Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Party AC difference
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MrMyth" data-source="post: 5130595" data-attributes="member: 61155"><p>Sure. But I don't think it is requisite for the Defender to absorb <em>all</em> attacks in an encounter. In a 5 monster encounter, at least 1-2 will certainly get past the Defender and go threaten the squishies. Honestly, that is as it should be, and that is where other tactics come into play - the strikers focus on taking those threats down first, the wizard breaks out his own tricks to get away or reduce the threat those enemies offer via various debilitating conditions, the leader heals anyone who starts to get in trouble. </p><p> </p><p>Is the Wizard's low AC going to mean they will go down in a single swing to the enemy that got to them? Probably not. If multiple enemies focus on them, then yeah, they won't stay standing long. But... should they be able to soak up as much punishment as the Fighter? I certainly don't think so.</p><p> </p><p>Of course, I'll admit that isn't really the argument on hand. It isn't a case of whether the Wizard should be less durable than the Fighter, but <em>how much</em> less durable they should be. And people's opinions will fall in different areas. </p><p> </p><p>Here's the thing - a wizard who does have a high Int, leather armor proficiency, and some of the various wizards tricks (Shield, Staff of Defense, Blur, etc) is going to be pretty tough. If you make the base Wizard tougher, you risk having the tough Wizard overshoot the Fighter entirely - similar to the problems that cropped up with Avengers and Barbarians. </p><p> </p><p>Now, that said, I think there is room to narrow the extremes. Making cloth a +1 armor bonus would honestly be a good start - Leather Armor Proficiency as a +2 AC boost makes it a hard feat to turn down, which is usually a sign of problematic design somewhere. On the other end of the extreme, maybe shields shouldn't give bonuses to defenses, but provide protection in another fashion. </p><p> </p><p>But beyond that, I do think a Wizard or Sorcerer who invests absolutely nothing in defenses <em>should </em>be 6 or so points behind a tank that has focused heavily on defense. I agree that 9 is too much - though part of that came, in the earlier example given, from disparate gear as well. </p><p> </p><p>In the end, if you want to limit those bonuses, you need to limit that factors that play into defenses. There is only so much room to do so without removing options entirely, or simply setting everyone to the default of having exactly the same AC. </p><p> </p><p>At least these days the disparity still takes place within the range of the d20. If I need a 14 to hit the uber-defender, and an 8 to hit the frail wizard, they are still both affected by the roll of the dice. </p><p> </p><p>The only real problem I see cropping up, honestly, is in temporary modifiers. I've seen a handful of those that are problematic. But the base numbers, and base variance, feels pretty much fine to me.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MrMyth, post: 5130595, member: 61155"] Sure. But I don't think it is requisite for the Defender to absorb [I]all[/I] attacks in an encounter. In a 5 monster encounter, at least 1-2 will certainly get past the Defender and go threaten the squishies. Honestly, that is as it should be, and that is where other tactics come into play - the strikers focus on taking those threats down first, the wizard breaks out his own tricks to get away or reduce the threat those enemies offer via various debilitating conditions, the leader heals anyone who starts to get in trouble. Is the Wizard's low AC going to mean they will go down in a single swing to the enemy that got to them? Probably not. If multiple enemies focus on them, then yeah, they won't stay standing long. But... should they be able to soak up as much punishment as the Fighter? I certainly don't think so. Of course, I'll admit that isn't really the argument on hand. It isn't a case of whether the Wizard should be less durable than the Fighter, but [I]how much[/I] less durable they should be. And people's opinions will fall in different areas. Here's the thing - a wizard who does have a high Int, leather armor proficiency, and some of the various wizards tricks (Shield, Staff of Defense, Blur, etc) is going to be pretty tough. If you make the base Wizard tougher, you risk having the tough Wizard overshoot the Fighter entirely - similar to the problems that cropped up with Avengers and Barbarians. Now, that said, I think there is room to narrow the extremes. Making cloth a +1 armor bonus would honestly be a good start - Leather Armor Proficiency as a +2 AC boost makes it a hard feat to turn down, which is usually a sign of problematic design somewhere. On the other end of the extreme, maybe shields shouldn't give bonuses to defenses, but provide protection in another fashion. But beyond that, I do think a Wizard or Sorcerer who invests absolutely nothing in defenses [I]should [/I]be 6 or so points behind a tank that has focused heavily on defense. I agree that 9 is too much - though part of that came, in the earlier example given, from disparate gear as well. In the end, if you want to limit those bonuses, you need to limit that factors that play into defenses. There is only so much room to do so without removing options entirely, or simply setting everyone to the default of having exactly the same AC. At least these days the disparity still takes place within the range of the d20. If I need a 14 to hit the uber-defender, and an 8 to hit the frail wizard, they are still both affected by the roll of the dice. The only real problem I see cropping up, honestly, is in temporary modifiers. I've seen a handful of those that are problematic. But the base numbers, and base variance, feels pretty much fine to me. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Party AC difference
Top