Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 5682375" data-attributes="member: 2011">Agreed. It's not about having a super high AC, it's about having a decent AC.I don't totally agree with this. Any DM who often plays his monsters as avoiding the defenders because the defenders have too high of an AC is gaming the system.Sure, if a given monster fights the same defender more than once, then that monster might eventually learn that this defender is too hard to hit.But the monsters swinging once (or worse yet, zero times), missing, and then moving on is the DM playing the numbers. This is especially true if the monster is marked or in a defender aura and it just decides to head elsewhere in round one.I do agree that most monsters should generally target foes in lighter or no armor when possible, but I don't agree that the defender can make his AC too high. The monsters shouldn't know (beyond what is obvious like the defender is in plate and shield) and it should take them more than a few rounds to figure it out. And unless they are hit with an extremely weak attack, monsters shouldn't just assume that a heavily armored defender is by definition, a weak attacker.I do agree that defenders should up their MBAs and such, but they shouldn't be auto-ignored, just because they upped their AC.</blockquote>