and Enhancements.

It still doesn't seem like enough of a difference to matter, especially with the high-end Heavy and Tower shields having the same 15DR.

rimble
09-02-2008, 10:33 AM
We need our Fighter's Dodge enhancement back. Given the revamp of the enhancements since then, maybe make it a level 5 enhancement that adds a +1 dodge bonus to AC.

Fighter's Dodge I
2 AP
Level 5 Fighter
Add +1 Dodge bonus to your AC

<snip>

And Fighter's Tower Shield Mastery should add DR (probably 1/2/3) to all Shields, in addition to raising the Dex cap.

Missing_Minds
09-02-2008, 10:39 AM
It seems to me that a TWFer can easily fall into that mode of defensive intimitanking--in the few fights it really matters--with shield blocking when necessary, especially with Lorikk's Champion (15DR Heavy Shield). He'd still have comparable AC, and fairly comparable DR, but potentially up to 9 less DR versus a Dwarven character with full Shield Mastery Feats and Enhancements.

It still doesn't seem like enough of a difference to matter, especially with the high-end Heavy and Tower shields having the same 15DR.

True, but it will be nice when they fix loric's to also have the HP recovery portion of heal.

maddmatt70
09-02-2008, 01:48 PM
Just because the TWF can get higher AC - doesn't make them a better intimitank.

Currently, shield blocking DR is more effective than AC when intimidating. Since your TWF is not using a shield (or for more generic dex builds - not using a tower shield's superior DR), the result is that your armor intimitank still does a stronger job.

My 2 cp.

If the mobs or bosses can't hit the character the character's dr is irrelevant. I have run on elite shrouds and elite vods where the raid bosses couldn't hit a twf ac character or at least only on a 20..

Reisz
09-02-2008, 04:29 PM
Why should Fighter Dodge Bonus cost 2 ap per level. The paladin AC aura only costs 1ap per level and it adds to everyone around him. hmm....

The devs have created a mechanism for increasing AC with the eldritch rituals. ATM only 1 level can be added, but the adamantine ritual has several levels. If the devs upped these levels for AC, it would let the S&B crowd get double benefits and close the AC gap.

flamberg
09-02-2008, 06:25 PM
Well the fact is that every other class in the game has been enhanced modified and as they say pimped out fighter's are the red headed step children of ddo. (sorry if your a red headed stepchild not trying to deprive you of your misery.) I like my sword and board fighter just would like a little fighter love.

Mistinarperadnacles
09-02-2008, 06:39 PM
This is why AC is so confusing to people. They assume AC means not getting hit. It doesnt it means not taking damage. A person wearing Full Plate is less manuverable then the cloth wearing person. However the person getting hit wearing the cloth would and should take more damage. Thus the DR system in Unearthed Arcana should be implimented. Although in DDO with damage output of enemies being astronomical the DR 4 or 5 whatever FP is would not really ammount to much. FP is meant to absorb the damage trying to be dealt not help you get out of the way.

I guess my interperitation is open to interperitation :D. That is to say it isnt right and they should give tanks a damage mitigation line in their action points to help keep them a very viable group addon rather then every group having 2 tempests and no armor wearing folk.

It would at least be something and low DR's do indeed add up to respectable amounts considered over time. Over 100 swings that connect, you're already 500 damage ahead.

This is possibly a very strong potential improvement to armour wearers and shield swingers.

The fact that anybody with a DEX 26+ (not hard to achieve) will out AC +5 Mithral Full Plate is laughable to me. (and thats before stuff like Icy Raiments and Monk splahses)

Borror0
09-02-2008, 06:42 PM
We need our Fighter's Dodge enhancement back.

No, we DON'T! Oh, let's waste some of my APs on AC so I suck even more at the rest...:rolleyes:

Fighters don't need further nerfing.

Gennerik
09-02-2008, 09:01 PM
No, we DON'T! Oh, let's waste some of my APs on AC so I suck even more at the rest...:rolleyes:

Fighters don't need further nerfing.

Yes, we can all spend out valuable APs on Fighter's Tactics and Stun, Sunder, and Trip every monster in the game... well, except for all those Red-named creatures, and the Raid bosses. And half the things with 4 (or more) legs. And I guess it doesn't matter with Devils since even stunned they can teleport away. And I guess it doesn't work on constructs and undead (at least some of those don't).

Anyway, maybe as a more Sword and Board type of dodge, you could make them more like this:

Fighter's Dodge I (through IV)
2 AP
Fighter level 5 (10,15,20)
When using a Shield, you gain a +2 Dodge Bonus to AC. (Increases by 2 each time)

Would a +8 AC bonus be worthwhile as long as you're using a shield for 8 AP? And seriously, so many of the Fighter's feats are situational, why shouldn't these be?

GlassCannon
09-02-2008, 10:59 PM
No, we DON'T! Oh, let's waste some of my APs on AC so I suck even more at the rest...:rolleyes:

Fighters don't need further nerfing.

They already waste ALL of their Feats on AC, why not waste ALL of their AP too? That way, they can become Destructable Scenery.


They also need Dual Shield Wearing as a feat, so they can be an additional 0.005&#37; defensive ;)

Borror0
09-03-2008, 12:27 AM
Yes, we can all spend out valuable APs on Fighter's Tactics and Stun, Sunder, and Trip every monster in the game...

Well, the solution to that is adding better enhancements. Not weakening AC builds furthermore... -_-

Borror0
09-03-2008, 12:30 AM
And Fighter's Tower Shield Mastery should add DR (probably 1/2/3) to all Shields, in addition to raising the Dex cap.

By the way, I like this idea.

flamberg
09-03-2008, 01:33 AM
Thanks for the input everyone glad to see not the only one peeved about it.

esoitl
09-03-2008, 02:22 AM
This is why AC is so confusing to people. They assume AC means not getting hit. It doesnt it means not taking damage. A person wearing Full Plate is less manuverable then the cloth wearing person. However the person getting hit wearing the cloth would and should take more damage. Thus the DR system in Unearthed Arcana should be implimented. Although in DDO with damage output of enemies being astronomical the DR 4 or 5 whatever FP is would not really ammount to much. FP is meant to absorb the damage trying to be dealt not help you get out of the way.

I guess my interperitation is open to interperitation :D. That is to say it isnt right and they should give tanks a damage mitigation line in their action points to help keep them a very viable group addon rather then every group having 2 tempests and no armor wearing folk.

DR has nothing to do with AC
wearing a set of full plate and wearing a robe are very very diferent. swing a sword at someone in a robe and every blow will be a damage dealing blow. swing at someone wearing banded mail and you will have a damage dealing hit only part of the time..... the suit is designed to protect but it has vulnerable areas. now swing at someone wearing full plate..... same scenario as the banded mail but the weak points are significantly smaller and fewer....... hence the AC system

it reflects the more complex and protective nature of the suit of armour, hence passing an AC om a roll basically means you get through the protection and hit one of the vulnerable areas, not that you are 'punching' through the armour lets say and there shouldn't be any DR applied at all


the reason AC can get so ridiculous in robes is that the stats can get ridiculous and robes make full use of those stats
a massive DEX, magical auras of protection, feats and magical items to enhance manouvring.... that's where he AC comes from and why it's almost non-existant in PnP. no DM would ever give out some of the magical items that appear in DDO unless they were silly and made overinflated dungeons, much like we encounter in DDO to make up for the lack of a live DM with crazy ideas to kill our heroes
i agree that sword and shield fighters should have the highest AC's but understand totally how, where, and what it takes to make an intensive AC build wearing mere clothing

some people post 70 ACs with some ridiculous modifiers though so take some with a grain of salt
if i posted a Monk that could obtain a 150 AC only while tumbling, eating a ham sandwich, on the 2nd tuesday of the month at high tide is it really worth a damn?
the playable AC is more important: ie what people are actually gettign while engaged in combat
i have a Fighter/Paladin with shield and hammer that should crash through the high 60's for AC engaged, haven't actually punched all the numbers but mid 70's engaged should be very possible.... no tumbling, no CE, mostly self bufed which IMO is more important than theoretical or situatinal AC's that some people post

Borror0
09-03-2008, 03:04 AM
i have a Fighter/Paladin with shield and hammer that should crash through the high 60's for AC engaged, haven't actually punched all the numbers but mid 70's engaged should be very possible.... no tumbling, no CE, mostly self bufed which IMO is more important than theoretical or situatinal AC's that some people post

I can't talk for your fighter/paladin, but mine will sit at 64 AC self-buffed with CE. (Link in sig if you care at all about the build/gear used.) So, if you think you tank can reach mid-70, you're wrong. Yes, if you got a 15 bard, a level 12 ranger, a cleric casting Recitation and a 15 paladin beside you, you can (64+4+2+2+4=76), but that's very unlikely.

However, Str-based ranger/monks can reach 70 AC on their own.

So, TWFers can really get crazy AC while "engaged combat".

JD2134
09-03-2008, 03:28 AM
AC for rangers is largely based on stats (e.g. DEX) which are hugely inflated in DDO compared with PnP.

AC on fighters is largely based on items (e.g. MFP) which are capped at PnP limits (+5)

Garth

There the problem righ there stats are insane in this game while the bonus to items is rule book

Saragon
09-03-2008, 04:18 AM
We need our Fighter's Dodge enhancement back. Given the revamp of the enhancements since then, maybe make it a level 5 enhancement that adds a +1 dodge bonus to AC.

Fighter's Dodge I
2 AP
Level 5 Fighter
Add +1 Dodge bonus to your AC

Fighter's Dodge II
2 AP
Level 10 Fighter
Add +1 Dodge bonus to your AC (Total of +2)

Fighter's Dodge III
2 AP
Level 15 Fighter
Add +1 Dodge bonus to your AC (Total of +3)

Fighter's Dodge IV
2 AP
Level 20 Fighter
Add +1 Dodge bonus to your AC (Total of +4)

Since most people don't take Fighter past level 2 if they splash it, or level 14 if they happen to be Tempest Fighters, only people that really stick with Fighter get the maximum Benefit. Though I doubt the enhancement costs would be added like the above, it would be nice to see some change from 1,2,3,4 or 2,4,6 for the enhancement lines, given that there is so much more flexibility that could be allowed. This could at least help Fighters maintain some sort of AC bonus a possibly close the gap between AC classes that aren't (Fighter) and those that aren't meant to be but are.

I don't think the return of the dodge enhancements will save the heavy tanks. The problem is that these tanks already have a heavy enhancement investment in armor and shield mastery just to get AC close to those dex rangers or monk splash builds. So where are you going to find even more enhancement points to invest in yet another enhancement line that still won't get you up to the AC of the robe wearers?

Gennerik
09-03-2008, 06:04 AM
Well, short of my second idea and giving up to 8 AC via APs (which seems overly powerful for enhancements, even if it is when using a shield), maybe you could just give heavy tanks an enhancement line to add to ther DR and just give up on the fact that they'll never have the same AC potential that a robe-wearing ranger with two weapons will have... Jeez, that sounds so ridiculous.

Maybe in addition to the Tower Shield Mastery adding DR (I'd have it passive DR and maybe twice the number active DR as suggested), they could have the Armor Mastery line add DR as well (That stacks with the Tower Shield Mastery and doubles when used actively). Hypothetically, that could give a heavily armored, tower shield wearing melee character could have up to 6/- passive DR or an additional 12/- Blocking DR. Granted, it would make my little Halfling cry, as he is supposed to be an AC build, but I guess having a moderate AC and decent DR could work as well.

[EDIT] A an aside, my last 3.5 character that I played had a 56 AC at level 32, and I felt godly. I literally only got hit on a 20, and that was by things that were CR 30+ (except for dragons, they could still hit fairly often, but I had a solution for that as well). If that doesn't give you an indication of exactly how broken the DnD armor methods are in DDO, I don't know what will, considering that we fight things where we NEED that AC just to not get hit every time. I might prefer just to add DR instead of AC, since attack bonuses will continue to go up, rendering AC builds less effective until higher AC items are introduced while DR will always be effective (as long as it's /- at any rate)

flamberg
09-04-2008, 06:56 PM
Imo Dr is nice but trying to get it to stack what works with what is a little confusing the way its set up on your character sheet. Ac has always been how hard it is to make a successful attack on a person. The better the armor the less likely you are to get hit. Pretty simple. The way the game is set up you would think we were in a matrix movie as the toon sees a arrow flying at him in slow motion. Hmmm where is that tower shield. Yes dex has a place. The way the game is set up in ddo you can splash here and there to maximize the best of all worlds. In pen and paper your dm would be crazy to allow some of the build. Monk was such a specialty that you devoted your life to it. What you sent that young monk student out there to study the wild then made him a ranger. Hey that magic looked cool let me drop all my studies to play in it a while. Dang I took the best of all worlds and put it together in one toon and made it into an elite toon. Imo they brought in a class that was a good class but if my memory serves me correctly it was a class that you couldnt sit there an splash other classes in it as you seemed fit. We have to have some of the rules here.

Missing_Minds
09-04-2008, 10:06 PM
The better the armor the less likely you are to get hit.

The better the armor be it dex or material, the less likely you are to take damage. The normal calling of it as 'being hit' is a bit missleading.


(monks)memory serves me correctly it was a class that you couldnt sit there an splash other classes in it as you seemed fit. We have to have some of the rules here.

Your memory does serve correctly. Once you left it, you left it. Same thing should apply to paladins, but it doesn't in this game. Why? It is an MMO. Some rules are tossed out to make it more viable to people. Gots to get the money after all.

But I've known many a DM that allowed splashing (within limits and normally by the book rules) to happen. Players had more fun, and the DM had fun as well, which is the main point.

Raithe
09-04-2008, 11:55 PM
Some rules are tossed out to make it more viable to people. Gots to get the money after all.


Those rules weren't tossed out to make it more viable for people. Look at this thread - it's a bunch of people saying that AC is not implemented correctly and the game is horridly misbalanced when the only characters given the availability of a hefty dodge bonus are those who already have very good dodge capabilities. I'd guarantee that far more people have left the game because of the implementation of paladins and monks than the number who stayed for it. The rules were tossed out because some or several of the development team like to metagame and thought it would be cool to leave loopholes for "superior" builds.

And the idea that the brokenness of the game design has done anything but lose Turbine lots of money is amusing.

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 12:41 AM
Those rules weren't tossed out to make it more viable for people. Look at this thread - it's a bunch of people saying that AC is not implemented correctly and the game is horridly misbalanced when the only characters given the availability of a hefty dodge bonus are those who already have very good dodge capabilities. I'd guarantee that far more people have left the game because of the implementation of paladins and monks than the number who stayed for it. The rules were tossed out because some or several of the development team like to metagame and thought it would be cool to leave loopholes for "superior" builds.

And the idea that the brokenness of the game design has done anything but lose Turbine lots of money is amusing.

Honestly, as a PnP player, I have always bristled at the irritating and somewhat arbitrary rules surrounding monks and paladins in regard to multiclassing. And some of my DMs over the years have waved those restrictions (as have I when I DM) and some have not. Sure, there is some flavor involved, but it makes for a less fun game experience, and usually just forced players to take those 2-4 levels of paladin or 1-3 levels of monk at level 1 before moving on to another class instead of letting a character develop naturally.

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 01:28 AM
On the AC issue...

Firstly, it should not be just about fighters, but should include any S&Ber (paladins as well, in other words). Yes, fighters and paladins should have different routes to attaining some of the same goals, but I feel they should be fairly close to each other in terms of AC. Especially since the fighter can benefit from the paladin's aura.

Secondly, as many have mentioned already, one of the major issues with S&B vs. Dex (and Wis) based AC characters is that ability scores are significantly higher in DDO than in PnP, while ARMOR and SHIELD rules have remained fairly static when compared to PnP. Weapons, while they do maintain a +5 cap to attack and damage, are already bleeding into epic bonuses with +11 and +12 weapons dropping in the Shroud and beyond. The issue here, is that armor items need to be permitted to go above +5 to their actual bonus, because even if the sum of the bonuses on an armor is epic, the armor itself will not be significantly more useful than the armor the character could have attained at level 8, while an epic weapon IS more useful than a non-epic weapon (and I use epic ONLY to mean a sum total of the bonuses on the weapon in excess of +10).

So, the easiest solution would be to simply starting putting +6, +7, +8, +9, +10 armor and shields into the game. Perhaps +6 and +7 now, and the rest going up to 20?

Another solution would be to add in the feats from Races of Stone and the Player's Handbook II that enhance AC: Heavy Armor Optimization, Greater Heavy Armor Optimization, Shield Specialization, and perhaps Shield Ward. The first 3 add +1 AC with their respective gear (in addition to a few other benefits), while the last adds the shield's AC bonus to checks to avoid being tripped, bull rushed, touch AC (almost useless in DDO), etc...

Maybe add in Improved Combat Expertise, that allows a character to trade more than 5 of their base attack bonus for AC, and consider giving it a prereq. that would exclude most Ranger/Monks...perhaps it only works while using a shield, or requires fighter or paladin levels.

AC-increasing enhancements, whether dependent or not on feats, are an okay idea, but those would target specific instances/classes, rather than generally making S&B a better option.

And obviously, simply adding more items that grant dodge or non-standard bonuses to AC won't work because anyone can grab them, unless they are given class requirements that cannot be passed by UMD or require a very high UMD.

Yeah, people can bemoan the "Monty Haul"-like way the game has developed, but unless Turbine dials some of that back (something I SERIOUSLY doubt will occur), the only thing to be done is to add in more bonuses to try and strike a balance.

Ultimately, the big issue isn't just that Dex/Wis based characters have a higher AC than S&B characters, but that the Dex guys are ALSO contributing more on offense than the AC tanks are, since TWF > S&B starting at around gianthold. Part of THIS problem is that TWFers don't have to work quite so hard to get their offense or their AC, especially Rangers and Ranger/Monks. Most of the necessary feats are granted them for free, and the additional stuff is all in the form of gear. On top of that, the -2 penalty on attack rolls means little enough that tagging another -5 onto that still hardly affects their combat effectiveness. Honestly, monsters need to be getting higher AC as well. High enough, certainly, that taking a penalty on attack rolls matters, whether from TWF, CE, or PA. Though, again, this will hurt S&B more than anyone else.

I guess, basically, Turbine has worked themselves into a hole from which there is no clear escape, and we, the defensive tanks, must suffer ourselves to ride the waves of effectiveness while Turbine seeks a balance.

Desteria
09-05-2008, 04:07 AM
I can't talk for your fighter/paladin, but mine will sit at 64 AC self-buffed with CE. (Link in sig if you care at all about the build/gear used.) So, if you think you tank can reach mid-70, you're wrong. Yes, if you got a 15 bard, a level 12 ranger, a cleric casting Recitation and a 15 paladin beside you, you can (64+4+2+2+4=76), but that's very unlikely.

However, Str-based ranger/monks can reach 70 AC on their own.

So, TWFers can really get crazy AC while "engaged combat".

Case and point my tempest monk UNBUFFED sits at 71 ac I think it is now(no nat armor item in that even), Self buffs to 78ish RAid buffs to well over 80 I believe in a perfect world Ie paladin standing beside me etc he is 91 Ac now... thats just stupid...

I think They nee dto make soem named sheilds Mith Tower and Large nad Full plate Mith and noty with soem Nic eDodge bonus on them armor with +4 dodge to balace otu the robes, sheild with about 4-6 ish becasue frankly you give up a toen to use a sheild in the game now so make them crazzy good ;)

Lewcipher
09-05-2008, 04:30 AM
I can't talk for your fighter/paladin, but mine will sit at 64 AC self-buffed with CE. (Link in sig if you care at all about the build/gear used.) So, if you think you tank can reach mid-70, you're wrong. Yes, if you got a 15 bard, a level 12 ranger, a cleric casting Recitation and a 15 paladin beside you, you can (64+4+2+2+4=76), but that's very unlikely.

However, Str-based ranger/monks can reach 70 AC on their own.

So, TWFers can really get crazy AC while "engaged combat".

Been farming for the Rainments on my Ranger/Fighter/Monk build. As of now, it's the Rainments and +8 armor bracers that I can get 5 more AC out of. Sadly, I can only self buff to a 60 with those (not counting a shield clickie on myself 'cuz it only lasts a minute, and I can't remember to use it more than once :D). STR based, not dex based. This is pure AC not (this pot, that pot, this spell that spell). Straight up CE and self barskin. I tend to use that reference for myself just in case bad things happen.

You're right, don't count on others standing there, a temporary here or there. Should be straight up standing with what you can manage. P.S. People tell me he's gimp so it must be true :D

creithne
09-05-2008, 08:00 AM
I'm not totally sure about this as my PnP knowledge is limited at best, but aren't there a fair amount of ways that dex based characters lose that dex bonus to their AC, being caught flat-footed, flanked, etc..., whereas the fully armored S&B tank pretty much always had their AC (not counting such things as incorporeal and whatnnot)?

Aspenor
09-05-2008, 08:46 AM
I'm not totally sure about this as my PnP knowledge is limited at best, but aren't there a fair amount of ways that dex based characters lose that dex bonus to their AC, being caught flat-footed, flanked, etc..., whereas the fully armored S&B tank pretty much always had their AC (not counting such things as incorporeal and whatnnot)?

This is very true.

Rogues, for example, have improved uncanny dodge which is supposed to make them unable to be caught flat-footed. In DDO, it's been reduced to a clickie ability I believe.

creithne
09-05-2008, 09:04 AM
This is very true.

Rogues, for example, have improved uncanny dodge which is supposed to make them unable to be caught flat-footed. In DDO, it's been reduced to a clickie ability I believe.

Reduced to a clickie that simply adds AC, correct? Since there is no such thing as "flat-footed" in DDO, one of the primary reasons to go with non-dex based AC doesn't exist...phooey!

Aspenor
09-05-2008, 09:05 AM
Reduced to a clickie that simply adds AC, correct? Since there is no such thing as "flat-footed" in DDO, one of the primary reasons to go with non-dex based AC doesn't exist...phooey!

I can't say for 100% sure that all it does is add the +6 AC/Reflex saves, but I believe this is the case.

Reisz
09-05-2008, 09:06 AM
I never understood why the Fighter Armor Mastery line and Tower Shield Mastery Line cost so much.

Tempest = +2 AC for 4 AP
Bulwark of Good = +2 AC Aura for 3 AP
FAM + TSM = +2 max dex bonus for 8 AP

See where I am going? Not only do the fighter enhancements cost more, they don't even guarantee an AC boost.

Lowering the cost of the fighter enhancements seems like the easiest place to start.

Aspenor
09-05-2008, 09:08 AM
I never understood why the Fighter Armor Mastery line and Tower Shield Mastery Line cost so much.

Tempest = +2 AC for 4 AP
Bulwark of Good = +2 AC Aura for 3 AP
FAM + TSM = +2 max dex bonus for 8 AP

See where I am going? Not only do the fighter enhancements cost more, they don't even guarantee an AC boost.

Lowering the cost of the fighter enhancements seems like the easiest place to start.

The reason they are so expensive is that before the release of tempest, icy rayments and monks, fighter AC was a generous amount higher than that attainable by a dex based character. Of course, that was a long time ago when the enhancement system was first revamped...

Reisz
09-05-2008, 09:12 AM
The reason they are so expensive is that before the release of tempest, icy rayments and monks, fighter AC was a generous amount higher than that attainable by a dex based character. Of course, that was a long time ago when the enhancement system was first revamped...

Back in mod 4, which was when things started going south for AC builds. Which is fine, but fix it now.

Raithe
09-05-2008, 09:55 AM
Sure, there is some flavor involved, but it makes for a less fun game experience, and usually just forced players to take those 2-4 levels of paladin or 1-3 levels of monk at level 1 before moving on to another class instead of letting a character develop naturally.

This isn't just about "flavor." While you may think it is fun to wander around using Divine Grace and Lay on Hands while assassinating everything from the rear, many of the other people in your group don't think it's fun. It's ridiculous, spoils the immersion, and makes all the game mechanics seem cheesy.

And moving from PnP to a MMO format should have actually extended the restrictions, to keep multi-classing somewhat balanced and to help metagamers get bored quickly. You'll note, also, that alignment restrictions on multi-classing were left intact solely for "flavor" purposes.

Alcides
09-05-2008, 11:56 AM
I strongly disagree against giving fighters an enhancement line that just gives dodge bonus to AC. I think a more appropriate solution is as follows. In addition I would make Fighter Armor Mastery I-III cost 1/2/3 AP and Fighter Shield Mastery I-III cost 1/2/3 AP.

Combat Expertise Mastery I
1 AP
Requires Fighter Level 4, Combat Expertise.
While using Combat Expertise increase the AC bonus granted by 1, and increase the attack penalty by 1.
ie +6 AC, -6 Hit

Combat Expertise Mastery II
2 AP
Requires Fighter Level 8, Combat Expertise, Combat Expertise Mastery I
While using Combat Expertise increase the AC bonus granted by 2, and increase the attack penalty by 2.
ie +7 AC, -7 Hit

Combat Expertise Mastery III
3 AP
Requires Fighter Level 12, Combat Expertise, Combat Expertise Mastery II
While using Combat Expertise increase the AC bonus granted by 3, and increase the attack penalty by 3.
ie +8 AC, -8 hit

Combat Expertise Mastery IV
4 AP
Requires Fighter Level 16, Combat Expertise, Combat Expertise Mastery III
While using Combat Expertise increase the AC bonus by 4, and increase the attack penalty by 4.
ie +9 AC, -9 Hit

Combat Expertise Mastery V
5 AP
Requires Fighter Level 20, Combat Expertise, Combat Expertise Mastery IV
While using Combat Expertise increase the AC bonus by 5, and increase the attack penalty by 5.
ie +10 AC, -10 Hit

Aspenor
09-05-2008, 11:59 AM
scratch that im a noob! :p

Alcides
09-05-2008, 12:08 PM
On this note...

Instead of adding new enhancements, giving fighters the ACTUAL Combat Expertise feat, allowing them to CHOOSE their AC bonus and attack penalty up to their BAB would be much better.

Just my 2 cp. If my fighter wants to go into turtle up mode and sacrifice all 16 BAB for 16 AC, I should be able to.

I know this is DDO, but if you're going to do something like that then following feat should be implemented. Here's the nutshell version.

Improved Combat Expertise
Source: Complete Warrior p100
Prerequisites: Int 13, Combat Expertise, Base Attack Bonus +6
Description: Choose a number X that does not exceed your Base Attack Bonus. Subtract X from your attack rolls and add X to your Armor Class.

Aspenor
09-05-2008, 12:11 PM
I know this is DDO, but if you're going to do something like that then following feat should be implemented. Here's the nutshell version.

Improved Combat Expertise
Source: Complete Warrior p100
Prerequisites: Int 13, Combat Expertise, Base Attack Bonus +6
Description: Choose a number X that does not increase your Base Attack Bonus. Subtract X from your attack rolls and add X to your Armor Class.

unfortunately i was flat wrong. but um....yeah CE should be looked at :) maybe the enhancements...i edited my noobish post that i made before thinking

Borror0
09-05-2008, 12:12 PM
Combat Expertise Mastery I
1 AP
Requires Fighter Level 4, Combat Expertise.
While using Combat Expertise increase the AC bonus granted by 1, and increase the attack penalty by 1.
ie +6 AC, -6 Hit

Combat Expertise Mastery II
2 AP
Requires Fighter Level 8, Combat Expertise, Combat Expertise Mastery I
While using Combat Expertise increase the AC bonus granted by 2, and increase the attack penalty by 2.
ie +7 AC, -7 Hit

Combat Expertise Mastery III
3 AP
Requires Fighter Level 12, Combat Expertise, Combat Expertise Mastery II
While using Combat Expertise increase the AC bonus granted by 3, and increase the attack penalty by 3.
ie +8 AC, -8 hit

Combat Expertise Mastery IV
4 AP
Requires Fighter Level 16, Combat Expertise, Combat Expertise Mastery III
While using Combat Expertise increase the AC bonus by 4, and increase the attack penalty by 4.
ie +9 AC, -9 Hit

Combat Expertise Mastery V
5 AP
Requires Fighter Level 20, Combat Expertise, Combat Expertise Mastery IV
While using Combat Expertise increase the AC bonus by 5, and increase the attack penalty by 5.
ie +10 AC, -10 Hit

This is a bad idea on so many levels...

Alcides
09-05-2008, 12:54 PM
This is a bad idea on so many levels...

Frankly, I think it's a whole lot more balanced than just giving fighters a bunch of dodge AC enhancements. To put it bluntly, if you're wanting to be more defensive then you should be less offensive...

Of course if you just wanted to put in these dodge enhancements, then I could agree with you on the condition the following spell was given to clerics and paladins. Otherwise no dice.

Shield of Warding
Level: Cleric 3, Paladin 2
Source: Spell Compendium p188
Range: Touch
Target: Single Shield - Changed to Self
Duration: 1 Minute/Level
While the target of this spell wears a shield, the target gains a +1 sacred bonus to AC and a +1 sacred bonus to Reflex Saves per 5 caster levels(maximum of +5 bonus at level 20).

Thrudh
09-05-2008, 12:54 PM
This is a bad idea on so many levels...

Why?

It's better than more Dodge bonuses.... because if you're using CE, you're not using Power Attack

(Fix CE by the way so it doesn't get turned off so easily)

(Set a Max Possible Dodge bonus too)

Zaodon
09-05-2008, 12:55 PM
It seems to me that Ranger/Monks get their high AC primarily from build+gear, whereas the solutions most people are providing for fighters are oriented around Enhancements.

Why not simply introduce the right gear to make fighters competitive (and paladins, too), such as:

- Add special abilities that can only appear on Full Plate, such as "Modulating" which could be something like:

Lesser Modulating: Adds a +2 Modulating bonus to AC
Modulating: Adds a +3 Modulating bonus to AC
Greater Modulating: Adds a +4 Modulating bonus to AC
Superior Modulating: Adds a +5 Modulating bonus to AC- Add special abilities that can only appear on Tower Shields, such as "Reinforced" which could something like:

Lesser Reinforced: Adds +1 Reinforcement bonus to AC, +1 Reinforcement bonus to DR, +2 Reinforcement bonus to blocking DR.
Reinforced: Adds +2 Reinforcement bonus to AC, +2 Reinforcement bonus to DR, +3 Reinforcement bonus to blocking DR.
Greater Reinforced: Adds +3 Reinforcement bonus to AC, +3 Reinforcement bonus to DR, +4 Reinforcement bonus to blocking DR.
Superior Reinforced: Adds +4 Reinforcement bonus to AC, +4 Reinforcement bonus to DR, +5 Reinforcement bonus to blocking DR.Since these abilities would only be generated on Full Plate/Tower Shields, they really can't be used by anyone other than Fighters/Pallys (and perhaps Clerics). You could always add "Class Restricted: Figher/Paladin" on there just to be sure.

Borror0
09-05-2008, 01:00 PM
Frankly, I think it's a whole lot more balanced than just giving fighters a bunch of dodge AC enhancements. To put it bluntly, if you're wanting to be more defensive then you should be less offensive....

Then you got it wrong! You don't want to be more defensive. You certainly don't want to be less offensive.

The more APs an AC build has to spend on AC, the weaker it is. The less HP, DPS, saves he got. Besides, if you got to lower the to-hit furthermore... it gets ugly. Those enhancements are clearly a bad idea. Do I agree with freebee dodge bonus too? Hell no. What needs to be fixed isn't the fighters or paladins, it's S&B and the overly inflated values that some TWF builds can reach.

Sorry, but this time it's nerfing that applies. Otherwise, you're just moving the problem. Never solving it.

And most likely creating another one.

Borror0
09-05-2008, 01:01 PM
Why?

S&B should get better, not weaker. Is that enough? Besides, those CE enhancements don't help S&B inclusivly.

Thrudh
09-05-2008, 01:07 PM
S&B should get better, not weaker. Is that enough? Besides, those CE enhancements don't help S&B inclusivly.


Gotcha...

So what we need is better shields.... maybe better heavy armor.

It IS pretty stupid that they brought in Insight weapons, but didn't do anything to buff up shields....

TWF > S&B on offense AND defense.... Pretty crazy

Alavatar
09-05-2008, 01:12 PM
S&B should get better, not weaker. Is that enough? Besides, those CE enhancements don't help S&B inclusivly.

Me thinks you meant exclusively? Because the enhancements do help S&B inclusively, along with TWF and THF. If they benefitted S&B exclusively, then THF and TWF would not be benefitted.

Anyways, perhaps a feat that adds improved shield AC when using a Tower Shield?

Alcides
09-05-2008, 01:15 PM
S&B should get better, not weaker. Is that enough? Besides, those CE enhancements don't help S&B inclusivly.

Well then let me suggest the following feats.

Heavy Armor Optimization
Source: Races of Stone p141
Prerequisites: Heavy Armor Proficiency, +4 Base Attack Bonus
Description: Any heavy armor that is worn by someone with this feat grants an extra +1 armor bonus to AC, and has it's armor check penalty reduced by 1.

Greater Heavy Armor Optimization
Source: Races of Stone p141
Prerequisites: Heavy Armor Optimization, Heavy Armor Proficiency, +8 Base Attack Bonus
Description: Any heavy armor that is worn by someone with this feat grants an extra +1 armor bonus to AC, and has it's armor check penalty reduced by 2. The modifiers granted by this feat stack with the modifiers of the Heavy Armor Optimization Feat.

Shield Specialization
Source: Player's Handbook 2 p82
Prerequisites: Proficiency with shields
Description: Any shield that is worn by someone with this feat grants an extra +1 shield bonus to AC.

Shield Ward
Source: Player's Handbook 2 p82
Prerequisites: Proficiency with shields, Shield Specialization
Description: Any shield that is worn by someone with this feat grants it's shield bonus to touch AC and on checks or rolls to resist Bull Rush, Disarm, Grapple, Overrun!, and Trip attempts.

Borror0
09-05-2008, 01:15 PM
TWF > S&B on offense AND defense.... Pretty crazy

Agree, honestly a lot of this could be solved by deflating a bit the AC in this game.


Me thinks you meant exclusively?

Yeah, sorry. Got a huge headache going on a while now. Can barely think.


Anyways, perhaps a feat that adds improved shield AC when using a Tower Shield?

Not keen on the idea.

Alcides
09-05-2008, 01:27 PM
Well the Shield Mastery Leads up to Shield Ward which would be a pretty nice boost to resisting overruns from raid bosses(Lailat and Hound et al.). Anyway the game has Dodge which is only +1 AC. Although you could have the shield mastery feat decrease the Armor check penalty of shields as well...

Also I think the following feat should be implemented.
Borror0 Placation
Source: Here
Prerequisites: Must be an avid DDO forum junkie that has the name Borror0.
Description: This feat grants the irresistable urge to be humbled into thinking about fuzzy care bears, bunnies and various other happypants type phenomenon.

Borror0
09-05-2008, 01:43 PM
Borror0 Placation
Source: Here
Prerequisites: Must be an avid DDO forum junkie that has the name Borror0.
Description: This feat grants the irresistable urge to be humbled into thinking about fuzzy care bears, bunnies and various other happypants type phenomenon.

http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t116/tyn616/comingsoontoddo.jpg

Credits go to Kalari.

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 01:43 PM
This isn't just about "flavor." While you may think it is fun to wander around using Divine Grace and Lay on Hands while assassinating everything from the rear, many of the other people in your group don't think it's fun. It's ridiculous, spoils the immersion, and makes all the game mechanics seem cheesy.

And moving from PnP to a MMO format should have actually extended the restrictions, to keep multi-classing somewhat balanced and to help metagamers get bored quickly. You'll note, also, that alignment restrictions on multi-classing were left intact solely for "flavor" purposes.

Firstly, do not assume anything about the rest of my group, or any group but your own.

Secondly, and more importantly, the multiclassing restriction for paladins and monks does NOTHING to stop someone from using Divine Grace, and Sneak Attack together on one character. All it does is force a character who would like to do so to take the paladin levels as one chunk and then never touch them again. So, that rogue who suddenly finds Heironious, but feels that his ability to sneak and catch a foe where it hurts will make him a better servant cannot go back and forth. And for no real reason.

There are PLENTY of RP reasons to go into and out of paladin or monk and back again as a character. Just because you haven't thought of them doesn't mean that allowing it spoils some immersion. Honestly, if someone multiclassing against your belief of what's proper spoils your immersion in the game, you likely weren't too immersed anyway. In MY group, immersion is based upon role-playing and storyline, and so long as someone can RP an idea well, the mechanics that support that idea are usually secondary.

Besides, many of the game mechanics ARE cheesy, but that certainly has naught to do with a paladin or monk multiclassing in, what you consider, and odd fashion. And, in my opinion, your being so upset at someone doing so at the gaming table seems like metagaming to me.

In any case, one of the greatest draws for me to play DDO over some other MMO is the number and variety of options. Restricting those options for some arbitrary reason seems silly. 4th edition completely removed both the alignment and multiclassing restrictions to paladins, as well as the requirement to only follow Heironious, another idiotic rule. Why should other deities not have their own paladin-esque champions? Both Pelor and St. Cuthbert were PERFECT candidates to have their own orders of paladins, yet, under the game rules, they could not. Does this make sense? Being Lawful makes sense, and being good makes some sense, but one my be both lawful and good in the service of someone who is not.

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 01:45 PM
Well then let me suggest the following feats.

Heavy Armor Optimization
Source: Races of Stone p141
Prerequisites: Heavy Armor Proficiency, +4 Base Attack Bonus
Description: Any heavy armor that is worn by someone with this feat grants an extra +1 armor bonus to AC, and has it's armor check penalty reduced by 1.

Greater Heavy Armor Optimization
Source: Races of Stone p141
Prerequisites: Heavy Armor Optimization, Heavy Armor Proficiency, +8 Base Attack Bonus
Description: Any heavy armor that is worn by someone with this feat grants an extra +1 armor bonus to AC, and has it's armor check penalty reduced by 2. The modifiers granted by this feat stack with the modifiers of the Heavy Armor Optimization Feat.

Shield Specialization
Source: Player's Handbook 2 p82
Prerequisites: Proficiency with shields
Description: Any shield that is worn by someone with this feat grants an extra +1 shield bonus to AC.

Shield Ward
Source: Player's Handbook 2 p82
Prerequisites: Proficiency with shields, Shield Specialization
Description: Any shield that is worn by someone with this feat grants it's shield bonus to touch AC and on checks or rolls to resist Bull Rush, Disarm, Grapple, Overrun!, and Trip attempts.

I suggested these a couple pages ago.

Alcides
09-05-2008, 01:48 PM
I suggested these a couple pages ago.

Good minds think a like :) Anyways, I kind of jumped in mid thread and skimmed the other posts, sorry :P

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 01:51 PM
I'm not totally sure about this as my PnP knowledge is limited at best, but aren't there a fair amount of ways that dex based characters lose that dex bonus to their AC, being caught flat-footed, flanked, etc..., whereas the fully armored S&B tank pretty much always had their AC (not counting such things as incorporeal and whatnnot)?

Yes, and this is part of the shift in balance in the game. In PnP a heavily armored character was at higher risk against touch and ranged touch attacks, because they ignore armor, shield, and natural armor bonuses to AC. In DDO, there are no touch attacks. While on the other side of the spectrum, Dex based characters were at risk of being caught flat-footed (something rogues stopped worrying about at level 4, but rangers and monks needed levels in some other class to gain that same immunity), or being denied their Dex bonus to AC due to any number of effects such as: while balancing, climbing, being held, being entangled, being stunned, being paralyzed, or if someone feinted successfully against them in combat.

The heavy armor wearer was always at slightly more risk against mages, while the Dex based character was at greater risk against a wide variety of effects that could come from many different sources. Now, both weaknesses are gone, and a somewhat important facet of game balance has been left by the wayside.

Zaodon
09-05-2008, 01:52 PM
Well then let me suggest the following feats.


Again, as I said a few posts ago taking Feats away from Fighters to get AC does not ultimately solve the problem. This should be solved by fighter/pally-restricted gear. See my post a few replies back.

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 01:53 PM
Good minds think a like :) Anyways, I kind of jumped in mid thread and skimmed the other posts, sorry :P

Not a problem! I do that sometimes as well. You may want to be careful though, I left my descriptions intentionally vague since I'm not sure that Races of Stone is under the open source code. Still, I don't think WotC trolls these boards much, so it probably doesn't matter. Guess I'm just used to posting on their forums a lot.

:)

Borror0
09-05-2008, 01:56 PM
Again, as I said a few posts ago taking Feats away from Fighters to get AC does not ultimately solve the problem.

Taking 'feats' away from fighters isn't the right wording. I mean, fughter need better feat. Now, of course, it's debatable if these feats are any good for that purpose.

At least, it'd give a little edge to fighters AC-wise. Which is nice. Besides, it makes splashing rogue for Evasion less of a no-brainer.


This should be solved by fighter/pally-restricted gear. See my post a few replies back.

I don't really like the idea... to be honest. I just don't think it's the way.

Borror0
09-05-2008, 01:57 PM
Not a problem! I do that sometimes as well. You may want to be careful though, I left my descriptions intentionally vague since I'm not sure that Races of Stone is under the open source code. Still, I don't think WotC trolls these boards much, so it probably doesn't matter. Guess I'm just used to posting on their forums a lot.

Aren't you allowed to use a certain percentage of any work at any time without problem?

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 01:59 PM
Again, as I said a few posts ago taking Feats away from Fighters to get AC does not ultimately solve the problem. This should be solved by fighter/pally-restricted gear. See my post a few replies back.

It doesn't solve the problem on their own, and it does detract somewhat from offensive capability, but it is a solution garnered from the PnP rules, so it is somewhere useful to begin. Adding AC bonuses of a different nature to heavy armor and shields could be interesting. Certainly a more S&B-geared response than my suggestion of simply raising the max +x bonus available on these things.

I agree with Borro, in that nerfing probably WOULD be the best way to handle all this, but I seriously doubt Turbine will take that tact. They have said that they wish to avoid doing so whenever possible, and doing so will drive more players away from the game than draw in new ones or make existing ones happy. There are very few things a DM can do that will universally upset players other than nerfing their character (whether it means changing/removing abilities, feats or gear).

Borror0
09-05-2008, 02:04 PM
There are very few things a DM can do that will universally upset players other than nerfing their character (whether it means changing/removing abilities, feats or gear).

It's no better to great more problems by trying to fix it.

Since we're talking about DMs, there is that paragraph in the DMG that explains that if you realise that you've allowed a palyer to be incredibly more powerful than his friends, the best thing to do was to have a talk with him about it. Try to talk with him and conclude on a compromise.

Nerfing is one thing. Nerfing into Oblivion is another.

It's all in the way you do it. Besides, Turbine should create that damned 'reroll' button.

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 02:04 PM
Aren't you allowed to use a certain percentage of any work at any time without problem?

Under the way the OSL (license, not code, my bad), only certain material is marked as such. Basically, anything in the SRD is OSL and able to be copied directly. For everything else you are restricted in what you may say about it. Basically, it comes down to banning someone from representing an idea thoroughly enough that the idea may be used without having to check (buy) the book in which it appears.

So, someone could post that it grants +1 AC and reduces your armor check penalty by 1, but adding in the prereqs. as well obviates the need to look it up, so it violates the OSL. I didn't bother mentioning the AC penalty reduction because I felt it was unimportant to the discussion, but left out the prereqs. for the above reason (and because I was too lazy to check the SRD).

I know that almost everything in the PHB, MM and DMG is in the SRD, but I do know that some things are omitted, but am unsure as to what is including from the other books. I think some of the DMG II and PHB II is included.

creithne
09-05-2008, 02:06 PM
We've had Crit Rage for how long with devs acknowledging how overpowered it is? I don't see Turbine swinging the nerf-bat...even though I and quite a few others agree that there are cases where it would most likely be the best or only route to fix the balance issues. :(

Alcides
09-05-2008, 02:10 PM
Not a problem! I do that sometimes as well. You may want to be careful though, I left my descriptions intentionally vague since I'm not sure that Races of Stone is under the open source code. Still, I don't think WotC trolls these boards much, so it probably doesn't matter. Guess I'm just used to posting on their forums a lot.

:)

Well I did paraphrase and give credit to the source and I didn't claim any rights pertaining to my post on this forum. So a lawyer would probably agree with me that I am within my fair use rights. Now had I posted a hyperlink to the entire work for everyone in the DDO community to download then it would be definite infringement. Plus I don't think WoTC is going to have that much beef about posting D&D 3.5 related content for the game that is supposed to be representative of D&D 3.5.

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 02:13 PM
It's no better to great more problems by trying to fix it.

Since we're talking about DMs, there is that paragraph in the DMG that explains that if you realise that you've allowed a palyer to be incredibly more powerful than his friends, the best thing to do was to have a talk with him about it. Try to talk with him and conclude on a compromise.

Here'e the deal, nerfing is one thing. Nerfing into Oblivion is another.

It's all in the way you do it. Besides, Turbine should create that damned 'reroll' button.

A big difference between PnP and DDO, is that in PnP your DM is usually a friend of yours, and there is a personal relationship. As such, if something needs to be nerfed for game balance, the DM can speak with his FRIEND and try to work it out. MMO players are fickle, and have no such bond with Turbine.

Yeah, creating more problems isn't really the way to handle it, but I don't know that they can easily fix stuff without causing problems either. Look at where the problems exist: availability of tomes, stat-boosting enhancements, availability of stat-boosting gear, and too many items that grant dodge or non-standard AC bonuses all much too early in the game.

They can't remove the inherent bonuses people have now, and making tomes LESS available is going to irritate all the people who already feel they are too unavailable as it stands.

They could get rid of the stat enhancements (that'd be a good start). Our +4, +5 and +6 items aren't going to become less prevalent, and while they could remove a lot of the gear that boosts AC (chaosgarde, chattering ring, icy raiment, shroud insight weapons) they'd have to give something back to the players. It ALSO reads in the DMG, that in the event that the DM has to take away an item that is too powerful, the DM is implored to give the player something in compensation.

Besides, any change that affects AC tanks' max AC is going to require an alteration to the attack bonuses of the enemies we face so that the lower AC is still relevant.

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 02:18 PM
Well I did paraphrase and give credit to the source and I didn't claim any rights pertaining to my post on this forum. So a lawyer would probably agree with me that I am within my fair use rights. Now had I posted a hyperlink to the entire work for everyone in the DDO community to download then it would be definite infringement. Plus I don't think WoTC is going to have that much beef about posting D&D 3.5 related content for the game that is supposed to be representative of D&D 3.5.

On the official D&D forums, from the WotC website, the rules are fairly strictly enforced, to the effect that moderators will delete posts or threads with non-OSL content, and users who repeatedly violate the OSL get banned. The point of the OSL isn't so much to prevent someone from making money off of the content, but to prevent people from giving the content away for free.

Think of it as equivalent to posting the latest CDs on your website in full for free download by anyone. You may give due credit, and you aren't trying to make money, but the artists and record labels will be really bent out of shape since they want to SELL this material.

I'm not trying to get on your ass about this, but pointing it out. And as I said, I doubt WotC trolls these boards searching for these kinds of violations, and I doubt Turbine does either, but it IS something to be aware of.

Zaodon
09-05-2008, 02:18 PM
Taking 'feats' away from fighters isn't the right wording. I mean, fughter need better feat. Now, of course, it's debatable if these feats are any good for that purpose.

At least, it'd give a little edge to fighters AC-wise. Which is nice. Besides, it makes splashing rogue for Evasion less of a no-brainer.

I don't really like the idea... to be honest. I just don't think it's the way.

Rangers/Monks can only get the AC that they do by getting the best gear in the game, which couples directly with their base build, and doesn't require any special feats or enhancements other than Tempest.

It makes no logical sense to balance this by making Fighters give up the Feats/Enhancements that they have just to up their AC enough to match. Nevermind what Paladins would have to give up as Feats/Enhancements.

Since Ranger/Monks get their high AC from Gear, thus so should Fighters + Pallies.

Borror0
09-05-2008, 02:24 PM
Under the way the OSL (license, not code, my bad), only certain material is marked as such. Basically, anything in the SRD is OSL and able to be copied directly. For everything else you are restricted in what you may say about it. Basically, it comes down to banning someone from representing an idea thoroughly enough that the idea may be used without having to check (buy) the book in which it appears.

I'm not talking about the Open Gaming Lisense.

I'm talking that for any copywrited book, you may quote a certain percentage and the owner can take any legal actionc against you. Now, maybe WotC have some special rules on their forums or maybe the law is different on your side of ther border, that I cannot know.


I know that almost everything in the PHB, MM and DMG is in the SRD, but I do know that some things are omitted, but am unsure as to what is including from the other books. I think some of the DMG II and PHB II is included.

I know that some monsters from the MM are exculded. Mindflayers and beholders come to mind.

Borror0
09-05-2008, 02:27 PM
Yeah, creating more problems isn't really the way to handle it, but I don't know that they can easily fix stuff without causing problems either. Look at where the problems exist: availability of tomes, stat-boosting enhancements, availability of stat-boosting gear, and too many items that grant dodge or non-standard AC bonuses all much too early in the game.

It's all in the way you do it, but I think you're assuming my idea is more radical than it really is.

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 02:28 PM
Rangers/Monks can only get the AC that they do by getting the best gear in the game, which couples directly with their base build, and doesn't require any special feats or enhancements other than Tempest.

It makes no logical sense to balance this by making Fighters give up the Feats/Enhancements that they have just to up their AC enough to match. Nevermind what Paladins would have to give up as Feats/Enhancements.

Since Ranger/Monks get their high AC from Gear, thus so should Fighters + Pallies.

Only partly true. And, most of the gear they have access to, so, too, do the heavy armor tanks. With lower ability scores, that set of +8 bracers wouldn't be such a huge leap above non-Dex-based AC characters.

Note that straight rangers have comparable AC to fighters and paladins, while it is the adding of a second stat (Wis) to AC, and the icy raiment that push their AC up so high. The Wis + Icy combines for ~+11 AC.

I think your other point is valid though: the fact that they achieve this AC with little build effort is really the issue. Those ranger/monks have higher AC AND, since they sacrifice little to attain that AC, have better offense still than fighters and paladins (often better, even, than offensively minded fighters and paladins).

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 02:29 PM
It's all in the way you do it, but I think you're assuming my idea is more radical than it really is.

Perhaps. How much of a nerf are you talking about?

Borror0
09-05-2008, 02:29 PM
Since Ranger/Monks get their high AC from Gear, thus so should Fighters + Pallies.

Fixing by gear is and will always be a bad idea. Period. No questioning it.

You know what to do with Icy Rainment? Change the bonus from dodge to Profane (or any other non-stacking bonus not yet available in DDO), then add a pair of bracers that give +2-3 Dodge and +X Profane. But that, is only part of the fix.

Alcides
09-05-2008, 02:38 PM
A big difference between PnP and DDO, is that in PnP your DM is usually a friend of yours, and there is a personal relationship. As such, if something needs to be nerfed for game balance, the DM can speak with his FRIEND and try to work it out. MMO players are fickle, and have no such bond with Turbine.

Yeah, creating more problems isn't really the way to handle it, but I don't know that they can easily fix stuff without causing problems either. Look at where the problems exist: availability of tomes, stat-boosting enhancements, availability of stat-boosting gear, and too many items that grant dodge or non-standard AC bonuses all much too early in the game.

They can't remove the inherent bonuses people have now, and making tomes LESS available is going to irritate all the people who already feel they are too unavailable as it stands.

They could get rid of the stat enhancements (that'd be a good start). Our +4, +5 and +6 items aren't going to become less prevalent, and while they could remove a lot of the gear that boosts AC (chaosgarde, chattering ring, icy raiment, shroud insight weapons) they'd have to give something back to the players. It ALSO reads in the DMG, that in the event that the DM has to take away an item that is too powerful, the DM is implored to give the player something in compensation.

Besides, any change that affects AC tanks' max AC is going to require an alteration to the attack bonuses of the enemies we face so that the lower AC is still relevant.

DDO should be the quintessential power game. Any thing less is unacceptable.

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 02:44 PM
DDO should be the quintessential power game. Any thing less is unacceptable.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

QuantumFX
09-05-2008, 02:46 PM
I'm not totally sure about this as my PnP knowledge is limited at best, but aren't there a fair amount of ways that dex based characters lose that dex bonus to their AC, being caught flat-footed, flanked, etc..., whereas the fully armored S&B tank pretty much always had their AC (not counting such things as incorporeal and whatnnot)?

Well, with the loss of the surprise round the DEX guys also lost a little something called Touch AC. This is AC without natural Armor, Armor or Shield bonuses. It's primarily used to dodge ray spells like enervation, disentegrate, scorching ray, etc. Omitting this defense from DDO screwed over Monks and Rogues big time. And to add insult to injury Turbine chose to implement a pseudo touch AC as giving ghosts a retardedly high "to Hit" number.


Fixing by gear is and will always be a bad idea. Period. No questioning it.

You know what to do with Icy Rainment? Change the bonus from dodge to Profane (or any other non-stacking bonus not yet available in DDO), then add a pair of bracers that give +2-3 Dodge and +X Profane. But that, is only part of the fix.

Or: Change the dodge bonus available on items to a "Dodge Enhancement bonus" so that the items don't stack.

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 02:51 PM
Well, with the loss of the surprise round the DEX guys also lost a little something called Touch AC. This is AC without natural Armor, Armor or Shield bonuses. It's primarily used to dodge ray spells like enervation, disentegrate, scorching ray, etc. Omitting this defense from DDO screwed over Monks and Rogues big time. And to add insult to injury Turbine chose to implement a pseudo touch AC as giving ghosts a retardedly high "to Hit" number.



Or: Change the dodge bonus available on items to a "Dodge Enhancement bonus" so that the items don't stack.

Wouldn't hurt rogues over level 4, but it would hurt rangers and any other Dex-based character without uncanny dodge.

QuantumFX
09-05-2008, 02:56 PM
Wouldn't hurt rogues over level 4.

Or Barbarians. But that's not the point. How do rogues like fort save effects that they should be able to dodge but can't thanks to a poorly coded to hit system?

Alcides
09-05-2008, 03:30 PM
On the official D&D forums, from the WotC website, the rules are fairly strictly enforced, to the effect that moderators will delete posts or threads with non-OSL content, and users who repeatedly violate the OSL get banned. The point of the OSL isn't so much to prevent someone from making money off of the content, but to prevent people from giving the content away for free.

Think of it as equivalent to posting the latest CDs on your website in full for free download by anyone. You may give due credit, and you aren't trying to make money, but the artists and record labels will be really bent out of shape since they want to SELL this material.

I'm not trying to get on your ass about this, but pointing it out. And as I said, I doubt WotC trolls these boards searching for these kinds of violations, and I doubt Turbine does either, but it IS something to be aware of.

Just one more thing on this...Copyright law does allow for fair use. You can quote short excerpts of a copyrighted work without the permission of the author for commentary/parody/news reporting etc...unless that posting may damage that work's commercial value. Considering WoTC has moved on to marketing D&D 4.0, I would say that paraphrasing 3.5 material is going to do very little to none commerical damage to them because the 3.5 product line is being phased out. And since this forum is technically commentary anyway in sanctioned subject matter they wouldn't have much of a legal fight, nor do I think they would want the bad publicity it would generate from poaching their gaming base.

Naash
09-05-2008, 06:54 PM
Well then let me suggest the following feats.

Heavy Armor Optimization
Source: Races of Stone p141
Prerequisites: Heavy Armor Proficiency, +4 Base Attack Bonus
Description: Any heavy armor that is worn by someone with this feat grants an extra +1 armor bonus to AC, and has it's armor check penalty reduced by 1.

Greater Heavy Armor Optimization
Source: Races of Stone p141
Prerequisites: Heavy Armor Optimization, Heavy Armor Proficiency, +8 Base Attack Bonus
Description: Any heavy armor that is worn by someone with this feat grants an extra +1 armor bonus to AC, and has it's armor check penalty reduced by 2. The modifiers granted by this feat stack with the modifiers of the Heavy Armor Optimization Feat.


As someone who hasnt been able to pull +5 mithral fulllplate for any of my fighters I would like to see this translated in some form.
Along with the armor ritual thats 3 more AC with a non-mithral full plate.
Not only would that make the black,white & blue dragonscale armors more effective it might save these armors from the vendor temporarily:

Giantcrafted Plate
Argentis Armor
Centurion Armor
Bastion of Fealty
Emerald Guard
Nightforge Plate

to a lesser extent:

Fullplate of Giants
Stonemeld Plate
Tourney Armor

Absoulutely not the solution but it helps non-mithral full plate users and saves some raid & non raid named armors from the trash heap.

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 07:24 PM
Or Barbarians. But that's not the point. How do rogues like fort save effects that they should be able to dodge but can't thanks to a poorly coded to hit system?

What?

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 07:24 PM
Just one more thing on this...Copyright law does allow for fair use. You can quote short excerpts of a copyrighted work without the permission of the author for commentary/parody/news reporting etc...unless that posting may damage that work's commercial value. Considering WoTC has moved on to marketing D&D 4.0, I would say that paraphrasing 3.5 material is going to do very little to none commerical damage to them because the 3.5 product line is being phased out. And since this forum is technically commentary anyway in sanctioned subject matter they wouldn't have much of a legal fight, nor do I think they would want the bad publicity it would generate from poaching their gaming base.

True enough. Hadn't even thought about that.

Raithe
09-05-2008, 07:34 PM
Firstly, do not assume anything about the rest of my group, or any group but your own.

For all you know, I'm one of your guildmates on his other account. This is a discussion forum for DDO. We are all sitting at the same table talking about how play is going to go and what rules are going to be abided. Whether or not I am in your group isn't really relevant, because someone else that is in my group is doing the exact same things as you. I love how the elitist mindset pervades every discussion on here, though.



Secondly, and more importantly, the multiclassing restriction for paladins and monks does NOTHING to stop someone from using Divine Grace, and Sneak Attack together on one character. All it does is force a character who would like to do so to take the paladin levels as one chunk and then never touch them again. So, that rogue who suddenly finds Heironious, but feels that his ability to sneak and catch a foe where it hurts will make him a better servant cannot go back and forth. And for no real reason.


Umm... the rules sometimes don't prohibit you from metagaming because it just hasn't been encountered in high volumes and it violates the whole purpose for playing, so why bother? The fact that paladin/rogue is an allowed combination never enticed very many roleplayers to actually create one. Translating PnP to a MMO format should have seen rogue take on the same alignment restrictions as bards and barbarians, however. It keeps metagamers out of other people's hair.



There are PLENTY of RP reasons to go into and out of paladin or monk and back again as a character. Just because you haven't thought of them doesn't mean that allowing it spoils some immersion. Honestly, if someone multiclassing against your belief of what's proper spoils your immersion in the game, you likely weren't too immersed anyway. In MY group, immersion is based upon role-playing and storyline, and so long as someone can RP an idea well, the mechanics that support that idea are usually secondary.


And yet my quote actually listed 2 particular feats being used in conjunction with an enhancement, and I said nothing about multi-classing levels. Perhaps in your world it can make sense to roleplay both as a divine and noble defender of truth and order, but still assassinate opponents without their foreknowledge. In mine, those are diametrically opposed philosophies that can't be reconciled.



Besides, many of the game mechanics ARE cheesy, but that certainly has naught to do with a paladin or monk multiclassing in, what you consider, and odd fashion. And, in my opinion, your being so upset at someone doing so at the gaming table seems like metagaming to me.

Yes, that is one of the chief problems with metagaming: it requires more metagaming to combat it. Good thing we have forums for airing our metagame interests or disinterests, and good thing I don't ever speak about these topics in game, then, huh?



In any case, one of the greatest draws for me to play DDO over some other MMO is the number and variety of options. Restricting those options for some arbitrary reason seems silly. 4th edition completely removed both the alignment and multiclassing restrictions to paladins, as well as the requirement to only follow Heironious, another idiotic rule. Why should other deities not have their own paladin-esque champions? Both Pelor and St. Cuthbert were PERFECT candidates to have their own orders of paladins, yet, under the game rules, they could not. Does this make sense? Being Lawful makes sense, and being good makes some sense, but one my be both lawful and good in the service of someone who is not.

Arbitrary reason? Like paladins being all about order and justice, and the very term rogue meaning "out of acceptable boundaries?" That's "arbitrary?" How about monks being highly devoted followers and trainees of a philosophy and ethos, so much so that they obtain special abilities because of it? But really, why can't they go ranger after a couple of decades as a monk and retain all those special attributes. I hear it's the latest fad in Tibet, too...

As far as 4th edition goes, I've already given my opinion on it several times now. It's an attempt to turn the original roleplaying game into a mechwarrior combat simulation, and discussion of it is really outside the relevance of any discussion of D&D gaming that existed before.

sephiroth1084
09-05-2008, 08:03 PM
For all you know, I'm one of your guildmates on his other account. This is a discussion forum for DDO. We are all sitting at the same table talking about how play is going to go and what rules are going to be abided. Whether or not I am in your group isn't really relevant, because someone else that is in my group is doing the exact same things as you. I love how the elitist mindset pervades every discussion on here, though.

I honestly have no clue what you are trying to say here.




Umm... the rules sometimes don't prohibit you from metagaming because it just hasn't been encountered in high volumes and it violates the whole purpose for playing, so why bother? The fact that paladin/rogue is an allowed combination never enticed very many roleplayers to actually create one. Translating PnP to a MMO format should have seen rogue take on the same alignment restrictions as bards and barbarians, however. It keeps metagamers out of other people's hair.

There are, in fact, prestige classes designed specifically for paladin/rogues. Why should the rogue have an alignment restriction? There are some rogues who (outside of DDO) focus almost entirely upon the skills available to the class and play any number of a range of characters that have little or nothing to do with the common perception of rogues in general, while there are others still who play an honorable thief. Then there are those who use the rogue class as a basis for a fencer, something which is entirely alignment independent.


And yet my quote actually listed 2 particular feats being used in conjunction with an enhancement, and I said nothing about multi-classing levels. Perhaps in your world it can make sense to roleplay both as a divine and noble defender of truth and order, but still assassinate opponents without their foreknowledge. In mine, those are diametrically opposed philosophies that can't be reconciled.

And that is the beauty of the 3.5 system of gaming and role-playing: what is true for one player/character, may not be for another, and yet both may not only exist, but may coexist! As for assassinating, I do not view sneak attack that way, and thus the entire argument is moot. And I happen to know some players who HAVE played paladin/rogues. I, personally, wouldn't, because that character doesn't fit my own preferences, but am I not so egotistical as to force my view or belief of the matter onto someone else, restricting THEIR options and ability to play a character of their choosing.




Yes, that is one of the chief problems with metagaming: it requires more metagaming to combat it. Good thing we have forums for airing our metagame interests or disinterests, and good thing I don't ever speak about these topics in game, then, huh?

Again, what are you talking about?




Arbitrary reason? Like paladins being all about order and justice, and the very term rogue meaning "out of acceptable boundaries?" That's "arbitrary?" How about monks being highly devoted followers and trainees of a philosophy and ethos, so much so that they obtain special abilities because of it? But really, why can't they go ranger after a couple of decades as a monk and retain all those special attributes. I here it's the latest fad in Tibet, too...

Actually, many spiritualists and martial artists in real life move from one philosophy or training to another, as a way of expanding their knowledge and self, and some of them return to their earlier training, while some do not. Besides, the person who leaves the path, whether in-game or in real life, attains a more varied skill set or outlook, but is not quite as adept at either class (in the gaming case) as someone who studies it exclusively. That's well represented by the fact that, when multiclasing, a character will gain more abilities, and become more diverse, but will never reach the pinnacle of any of their individual classes.

Ultimately, your entire argument looks like: "I DON'T LIKE IT THIS WAY SO IT SHOULDN'T BE THIS WAY BECAUSE I SAY SO AND NYAH NYAH NYAH!!!"

Borror0
09-06-2008, 02:03 AM
The fact that paladin/rogue is an allowed combination never enticed very many roleplayers to actually create one. Translating PnP to a MMO format should have seen rogue take on the same alignment restrictions as bards and barbarians, however.

First of, from a RP persective it makes no sense.

Secondly, that's removing build options and quite frankly, that's bad. One of the marvelous things about 3.5 D&D is how many valid builds there are out there. there are so many valid permutations even to acheive the same goal! Different feats, starting abilities, class mixes, it's great and part of the fun. Even the most casual players actually enjoy this.


Perhaps in your world it can make sense to roleplay both as a divine and noble defender of truth and order, but still assassinate opponents without their foreknowledge. In mine, those are diametrically opposed philosophies that can't be reconciled.

Then you simply don't understand what a rogue is about.

What you have described, is an assassin. It's a PrC available to those of Evil alignment. Those are the ones made to kill, without asking questions and without caring about who is right or wrong. They just kill. But, that is not a rogue! That's an assassin! Rogues are about overcoming obstables with their intelligence and dexterity rather than use brute force. That's all they are.

Rather than tearing an opponent into shears with a greataxe, they will hit them where it hurts most with a rapier. That's how they overcome stuff. There is nothing about being a rogue that forces you to kill without asking. Yes, there are facades of a rogue that may lead to chaoticness but nothing says you will automaticly be.


Arbitrary reason?

Yes. Alignment restrictions are one of the most stupid things of 3.5 D&D.

Why can't a barbarian be lawful? Ok, he enters in rage once in a while, but it's not like he looses control over his actions. Why can't a bard be lawful? He's an artist and thus can't be lawful? Totally silly. Why can't a paladin be Lawful Neutral if he worships a LN diety, most likely this deity will ask him to perform LN acts, rather than LG ones... no? Why does a monk have to be lawful? Some chaotic really can't train hard enough? That's hell of a non-sense there.

They make not much sense. The one for barbarian and bard have an in-game explanation but it's rather weak.

Gornin
09-06-2008, 05:35 PM
Yes. Alignment restrictions are one of the most stupid things of 3.5 D&D.

Why can't a barbarian be lawful? Ok, he enters in rage once in a while, but it's not like he looses control over his actions. Why can't a bard be lawful? He's an artist and thus can't be lawful? Totally silly. Why can't a paladin be Lawful Neutral if he worships a LN diety, most likely this deity will ask him to perform LN acts, rather than LG ones... no? Why does a monk have to be lawful? Some chaotic really can't train hard enough? That's hell of a non-sense there.

They make not much sense. The one for barbarian and bard have an in-game explanation but it's rather weak.

Agree with the first part of post, so I edited it out. Just gonna remark on this part.

IMO, alignments in 3.5 were fine and never had a problem with them, but hearing the horror of DM's who controlled the players through their alignment, I can understand the sentiments of those who have experienced that. Like most complaints about 3.5, it can almost always be pointed out that it was a bad DM causing the issue, not the rules, either RAW or RAI.

Just offering some ideas for the questions you posed. Not saying they are correct, but this is how I use the alignments and the restrictions when I DM.

Barbarians being chaotic, I believe the thought is that those who are of a chaotic nature are usually much more self aware and independant. It is important to have a strong sense of self identity, or else you could be lost to the rage.

Bards being chaotic is a similar issue of independence. Artists tend to go against the grain, even stirring up trouble by tweaking the local authorities and popping those big heads of theirs. They don't like being told what to write/sing/sculpt/paint about. Also, bards are loosely based on the Celtic/Brit model of traveling troubadours that collected news and events and passed them along, who were also used as messengers by nobles, since Bards had a certain immunity due to their notoriety and usefulness ( and knowing secrets ), and not being above petty larceny and such to survive. So for Bards, its a combo of historical and personality that tend to paint them as chaotic.

Monks are disciplined. The training instills discipline which leads to power. Sure a chaotic individual can learn techniques similar to a monks, and be effective martial artists, but the mastery of self leads to the special powers, like disease and poison immunity. That is what separates the monk from a martial artist.

Like I said, just some views that might be worth something.

nbhs275
09-06-2008, 07:20 PM
Only partly true. And, most of the gear they have access to, so, too, do the heavy armor tanks. With lower ability scores, that set of +8 bracers wouldn't be such a huge leap above non-Dex-based AC characters.

Note that straight rangers have comparable AC to fighters and paladins, while it is the adding of a second stat (Wis) to AC, and the icy raiment that push their AC up so high. The Wis + Icy combines for ~+11 AC.

I think your other point is valid though: the fact that they achieve this AC with little build effort is really the issue. Those ranger/monks have higher AC AND, since they sacrifice little to attain that AC, have better offense still than fighters and paladins (often better, even, than offensively minded fighters and paladins).

You have obviously never partied with a truly good paladin or fighter have you? Most of these monk/ranger builds that are running around the streets are weak sauce in the damage department, and really only gain the extreme AC advantage at high end.

I would like to see something to boost the full 15-16 level monks, but kinda pull back on the extreme splashyness of monk 2.

Borror0
09-06-2008, 07:25 PM
You have obviously never partied with a truly good paladin or fighter have you? Most of these monk/ranger builds that are running around the streets are weak sauce in the damage department, and really only gain the extreme AC advantage at high end.

You're telling me that you know S&B fighters that can out-DPS a Str-based ranger? I'd love to see that.

sephiroth1084
09-07-2008, 02:20 AM
Borro, the monk/ranger builds aren't Str based, that I was aware of.

That said, a S&B fighter or paladin is still fighting with 1 weapon, and will not have all that much more Str than a Tempest monk/ranger, which is the type of character posting AC in the 70-80+ range. They will have comparable Str, while attacking faster, and applying more weapon effects during their attacks. What has that got to do with a paladin or fighter being good, nbh?

How much Str is going to be lost? Figure, at minimum, such a character will usually try to hit a 13 base Str to take Power Attack. Let's assume, at minimum again, that said character takes a 10 Str and relies on a +3 tome to hit 13, with a +6 item and 1 point from somewhere else (splash 1 level of fighter, be human, make a weapon with Str on it, whatever), they'd be at 20, vs. the 30 most S&B guys are looking at, so 5 fewer points of damage/hit. S&B has an option for better threat-ranged weapons, while the monk/ranger is relegated to the sub-par kama, but I don't think the slightly higher crit % or damage and MAYBE 5 points difference in base damage will make up for the extra attacks and additional effects that come with them.

That is to say nothing of favored enemy, halfling guile enhancements, etc...

Inspire
09-07-2008, 02:26 AM
You're telling me that you know S&B fighters that can out-DPS a Str-based ranger? I'd love to see that.

Rawr! Untouchable Can Out DPS Pearce And Woad Together!... *Cough*:rolleyes:

Desteria
09-07-2008, 03:26 AM
Borro, the monk/ranger builds aren't Str based, that I was aware of.

That said, a S&B fighter or paladin is still fighting with 1 weapon, and will not have all that much more Str than a Tempest monk/ranger, which is the type of character posting AC in the 70-80+ range. They will have comparable Str, while attacking faster, and applying more weapon effects during their attacks. What has that got to do with a paladin or fighter being good, nbh?

How much Str is going to be lost? Figure, at minimum, such a character will usually try to hit a 13 base Str to take Power Attack. Let's assume, at minimum again, that said character takes a 10 Str and relies on a +3 tome to hit 13, with a +6 item and 1 point from somewhere else (splash 1 level of fighter, be human, make a weapon with Str on it, whatever), they'd be at 20, vs. the 30 most S&B guys are looking at, so 5 fewer points of damage/hit. S&B has an option for better threat-ranged weapons, while the monk/ranger is relegated to the sub-par kama, but I don't think the slightly higher crit &#37; or damage and MAYBE 5 points difference in base damage will make up for the extra attacks and additional effects that come with them.

That is to say nothing of favored enemy, halfling guile enhancements, etc...

NOTE the 15 ranger 1 monk build is NOT limited to a kama they can use the full ranger weapon set and retain the Wis bonus to AC, the wisdome to ac is only lost if you wear armor or use a sheild.

The build that go formor monk levle for centered ac and wind/ocean stance ofr more AC are limited to kamas.

That all being said my Tempest monk (6rgr/10monk) who DID not go for PA (8 str base), but in the perfect situation pally etc, (but fightign not tumbling or useign clicky boosts), should hit 90AC, still hits for 25-35ish +8 guile, +8 thrane goggles, +1 force, +1d4 slicing, +2d6 holy Per kama, I know a S&B fighter will do more base per hit, and definetly have better crit options but that extra 16+1+1d4+2d6 points of damage on the off hand at 10% faster speed all the time has got to add up way FAST and i would not be at all suprised if i was out damageing a S&B fighter, (maby I'll look up the dmage calc and run the numbers then edit them in here) and this guy was build with the aim of AC AC AC SAVES dps, sac a Few points of AC off the top end you might ocational get hit on eliet by harry on less then a 20 and you could add a bunch more dmaage.

***EDIT OMFG....

So i ran the number throught this damage calculator: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/ddo/index.php
NOTE: this does NOT add the the 2 extra attacks ddo grants twf now so off hand was onyl getitng 3 attacks per set, I added 10% more swings for tempest so kwaiii's DPS should be higher thsi was don with average buffs verses what we fight 90% of the tiem at high levels namly raid bosses/mobs I weighted in towards the fighter in a lot of ways IE i gave them both GS weapons i assuemd the fighter had a khopesh and all spec feats I made both haflings since i was useing my guy and assumed the AC build S&B some how bought a 18 str still ie 16 starting after the -2 compared to my 8 starting, I gave the fighter a Bloodstone while omitting one for me since i dont use one normaly (dont have a spair for one thing), I'm useign dul Kamas...
The Fighter came out at about 105 DPS Kwaiii Came out at 138 DPS, I am not built for DPS, I'm a build for AC above all else, if a S&B fighter can not even come close to me, (and this was missing 2 of my off hand attacks), they can not come close to ANY twf robe AC/DPS build.

QuantumFX
09-07-2008, 03:52 AM
What?

OK it will require you to read the d20 ruleset to understand touch attacks (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatStatistics.htm#touchAttacks). A lot of spells in P&P don't have a save because you have to make a ranged touch attack with them. Off the top of my head: all the Orb spells and Enervation.

By not including Touch attacks Turbine screwed over anyone who would have a high touch AC. (Rogues and Monks are the 2 classes that are heavily hit by this.) This is partially offset by omitting the surprise rules.

Borror0
09-07-2008, 05:00 AM
Borro, the monk/ranger builds aren't Str based, that I was aware of.

They can perfectly be. I have desgined a 28 base Str dwarven ranger that can reach 70 AC while TWF.


How much Str is going to be lost?

2 Str, to be accurate. 28 vs 30.


while the monk/ranger is relegated to the sub-par kama

They are not. They can use khopeshes, dwarven axes and other good weapons as they like.

flamberg
09-07-2008, 06:23 PM
Wow I leave for couple of days and this thread has gone great. My tank doesn't have the beutiful feat of CE. This is what he wears and He maxes the dex bonus to a +6.

Defender plate alchemy bonus in place
leviks bracers
Leviks defender
Tharnes goggles
Chattering ring
Disease Immunity of GFL
the +6 wis dragon helm
Greater fire resist fear immunity poison immunity greensteel cloak
Con 6 belt
+6 dex gloves
boot of the innocent
Head of good fortune
until greensteel is done a amulet of the stormreaver

Yes i have great gear I can intim on vod with a helm and cloak change but dang with buffs only getting in the 60s hp 436 this is a 28 pt build from beta days and hes a human fighter.

sephiroth1084
09-07-2008, 07:06 PM
OK it will require you to read the d20 ruleset to understand touch attacks (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatStatistics.htm#touchAttacks). A lot of spells in P&P don't have a save because you have to make a ranged touch attack with them. Off the top of my head: all the Orb spells and Enervation.

By not including Touch attacks Turbine screwed over anyone who would have a high touch AC. (Rogues and Monks are the 2 classes that are heavily hit by this.) This is partially offset by omitting the surprise rules.

No need for the sarcasm or demeaning tone. I misread the post to which I responded as such. In any case, many of those same spells may be avoided simply by paying attention and moving. Yeah, lack of touch attack mechanics has had an odd affect on the game, and the balance of classes, but I find the ray mechanic in DDO to be more engrossing. I don't like watching my friends play City of Heroes where half the attacks someone throws at them will hunt them down around corners to go off.

QuantumFX
09-07-2008, 09:59 PM
No need for the sarcasm or demeaning tone. I misread the post to which I responded as such. In any case, many of those same spells may be avoided simply by paying attention and moving. Yeah, lack of touch attack mechanics has had an odd affect on the game, and the balance of classes, but I find the ray mechanic in DDO to be more engrossing. I don't like watching my friends play City of Heroes where half the attacks someone throws at them will hunt them down around corners to go off.

Wasn't meant to be demeaning. The rules on Touch Attacks really don't have a readers digest version. :)
Also, the physics portion of this game do a horrible job at emulating Touch AC. They do an OK job emulating Range increments though.

Alcides
09-07-2008, 10:13 PM
The AC problem will be partially fixed when paladins get the Divine Shield feat/enhancement(which adds charisma bonus to AC while using a shield for about 1 min at level 16). Of course, we can't give paladins teeth again because they were too good before mod 3 :D

Even better, allow Paladins and Clerics to get the Saint Template with enhancements(which adds Wisdom bonus to AC with no penalties)

sephiroth1084
09-07-2008, 11:27 PM
Wasn't meant to be demeaning. The rules on Touch Attacks really don't have a readers digest version. :)
Also, the physics portion of this game do a horrible job at emulating Touch AC. They do an OK job emulating Range increments though.


The AC problem will be partially fixed when paladins get the Divine Shield feat/enhancement(which adds charisma bonus to AC while using a shield for about 1 min at level 16). Of course, we can't give paladins teeth again because they were too good before mod 3 :D

Even better, allow Paladins and Clerics to get the Saint Template with enhancements(which adds Wisdom bonus to AC with no penalties)

The Saint template is SO BROKEN! Not to mention, things like level adjustments don't exist in DDO, making it even more so. Drow at least are balanced against the 32 point build (after being nerfed).


Wasn't meant to be demeaning. The rules on Touch Attacks really don't have a readers digest version. :)
Also, the physics portion of this game do a horrible job at emulating Touch AC. They do an OK job emulating Range increments though.

True enough. Many rules in D&D 3.5 can give all but the most savvy rules lawyer a headache.

I don't agree with the physics portion. I don't think they make ANY attempt at emulating touch AC. Yeah, I'd have liked touch spells and incorporeal touch attacks to function as intended, but the way arrows, ray spells, fireballs, etc... function add much to the game and its transformation from a turn-based game to a real-time one.

Alcides
09-08-2008, 07:36 AM
The Saint template is SO BROKEN! Not to mention, things like level adjustments don't exist in DDO, making it even more so. Drow at least are balanced against the 32 point build (after being nerfed).

Yeah, the saint template is pretty broken, and the wisdom bonus to AC is an Insight bonus(which wouldn't stack with greensteel items). Of course they could give characters with a majority of paladin or cleric levels something decent for hitting high favor. Although, I think the Divine Shield feat/enhancement (adding charisma bonus as an unnamed bonus to shield AC) would be pretty nice for battle clerics and paladins that want to get AC on par with these TWF AC builds. And since you need to be wearing to shield to use this ability, it won't stack with monk wisdom to AC.

oogly54
09-08-2008, 09:19 AM
NOTE the 15 ranger 1 monk build is NOT limited to a kama they can use the full ranger weapon set and retain the Wis bonus to AC, the wisdome to ac is only lost if you wear armor or use a sheild.

The build that go formor monk levle for centered ac and wind/ocean stance ofr more AC are limited to kamas.

That all being said my Tempest monk (6rgr/10monk) who DID not go for PA (8 str base), but in the perfect situation pally etc, (but fightign not tumbling or useign clicky boosts), should hit 90AC, still hits for 25-35ish +8 guile, +8 thrane goggles, +1 force, +1d4 slicing, +2d6 holy Per kama, I know a S&B fighter will do more base per hit, and definetly have better crit options but that extra 16+1+1d4+2d6 points of damage on the off hand at 10% faster speed all the time has got to add up way FAST and i would not be at all suprised if i was out damageing a S&B fighter, (maby I'll look up the dmage calc and run the numbers then edit them in here) and this guy was build with the aim of AC AC AC SAVES dps, sac a Few points of AC off the top end you might ocational get hit on eliet by harry on less then a 20 and you could add a bunch more dmaage.

***EDIT OMFG....

So i ran the number throught this damage calculator: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/ddo/index.php
NOTE: this does NOT add the the 2 extra attacks ddo grants twf now so off hand was onyl getitng 3 attacks per set, I added 10% more swings for tempest so kwaiii's DPS should be higher thsi was don with average buffs verses what we fight 90% of the tiem at high levels namly raid bosses/mobs I weighted in towards the fighter in a lot of ways IE i gave them both GS weapons i assuemd the fighter had a khopesh and all spec feats I made both haflings since i was useing my guy and assumed the AC build S&B some how bought a 18 str still ie 16 starting after the -2 compared to my 8 starting, I gave the fighter a Bloodstone while omitting one for me since i dont use one normaly (dont have a spair for one thing), I'm useign dul Kamas...
The Fighter came out at about 105 DPS Kwaiii Came out at 138 DPS, I am not built for DPS, I'm a build for AC above all else, if a S&B fighter can not even come close to me, (and this was missing 2 of my off hand attacks), they can not come close to ANY twf robe AC/DPS build.

If you are going to talk about a min/max build witha ranger, do the same for a fighter. 34 STR and +4 to damage for Weapon specialization/greater. (+6 to damage every attack) The fighter will also be attacking at a BASE attack bonus of +37, which with my fighter I still miss on greater than a one in an Elite Shroud (depending on buffs and destruction, ETC.). So your ranger, attacking with a ~+32 is going to miss a whole lot more. And what about the fighters 30% attack speed boost nobody ever mentions. Best boost in the game EASILY. I am not saying S/B is better DPS, have not ran the numbers myself, just next time you run a comparision, do it fairly and compare both at min/max.

Desteria
09-09-2008, 03:49 AM
If you are going to talk about a min/max build witha ranger, do the same for a fighter. 34 STR and +4 to damage for Weapon specialization/greater. (+6 to damage every attack) The fighter will also be attacking at a BASE attack bonus of +37, which with my fighter I still miss on greater than a one in an Elite Shroud (depending on buffs and destruction, ETC.). So your ranger, attacking with a ~+32 is going to miss a whole lot more. And what about the fighters 30&#37; attack speed boost nobody ever mentions. Best boost in the game EASILY. I am not saying S/B is better DPS, have not ran the numbers myself, just next time you run a comparision, do it fairly and compare both at min/max.

Um i Compatred a Minmaxed AC S&B fighter Fighter maxed for damage (I stated i gave him the feats AND a bloodstone wich i did not give to the monk, I gave him 32 str insted of 34 str to say hes a hafling but that also ment i gave him +8 damage form hafling guile4) TO NOT maxed for damage monk/ranger AC build and the monk ranger decimated the S&B, So a more built for damage ranger 15/monk1 thats can still hit insainly high ac just not quite as insain as my guy would uterly decimate the DPS of any S&B while havign significant more AC then said S&B.

Thank-You have a nice day.

***Edit
For **** and giggles I stuck my human Str ranger in with her min2 Kopeshes (i disreguarded all acid damage because most key stuff has resist anyway), she came out at Almost Twice Kwaiii's DPS 260ish She is NOT minmaxed close but only started with a 16 str, though for TRUE max dps would be making her a hafling str ranger ;) same 16 starting str and +8 guile damage mmmm mmm good.