Destil
Explorer
That's the exact number I wanted to see avengers at with the eratta. But I'd have preferred if they ruled out leather and this and just add +1 to improved armor of faith.
PHB 3 Feat List
- Thread starter Destil
- Start date
That's the exact number I wanted to see avengers at with the eratta. But I'd have preferred if they ruled out leather and this and just add +1 to improved armor of faith.
Samir
Explorer
A swordmage with zero feats is at AC 19 (+4 ability, +2 leather, +3 warding). A fighter with one feat goes from AC 17 to 18--but can easily increase this to 20 by wearing a heavy shield. Same goes for the Paladin. I'm not sure why you'd compare a Defender sans shield to a Striker that can't use one effectively.
With the AC, an Avenger is at about Barbarian levels of survivability, minus some health and surges.
I was comparing two handed weapon builds to other two handed weapon builds. I think it's a fair comparison. For instance, a defender with a polearm should not be stuck with a lower AC than an Avenger. A defender regardless of what he's wielding, is a defender, and tries to draw enemy fire through marking, pulling enemies to him, etc. Avenger is not a defender, and should not be more resilient than one. Avenger should be a softer but harder hitting target that the defender needs to protect.
Its a good point. Why should a striker similarly equiped to a defender (i.e. two handed weapon) have a significantly higher ac? Ac is meant to be part of the defenders bread and butter, where strikers sacrifice defence for attack and mobility. But here we have a situation where a Striker boasts one of the highest ac achieveable in the game.
It got corrected, now it appears they are uncorrecting.
As to the whole "Avengers dont have to take the feat" argument. Well, yea, but by that logic every class should have access to a feat which gives a +2 ac on an already adequate ac given role. Why should avengers alone get this privelege? (and no, the whole "avengers need it" bit doesnt wash. It doesnt apply to other melee strikers, who must put themselves in peril, so why should the avenger get special treatment).
They don't get any special treatment. A ranger that wants Defender level AC can just opt to invest 3 feats and wear plate.
A Barbarian can take Hide Armor Expertise.
A Rogue can invest in hide armor and focus on dexterity.
However, a defender doesn't need to invest said feats: his AC is usually pretty high right out of the box: just like you can build a fighter that deals striker level damage, you can create an avenger, barbarian, rogue or wizard that can reach defender-level AC, provided you are willing to spend a fair chunk of your (limited) resources.
If a striker spends those 2 feats for 3, 4 points of AC, he's falling behind in terms of damage: as you said, an Avenger's AC is more than adequate for a striker. Thus, as long as the defender in the group does his job, a striker that wants to be the best at his role should be using his feats and powers to reinforce his schticks ( damage and mobility ), rather than waste his resources to improve his AC. Vice versa, if a group lacks a defender, the Avenger/Barbarian/Rogue/whatever can still opt to improve his defenses.
Sure, you can argue that if everyone has defender-level AC then the defenders become useless; however, the party is also losing a fair chunk of battlefield control: sure, that Avenger might have an AC that's as high as the fighter's, but what will he do when all the opponents on the battlefield focus-fire him and there's no fighter or paladin to take the monsters away from him? A good defender doesn't just grab as many monsters as he can and take all the heat, a good defender knows how to spread the monsters' damage around.
Last edited:
The "right out of the box" bit is right. Yes I can "striker up" my defender, and I can "defender up" my striker. Fully acknowledged and agreed with.
I guess the thing thats grinding me is the +2. Its just such a boost. If it was +1, I wouldnt speak up so much, but +2 from one feat (untyped? not sure) is so much for a class whos AC was already on par.
What it means is that the avenger, between 2 feats(this and Improved armor of faith which is untyped as per description in Jan errata) has a full +5 bonus by epic. I know other classes can use feats to boost ac, but can any other class boast a +5 from two feats?
You gotta admit, thats damn cheap AC
I guess the thing thats grinding me is the +2. Its just such a boost. If it was +1, I wouldnt speak up so much, but +2 from one feat (untyped? not sure) is so much for a class whos AC was already on par.
What it means is that the avenger, between 2 feats(this and Improved armor of faith which is untyped as per description in Jan errata) has a full +5 bonus by epic. I know other classes can use feats to boost ac, but can any other class boast a +5 from two feats?
You gotta admit, thats damn cheap AC
Samir
Explorer
Barbarians can pick up Hide Armor Expertise and Second Skin for a total of +10 AC by L30 with 18 starting constitution. They also have defender level HP and surges, with constitution as a primary stat, and of course deal striker-level damage.
Well, as you aknowledged, fighters and paladins get +9/+10 AC essentially for free..."free" is better than "cheap"
Aside from that, on top of my head a wizard/warlock/sorcerer that takes Leather Armor Proficiency gains 2 points of AC; a Swordmage that takes Greater Swordmage Warding gains +2 to all defenses ( quite good for a single feat ); a primal class that takes Hide Armor Expertise may gain 5 or more points of AC by the time he's epic ( and he can stack Second Skin on top of it ).
Furthermore, you have to take in account the fact that Unarmored Agility (it's a Feat Bonus, BTW) is not Avenger only: it's a boon for monks ( whose AC is not stellar ) for wizards that don't want to wear leather armor, and it's a good alternative to leather armor if you want to play an unarmored swashbuckler.
Frankly, I don't see the feat as OP: it's a feat bonus, it can only be used in conjunction with the weakest armor, it's geared towards strikers and controllers rather than defenders, meaning that the AC bonus it bestows has to be dirty cheap or nobody would waste a feat for it...YMMV, though
Destil
Explorer
Oddly I consider hide armor expertise badly broken (con barbs have plenty of other ways to stay on their feat and their AC was never bad), the avenger with this new feat is just a tiny bit too high (one point, IMHO).
Samir
Explorer
I don't think it's a fair comparison at all. A defender with a two-hander is intentionally making himself a sub-optimal defender for a little bit of damage.
It's as if you compared a melee Ranger with a one-handed weapon and a shield to a fighter with a one-handed weapon and a shield, and claimed that since the fighter did equivalent damage and had better defenses, the fighter was too good of a striker.
If you're going to make a defender comparison, you have to at very least use a defender who's actually trying at his role. A fighter or paladin without a shield is going to have equivalent or less AC than a lot of other classes.
