High AC normal?

[avin]

Well, my first PF game is gonna be november 26 after a while GMing GURPS and 4E.

I'm a bit rusty on 3.5-like and PF is completely new to me.

Players sent their character sheets and I was surprised seeing a lv 16 warrior (Hobgoblin) with a 42 AC: +14 armor (+5 Armor Spikes Mithral Full Plate), +7 shield (+5 Arrow Catching, Shield Spikes Mithral Shield,
Heavy Steel,), +5 dex, +3 natural armor, +3 deflect.

Haven't checked magic items yet but is it something I should expect on PF? o0

 

[Epametheus]

That's actually pretty reasonable, and one of the perks of actually being a fighter (his class lets him get more dex bonus to AC than the normal cap imposed by his armor).

He's also throwing a lot of his resources into his AC. His offensive ability and his saving throws probably aren't nearly as impressive, and most folks in the party won't be in his league for AC.

I assume this will get kicked over to the Pathfinder forum eventually.

 

[KiloGex]

This is why I prefer to play in low-magic settings, where the magic items are limited. IMO a PC should not have an AC as high as a solo of the same level - If a character can go toe-to-toe with an equal CR than there is something off.

 

[Nebten]

What you are listing is roughly 108520gp (ring of protection +3, amulet of natural armor +3 included). If you are starting off at 16th level, that's less then half of what they recommend gold wise (315,000 gp)

Better questions would be, why start off at level 16 if this is your first time playing Pathfinder?

 

[thundershot]

Better questions would be, why start off at level 16 if this is your first time playing Pathfinder?

That's what I was going to ask. You miss out on all the great character moments in the first few levels... Where they get their butts handed to them by orcs and learn together certain things that they don't want to deal with. (my Kingmaker party HATES wild boars because they nearly took them out several times in the early levels).



Chris

 

[KiloGex]

Completely agree Nebten and thundershot - Especially since Pathfinder as some great campaigns ranging the gambit of levels, even starting them at 1 and running all the way to 20. No better way to experience a game than to run through the entire thing.

 

[avin]

Better questions would be, why start off at level 16 if this is your first time playing Pathfinder?

First Pathfinder, but I've DMed 3.0 since start and 3.5 until 4E hits the shelves, so I'll be fine, I like the challenge

I just didn't remember AC 42 on my games. I'm probably rusty or somewhat spoiled with 4E's "balance". That Fighter is probably gonna be tough against melee foes but will have a hard time against a spellcaster.

But it's gonna be fun. PF is not too different from 3.5 and I had a lot of fun on 3.5 until I burned out

 

[avin]

Completely agree Nebten and thundershot - Especially since Pathfinder as some great campaigns ranging the gambit of levels, even starting them at 1 and running all the way to 20. No better way to experience a game than to run through the entire thing.

It must be lv 16.

Characters came from an old 3.5 Campaign. They were level 15 when we did stop playing.

 

[Noir le Lotus]

Let's compare the 42 Ac against the attacks of the CR the fighter will meet :

* easy encounter : a Horned Devil (CR 16). Best attack at +26 => only hit on 16+, other attacks need 18+. The fighter's AC will protect him very well against this foe.

* challenging encounter : a Kraken (CR 18). 3 attacks at +26 => only hit on 16+, other attacks need 18+. The fighter is still well protected against attacks but unless he has a ring of FoM, his chances of getting grabbed are important and then things will be more complicated for him.

* hard encounter : Pit Fiend or Balor (CR 20). Best attacks are all above +30, need between 10+ and 12+ to hit him. The fighter will have a hard time but Ac is enough to protect him from PA and will keep him alive for several rounds.

* Necromancer Games module random encounter : Tarrasque (CR 25). Best attack at +37, only need a 5+ to hit. He will be crushed like anyone ...

I didn't take in count dragons, who have usually a better chance to hit for their CR (Ancient Red Dragon will touch him on a 7+ for a CR 19).

As a conclusion, I think we can say that this fighter is a good tank. His AC is high enough to face big foes and last a few rounds. As all tanks, he is almost unhittable by "weaker" monsters but will have other weaknesses (ST, grapple, etc ...).

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

He's going sword and board traditional tank/turtle style, including the full plate. He's trading offense for defense, 42 AC is perfectly reasonable for a tank fighter to have. He could get it higher, still, pretty easily. He has no spellcasting ability at all and not much to speak for in the way of class skills, melee fighting is about all he's good at, so it's only fair that he be very very good at it.

This is why I prefer to play in low-magic settings, where the magic items are limited. IMO a PC should not have an AC as high as a solo of the same level - If a character can go toe-to-toe with an equal CR than there is something off.

No, nothing is off. A FIGHTER should be able to go toe to toe with an equal CR challenge. Chances are, especially with this fighter's build, he'll need help ot kill the thing, but he should absolutely be able to hold his own. Hell, if he were alone against a CR 16 foe, he should have about a 50-50 chance of winning, since another [PC Class 16] is supposedly a CR 16 challenge. Low-magic is just a good way to screw over the noncasters.