Class defense bonus

[ARandomGod]

Have the bonus equal the opposite of your BAB. That will stop your problems right there.

That was exactly what I was thinking....

Or maybe not. He might mean have your "bonus" be a negative that's applied to your AC, equal to your BAB. So that higher level people become easier to hit?

Whereas I was thinking have a BAB progression opposite of the armor progression, so that people with "good" BAB get "poor" AC progression, etcetera.

Of course, I'm not actually espousing this idea... I've yet to see a class AC progression that I've liked.

Also, generally speaking, why wouldn't the mage in question just take his first level as fighter if he wanted to have a level of fighter? If it's because he's already built, that's a poor reason. He should get a respec in that case. That should be the case anytime the rules are altered. Just make an Eldritch Knight! ^_^

 

[ARandomGod]

This seems to work quite well, but there are a few holes. First and foremost is that this causes AC to increase linearly when under the normal rules it does not. This, however, is not that important. Certain classes are aided more than others. The barbarian will be aided more than the monk. In fact, the monk is sort of screwed because they rely heavily on equipment. This also tends to favor two-handed fighting because the bonus for a shield never increases beyond 2 (no magic). Finally, you'll see a majority of your wizards going Eldritch Knight because that is a really powerful combo.


All in all though the pros outweigh the cons many times over in my opinion, and I've seen it used to good effect several times.

I have to agree, AC shouldn't increase linearly. The monk would need a higher AC bonus built into his class... and people would start to really disfavor the shield.

You could make spot changes to help this. Actually give the monk a bonus AC progression based on wisdom (increase his monk AC progression). That will clear that right up. Use DR for armor, and a deflection effect for a shield (meaning have armor and shield not grant AC at all, armor is damage reduction, and a shield grant either 10% or 20% miss chance. Maybe 10 for a buckler, 15 for a normal shield, and 20 for a tower shield, tower shields can still be used for total cover instead...)

I don't know if that would work, but it's an idea to play with.

 

[ARandomGod]

This seems to work quite well, but there are a few holes.

Another issue that strikes me right away is touch attacks. Mages get low BAB, making them poor in physical combat, but they are generally given touch attack spells, to compensate for their low BAB when making magical attacks, at which they're supposed to excell...

Perhaps granting full BAB for magical attacks listed as "touch attacks"?

 

[SWAT]

Well thanks for all the replies. Here are my thoughts...

I really have never seen any class as requiring more magical protections than others, so all this talk of monks surprises me. I've always seen things as "your equipment is worth this much, focus it on whatever you want." Anyway, I plan on running a low-magic-item game, not a no-magic-item game. I can still see 20th level characters having 100k in equipment.
So this might ease the issues you mention with monks and shields.

As for touch attacks, I'm thinking the exact opposite. What usually gets calculated into a touch attack AC? Dex, obviously. Maybe some deflection from a ring of protection, maybe a few active spells. Not that much. It seems that adding 1/2 BAB will, on average, increase touch attack ACs, rendering touch attacks slightly less useful, but probably not enough to be significant.

And my problem with the Wizard/Fighter multiclass with UA is that it seems to me a Wizard giving up one spellcasting level for everything a first Fighter level gives AND getting an almost constant +4 to AC is unbalanced. It's just a little too good not to do. And I can see every one of my players playing Wizards/Sorcerers/Psions doing it. Which means it's definitely unbalanced, because when all my players want the same thing, it's a sure sign something is wrong.

 

[nothing to see here]

Best application I've seen of class defence bonus was Green Ronin's Advanced Gamemaster's Guide which gave out class 'dodge' bonuses that progressed at a more relaxed rate than BAB's. Still the bonuses added up over time (i.e. a 10th level ranger would get a +4 dodge bonus)...yet the big balancing factor was that this dodge bonus would stack with your DEX bonus for the purposes of being flat footed, maximum DEX bonus from armour etc.

Simple system -- great system.

 

[ARandomGod]

I really have never seen any class as requiring more magical protections than others, so all this talk of monks surprises me. I've always seen things as "your equipment is worth this much, focus it on whatever you want." Anyway, I plan on running a low-magic-item game, not a no-magic-item game. I can still see 20th level characters having 100k in equipment.
So this might ease the issues you mention with monks and shields.

Monks need more because ALL their armor must be magical, they are denied access to any non-magical armor.

As for touch attacks, I'm thinking the exact opposite. What usually gets calculated into a touch attack AC? Dex, obviously. Maybe some deflection from a ring of protection, maybe a few active spells. Not that much. It seems that adding 1/2 BAB will, on average, increase touch attack ACs, rendering touch attacks slightly less useful, but probably not enough to be significant.

Other than that last line, I'm not sure what you're saying is the opposite of my point. Yes, the proposed rule would, on average, increase touch attack AC's. Not that much? Perhaps. But how much BAB does a wizard get? Correct! Not that much! To compensate for this their magical attacks are generally touch attacks, which are pretty easy to hit (and wizards still do miss)... to increase their attack ability. If you increase it 'not that much', it's proportionally a lot to a magic user, and I contend that they would need a compensatory increase in their ability to hit with a touch attack.

You could, of course, simply say that magical touch attacks ignore the class AC bonus. If the increase was not enough to be concerned about, then removing it is equally inconsequential. On the other hand, if removing it WOULD have a big effect, then that effect is clearly needed.

 

[Sravoff]

The other option for magical to9uch attacks is to make them better at directing magic. Say they get the clerics bab when dealing with directing magic

just a thought

I already use ranged touch attacks for wizards using their int mod instead of their dex mod. Just makes more sense that way. Speciallty when you end up fighting things with ridiculous dex mods.

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=137918
^-My untested idea for class ac bonus
-Sravoff