Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
How to deal with high AC PCs
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6042935" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I don't play or GM 3E or PF, so to some extent am just a bemused onlooker.</p><p></p><p>But I think this question slightly misses the OP's point. The OP's qusetion isn't "How can I nerf my player's PC building choice?" It's "Given that the PC build rules seems to allow players to channel their choices into directions that undermine the fun of action resolution, what advice can anyone give me?"</p><p></p><p>I think [MENTION=3586]MerricB[/MENTION]'s post is actually the best response yet to the question as I understand it, as it clearly identifies the three problematic mechanics: </p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">(1) stacking of deflection and enhancement bonuses, a 3E innovation;</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">(2) the distinction between, and consequent stacking of, armour and natural armour bonues, another 3E innovation;</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">(3) stacking of enhancement bonuses on armour and shield, something that goes back to classic D&D, but becomes exaggerated in an environent like 3E/PF where tailored magical items are easier to come by.</p><p></p><p> [MENTION=91954]Friend of the Dork[/MENTION], I would suggest you talk to your group and explore taking one of two options - I've taken both approaches in my own time as GM, depeding on the group consensus that emerges and what seems the approach least likely to break down under the pressure of future play.</p><p></p><p>One option is the "gentelmen's agreement": leave the rules intact, but establish an understanding that PCs won't use more than one enhancement or deflection bonus, nor more than one armour or natural armour bonus. (This is, in effect, a version of talking to the player about a PC rebuild - but in a slightly more systematic fashion.)</p><p></p><p>NPCs and monsters are exempt from the agreement - you and your players rely on the CR rules, rather than the bonus stacking rules, to make sure they are fair and balanced.</p><p></p><p>I think the main thing that might put pressure on option 1 would be the PCs making hauls of loot they can't use without violating the agreement.</p><p></p><p>The second option is a full-fledged houserule along the same lines. This is easier to police, because - provided people play by the rules - it is self-policing. And the aesthetics of it will be more pleasing to some groups. But without knowing 3E/PF monsters all that well, I would assume it would mandate quite a bit of monster and NPC rebuilding, which would be a PitA.</p><p></p><p>Whichever path you adopt, I think it would be crucial to let players to rebuilds of their PCs, and revisions of items also, to make them fit rationally into the new scheme of things.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6042935, member: 42582"] I don't play or GM 3E or PF, so to some extent am just a bemused onlooker. But I think this question slightly misses the OP's point. The OP's qusetion isn't "How can I nerf my player's PC building choice?" It's "Given that the PC build rules seems to allow players to channel their choices into directions that undermine the fun of action resolution, what advice can anyone give me?" I think [MENTION=3586]MerricB[/MENTION]'s post is actually the best response yet to the question as I understand it, as it clearly identifies the three problematic mechanics: [indent](1) stacking of deflection and enhancement bonuses, a 3E innovation; (2) the distinction between, and consequent stacking of, armour and natural armour bonues, another 3E innovation; (3) stacking of enhancement bonuses on armour and shield, something that goes back to classic D&D, but becomes exaggerated in an environent like 3E/PF where tailored magical items are easier to come by.[/indent] [MENTION=91954]Friend of the Dork[/MENTION], I would suggest you talk to your group and explore taking one of two options - I've taken both approaches in my own time as GM, depeding on the group consensus that emerges and what seems the approach least likely to break down under the pressure of future play. One option is the "gentelmen's agreement": leave the rules intact, but establish an understanding that PCs won't use more than one enhancement or deflection bonus, nor more than one armour or natural armour bonus. (This is, in effect, a version of talking to the player about a PC rebuild - but in a slightly more systematic fashion.) NPCs and monsters are exempt from the agreement - you and your players rely on the CR rules, rather than the bonus stacking rules, to make sure they are fair and balanced. I think the main thing that might put pressure on option 1 would be the PCs making hauls of loot they can't use without violating the agreement. The second option is a full-fledged houserule along the same lines. This is easier to police, because - provided people play by the rules - it is self-policing. And the aesthetics of it will be more pleasing to some groups. But without knowing 3E/PF monsters all that well, I would assume it would mandate quite a bit of monster and NPC rebuilding, which would be a PitA. Whichever path you adopt, I think it would be crucial to let players to rebuilds of their PCs, and revisions of items also, to make them fit rationally into the new scheme of things. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
How to deal with high AC PCs
Top