Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 5682358" data-attributes="member: 2011">I don't consider dropping half of the powers of a class and forcing a player to bump up a secondary ability score like Int or Dex instead, just so that he doesn't get wiped out in a single round, to be viable.Every class should be able to easily access any of the powers of that class without having to resort to nerfing their AC or being forced to purchase one or more specific feats to do so.You might want to be forced to bump up your Dex or Int significantly, and limit your PC Warlock to only Cha powers or only Con powers, but any class that doesn't get to use either no ability score or a primary ability score towards AC is bad game design.Being forced to use a secondary or tertiary ability score for AC IS a problem with the system because the player doesn't really get a choice and is pretty much forced to spend precious point buy points on AC.You don't consider a starting first level Wizard or Psion at AC 14 to be problematic when a Paladin is walking around with AC 20? That's a 6 AC delta in a D20 system on a defense that gets attacked over half of the time.A mere 2 NPCs attacking the first level Psion at AC 14 (+6 to hit for same level foes) knocks the Psion unconscious ~40% of the time in a single round. For the 20 AC Paladin to get knocked unconscious in a single round ~40% of the time, it takes closer to 6 foes attacking him in a single round.2 foes. That's not a lot of enemies and one round is not a lot of time. And the odds go up if the foes are higher level.Just 2 artilleries firing in round one and there's a good chance that the PC Psion is down before his initiative might have even come up.People sometimes complain about the lowest NAD stat problem that takes 27 levels to illustrate an additional 4 delta on a D20 on a defense that only gets attacked one time in 6. The lowest AC problem shows up at level one, that defense gets attacked at least half of the time, and does in reality create a feat tax for many players of the low AC PCs, but nobody notices that problem.And bumping AC 14 to AC 16 isn't exactly making the AC unassailable. It's barely bringing it up to an acceptable level (where 3 attacking foes are typically needed to get to the ~40% chance of taking the PC Psion out in a single round). Bottom line: it's a feat tax to merely get to a lousy AC. PS. I have run two PBP PCs that did not boost their AC, one was a hybrid swordmage|wizard and another was a sorcerer. So, it is doable, but I have never ever seen anyone else do it. Ever. It's fairly rare. We should post a poll. There's a difference with not getting the rider to the power and the power not being usable at all.Again, there is a difference between being able to take any power out of the box without spending a feat to do so, and being required to spend a feat to do so. That's called a feat tax for a given build, merely to take one of their own class powers.If one has to take a specific feat to acquire a power, it's usually called multiclassing.With regard to a Paladin, yeah, having a low Wisdom can impact Lay on Hands. But there are 7 races that can do either 18 Str 18 Cha 14 Wis, or 18 Str 16 Cha 16 Wis, or 16 Str 18 Cha 16 Wis. Using Lay on Hands 2 or 3 times per day and still being able to use both Str and Cha powers is doable without spending a single feat. Like you say, it was your player's choice to make it less then 2 or 3 times per day.All of the time??? I'll bet you can't do descend a rope with one hand. I know I cannot. It's really hard to descend down a rope from an elevated surface with two hands, let alone one hand (not rappel, descend without rappeling gear). I'll bet real money that you cannot do that with 100 pounds of armor and gear on. Your new nickname would be Doctor Splat. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />It's just a different set of rules. Depending on campaign, it could be extremely rare to sleep out in a dangerous setting.You're acting as if the house rule is chopping the arm of a defender off.Sometimes losing a surge? Oooh. That's broken. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />You call 5,000 feet high altitude?I would call 10,000+ feet high altitude and 20,000+ feet extreme altitude.5,000 feet isn't even a mountain. People exert themselves fairly easy at 5,000 feet all of the time. I wouldn't put an Environmental check in for that low of an altitude.What I find really funny is that you are arguing that low AC isn't a problem or a feat tax for Psions or Wizards, but that low AC once in a blue moon for a defender who isn't wearing his armor is a catastrophe.Those poor heavy armor PCs. They basically get their AC for free, do not have to assign ability scores for it, and they are being picked on here in this thread. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing    :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" />There are always tradeoffs, but a player shouldn't have to make a tradeoff between anything and AC considering that AC is attacked more often in the game system than all of the other defenses combined. Which, btw, nearly all PCs have at least one and often two good NADs.Not every PC has good AC. Some PCs are screwed in this regard.Not all PCs have good AC and it's because AC is not always based on primary ability score or given for free without using an ability score.No. They just need a good skill or the Durable feat. Either of these can be acquired with a feat (and no feat at all if the skill is just taken). With the house rule, that feat could then be trained out later on.You sure are blowing up a mountain out of a molehill.Such a PC would need either a skill or a feat to avoid the issue, but only when in the given set of circumstances and not all of the time? That's unbalanced?Not in Epic. Not with the revised house rule.Our group probably trusts our DMs more than that.It's a problem if the DM has his NPCs play intelligently and attack the low AC PCs?Seriously?It's a major balance problem if a PC in heavy armor sometimes loses a healing surge or two once in a great while because of an environmental condition?Seriously?You and I have different ideas of the definition of balance.</blockquote>

Verification