PDA

View Full Version : Ac and to hit



phum
04-06-2011, 04:04 AM
I think AC should have something that makes it void like incorporeal and concealment do for to hit. A consequence would be a relatively easy implementation of AC meaning something at higher levels. Thoughts? Any1 see any downside? I'm thinking of something along the 20% chance of blur and a short term 50% like displacement.

So, to attempt to formulate my idea a bit more simply:

1. Make a new factor that gives a monster or pc a chance to bypass AC. Only AC. Nothing else.

2. Give bosses a significant value (my guestimate 20-40%) and normal monsters mostly insignificant values (10-20%).

3. Allow AC values to increase or lower higher level content monsters' to hit values. And the other way around, if pcs are given buffs/enhancements/feats for it.

What u get is more variety with a quite simple addition. I believe there are many who would like more AC build variation in higher level content. Now only AC monks and some S&B's with the very good gear can achieve it.

Concerns:
Too high factors would hit AC tanks too much
Too low factors would still force to hit balancing to be done based on the few builds with effective AC at higher lvls

Absolute-Omniscience
04-06-2011, 04:20 AM
What? :confused:

Aaxeyu
04-06-2011, 04:22 AM
Huh? :confused:

MrLarone
04-06-2011, 04:28 AM
you mean like destruction?

http://ddowiki.com/page/Destruction_%28weapon%29

there's a improved version too.

Malky
04-06-2011, 04:32 AM
WTS translators for all kind of languages :D

donfilibuster
04-06-2011, 07:11 AM
I think AC should have something that makes it void like incorporeal and concealment do for to hit. A consequence would be a relatively easy implementation of AC meaning something at higher levels. Thoughts? Any1 see any downside? I'm thinking of something along the 20% chance of blur and a short term 50% like displacement.

Yes, the downside is AC is a build option we have and merging it with other defense options takes it away from the customization.
The usual suggestion is to let AC work as intended and do the straight fix of just adding more AC options.
e.g. more spells, of which d&d already have a few that are not in ddo like greater mage armor.

What works with AC is cover, rather than concealment. Partial cover is +4 to AC.
But in DDO we already have total cover from obstacles, shield blocking and standing behind another toon.
We just tend to obviate it and prefer to have AC while engaged, in which case an alternative defense like concealment is useful.

phum
04-06-2011, 09:38 AM
Guess I should try to elaborate a bit. I'm not a native in case u didn't guess. AC as a build option is invalid for higher lvl content as probably all of u know. To make it at least a bit viable, but not directly too powerful, there have been too many ideas to recite anywhere.

However, I have yet to see something as simplistic as a bypass factor to counter the otherwise completely op builds. The op builds are the problem in AC and I believe also the problem in stat balance: why dex cannot be boosted very much.

So, to attempt to formulate my idea a bit more simply:

1. Make a new factor that gives a monster or pc a chance to bypass AC. Only AC. Nothing else.

2. Give bosses a significant value (my guestimate 20-40%) and normal monsters mostly insignificant values (10-20%).

3. Allow AC values to increase or lower higher level content monsters' to hit values. And the other way around, if pcs are given buffs/enhancements/feats for it.

What u get is more variety with a quite simple addition. I believe there are many who would like AC builds to be more viable in higher level content.

The real question is whether this is a too drastic solution (tho simple it can be wrongly implemented quite drastic) and whether this could be done even easier by wonking the crit ratios (every1 uses or should use fort 100 or more anyway). Might be. However, as noted in the other thread, tying AC to fort has unwanted consequences. Does this one?

Did this post make any sense?

donfilibuster
04-06-2011, 10:36 AM
It makes sense, thing is it's as good and valid as any other as the other many countless suggestions to fix AC.
If you ask it is too drastic, i believe any change from one defense to another is quite drastic yeah.
As opposed to just adjust the monster stats to reasonable amounts or simply add more AC buffs to keep up with the hit buffs.

Here's for example another idea that is fairly simple and comes from the DMG:
The base AC is 10, and this variant lets you use a d20 roll instead of using that base 10.
The DMG reasons the usual base 10 would be like taking 10 on the d20 roll.
So if you allow this variant you'll be effectively having an AC buff half of the time and a lot of margin.
All while still balanced by the fact you'll roll low half of the time, which also counts for variety.

So just an idea and have seen similar ideas from players tweaking this or that roll to allow for a larger gap on the AC range.
Messing with the crit is on the same lines, but would occur far less than 50%, so there's plenty of room to see what works best.

phum
04-06-2011, 11:10 AM
Yes. That would also work, but on lower levels it would maybe be a bit too random (?). With AC 40 and monster to hit e.g. 35 the double roll would decrease the chance of miss from 75% to 9/16, almost 20%. Would require quite a bit of rebalancing.

phum
04-06-2011, 11:56 AM
My math suck. Of course I need to take into account also crit ranges, when calculating changes like that. But it's a nice idea tho :o

donfilibuster
04-06-2011, 12:23 PM
Yes. That would also work, but on lower levels it would maybe be a bit too random (?). With AC 40 and monster to hit e.g. 35 the double roll would decrease the chance of miss from 75% to 9/16, almost 20%. Would require quite a bit of rebalancing.

Not so sure on the math but for now i'm trying to picture it as rolling high or low.
A monster that had a 50% chance to roll high will now have only 25% to roll high while you roll low.

A starting toon is probably being hit anyways and a fully geared toon is probably still defending well.
More of an issue is that either one is going to take 25% longer for the monster to roll low while you attack.
But since the way it is now you get hit from lack of AC it effectively help defend with less AC.

The same goes for crits, friend and foe still crit the same amount, but may fail at the confirmation roll half the time.

However, the same is true of any other from of improving AC, if you can defend more so can the monsters.
If the enemy cannot defend in that way then all we get is an easy button.
If the enemy can defend, the overall effect is slowing the battle by a small amount but being safer on the melee.
Again, the fully geared toon will still perform well and fast, while the starting toon may gamble but last longer doing so.

Inkblack
04-06-2011, 01:00 PM
Effect of replacing the base 10 in AC with a d20 roll:

http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r287/InkblackDDO/HitProbability3.jpg

Had to jump in the wayback machine to find this. Originally posted in 2008.

Ink

phum
04-06-2011, 01:49 PM
Effect of replacing the base 10 in AC with a d20 roll:

http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r287/InkblackDDO/HitProbability3.jpg

Had to jump in the wayback machine to find this. Originally posted in 2008.

Ink

Cool. Tyvm^^ That's quite a change. Apparently there r AC 'crits' in it. Any idea what happens when both attacker and defender crit?

Inkblack
04-06-2011, 02:17 PM
Cool. Tyvm^^ That's quite a change. Apparently there r AC 'crits' in it. Any idea what happens when both attacker and defender crit?
I think the graph assumes the attacker hits on a 20 and misses on a 1, but the defender's roll just establishes the AC. However, I cannot see the graph because work blocks the image hosting site now. I'm just responding from memory, so I may be completely off base.

phum
04-06-2011, 02:40 PM
Not so sure on the math but for now i'm trying to picture it as rolling high or low.
A monster that had a 50% chance to roll high will now have only 25% to roll high while you roll low.

A starting toon is probably being hit anyways and a fully geared toon is probably still defending well.
More of an issue is that either one is going to take 25% longer for the monster to roll low while you attack.
But since the way it is now you get hit from lack of AC it effectively help defend with less AC.

The same goes for crits, friend and foe still crit the same amount, but may fail at the confirmation roll half the time.

However, the same is true of any other from of improving AC, if you can defend more so can the monsters.
If the enemy cannot defend in that way then all we get is an easy button.
If the enemy can defend, the overall effect is slowing the battle by a small amount but being safer on the melee.
Again, the fully geared toon will still perform well and fast, while the starting toon may gamble but last longer doing so.

Yes, changing the whole AC system is a hard task for the devs. My idea would pretty much circumvent that. I think a factor put in items/enhancements/w/e would be probably easiest and no consequencies on fort/fort reduction (adding a similar effect with critical hit would result in problems with monsters that reduce fort I believe).

I believe the desired effect would be to smoothen the progression so that high AC would not be completely OP, but highish AC would give benefit. This is exactly what the d20 system does. The problem with changing AC system e.g. with the d20 system is that d20 is smallish.

Balancing of monsters will always be done based on what is feasible. However, the AC spectrum at high lvl is so broad that the balancing is done on so low percentile of different chars, that the current guideline new players often is that AC is useless (which isn't true on low lvls). I believe the problem isn't the bredth of the spectrum, but the OP builds that result. Those are something even the d20 system would not (I believe). U will still have builds with AC that makes them intouchable, if the other builds are given some feasibility.

I remember reading lvl spectrum of epics becoming broader so that the earlier ones are below lvl 25. If this happens, it might give AC at least a little benefit in the earlier epics, but who knows.

phum
04-06-2011, 02:42 PM
I think the graph assumes the attacker hits on a 20 and misses on a 1, but the defender's roll just establishes the AC. However, I cannot see the graph because work blocks the image hosting site now. I'm just responding from memory, so I may be completely off base.

Ok ^^ I assumed wrong based on the graph. Stupid me :) I believe u r right and the defender is not given any 'roll 20 and the attacker will always miss' bonus.

Ryiah
04-06-2011, 04:43 PM
AC as a build option is invalid for higher lvl content as probably all of u know.

Invalid how? I've got a friend who has a pretty successful AC tank rogue/monk (uses Epic Midnight Greetings (http://ddowiki.com/page/Epic_Midnight_Greetings)). He was pretty easily tanking raids and epic quests last I remembered even though he didn't have all the gear he wanted (he kept complaining he couldn't pull a chattering ring).

rezo
04-06-2011, 04:57 PM
Here is a thought, how about making your lvl part of the AC.

Ex.
lvl 10 fight will have a +10 to his AC with his armor, dex mod and shield.
Same thing for all classes.

Your armor will go up every lvl you go up.

phum
04-07-2011, 12:55 AM
Invalid how? I've got a friend who has a pretty successful AC tank rogue/monk (uses Epic Midnight Greetings (http://ddowiki.com/page/Epic_Midnight_Greetings)). He was pretty easily tanking raids and epic quests last I remembered even though he didn't have all the gear he wanted (he kept complaining he couldn't pull a chattering ring).

Yes bad wording:o There are some monk/monk splashes, but for the vast majority of builds ac is a dumb thing after lvl ~10(?).

donfilibuster
04-07-2011, 02:04 AM
Thanks Inkblack for the great graphic.
Unless i'm looking at it backwards i can see it helping to avoid being hit if you don't have high AC.



I believe the desired effect would be to smoothen the progression so that high AC would not be completely OP, but highish AC would give benefit. This is exactly what the d20 system does. The problem with changing AC system e.g. with the d20 system is that d20 is smallish.


Yep, this is the crux of the issue, that currently you need a high AC build to have any benefit from it.
This is more a MMO issue than a D&D issue, because a tank is expected in a party, whereas D&D classes are versatile.
The system itself is fine, the d20 roll is as good as a d% in the broad sense.
Giving more AC buffs would be a healthy fix in this regard. e.g. by adding more spells.

As for variants, the rolling base is basically a free but random buff yet as you mention has a small window.
I am posting variants because your first idea was concealment, and is not much different from the AC as DR variant.
The roll base variant was from the DMG, but there's another variant but from UA, which is meant for campaigns that need to do things different.
If found this Defense Bonus: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/defenseBonus.htm
Personally i try to steer away of changes like these but i can see it fitting and people often say AC should grow with your level.

Gotta note these that all UA variants are separate, one thing may fit, other may not.
In particular i posted against the Magic Rating that is very much like this Defense Bonus but for caster level.
But stacking caster level has arguments against while AC is like BAB in which all classes have some measure of it.
As far as AC goes, this variant states it can be used when wearing armor is not desirable or the only option.
DDO is like this, being high magic and what with all the pajama users and naturally the all-or-nothing that force you to go for tank builds.

phum
04-07-2011, 01:46 PM
Thanks Inkblack for the great graphic.
Unless i'm looking at it backwards i can see it helping to avoid being hit if you don't have high AC.



Yep, this is the crux of the issue, that currently you need a high AC build to have any benefit from it.
This is more a MMO issue than a D&D issue, because a tank is expected in a party, whereas D&D classes are versatile.
The system itself is fine, the d20 roll is as good as a d% in the broad sense.
Giving more AC buffs would be a healthy fix in this regard. e.g. by adding more spells.

As for variants, the rolling base is basically a free but random buff yet as you mention has a small window.
I am posting variants because your first idea was concealment, and is not much different from the AC as DR variant.
The roll base variant was from the DMG, but there's another variant but from UA, which is meant for campaigns that need to do things different.
If found this Defense Bonus: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/defenseBonus.htm
Personally i try to steer away of changes like these but i can see it fitting and people often say AC should grow with your level.

Gotta note these that all UA variants are separate, one thing may fit, other may not.
In particular i posted against the Magic Rating that is very much like this Defense Bonus but for caster level.
But stacking caster level has arguments against while AC is like BAB in which all classes have some measure of it.
As far as AC goes, this variant states it can be used when wearing armor is not desirable or the only option.
DDO is like this, being high magic and what with all the pajama users and naturally the all-or-nothing that force you to go for tank builds.

Hmm. It is true that the AC spectrum is fine to be wide. If more buffs are added or a level progression, the spectrum either broadens or remains unchanged depending on how many take it and what lvl window is examined.

Adding d20 widens the window through which the spectrum is looked at. Maybe the window would be large enough and AC would not be so insignificant. As I'm sure you know, AC as an 'all'-or-'nothing' question means it's 'nothing' that great many pc's choose. Whether or not the d20 build strong enough a solution (the window is wide enough to give an option for most melee's to even think about not dumbing AC) is a question and I assume the system would be quite hard to implement and balance fairly in DDO. Tough to say, but it's very interesting in any case.

Thx a lot for the link too^^ Oh and the concealment was just used as an example of how the system could be put together. Meaning that the factor I propose would work for AC like concealment works for to hit, but maybe the example is stupid and confusing:)