Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 6244685" data-attributes="member: 2525">It's 27 AC, but I agree, I think that's not a crazy high cap for AC and the higher level monsters need a bit higher attack bonus.  My guess is they will (or should) make barkskin not stack with armor.  And my guess is the +1 ring of protection benefit to AC should probably not stack with the +1 benefit to AC of the armor.  Possibly the Mountain Dwarf +1 bonus to AC shouldn't stack with the Defense class ability of the Ranger (and Fighter and Paladin).  I am not sure which of these stacking issues will play out that way, but likely the realistic cap is around 25 AC.The funny thing is, that Mountain Dwarf (+1 AC race) Ranger 5 (+1 AC Defense) / Mage 2 (Aura Disadvantage) with just three "normal" magic items (+1 plate armor (19 AC), +1 shield (+3 AC), +1 ring of protection (+1 AC)) casting Barksin (+2 AC) isn't a one-trick pony (total AC 27, Disadvantage).  They devoted two class-choices to AC (Defense and the Mage's Aura), one or two spell slots (Barkskin), and the rest is likely stuff any PC might want.  They have all their mage spells, most of their ranger spells, most of their other ranger and other mage abilities, and they're probably quite effective in dealing damage, in handling non-combat encounters, and in handling exploration.You could also go Mountain Dwarf Paladin 2 (Defense) / Druid 5 (Barkskin, Elemental Mantel spell = Immunity to Fire), with the three magic items, and solo a Red Dragon.  It needs a natural 20 to hit with any of it's attacks, and you're immune to it's breath weapon.  That's a 7th level PC, with no magic items, able to solo a 13th level Red Dragon.</blockquote>

Verification