Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Help: Gap between AC and defenses seems too large.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="eamon" data-source="post: 5575818" data-attributes="member: 51942"><p>If you use the auto-build feature in the character builder, you'll generally have such a defense score. If you follow the building advice in the books (i.e. mentioning primary and secondary scores), you'll quite likely arrive at such a score. In fact, if you crunch the numbers, you'll find it's probably numerically the strongest option to have a weakness, though that depends on how you define "strongest" and what it is you look for in a character. Some classes have aligned primary+secondary stats, making it prohibitively expensive to avoid such low nads. I wouldn't expect everyone to have a 13 by fourth level, but I'd expect every party to have one. Cautious players that prefer to have all bases covered might well choose a higher tertiary stat; the risk-takers will probably prefer to have a more powerful strengths at the cost of more pronounced weaknesses. Also, note that in the computation to arrive at 17 as the mean number in the OP's scenario, I (optimistically) assumed a defense-focused build, with a stat distribution for maximized defenses. All in all, it doesn't actually help very much since the extra point-buy points reduce the primary or secondary score which also affects a NAD.</p><p></p><p>The spread of defenses in 4e is rather narrow. For defenders, you'll find that most defenders (as their name implies) have good defenses. On this side of the fence that implies a <em>minimum</em> of AC 22 - you'd have to actively try to get lower than this. The other type of defender prefers offense to defense; such a defender forgoes a shield for greater offense. The only exception to this rule I can think of is the warden; and this is an unusual class in that it has more hitpoints than any other class in the game, at the cost of lower-than-normal defenses (and even they manage AC21 virtually automatically, and AC22 if they want to, assuming a build with a shield). If you look at the various defenders in the game, you'll find that the defensive defenders (more common) all have scale mail+heavy shield proficiency or better, and that the corresponding offensive build loses about 2AC.</p><p></p><p>A Swordmage starting with a 17 or 18 primary stat and the Improved Swordmage Warding or Hide Armor proficiency feats has AC24 (and I'd expect pretty much every swordmage to get either feat eventually). That's without magic items; which in most games would enter play and could contribute to AC. You could search the charop boards, but I'd bet you'll find builds exceeding 24AC with level-appropriate gear. E.g. the high-AC rogue might trivially have a Mage's Parrying dagger for a very easy +1AC (coupled with feats for potentially more).</p><p></p><p>So you'd expect only a few characters in a game to have this kind of AC (not everyone plays a defender or invests feats and other choices to reach defender-like AC), but you'd expect most parties to have such characters; unless the only defender chooses to focus on offense, and no other PC chooses to focus on defense.</p><p></p><p>The OP's distribution is again entirely normal, and the value of 22AC isn't particularly high - it's bog-standard defender AC.</p><p></p><p><em><strong>Edited to add:</strong></em> It's also worth noting that AC's just don't vary that much. So 23 is high yet 22 is normal for a defender; that's because in 4e these things hardly diverge.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="eamon, post: 5575818, member: 51942"] If you use the auto-build feature in the character builder, you'll generally have such a defense score. If you follow the building advice in the books (i.e. mentioning primary and secondary scores), you'll quite likely arrive at such a score. In fact, if you crunch the numbers, you'll find it's probably numerically the strongest option to have a weakness, though that depends on how you define "strongest" and what it is you look for in a character. Some classes have aligned primary+secondary stats, making it prohibitively expensive to avoid such low nads. I wouldn't expect everyone to have a 13 by fourth level, but I'd expect every party to have one. Cautious players that prefer to have all bases covered might well choose a higher tertiary stat; the risk-takers will probably prefer to have a more powerful strengths at the cost of more pronounced weaknesses. Also, note that in the computation to arrive at 17 as the mean number in the OP's scenario, I (optimistically) assumed a defense-focused build, with a stat distribution for maximized defenses. All in all, it doesn't actually help very much since the extra point-buy points reduce the primary or secondary score which also affects a NAD. The spread of defenses in 4e is rather narrow. For defenders, you'll find that most defenders (as their name implies) have good defenses. On this side of the fence that implies a [I]minimum[/I] of AC 22 - you'd have to actively try to get lower than this. The other type of defender prefers offense to defense; such a defender forgoes a shield for greater offense. The only exception to this rule I can think of is the warden; and this is an unusual class in that it has more hitpoints than any other class in the game, at the cost of lower-than-normal defenses (and even they manage AC21 virtually automatically, and AC22 if they want to, assuming a build with a shield). If you look at the various defenders in the game, you'll find that the defensive defenders (more common) all have scale mail+heavy shield proficiency or better, and that the corresponding offensive build loses about 2AC. A Swordmage starting with a 17 or 18 primary stat and the Improved Swordmage Warding or Hide Armor proficiency feats has AC24 (and I'd expect pretty much every swordmage to get either feat eventually). That's without magic items; which in most games would enter play and could contribute to AC. You could search the charop boards, but I'd bet you'll find builds exceeding 24AC with level-appropriate gear. E.g. the high-AC rogue might trivially have a Mage's Parrying dagger for a very easy +1AC (coupled with feats for potentially more). So you'd expect only a few characters in a game to have this kind of AC (not everyone plays a defender or invests feats and other choices to reach defender-like AC), but you'd expect most parties to have such characters; unless the only defender chooses to focus on offense, and no other PC chooses to focus on defense. The OP's distribution is again entirely normal, and the value of 22AC isn't particularly high - it's bog-standard defender AC. [I][B]Edited to add:[/B][/I] It's also worth noting that AC's just don't vary that much. So 23 is high yet 22 is normal for a defender; that's because in 4e these things hardly diverge. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Help: Gap between AC and defenses seems too large.
Top