Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7639489" data-attributes="member: 12731">Each point of AC roughly negates 5% of incoming damage.If you're saying the difference between a +3 greatsword and a +3 longsword is 6d6 - 3d8 = 7,5 then the shield gets competitive when you can assume roughly 50 points of incoming damage that round.(Ignoring outliers when monsters hit you on 1 or only 20. Also ignoring crits for the mo')Assuming avoiding 1 point of damage is about as valuable as dealing 1 point of damage. Which probably isn't true, since &quot;a pound of adventurer&quot; is generally much more lethal than &quot;a pound of monster&quot;, so let's say the +3 shield starts to look interesting once you're facing monsters who deal 25-50 damage (before accounting for misses; only damage directed at you specifically).Then upping the number again to account for the way increased offense is a fine way to lower incoming damage (dead monsters deal less damage [emoji846])......so... maybe 20 damage per plus?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 7639489, member: 12731"] Each point of AC roughly negates 5% of incoming damage. If you're saying the difference between a +3 greatsword and a +3 longsword is 6d6 - 3d8 = 7,5 then the shield gets competitive when you can assume roughly 50 points of incoming damage that round. (Ignoring outliers when monsters hit you on 1 or only 20. Also ignoring crits for the mo') Assuming avoiding 1 point of damage is about as valuable as dealing 1 point of damage. Which probably isn't true, since "a pound of adventurer" is generally much more lethal than "a pound of monster", so let's say the +3 shield starts to look interesting once you're facing monsters who deal 25-50 damage (before accounting for misses; only damage directed at you specifically). Then upping the number again to account for the way increased offense is a fine way to lower incoming damage (dead monsters deal less damage [emoji846])... ...so... maybe 20 damage per plus? [/QUOTE]

Verification