AC and description

[Center-of-All]

This is almost certainly a stat block error. Armor always adds to reflex defense; I cannot imagine any situation where it would be deliberately lower. Especially if it's light armor.

No, armor doesn't add onto defense, it's calculated separately. There are some instances where Reflex would be higher than AC (a naked rogue, or one with a highly magical amulet but significantly less magical suit of armor), but the times that will happen seem to be rather rare.

 

[mach1.9pants]

This rather begs the question, though. Why not then just let the PCs have the AC appropriate to their level and role, and let them pick whatever window dressing they like?

Hong and you should game together!

 

[WyzardWhately]

Hong and you should game together!

Not really. He seems like an okay guy, but I think we have pretty vastly differing philosophies.

 

[mach1.9pants]

It was more that when the design philosophy of 'armour is costume for NPCs' came out Hong suggested as you did, give AC based on level and call it whatever armour you want.

 

[lutecius]

Come on, making rules a little more consistent, or using them, couldn't be that hard.
Either it's a typo, but some people are willing to defend anything 4e... OR it's really lazy design.
I don't know which is worse :\

 

[WalterKovacs]

For the minions ... they are wearing heavy armor correct? [If not, perhaps a property of being a Kobold is that you are so small that most armor is considered heavy] Hide probably prevents them from getting the ability bonus. A 'naked' Kobold on the other hand gets a full bonus based on the ability before they add the shield bonus. The shield may have some sort of natural property ... and similarly, the Kobolds selected to become Dragonshields are those that have tough hides.

With the artilery it is either a typo, or they have a lower AC through some kind of unnamed penalt occuring. However, ultimately, the role of the artilery is to NOT want to get attacked ... having the lower AC encourages that.

Ultimately ... the dragon shield is the fighter type ... he should have the highest AC. The artilery is equivalent to the "squishy mage" ... he should have the lowest AC. They should fix the fluff to fit what they want ... but it may be hard to give artilery a bad AC despite the fact that they pretty much need to have a good dex ... at least in the case of low level characters like this one, who are also non magic users. [Although a wizardy type would have a similar problem with Int based attacks].

Maybe kobolds are just throwing on armor because it makes them FEEL safer, despite the penalties the armor causes outstripping the benefit.

 

[Ravingdork]

It's my understanding that bonuses from armor are stacked onto Reflex Defense to create the Armore Class.

As for winging numbers? That's good in an emergency when you didn't prepare in advance, but for regular play? That's just stupid. A tabletope RPG needs consistency or else we are all back to playing cowboys and Indians.

Cowboy: I shot you!
Indian: No you didn't!

*rolls eyes*

 

[Staffan]

It's my understanding that bonuses from armor are stacked onto Reflex Defense to create the Armore Class.

I don't think so. The following things go into the various defense stats according to the character sheet I linked earlier:

Fort/Ref/Will: 10+½ level+ability+class+feat+enhancement+misc

AC: 10+½ level+armor/ability+class+feat+enhancement+misc

It should also be noted that the paladin in question has a +1 class bonus to his Ref defense, but no such thing on his AC.

 

[Destil]

What we've seen so far:

1/2 level to all defenses, including AC.
Light armor stacks with better of Int/Dex. Heavy armor doesn't.
Heavy armor can have a pretty massive bonus, though, judging by the Wired sheet.

There are baselines for each monster roll and level.

HOWEVER: if you take a look at scaling a monster you note that there a part of the article where they mention how to deal with changing armor (and I'm of the opinion that it's far too fiddly and the worst part of the process). What we can take from this is that Armor is considered with all the MM monsters. The designers most likely choose armor appropriate to each monster's level/role, however, and thus everything should be good.

And I agree completely with Lizard. Armor is a visual clue to your players on how to deal with monsters. Unless there's a good reason (doubt a stone golem really has much to gain from a few flimsy iron plates) the tough soldier types should be grid with heavy armor as a way to put a bullseye on their back for the rogue's reflex defnese powers.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20080418a

 

[hong]

As a side note for those who view armor as "purely cosmetic", consider the storytelling/narrative value. Armor is supposed to tell you something meaningful about your opponent. Barring unusual, very DM-driven circumstance, the guy wearing ten tons of spiked plate should be hard to hit with swords, easier to hit with spells or attacks against defenses other than armor. While you CAN just say, "Oh, his armor and reflex defense is the same, he's just wearing plate 'cause it's cool", doing so is "cheating" the player in a way -- it's giving him information about narrative expectations which isn't valid, and that's not something you want to do casually or without context.

The correct narrative expectation to draw from "this guy is wearing ten tons of spiked armor" is "he gets the slow-motion zoom into focus", not "he's hard to hit".