Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6043144" data-attributes="member: 6681948">I'd say if items are readily available and the character is prepared to focus most or all resources on AC.  I can't speak to 4th Ed, but a character that's really tough to hit always seemed pretty scarce in 3/3.5.  Of course, there's still a lot of hit points under that AC.I think this is an aspect of gear reliance in general.  The PC's need their wealth by level equipment allotment to be competitive with the monsters' rising AC's and BAB's.  With those added bonuses, they are going to be superior to an equal level NPC who doesn't get that same access to gear.  If all characters, PC and NPC, were reliant primarily or exclusively on inherent bonuses, the PC's and NPC's would be much more comparable without gear.The power curve in 3.0/3.5 and Pathfinder is such that lower level characters are outpowered pretty quickly.  Two L4 characters aren't much of a threat to a L8 character.  The AC focus exacerbates it - the inability to hit is pretty obvious in combat.  If that fighter were instead focused on damage per round, I suspect those L3 warriors wouldn't be a lot better off.  They'd just get the occasional hit on the fighter, scratching him a bit before he takes them down - and he'd take them down quite a bit faster.Ultimately, if this guy sinks such a significant portion of his character resources into AC, it seems like he SHOULD be very hard to hit.  3rd level NPC classes should have a tough time in that regard.Rather than looking for ways to challenge him in his area of strength, I think challenges that highlight he also has weaknesses are important.  @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=91954" target="_blank">Friend of the Dork</a>, you've mentioned the player gets frustrated when his character's weaknesses are targeted, instead of having opponents try, and fail, to attack his strengths.  A discussion with the player, or the group as a whole, might be in order.  I think the player needs to understand that he is hyper-specialized, and that the game will include a variety of challenges, some that his hyper-specialization may make him very effective at, but also others which will focus on his weaknesses rather than his strengths.  There's nothing wrong with extending the option of revising his character to be more balanced - less AC in exchange for more effectiveness in other areas -  which it seems would reduce your frustrations and, presumably, would reduce his when areas his hyperspecialization is less effective against come up - as they should, with reasonable frequency.  If the playuer has expressed frustration when his character's weak points are targeted, it's worth pointing that out.He should certainly have his opportunities to shine, but no more so than any of the other characters.  Sometimes, being well nigh unhittable by the mooks could and should be an ability that wins the day.  But not every time.  Having a variety of character strengths and weaknesses necessitates a team, and the game should focus on a team, not one superbuild and his amazing friends/comic relief.I'd be guided<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=91954" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=91954</a> by two things.  First, is the player reacting negatively when the enemy exploits his weaknesses instead of breaking against his specialized strength?  If so, then the player needs to consider a better balanced character.  Second, are the other players frustrated that his character seems overly effective/powerful?  If so, then there is a greater need to focus on their strengths and/or perhaps the group needs to consider rebuilds to be more or less equally optimized (even if optimized for different challenges) so everyone gets their turn to shine.If neither of these are a problem, then that leaves a GM issue - for some reason, you can't get past the fact that this character is highly effective against mooks.  In the worst case, that may mean the character needs to change to fit the campaign, but it seems like giving him his chance to shine against the mooks is no worse than giving the other characters their opportunities to shine in their specialties.  Mooks, serious threats, enemy conspiracies, BBEG's and all other adversaries ultimately exist for the purpose of losing to the PC's, so having the PC's be effective against them doesn't strike me as a major flaw.</blockquote>

Verification