Balance Debate Question: +1 Dodge to One Target vs +1 Armour vs all

[Rystil Arden]

Hi--this is a simple poll, but make sure to read both choices carefully:

If you had to choose one of these bonuses as more powerful than the other (assuming all else is equal) which would you choose as most effective?

1) +1 Dodge Bonus against One Target--this is like the Dodge feat. Each round you pick one target and get a +1 Dodge Bonus to AC against the target. It applies to touch AC but not flat-footed

2) +1 additional Armour Bonus against all targets--this option stacks with all normal Armour Bonuses. It applies to all opponents. It affects flat-footed AC but not Touch AC

 

[Deset Gled]

I would choose #2 just because I hate keeping track of the Dodge target. Power and mechanics don't matter if I don't remember to apply the bonus.

 

[Rystil Arden]

I would choose #2 just because I hate keeping track of the Dodge target. Power and mechanics don't matter if I don't remember to apply the bonus.

Thanks and that is good to know for the purpose behind this poll. However, as far as the poll itself goes, for future posters, if you honestly and truly think that convenience is the only difference between the two and that they are otherwise equal in power and utility for a character (and it isn't clear you would pick that anyway, I guess Deset ), you should choose option 3

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

Dodge Bonus works against only one person, but stacks with other dodge bonuses and all other bonuses, but is lost flat footed.

If that armor bonus, as you say, stacks with your bonus from armor ... it then applies to all attackers all the time other than touch.

Just the "all attackers" or "one attacker" is what does it. That you can then note it and forget it is gravy.

So much gravy, though, that I houserule Dodge in all of my games to just always apply vs. all attackers. Because I think a +1 vs 1 bonus slows the game down more than it adds lovin'.

--fje

 

[IcyCool]

Option 3 is worded in such a way as to make me think that if I voted for it, that means I don't understand the difference between Touch AC and Regular AC. However, since I'm fairly certain I know what you intended (i.e. the two are equivalent, not "exactly equal"), I voted option 3. Could you change the wording for option three to read, "They are equivalent, neither has an edge over the other."?

If my understanding of option 3 isn't correct, then chalk me up as an idiot in your book.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Much of this is situational.

If you are fighting one opponent at a time, #1 is more useful because you are getting that AC against everyone anyway and in most cases touch is more likely to come up more often than flat-footed.

But, if you are fighting more than one opponent #2 is more powerful because you get the AC against all and touch vs. flatfooted is not nearly as significant as bonus against all.

So, I could have legitimately voted for 1 or 2, but not 3. In my understanding, they are not equal. So I had to make a few assumptions.

Tactically, it is often possible to work together so that a person really only need worry about 1 enemy at a time. This is ce3rtainly not always possible, but often possible. Thus, I went with touch AC over flatfooted AC and voted for #1.

Having said that, if I was in a campaign where the DM constantly threw many lower level opponents at me I'd prefer #2. So ...

I hope this helps in some sort of slightly meaningful way. :\

 

[Rystil Arden]

Option 3 is worded in such a way as to make me think that if I voted for it, that means I don't understand the difference between Touch AC and Regular AC. However, since I'm fairly certain I know what you intended (i.e. the two are equivalent, not "exactly equal"), I voted option 3. Could you change the wording for option three to read, "They are equivalent, neither has an edge over the other."?

If my understanding of option 3 isn't correct, then chalk me up as an idiot in your book.

You're right about Option 3. I can't change it though. Exactly equal means that neither has an edge, as I said at the end of that to try to disambiguate.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Much of this is situational.

If you are fighting one opponent at a time, #1 is more useful because you are getting that AC against everyone anyway and in most cases touch is more likely to come up more often than flat-footed.

But, if you are fighting more than one opponent #2 is more powerful because you get the AC against all and touch vs. flatfooted is not nearly as significant as bonus against all.

So, I could have legitimately voted for 1 or 2, but not 3. In my understanding, they are not equal. So I had to make a few assumptions.

Tactically, it is often possible to work together so that a person really only need worry about 1 enemy at a time. This is ce3rtainly not always possible, but often possible. Thus, I went with touch AC over flatfooted AC and voted for #1.

Having said that, if I was in a campaign where the DM constantly threw many lower level opponents at me I'd prefer #2. So ...

I hope this helps in some sort of slightly meaningful way. :\

I would contend that the enemy is at least not being played like I see PCs played if there are multiple opponents and they don't focus-fire.

IcyCool is correct--they are clearly not situationally equivalent. The question is which has the edge overall.

 

[isoChron]

We play it as dodge bonus vs. all enemies. The additional bookkeeping for normal dodge is just so annoying ... bah. It has never been overpowered in our games.
So I voted for #2 because it's easier to get the bonus and don't forget it in the course of action.

 

[Thanee]

#2

Dodge is only ok, because it's also a prerequisite for some other nice feats.

Bye
Thanee