Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Falling Icicle" data-source="post: 6208545" data-attributes="member: 17077">We know that player ability scores cap at 20, at least without magic, and monster ability scores cap at 30. A character or creature gets at most a +6 proficiency bonus from its level/HD, due to bounded accuracy. So even though they will no doubt be making some improvements to the monsters, we know what kind of number ranges we're dealing with as far as attack bonuses are concerned.It's possible right now, with just the meager list of magic items we have in the packet, to have an AC approaching 30 (+3 full plate: 21, +1 mountain dwarf, +2 shield, +1 ring of protection, +3 defending weapon, +1 ioun stone). That's an AC of 29, and I'm not even assuming a +X magic shield, since we aren't entirely sure those will exist. If they do, that can potentially add another +1 or even more. I'm also assuming only one ring of protection and one ioun stone, but there's technically nothing in the rules preventing you from having more than one of those. The ring of protection requires attunement, but this example character could still have 2 such rings, as the only other item he has that requires attunement is the defending weapon. And then there's buffing spells, which can add even more. Throw in a barkskin or haste spell, and this character has an AC of 31. The mightiest monster in the game, Asmodeus, has an attack bonus of +10. And that's pretty much what you'd expect from a level 20 monster, given the math they're using and bounded accuracy. An AC of 30+ means even Asmodeus can only hit you on a roll of 20. So I can confidently say that magic item stacking as it is currently written breaks the game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Falling Icicle, post: 6208545, member: 17077"] We know that player ability scores cap at 20, at least without magic, and monster ability scores cap at 30. A character or creature gets at most a +6 proficiency bonus from its level/HD, due to bounded accuracy. So even though they will no doubt be making some improvements to the monsters, we know what kind of number ranges we're dealing with as far as attack bonuses are concerned. It's possible right now, with just the meager list of magic items we have in the packet, to have an AC approaching 30 (+3 full plate: 21, +1 mountain dwarf, +2 shield, +1 ring of protection, +3 defending weapon, +1 ioun stone). That's an AC of 29, and I'm not even assuming a +X magic shield, since we aren't entirely sure those will exist. If they do, that can potentially add another +1 or even more. I'm also assuming only one ring of protection and one ioun stone, but there's technically nothing in the rules preventing you from having more than one of those. The ring of protection requires attunement, but this example character could still have 2 such rings, as the only other item he has that requires attunement is the defending weapon. And then there's buffing spells, which can add even more. Throw in a barkskin or haste spell, and this character has an AC of 31. The mightiest monster in the game, Asmodeus, has an attack bonus of +10. And that's pretty much what you'd expect from a level 20 monster, given the math they're using and bounded accuracy. An AC of 30+ means even Asmodeus can only hit you on a roll of 20. So I can confidently say that magic item stacking as it is currently written breaks the game. [/QUOTE]

Verification