Party AC difference

[Holy Bovine]

I'm really displeased with the variation in NAD defenses as at first level you can have anywhere from 10-17 in a given defense based on class and stats. This is bad design.

No it is a player choice to have dumped 2 of his stats to 10. That is pretty much the only way you can end up with a 10 in any defense.

Do game designers really need to handhold players this much so that any negative choices they make in chargen are instantly negated and the PC can then be all awesome all the time?

 

[MrMyth]

I voted for the 6-7 point difference as the maximum. Assuming you have a baseline somewhere in there, it should be reasonable to get a really good AC perhaps 3-4 points higher, or a bad AC perhaps 2-3 points lower. Reduce that range and choices start being meaningless. Have too many choices that let your numbers grow beyond that, and it starts being hard to threaten one PC without overwhelming another one.

 

[Infiniti2000]

The OP asks for both the maximum and what would be a good range. Since I think a good range is more useful knowledge, I chose 3-4. The maximum is probably 5-6.

 

[Storminator]

No it is a player choice to have dumped 2 of his stats to 10. That is pretty much the only way you can end up with a 10 in any defense.

Do game designers really need to handhold players this much so that any negative choices they make in chargen are instantly negated and the PC can then be all awesome all the time?

I made this choice with my PC. My dwarven cleric has a 10 INT and a 10 Dex. His reflex defense is abysmal. Until I got a cloak it was the worst possible (using standard point buy) for his level. But I just sucked it up and made jokes about dwarf dodging skills. I sometimes get missed - and that's an event!

I've got enough good going for me that I can suck rocks on one defense.

For the OP, I put 3-4 is a good range. You can really feel that difference without it breaking the game.

PS

 

[Mengu]

This poll is missing the point. The question is not what AC the other party members have, but what attack bonus the monsters have that you fight.

The game is balanced around the idea that the standard monster hits the standard non-defender PC of the same level with a chance of 50%.

The DM can make adjustments by using more lower level or fewer high level monsters, or by varying the roles from brute to artillery to find a sweet spot for hitting PC's, or by using more leaders that give bonuses, depending on whatever will create the most exciting challenges.

So I think relative PC defenses is what matters more so than the assumed monster hit percentage which is largely in the DM's hands, at least in my experience.

The point of the poll is pretty much to get a ballpark on what kind of AC spread people feel comfortable with. Personally, I would try very hard to not play a character with AC 5 points above or below another party member, though exceptions are sure to happen when someone does off the wall optimization or dumps their AC in an uncaring fashion. As a DM I would just feel more comfortable, if the AC's of the characters were within 4 points of each other. At first level this means AC's 16-20 which seems pretty reasonable, and could be maintained through all levels. If I had one character at AC 13, another at AC 22, I'd be a bit disconcerted. Reading comments so far, I'm glad I'm not the only one.

 

[Shin Okada]

5-6　would be well within the basic design.

A 1st-level Paladin in Plate Armor with a Heavy Shield has AC 20.
A 1st-level Wizard with Int 18 has AC 14.
Both of them are workable characters.

Even 6-7 or more could be ok.

Basically it is defender's job to protect some squishy PC from attackers who target AC.

And there are many monsters attacks, even basic ones, which target some NAD.

As long as the players know each of their PCs' strength and weakness, and act as a team, the difference in AC tend not be a big problem.

 

[Starfox]

I believe the difference in AC between the sneak thief and the scale mail fighter IMC is 12. Kind of wreaks havoc with the expected damage calculations.

 

[Pickles JG]

5-6　would be well within the basic design.

A 1st-level Paladin in Plate Armor with a Heavy Shield has AC 20.
A 1st-level Wizard with Int 18 has AC 14.
Both of them are workable characters.

Even 6-7 or more could be ok.

Basically it is defender's job to protect some squishy PC from attackers who target AC.

And there are many monsters attacks, even basic ones, which target some NAD.

As long as the players know each of their PCs' strength and weakness, and act as a team, the difference in AC tend not be a big problem.

This mostly - 6 is the design limit between a Wizard that is not trying & a Plate wearer. In practice 4 is probably a safer target spread though. Most of the wizards with low base AC get Shield & other things.
With 4 base spread you can expect a bit more variance as people get better armour at different times. 4 is definitely noticeable without being overwhelming.

 

[Davachido]

I think with a set of smart players (Keyword: Smart) the party should do fine with a difference of 4-5 AC.

Defenders at the higher end of that and some of the long range strikers can be at the low end. As long as they have ways to escape getting hit or are tactically positioning themselves they shouldn't get hit that often. I've found when a party does this or goes through cycles of buffing themselves when they anticipate an attack then they do alright.

However if someone is reckless and charges headstrong into the middle of loads of enemies such as a wizard with 6 healing surges and no teleport spells then you can find that the low/high AC becomes a problem. This also pisses off the leader.

On a side note I usually have on level monsters or maximum of +/-2 off the players current level.

 

[gnfnrf]

I must say, my personal experience has been very different.

The game I run is at 9th level right now, and the party ACs are:
24 (cleric)
23+ (warden)
20 (sorcerer)
19 (wizard)

The warden's AC is often much higher due to second winding and other tricks.

I play in a game at 13th level, and the party ACs are:
30+(swordmage)
29(fighter)
27(druid)
25(warlock)
23(bard)

The swordmage often has an AC of 32-34 due to magic item and daily utility powers.

I play in another game, oddly enough also at 13th level:
28(paladin)
26(warlord)
26(ranger)
24(wizard)

So the point is, in one game, the spread is 5+, and in one, the spread is 7+. Only in the third game is the spread within the 4 area that most people seem to think is the sweet spot.

However, we've never noticed a problem with the defense spread causing issues in any of the games. If the bard is getting attacked in melee, the swordmage and fighter are already not doing their jobs. If he's being attacked ranged vs. AC, he is usually able to find cover, concealment, or another way to stop being the target of attention.

--
gnfnrf