[UA] Class Defense Bonus too high?

[Ashrem Bayle]

Tonight I playtested an encounter that is about to occure in my campaign.

I used the Wounds/Vitality system, along with the Armor as Damage Reduction and Class Defense options.

Pretty much, everything went great. I didn't have to adjust any CRs because of the changes and I got the result I wanted: A very hard encounter, but without a TPK. The new options really seemed to add a lot of "freshness" to the game.

The only problem I saw was that it took a very long time. Roughly, 4.5 hours for a "EL: Very Hard" encounter. I think the problem was that everyone had a hard time landing hits and it was because the Defense bonus was so high.

For example, with the standard rules, a typical kobold warrior has an AC of 15. With this system, he has a 19. Now, I already adjusted the Class Defense table to read +2, +3, +4, +5. (I figure +6 is a bit much for a 1st level fighter to start with.) However, now I'm leaning toward adjusting the starting bonuses to: +1, +2, +3, +4.

Anyone else think the bonuses are a bit high?

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

Or maybe I read something wrong......

According to the MM, monsters such as kobolds are considered to have a level of Warrior. So, that means they can use all forms of armor. If you follow the table given on page 110 of UA , they'd get a +6 bonus to AC.

However, in the monster section of the Class Defense rules, it says that monsters get a bonus (as per table 4-3) depending on whatever armor they are described as wearing. In the kobold's case (leather armor), this would fall under the "Light" catagory. But, if the creature has levels in a class, it gets the standard bonus as per table 4-1 of UA.

One way of interpreting it gives the standard MM kobold an AC of 19. The other way gives them a 14. Which is the correct way? I'm thinking the AC of 14 sounds much more reasonable.

I'm still thinking of adjusting the table to +1,+2,+3,+4 though for characters with class levels.

 

[Celtavian]

re

Does a kobold warrior have natural armor +4? Class defense bonus does not stack with your armor bonus. It is there to replace your armor bonus. If the kobold were wearing armor in the Monster Manual, then he would use either the value for Class Defense or the Armor bonus Value, whichever was higher.

I don't have my MM with me right now. I assume that kobold is like the other humanoids and was given a standard set of armor and weapons. If he is wearing armor, then the kobold's armor bonus should not count towards its AC if it does not exceed it's class defense bonus.

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

I wasn't counting their armor.

Kobolds have: 15 (+1 size, +1 Dex, +1 natural, +2 leather)

Replace the +2 leather with a +6 Defense bonus and you gat a 19 AC.

or...

With the second option, they get an AC of 14.

Add in the Armor as DR and they get AC: 14, DR: 1/- which I think is much better. In fact, I'm pretty certain the second option is the way it is intended to be. You don't count the default level of Warrior and instead give them a bonus based on the armor they use in thier profile. If you later tack on a second level of Warrior, then they get the full +6.

(Or+4 if you use the house rule I'm considering.)

 

[CRGreathouse]

Well, kobolds don't have the HD or the base attack of a first-level warrior, so I'd go with AC 14.

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

Sure they do.
Standard kobold Hit Dice is 1d8 (4hp). They also get a +1 (-1 Str, +1 BAB, +1 Size) to hit, just like a 1st level warrior.

 

[eryndel]

Sure they do.
Standard kobold Hit Dice is 1d8 (4hp). They also get a +1 (-1 Str, +1 BAB, +1 Size) to hit, just like a 1st level warrior.

I'd consider them warriors, as I would all creatures who don't have monster levels. If they have monster levels (gnoll, bugbear) I'd go with the guidelines in the UA. I'm not sure what that does to the Kobolds and defense bonus. It sounds like it gives them a 19 AC (10+1(nat) +1 (size) +1 (Dex) +6 (Def.)) or they could choose to have armor to get that 1/- DR.

I withhold the right to change my mind when I actually look at my books, though

Werner

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

Round 2 of playtesting was indeed faster, yet still well balanced. I'll definately be dropping the beginning bonuses to +1, +2, +3, & +4 and kobolds without anything more than the default level of warrior gets an AC of 14 and 1/- DR.

I'm a big fan of the Wounds/Vitality system now. Interestingly, both playtests ended with the party fighter killing the enemy leader in a grapple. Basicly, he held him down while the rogue stabbed him a few times. Once he was sufficiently softened up, the fighter broke his neck with an unarmed attack.

Cool....

 

[Uruush]

I've done a bunch of playtesting with this myself.

1) Yes, the Class Defense bonuses on Table 4-1 are a little too high if you are combining them with AADR.

2) I probably wouldn't give any class bonuses to NPC classes like "Warrior", "Expert", etc. A Kobold "Monster" has Leather Armor and so their total Defense bonus is +1. So, yeah, they get an AC of 14 (10+1+1+1+1) and 1/- DR .

3) I'm using table 4-4 as is; PC characters and creatures can choose the higher of their bonuses - when they're flat-footed they'll still get their +3 Armor Bonus and 2/- DR for chainmail, for example. Most of the time, PCs will be using their class bonus because it will almost always be higher unless you're talking a low-level wizard who's in full plate for some reason.

4) In my opinion, Class Defense Bonus based on Armor Proficiencies, rather than BAB and Reflexes is a bad implementation of a great idea, particularly when combined with AADR. There's no palatable reason a Fair BAB, Poor REF Cleric gets the best bonuses to avoid being hit AND can use Plate Mail for the DR. I'm going to be posting my own chart specifically for Midnight at againsttheshadow sometime in the next day or so - it has 4 columns, but is modeled after Kenneth S. Hood's "Grim-N-Gritty" rule set principle that BAB and Reflex are the keys.

 

[Mouseferatu]

4) In my opinion, Class Defense Bonus based on Armor Proficiencies, rather than BAB and Reflexes is a bad implementation of a great idea, particularly when combined with AADR.

Actually, I thought it was a fairly inspired idea, myself. Let me explain...

By basing the Class Defense bonus on the sort of armor allowed, the folks who wrote UA ensured that the relative armor classes of the different classes to one another wouldn't change if people wanted to switch from the standard system to the new one.

In the old system, all else being equal, fighters, paladins, and clerics are expected to have the best AC, because they can wear the best armor. If they based the new system on attack bonuses or Reflex saves, that fact would change. Because they did it as they did, those proportions remain roughly the same. That is, the average fighter of a given level is still going to have a better AC--by roughly the same amount--as the average druid of a given level.

Now, that doesn't mean other methods are bad. There's no inherent reason why those proportions must stay the same. But I like the fact that they do in the rule as written. It's easier to tweak something away from standard, IMO, than to tweak it toward.