Heavy Armor Optimization

[Bront]

Well, it's not terribly hard to change the feat. But I see that the desire to change it wasn't exactly very strong ...

At any rate, I think the Races of stone feats lower ACP and provide flat AC bonuses. I like Bront's proposed idea, it doesn't sound too bad. Maybe a little weak, if anything.

Actualy, the desire by other judges to not change it was strong, so I decided it wasn't worth pursuing.

It might be weak compared to LAO, but 10% crit reduction is nothing to sneaze at, being nameless, it allways applies, so even if you are flatfooted, you know how to setup and wear your armor right, and eventualy your armor doesn't hinder you as much as it used to.

Let's max it out and see.

Mithril Chain Shirt with LAO, +6 armor, +8 max dex = +14 total AC (before enchantment, which is even on any armor.

Mithril Chain shirt without LAO, +4 armor, +6 Max Dex = +10 Total AC.

Full Plate with HAO as written, +8 armor, +2 Max Dex = +10 total AC.

Mithril Full Plate, while ideal, is the equivilent of a +3 enchantment on the Mithril Chain shirt, so I did not compare them. Again, granted, a +4 Mithril Chain shirt isn't too much less than +3 Mithril Full Plate, but it's a balancing factor, and the fact that the Mithril version may not apply to this feat anyway.

Mithril Full Plate with MAO... +8 Armor, +3 Max Dex = +11 total AC Bonus (And 30' move)

Just to keep perspective.

On a pure armor level, A Mithril Chain Shirt is better than full plate with both feats, but that does involve a high (though attainable) dex. With LAO, it's nuts, but that's besides the point, and admittedly does require a 26 Dex. HAO would reward a heavy armor character with a little AC breathing room, and the crit resistrance is certaintly helpfull for a character likely to be subjected to multiple attacks (As most people with Heavy Armor would be), and generaly facilitates them better. I guess that perhaps the feat should be a bit better just to help deal with the frustration resulting from the fact that Mithril is not an option if you want heavy armor.

And ultimately, I think the problem with LAO is simply that it points out an already flawed issue of dealing with Light/Medium/Heavy armor in the first place and accentuates it.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Yep. And I'll point out that I have a character with 25 in one of his stats, soon to be 26 in a few levels, so LEW does have stats in that range.

 

[Bront]

Yep. And I'll point out that I have a character with 25 in one of his stats, soon to be 26 in a few levels, so LEW does have stats in that range.

How about constructive feadback at the feat we're discussing?

 

[Rystil Arden]

How about constructive feadback at the feat we're discussing?

Reading your post, it reminded me of the LAO threads where people kept claiming that stats would never get that high, so we could just ignore the problem. As for HAO, it seems okay--as you mentioned, the biggest restriction is that it doesn't work with Mithral Fullplate.

 

[IcyCool]

I like the crit avoidance chance. 10% isn't much, but could be increased through the feat chain. Your basic currencies for armor are ACP, Max Dex, Armor Bonus, Speed, and (to a lesser extent) time needed to don the armor. You've also got weight and cost, but both of those would be wonky to mess with in a feat. I think Bront's approach of adding something special is a neat way to go.

Actualy, the desire by other judges to not change it was strong, so I decided it wasn't worth pursuing.

Ah. Must have been a conversation I was not privy to. I didn't realize this was the case.

At any rate, I only mentioned LAO because the OP mentioned it, and I wanted to make sure he was aware that it might not be a good basis for creating a HAO feat.

Reading your post, it reminded me of the LAO threads where people kept claiming that stats would never get that high, so we could just ignore the problem.

For reference, see this thread.

 

[Bront]

Ah. Must have been a conversation I was not privy to. I didn't realize this was the case.

At any rate, I only mentioned LAO because the OP mentioned it, and I wanted to make sure he was aware that it might not be a good basis for creating a HAO feat.

I think it was a good idea, and I like MAO, but LAO is unbalanced. The conversation I speak of was one where KO basicly said 'We won't revisit previous approvals' in the thread.

And it got brougt up again by others. I only ran the numbers to compare it balance why to LAO and normal armor.

But, I'd rather get the feat the OP was looking for refined. I am worried that perhaps it's not quite enough.

 

[Solange]

I like what Bront has written up so far. Maybe make it +3 for the first feat on the crit AC thingie, and +1 more for a +4 total on the second feat?

 

[Rystil Arden]

For reference, see this thread.

I saw what this originally said before the edit--don't worry, dude. I didn't mean you. You were true to your guns the whole time. I meant at the end when people other than you and me and Bront started posting, most of them said something like that

 

[IcyCool]

Well, I can understand that maybe Bront doesn't want to make the feat chain benefits the equivalent of Light Fortification (would the feat benefits and the Fortification enchantments stack?)

Maybe the feat could be designed along the lines of the Tactical Feats in Complete Warrior? So the feat could provide one of a few benefits (one at a time, with maybe a free or move action to switch):

* A fortification %.
* A small miss chance due to concealment if the feat user fights defensively (so as long as the user fights defensively, he is immune to sneak attacks). This is pretty potent though, hmm.
* ?

I saw what this originally said before the edit--don't worry, dude. I didn't mean you. You were true to your guns the whole time. I meant at the end when people other than you and me and Bront started posting, most of them said something like that

Thanks, and sorry about what I posted before the edit. Outside irritations spilling over into my posts and all that.

Today is a better day.

 

[Solange]

Fortification is a flat chance to ignore a critical, Bront's suggestion just makes it harder to confirm the critical in the first place, so they should stack.