Adventurer's Vault masterwork armours

[Nail]

Originally Posted by CapnZapp

The three core books are a contained game and should be viewed as such. Any additional books are completely optional. I don't buy that only "half the system" is included. You get the whole system alright, then if you wish more options, the rest of the books are there for you.

I, too, wish this were so.

But if wishes were horses....

The fact is that 4e is designed - far more than 3.xe - to be a "supplement game". You only have to look at the design of PH #1 to see this is true. There's only a little bit of everything in there, but nothing is done completely. If you need further proof, check out the up-coming PH #2, and talk of the future PH #3.

Originally Posted by CapnZapp

Feel free to buy everything Wizards throws at you, but don't expect others to feel the same.

Your frustration is mis-directed. I'm not advocating that anyone buy anything. I'm just talking about WotC's 4e marketing.

Originally Posted by CapnZapp

That said, have a nice day. I certainly don't wish to argue about this either, so let's agree to disagree and move on

I've got no idea what you and I are disagreeing about.

[Diirk]

Originally Posted by Regicide

No, it doesn't, it's actually rather silly. Theres no reason a paladin in magical godplate armour which is as light and flexible as magic can make it can't be just as nimble as the rogue AND with the heavy armour be better protected. It gets even sillier when when compareing it to int-based defence. Hands up if you think that an 80 year-old scientist should be much harder to hit than a 25 year-old marine.

Even with masterwork armours, theoretically at lvl 30 the max stat one can obtain is 30 (20 starting, 8 bumps from levels, +2 epic destiny) giving +11 armour bonus from hide, +10 stat = +21 AC. Godplate maxes out at +20 AC. While a plate class can pick up a shield for another +2, theoretically so can a rogue with appropriate feats, I think?

So no matter what you do I'm pretty sure light armour classes can get a higher armour class still than heavy armour classes. Which is ridiculous.

[CapnZapp]

Originally Posted by Nail

I've got no idea what you and I are disagreeing about.

Nothing important really. And I'm more and more hesitant to continue this discussion, because I have no quarrel with you.

However, because you asked: you seem to have resigned to the fact 4E is some kind of supplement game, where errata aren't supposed to be applied to the product it references.

I disagree. That's the short answer!


The slightly long-winded answer is: I maintain the useful stance to take is to consider the PHB on its own. I'm certainly not going to buy PHB II & III just because Wizard says I need it for my core game.

Because I don't. You may think the Druid or Barbarian or Gnome is part of the core game, but it isn't. Anymore than the Warlock and Warlord or Tiefling were part of the core game in 3E.

Wizards changed which races, classes etc they offered in the PHB, which I can live with. The Sorcerer isn't any more core than the Warlock. 3E isn't some kind of baseline here. The new set of options in the PHB offers as complete a game as did the 3E PHB.

Now, if Wizards would have left out a crucial gameplay rule, and waited until PHB II to introduce it, then you'd have a point. Then you could say "we need PHBII to play D&D". But because we don't, it's optional.

You don't need to buy the supplements to play D&D.

In fact, if enough of us adopt your resigned stance, then Wizard would get away with awful business decisions like the one about AV MW. On the other hand, whatever we do not accept will not be repeated. The customer tells the manufacturer what to do through voting with their wallets.

So please reconsider. That would be my answer.

[Nail]

Originally Posted by CapnZapp

..you seem to have resigned to the fact 4E is some kind of supplement game, where errata aren't supposed to be applied to the product it references.

FWIW, "resigned" isn't how I feel about it. "Cognizant" is a better fit.

Originally Posted by CapnZapp

I'm certainly not going to buy PHB II & III just because Wizard says I need it for my core game.

BTW, did you buy 3.xe supplements? Did your group use them?

Currently, in 4e, both my groups have a blanket "accept published WotC books" policy, with the obvious "DM reviews it" caveat. So when Martial Power came out - and I'm currently playing 2 martial PCs - it would have been hard not to purchase the splatbook.

Originally Posted by CapnZapp

..The new set of options in the PHB offers as complete a game as did the 3E PHB.

That doesn't feel as true to me as I'd like it to.

[DracoSuave]

Well look at it this way... 2e edition had a splat for each character class, then a splat for varients of those classes (necro, ninja), then splats for individual parts of DMing... then splats for varients of classes as per campaign settings (complete gladiator, EAFW for Darksun), then splats for the campaigns, then splats for the splats for the campaigns (Planescape I'm lookin at you)...

3rd edition went a different route, with splats for character roles (Complete Warrior, Arcane, etc).

Now we have a splat for each power source (of which there are only three)... and supplements for new classes. It's not even CLOSE to as rediculous as 3rd edition got, which was itself nowhere near as retarded for it as 2nd edition.

The conclusion to be made is, their current strategy involves less player splats, not more. Simple math can show that.

[Moon-Lancer]

Originally Posted by Diirk

Even with masterwork armours, theoretically at lvl 30 the max stat one can obtain is 30 (20 starting, 8 bumps from levels, +2 epic destiny) giving +11 armour bonus from hide, +10 stat = +21 AC. Godplate maxes out at +20 AC. While a plate class can pick up a shield for another +2, theoretically so can a rogue with appropriate feats, I think?

So no matter what you do I'm pretty sure light armour classes can get a higher armour class still than heavy armour classes. Which is ridiculous.

When 4e came out i did the math. dealing only with stats and armor,

a ranger archer (or any charicter that starts with a 20 in dex or inteligence) vs any character with god plate, essentially tie in terms of armor. I forget the number though. I do remember that a shield breaks the tie.

[CapnZapp]

Originally Posted by Nail

Currently, in 4e, both my groups have a blanket "accept published WotC books" policy, with the obvious "DM reviews it" caveat. So when Martial Power came out - and I'm currently playing 2 martial PCs - it would have been hard not to purchase the splatbook.

Yeah, I know the type.

Cant say I like it. If we had played three characters each through level 30 then maybe. As it is, this line of reasoning just means the PHB gets obsolete before its stuff has been tried out even once...

But I realize thats not the popular approach.

So Ive ruled out Martial Power from a different angle, the fairness angle. It provides so many nifty things for martial characters that others are left out in the cold. It seems as if Im actually going to pull this off (Itll be a while until Divine Power and Arcane Powers out and my argument loses its steam... enjoying it while it lasts!)

[Nail]

Originally Posted by DracoSuave

The conclusion to be made is, their current strategy involves less player splats, not more. Simple math can show that.

...you've got to be kidding. We're only 6 months in! To compare as you suggest, we'd have to look at the first 6 months of 3.0e and compare them to today.

[Nail]

Originally Posted by CapnZapp

So Ive ruled out Martial Power from a different angle, the fairness angle. It provides so many nifty things for martial characters that others are left out in the cold.

That's a good approach. Good thinking!

[Nail]

Originally Posted by Moon-Lancer

When 4e came out i did the math. dealing only with stats and armor,

a ranger archer (or any charicter that starts with a 20 in dex or inteligence) vs any character with god plate, essentially tie in terms of armor. I forget the number though. I do remember that a shield breaks the tie.

Heavy Armor (Hvy) vs. Hide Armor + ability score (Dex)

Assume for both: 18 Dex, Always bump Dex, No shield, Armor specialization feat ASAP, enhancement of armor at equal level, masterwork armor at equal level, include AV masterwork armors for Plate

Level  Hvy    Dex
1       19     18
2       20     19
3       20     19
4       21     20
5       21     20
6       24     22
7       24     22
8       25     24
9       25     24
10      26     25
11      29     27
12      30     28
13      30     28
14      31     30
15      31     30
16      34     33
17      34     33
18      35     34
19      35     34
20      36     35
21      38     37
22      39     38
23      39     38
24      40     39
25      40     39
26      44     42
27      44     42
28      45     44
29      45     44
30      46     45

[Nail]

Moon-Lancer: Does that (above post) match your memory?

[Moon-Lancer]

Yeah, but how is the heavy starting with 19? I must have missed something when i did my calculations the first time when i got the book.

I started them both at 18 and worked up and got an equal number.

[Nail]

I assume - in the calculations above - that when you get to a level, you have that level magic armor. IOW, at level 1, the PC has +1 armor.

Take the magic away, and the difference between armor paths remains the same.

As you see, heavy armor is consistently 1 or 2 ahead of Hide + Dex (assuming Dex starts at 18). Add in a heavy shield, and the difference is (obviously) larger.

Note that without the masterwork armors in AV, the above is not the case at a few odd levels. Adding the AV masterwork armors in is a Good Idea(tm).

[Moon-Lancer]

Ah that would be whats setting me off.

I am assuming point buy to 18 with +2 race (20) so 18 ac, but i had not calculated +1 armor for ether,

I just looked at level 1 armor and level 30. I had not seen that their was a discrepancy mid level for heavy armor using just the phb, but i i did notice that heavy armor made some pretty big jumps with masterwork.

so my view is that heavy armor is easy to maintain, while light armor users require much more focus. Elf archer for the win i guess.

[CapnZapp]

Yes, the obvious comment to the above table is that by taking heavy armor, you might not come out ahead in AC terms, but you do free up the need to advance Dex each level.

It seems heavy armor combatants doesnt get more protection (give or take the odd point) than lightly armored combatants (which I like btw, because the opposite would strongly suggest that the lightly armored combatant archetype would be non-viable), but that they do get the opportunity to hit that much harder (& more often), unless you go the archery route (getting to use all that Dex) or the Thief route (getting powers where you can attack and damage using Dex).

All in all, it seems fairly okay to me.

[CapnZapp]

And, for that matter: the numbers show fairly conclusively that the proper place for those MW armours is in the PHB, not in some splatbook...

At the very least, Wizards should add the page theyre on to any free previews of AV they might have.

[Diirk]

Originally Posted by CapnZapp

It seems heavy armor combatants doesnt get more protection (give or take the odd point) than lightly armored combatants (which I like btw, because the opposite would strongly suggest that the lightly armored combatant archetype would be non-viable), but that they do get the opportunity to hit that much harder (& more often), unless you go the archery route (getting to use all that Dex) or the Thief route (getting powers where you can attack and damage using Dex).

Or the wizard route, or the swordmage route, or ... basically heavy armour is better if your key (or possibly secondary) attack stat isn't your armour stat. I think the swordmage ends up as the most durable defender, with a possible +2 AC over other defenders (+1 for maxing int w/ light armour, +1 for swordmage warding vs shield). This involves taking demigod for the additional +2 to stat, but thats hardly a bad epic destiny.