Masterwork Armour ?
- Thread starter bramadan
- Start date
wayne62682
First Post
As much as I enjoy 4E, I have to say: This. Especially since my DM doesn't realize the game wasn' "done right" and that we need masterwork armor and expertise bonuses, and happily plays the game as though everything is peachy without them (granted the other players can take the Expertise feats, but they don't realize it's needed either because they are only casual gamers and don't read the forums or have D&DI at all) even though our AC is lower than it should be so we get hit a lot more often by creatures.
When I mention that we should have x instead of y because it fixes the math he gets frustrated and goes on a rant about how D&D is exactly the same now as it was back in the old days and all this stuff is just for powergamers. Then he wonders why I post threads on the WotC boards asking how to deal with him when he's putting us up against fights 4 levels higher than us all the time and thinking that he can run published adventures verbatim and let us skip through parts of it but still not change any encounters to compensate for the fact we're lower level!
Off on a tangent but I wish that the published adventures would point out in the text where the PCs should level up, to make it clear that the new adventures take you from one level to the next and are NOT a level range like LFR and the old AD&D mods.
This.
My only real problem with MW armor is that the designers leave the impression that its optional.
Its only as optional as not giving your players higher level weapons is optional...you can but if you want to give them the proper power level you shouldn't.
Personally I would have preferred the bonus had been handled in the level system, not in the armor, and then MW armor could have given other kinds of benefits.
Its only as optional as not giving your players higher level weapons is optional...you can but if you want to give them the proper power level you shouldn't.
Personally I would have preferred the bonus had been handled in the level system, not in the armor, and then MW armor could have given other kinds of benefits.
At 11th, plate mail's going to give a +13 to AC. Even a hide-wearing elven archery ranger isn't matching that.
So, let's eee a show of hands for a revised 4th edition rulebook after less than two years....
Yeah, didn't think so.
He's not supposed to. It's Plate.
In the PHB, it was +11 to AC (+3 magic, +8 Plate), not +13 and only accessible to the Paladin without a feat.
The elven archery ranger in Hide with +3 Hide, +5 Dex, +3 Magic = +11.
At level 1, it was Ranger AC 17, Paladin AC 18.
At level 11, it was Ranger AC 26, Paladin AC 26.
The monsters are +10 to hit, the Ranger is +9 defense and the Paladin is +8 defense in 10 levels.
Do you really think that someone in Hide should be improve in AC compared to someone in plate?
But, the real problem is not level 11. It's mid-Paragon where this becomes real obvious.
At level 15, it was Ranger AC 29, Paladin AC 27. The Ranger keeps climbing. The Paladin keeps falling behind.
14 levels later, the monsters are +14 to hit, the Ranger is +12 defense and the Paladin is +10 defense. What's wrong with this picture?
That was the problem that the heavy armor masterwork math fixes handled in AV and PHBII. With the fix:
14 levels later, the monsters are +14 to hit, the Ranger is +12 defense and the Paladin is +12 defense.
There will always be a slight descrepancy between light and heavy armors because they use two different equations.
Light armor has a +4 boost due to level ability score increases, a +1 boost to Epic ability score gain, and a +2 boost to masterwork = +7.
Heavy armor has a +6 boost to masterwork = +6.
Light armor wins out in the long run anyway.
You are focusing on one level and saying "Heh, Plate gets +13 here". Err, so. Hide gets +11 and Hide started one level lower. Plate gains a whopping 1 AC for levels 11, 12, and 13 (assuming the PC gets magic armor at level 11).
That's not as bad as Hide gaining 1 AC on Plate at levels 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13; and gaining 2 AC on Plate at levels 14 and 15. That's a lot more unbalanced.
That's what was fixed.
AbdulAlhazred
Legend
Eh, I don't really see what the big deal is. Yes, they should have just explained it wasn't optional to have masterwork, but as a game mechanic what's wrong with it?
Even more cool suppose you want to have a light armor campaign. You can just leave out masterwork heavy armor. Granted you may have to restrict yourself to certain fighter builds, but that's kind of sorta part of the point. As long as chain is allowed (maybe it is called a partial armor) then chain loving classes aren't gimped either and it will open up a few extra options.
If its all built into the system, then yeah you will have the same numbers, but no DM control over those numbers except house ruling. Moving more stuff out of the base character rules makes it easier to use different armor tables etc. and lets you control the flavor of the campaign in a simple way.
I'm not sure what the BEST way is, there probably isn't one, but for WotC modularity of the system seems like a good goal. Even if 4e isn't quite right for a generic system at least you can tweak it.
Even more cool suppose you want to have a light armor campaign. You can just leave out masterwork heavy armor. Granted you may have to restrict yourself to certain fighter builds, but that's kind of sorta part of the point. As long as chain is allowed (maybe it is called a partial armor) then chain loving classes aren't gimped either and it will open up a few extra options.
If its all built into the system, then yeah you will have the same numbers, but no DM control over those numbers except house ruling. Moving more stuff out of the base character rules makes it easier to use different armor tables etc. and lets you control the flavor of the campaign in a simple way.
I'm not sure what the BEST way is, there probably isn't one, but for WotC modularity of the system seems like a good goal. Even if 4e isn't quite right for a generic system at least you can tweak it.
kaomera
Explorer
Masterwork armor is the best solution to the problem I've seen. It allows both light and heavy armors to be useful.
I can accept the POV that Masterwork armor is not mandatory by RAW, but I can't actually agree with it. Any suit of armor with an appropriate bonus gets a Masterwork quality for free. To me, not handing out Masterwork armor is like giving the PCs a +3 Sword as an 11th level item, but only allowing them to apply +1 of the Enhancement bonus to attack rolls.
Expertise feats are a thornier issue. If they're available they trump any other options for a lot of players, probably most or all players in many groups. But there's no unanimous agreement that they are needed to fix the math, you can play without them or you can allow them, or you can give them out as a bonus.
The real issue occurs when different players / the DM in a group have different opinions on the matter. D&D tries really hard to be a game that any (random) group can sit down and play, but you're just going to have a better time with a group of people who feel the same way about the game.
I'm not getting your math: 11th level Plate is a +8 Armor bonus, 11th level Hide is +3 Armor. Both get a +3 Enhancement Bonus. Hide gets to add in up to +6 Dex or Int. That's +11 AC for Plate, and between +6 and +12 for Hide, by my math.
There are other initial design solutions which were better (course, too late now).
Like not increasing ability scores by 8 or 10 in 27 levels. The ability score bonuses screwed up all of the defenses and required special rules.
They screwed up Light AC, forcing masterwork in Heavy to keep pace (which btw, it doesn't anyway, Light AC outpace Heavy AC by 1).
They screwed up 1 out of 3 NADs since at most 2 NAD ability scores can be increased each level.
There are many feats that are considered "must have" by some players because of ability score boosts. Feats that don't really need to even be in the game system.
And the reason for ability score boosts (or masterwork boosts for that matter) is because of the simple jarring math of:
Monsters increase by 1 per level.
PCs increase by 1/2 per level.
In order to come near to the +14 bonus that monsters in 29 levels acquire over PCs, the PCs have to have a lot of extra bonuses thrown in over the levels.
A system of PCs increase by 3/4 per level could have removed both ability score bonuses and masterwork armor.
By level 30, monsters would increase by +29 and PCs would increase by +22 for level (basically using the same math as the Cleric or Rogue 3.5 BAB chart for to hit and defenses) and there would still be basically the same amount of room left over for magic items, powers and conditional feats as there is today.
The math issue with a D20 system is that every +1 bonus is 5%. Get too many of them as conditional elements (i.e. differences between one PC and another due to feats, powers, magic items, and ability score leveling decisions), and the system starts creaking at the edges. The solution is to limit the number of different conditional bonuses possible.
