Forget the fighter for the moment as they would require a feat to gain Plate armor but instead concider the Paladin who is proficient with all armor. As it stands right now, you have a choice between +1 speed (SAS) or +1 Armor (PAS), with your adding +1 speed to PAS, why would any paladin ever take scale?
Armor Specialization (Plate)
- Thread starter Lord Pendragon
- Start date
CapnZapp
Legend
I don't understand the speed comments - both Scale and Plate carries a -1 penalty to Speed, right? (Removing this penalty for either would be far too good, btw).
I think the current set-up is fine. I think it's hard to give Plate Prof. anything without that choice immediately becoming clearly superior to Scale.
I think the current set-up is fine. I think it's hard to give Plate Prof. anything without that choice immediately becoming clearly superior to Scale.
Lord Pendragon
First Post
Along with +1 to AC, [Armor Specialization (Scale)] also removes the -1 speed penalty. The plate version does not.
In a vacuum, I argue that the plate feat is significantly weaker than the scale feat. Adding something to the plate feat would make them equal. Others have argued (quite effectively, IMO) that practically speaking, without some kind of additional benefit, a +1 on top of plate is actually stronger than a +1 on top of a weaker armor, so while plate's "extra" may be hidden in the math, it is nevertheless present.
This is an interesting point. My viewpoint in this discussion assumes the ranger as the main point of reference, as that's what I'm dealing with in my game. A ranger spends 3-4 feats to boost armor up to plate. And it seems strange to me that a character making that kind of investment should be denied the little rider bonus that, say, a mage bumping up to chain would enjoy.Drakhar said:
However, I agree that for the paladin, adding anything to the plate feat does indeed make the issue a non-choice.
Last edited:
frankthedm
First Post
I say giving diminishing returns on maximizing anything is a good thing. If you insist on bringing your AC to the max, the last few steps cover the least distance. If you have to have the AC of plate ASAP, then you get less out of taking the Armor Specialization (Plate) feat. If instead you stick with scale, you are one feat ahead and later can take the Armor Specialization (scale).
Think of it like a bartender watering down your drinks the more you order when you have had too much.
4E is rigged to keep PCs from getting unhittable, making plate inefficient for what you have to put into it is one of those ways.
Think of it like a bartender watering down your drinks the more you order when you have had too much.
4E is rigged to keep PCs from getting unhittable, making plate inefficient for what you have to put into it is one of those ways.
Last edited:
Goumindong
First Post
Kinda and kinda not. You actually run into diminishing returns without looking at your opportunity cost.
Consider for a moment that a defenders job is basically to absorb attacks. The more attacks he absorbs the better. But, each day, there are only so many attacks that he can absorb. Once you get over this, being able to absorb more attacks doesn't make much of a difference to how good you are.
For instance going from enemies hitting you on a 19 to a 20 more than doubles the number of attacks you can absorb each day. This is more than the difference between 18 and 19. But if you only needed to get enemies to a 17 in order to outstrip the number of attacks you're likely to get in a day, then the extra AC above that isn't doing much.
Dice4Hire
First Post
That is my experience also. If you are looking for AC, you take what you can get.
This is an assumption on your part. The defenders job is to slow up enemies in order to give the rest of the party time to deal with the threat. Not to just stand there and take damage. One could argue that a BRV Fighter's job is to absorb attacks, but not most other defenders. They are not given the proper tools for that.
A Mark, for example, does not just influence enemies to attack the defender. It also penalizes the enemy for attacking anyone else. In fact, very few defender abilities FORCE the enemy to attack the defender.
Goumindong
First Post
:roll:
The defender makes it better to attack him than others. He then gets attacked. The amount of attacks he can take per day is basically his rating as the amount of his job he can do.
At some point even though the amount of job he an do is increasing at an increasing marginal rate the limits of what he needs to achieve make those margins lower than they would be otherwise.
It doesn't matter what you call it.
The defender makes it better to attack him than others. He then gets attacked. The amount of attacks he can take per day is basically his rating as the amount of his job he can do.
At some point even though the amount of job he an do is increasing at an increasing marginal rate the limits of what he needs to achieve make those margins lower than they would be otherwise.
It doesn't matter what you call it.
Which is why he should want the best possible protection.
When we had a Fighter in our group, we always gave him the best defensive magical items first. Other PCs got his hand me downs.
The concept of not doing so, just to encourage enemies to attack him more often is silly.
Not in this game system. Foes never need an 18 or 19 or better to hit the Defender as per your example.
If one dropped the margins so that he never took damage, it would be a good thing for the party. One less PC to heal. One less PC to have his action economy decreased due to conditions.
Obviously, the defender never getting hit will never happen. But, the best defense for the defender should be a very high priority goal for the party, just like the best to hit for the striker should be a very high priority goal.
Similar Threads
