D&D 5E Drawbacks to Increasing Monster AC Across the Board?

[tetrasodium]

Peoiple make a lot of assumptions and double down on the math being wrong.

Its not hard to get that 65% up to around 85% via advantage for example. Then people here argue about it when you have used a class feature or Faerie Fire or whatever to achieve it.

Its an internet assumption that shouldn't be and its an old one as well. 2014 material has magic items in it for exampe in all the printed adventures. Average AC is 14.5 in 2014. High ACs are rare.

I wouldn't be taking 65% as gospel. Ive done official products with AC 5-10 being used so your hit rate is more like 75-95%.

It throws off a lot of assumptions you lot are making and preaching based on nothing at all as far as I can see. From Hoard of the Dragon Queen onwards......

Conspiracy theories?

I reading a lot of implied and hypothetical reasons why the data represented in the math could be something not representative of the obvious result rather being used for any assumptions. What I'm not reading is any reason supporting such a claim about the obvious math with a new interpretation or an alternative take.

Why ask where the 65% comes from and then dismiss it with this kind of thing?

 

[Zardnaar]

Conspiracy theories?

I reading a lot of implied and hypothetical reasons why the data represented in the math could be something not representative of the obvious result rather being used for any assumptions. What I'm not reading is any reason supporting such a claim about the obvious math with a new interpretation or an alternative take.

Why ask where the 65% comes from and then dismiss it with this kind of thing?

Because it's not grounded in anything g concrete.
You have peopke claiming magic items don't belong in the fane because of it.

It's not in official product, tge numbers are essentially made up based at best on a comment years ago.

ACs fairly low in 5.0 its what made the -5/+10 feats so good.
. Peopke are treating it as gospel.

 

[Flights of Fancy]

Because it's not grounded in anything g concrete.

It's grounded in the average AC vs. the expected attack bonus over the course of the game.

Tier 1, AC 13 vs. +5
Tier 2, AC 15 vs. +7
Tier 3, AC 17 vs. +9
Tier 4, AC 19 vs. +11

In each case the number needed to hit is 8 or better, or 65%.

Yes, there is some varaiance, but this is the average over all.

You have peopke claiming magic items don't belong in the fane because of it.

Magic items skew the percentages higher, as do spells and gaining advantage, but 65% is the baseline.

It's not in official product, tge numbers are essentially made up based at best on a comment years ago.

No, the numbers are derived from the values of creature ACs, ability score modifiers, and proficiency bonuses.

ACs fairly low in 5.0 its what made the -5/+10 feats so good.

No, gaining advantage to offset the -5 penalty is what makes it so good. When AC is below the tier average, it is just that much better. When AC is above the tier average, it is expectedly worse.

. Peopke are treating it as gospel.

It's what the numbers show is the baseline, whether intentional or not. In practice it can certainly be much higher because most groups do use magical items, spells, etc.

Which is why to address the OP, depending on if you are in a group which uses magic items, spells, etc. to boost attacks, increasing AC just gets you back to the original baseline.