what do you consider a "good" AC?

I throw mine out, he is a 8th level rogue svirfneblin. under core rules, he's an ECL 11, but my DM house ruled it to ECL +2 for deep gnomes (so reall ECL 10 in our campaign). I am about 600 xp from lvl 9 (ecl 11).

His AC is 31, if I remember correctly. Plus I have a ring of blinking, so there is a 50% miss chance from enemies.

Lets see if I get my bonuses correct (this is from memory)

10 (base, duh!) + 7 (+3 Mithral Shirt) + 2 (+1 Buckler) + 4 (Deep Gnome dodge) + 1 (Size) + 5 (Dex) + 2 (Ring of Deflection)

Is 31. I'm getting dodge next level, so it'll be 32 against one opponent.

I get hit, but not often

I had a deep gnome monk/illusionist that through buffs could get up to AC of 33 or so (at monk 1/illusion 3 (ecl 7)...and it was all touch AC. Of course, flat footed was 15 (with the help of mage armor)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

demon_jr:

If you have no armor or shield, and no intention of wearing armor, you MUST get Bracers of Armor. There's no real question about it, IMHO, you have no Armor AC bonus. It's by far the cheapest AC to get, at 1000*x^2 for bracers, even cheaper for normal armor.

But frankly, even with that, you seem to have chosen to become a spellcaster, even with all the drawbacks that entails. Just going from normal armor to Bracers costs you 3 or 4 AC right off the bat. If you're a 14th-level warrior-type, and you only have ONE level of Sorcerer, you shouldn't be giving up on armor just for the dinky amount of spellcasting you'll do.
Buy a suit of Celestial Armor (chain type, high Max DEX, only 15% arcane failure, and you can fly 1/day! Plus it's light, so no movement penalty) and hope for the best on the arcane failure rolls. Note that True Strike has no somatic component and therefore won't cause problems in armor; there are a few others that work like that, too. Oh yeah, and get a good shield.

Your miscellaneous magic items are a problem, too. Ring of Protection +2 and Amulet of Natural Armor +1 cost a total of 10k, while you should have (DMG guidelines) 150k in assets. My 14th-level character had a Ring of Protection +2, Amulet of Natural Armor +2, +8 in armor AC (+3 celestial armor) plus a +3 small shield, a ring that (among other things) gives a +2 luck bonus... and he was a Psion.
 

dcollins said:


I don't use the Epic book, so maybe there's something in there that changes things radically. However, to date I've still never seen anyone claim an AC of 50 or more that didn't (upon presenting details) have some significant error in their calculation: either in the use of stacking rules, house-ruled new magic items, nonstandard equipment valuation, and/or counting a series of extremely situation-specific modifiers into their claimed AC.

I'll bite, with psionics HB though.

10 Base
+ 10 armor bonus, ectoplasmic armor power
+ 6 insight bonus, shield of prudence power
+ 11 natural armor bonus, hill giant form
+ 5 dex bonus (animal affinity 5 + stone giant 15 dex)
+ 4 haste bonus, boots of speed
+ 5 deflection bonus, ring of protection
- 1 size
______________-

total 50 AC

this is used in my high level game, by the 18 or was it 19 level psychic warrior. Only item is the ring of prot +5. I don't allow animated shields, so he's missing another 7 points in the ac.

EDIT: forgot the size penalty!
 
Last edited:

Spatzimaus said:
I'm not dcollins, but I'd like to throw in a few things. First of all, Pax, I really like your character; a Duellist 10 is expected to have a high AC, of course. I just don't think the way you totalled things is good for these discussions.

ALL armor bonusses, except the first 10, are situational. Is your warrior even wearing his armor, or X magical doodad? That's a situational issue too. Did your wizard cast Mage Armor for the day yet? I guess Mage Armor should also be considered situational.

"Situational", to me, means spells that last minutes or less, potions that need to be drunk, or something that either requires a large change in your combat strategy or that has a penalty you won't always want (like Expertise or Barbarian Rage). Yes, it's a bit open-ended.

Oh, I don't dispute that most of my Duellist's AC is situational at all, I dispute that it is "extremely" situational. No moreso than other "non-innate" armor bonusses.

Oh, since the Duellist will always want to use at least one point's worth of Expertise (because that +1AC / -1 to hit triggers another +10AC ... 11AC bonus for a 1-point to hit penalty), it's one of the less situational issues for that character.

The entire concept of the character was, to "whore for armor class" (pardon the expression). :) I thought it up for a one-shot "against the Tarrasque (and friends)" outting.

Mage Armor isn't situational. Any 20th-level caster casts it once when he wakes up, and it's up the entire day unless he gets dispelled. You can reasonably expect a flat-footed mage to still have the spell up. In fact, interrupt him in his sleep and he's still got a good chance of having it up.

50/50, assuming 8 hours of sleep. Which means, in an encoutner while the adventurers are encamped, there is a 50/50 chance the wizard or sorceror hasn't recovered the spell, and, the duration wore out. Thus, it's not an absolutely guaranteed benefit.

There are degrees of situational, after all. :)

Shield, on the other hand, is situational. Short duration, and you need to aim it. You can reasonably expect that it'll only be up during combat.

Persistent Spell Metamagicks; Shield was -made- for it (and a potion of Persistent Shield would cost between 4500gp and 5000gp :) ). Drinking a potion of Shield, is no rougher than the Wizard casting the spell, in terms of time used.

Expertise, similarly, does not require a melee attack; nothingin the wording of the feat requires your attack action or full attack action to be made with a melee weapon

PHB, page 82, Expertise Feat:
"When you use the attack action or full attack option IN MELEE, you can take a penalty..."

Admittedly their grammar could use a little work, but it's there.

OK, I missed that bit (their grammar DOES need work! :) ). And ... it doesn't agree with the "Fighting defensively" entry (PHB page 124), which does not specify you must be in melee to do so. So, use that instead of Expertise, against ranged attacks (the Duellist class ability is basedon fighting in a defensive manner, noton use only of the Expertise feat).

Eliminating the potion of Shield would be the house rule.

This has been covered in a few other threads. Here's the reason it's been argued the other way:

PHB, p.251, Shield spell: "Range: Personal, Target: You", and "You designate half the battlefield..."
DMG, p.190, "Potions are like spells cast upon the imbiber. The character taking the potion doesn't get to make any decisions about the effect..."
PHB, p. 80, Brew Potion: "You can create a potion of any spell of 3rd level or lower that you know and that targets a creature or creatures"

Exactly, I dispute none of the above.

So, first, there's disagreement on whether "You" works as "a creature". Someone can probably find the link, but I remember a Sage response saying that it doesn't count, that only spells that can be cast on someone else work.

I defy anyone to point me at how a spellcaster can be aught else but "a creature". Since, therefor, targeting the caster is in fact targetting "a creature", Shield IMO passes this test, taking the rules as directly written.

And official as some may want to hold it ... until it's in the errata, and they change/clarify the wording of the Brew Potion feat ... Sage Advice is IMO merely a suggested set of house rules.

Note the DMG part about "spells cast upon the imbiber". As in, it only works if the person who makes the potion is capable of casting it on the person drinking.

I disagree. What if I have a wizard make a potion of Shield, and then, that same wizard drinks it? THEN, the wizard is in fact capable of casting the spell on the imbiber of the potion.

That's why there's not a single Personal spell on the list of potions. Note that the official errata removed Clairvoyance and Detect Thoughts from the list, every spell remaining on the list has at least a range of Touch.

There are a lot of things that are not explicitly listed in the DMG. For example: there's no explicit lisitng of a Fireball scroll; yet noone disputes they can be made.

As for designating "my front half", the spell says you designate half the battlefield, not half the person. In 3E there is no facing; you have no inherent front or back. You can declare "west half of the battlefield" or "east half", but not "my front" or "my back". It wouldn't rotate with you.
Since a potion doesn't allow the drinker to make decisions, this means you'd have to make it be a Potion of Shield (north) or something. Not very useful, and I'd have to question how a potion even knows which way is north. Maybe Potion of Shield (one particular direction when I drink it)? Still not that useful.

If one wishes to be that exacting, then, TWO potions (one for north, one for south). *shrug* I interpret things differently; while D&D does not include facings for issues of AC and the like, there is no reason not to refer to facings when describing effects or events.

Either way, you shouldn't count it here due to the short duration, and the fact that as a potion it's a 1-shot item. Fight 3 battles in one week, and the potion is only useful for one. I could make a Rogue with 20 nearly-depleted wands, and claim the bonuses from tons of high-level spells, but that's not really a fair evaluation of the character.

See reference to Potion of Persistent Shield, above. :)

Perhaps the Buckler's AC bonus, but not the Haste bonus.

You're right on this one. The Haste effect stays, and that's what you get for paying for a +10 shield. Of course, if you're not getting the AC you might as well go with Boots of Speed, but redundancy is nice too.[/b]

Actually, notice I also revised the shield to +1, Medium Fortification, Speed. I think that may only be a +9 shield (Medium Fort is +3, right?), but that at least wrings more benefits form the buckler. Or else just go "+1 of Speed".

For one, #1 is no more "extremely situational" than any other measue of AC.

IMHO it is. Unless you're going to be using Expertise/Fighting Defensively/Defending weapons on every turn (which pretty much guarantees you'll never hit anything ever again), it's not fair to count that AC. If a spell is so short in duration that you have to spend an action during combat getting it up (Shield), it's not a good thing to count. If it requires using a one-shot item, it's not a good thing to count because we're talking about characters over the long haul.[/b]

Not so. The dagger is the defender; the main weapon (a rapier, in keepig with the style and abilities of the class) will benefit from it's own magic (Elemental Aura, Keen, Sure Striking, Wounding, Dispelling, +1; total of a +10 weapon; buld it of, say, Darksteel (+1500gp and counts as masterwork); net price is 201,520gp; it does 1d6(base), +1(electric, stacks withother electric damage bonusses), +1d6(any one element type, chosen per-round); not a shabby weapon); it will also benefit form Weapon Finesse, and Weapon Focus (and of course, Weapon Specialisation).

At top penalty, which is -8 (-5 Expertise, -1 Buckler-and-off-weapon, -2 TWF/Ambidex and light weapons), the Duellist will still have an attack of +23/+18/+13/+8. Not astounding, but quite useful nonetheless.

Personally, I only keep track of 2 ACs: unbuffed (when you get hit by lots of Dispel Magics), and typical (Items and any spell lasting all day that I can cast on myself).

That's your personal choice, and you're welcome to it; I also like to track "theoretical maximum without outside aid" ("outside" aid being that sourced from beyond that character, and his/her equipment list).
 


(Psi)SeveredHead said:
Remember to double to cost (see Tome and Blood or Magic of Faerun), since Persistent Shield is a 5th-level spell for item-crafting purposes.

Persistent Spell metamagic is a +4 level adjustment; acutally, I had OVER-estimated the price, misremembering the metamagick adjust as a +6 level one (7th level spell, minimum 13th level caster, 7x13x50 = 4,550gp).

The actual price would be (5th level spell, minimum 9th level caster, 5x9x50 =) 2,250gp

So my orignal 5K for the Potion, would buy TWO of them.
 

Pax said:
The entire concept of the character was, to "whore for armor class" (pardon the expression).

What, you think we object to whores?

IMHO, if we start including one-shot items in the discussion, it just gets silly. For that matter, I could claim that I know an 80th-level Wizard who's researched a custom 16th-level spell that he cast on me before the fight that makes me utterly invincible. I mean, it's situational, and as long as the DM approved it it's okay, because there's nothing in the core books that says that spell isn't allowed.

50/50, assuming 8 hours of sleep.

Actually, 62.5/37.5. One of the four hours he misses will be the hour of meditation after he wakes up. And you'd better believe THAT one can be used against you.
Or he could have just cast Extended Mage Armor the day before and have it last 40 hours. Extended twice (ooh, a 3rd-level spell), it lasts two and a half days!

Which means, in an encoutner while the adventurers are encamped, there is a 50/50 chance the wizard or sorceror hasn't recovered the spell, and, the duration wore out. Thus, it's not an absolutely guaranteed benefit.

The difference here, besides the fact that attacks while sleeping are far less common than attacks while awake (since most adventurers are looking for trouble) is the course of action it leads to. If I get ambushed while sleeping, my first instinct is to get away. Clear out, regroup, come back when I'm better prepared. Admittedly, a good AC will help you survive until the Teleport goes off, but it's not the same sort of priority. Same goes for fighters caught without their armor.

The main point was to separate spells/effects into "long duration" (I have plenty of time to cast it before combats, and even if I'm caught by surprise I'll be likely to have it up) and "short duration" (I'll only have it up if I was expecting immediate combat, or I'll have to cast it in the first round of combat).

Persistent Spell Metamagicks; Shield was -made- for it (and a potion of Persistent Shield would cost between 4500gp and 5000gp :) ). Drinking a potion of Shield, is no rougher than the Wizard casting the spell, in terms of time used.

Clearly you think so, but the Sage answer I saw, the list of which potions can be made, and the general rules for decision-making spells in items seem to disagree. It's one of those things that's still vague, and I wish they'd errata it once and for all, but they're slow on erratas for one simple reason: they only update them when they're ready to do another printing of the book. Since the PHB and DMG have been out so long, and demand has died down a bit, they're understandably slow. The last DMG errata was 8/20/01.

OK, I missed that bit (their grammar DOES need work! :) ). And ... it doesn't agree with the "Fighting defensively" entry (PHB page 124), which does not specify you must be in melee to do so.


They're two different things, which is why they stack. Gotta love the stacking rules.

I interpret things differently; while D&D does not include facings for issues of AC and the like, there is no reason not to refer to facings when describing effects or events.

As far as I know, there's no such thing as facing, anywhere in the core rules. Can you find anything that involves facing?

Actually, notice I also revised the shield to +1, Medium Fortification, Speed. I think that may only be a +9 shield (Medium Fort is +3, right?), but that at least wrings more benefits form the buckler. Or else just go "+1 of Speed".

Yes, medium fort is +3. Personally, if you wanted to stick with the +10 price tag, go +1 Arrow Deflection Animated shield of Speed. Frees up an extra hand, so no -1 buckler penalty, and arrow deflection can be fun. Although how you get Haste from a shield floating in front of you, I can't figure.

At top penalty, which is -8 (-5 Expertise, -1 Buckler-and-off-weapon, -2 TWF/Ambidex and light weapons), the Duellist will still have an attack of +23/+18/+13/+8. Not astounding, but quite useful nonetheless.

You didn't include fighting defensively (another -4); we ARE going for max AC, right?

----------------------------

I think for these sort of discussions we need to agree on some sort of guidelines. Ever read the Sultans of Smack thread? It gets a bit ridiculous at times. Remember, the original point of this thread was that someone was trying to get a general idea of what sort of AC he should reasonably have at a given level (in his case, 14).

How's this sound:

> Level 15 (Why? Because I like that level. You haven't topped out your Prestige Class yet, you haven't used Wish to gain +5 to every stat, and your assets are exactly 200k, not enough to get all +6 items and +10 weapons)

> No custom Feats, Spells, Items, or Prestige Classes; only official WotC material is allowed. That means PHB, DMG, MM (templates), PsiHB, MotP, the official splatbooks, that sort of thing. Dragon Magazine materials or anything involving the Forgotten Realms may only used with an explicit disclaimer. Anyone who uses Monte Cook's Ranger gets slapped silly.

> Standard assets: 200k gp. No single item may be worth more than 50k. All items must be explicitly listed in official source material (see above).
(No asking for an item that casts Cure Light Wounds at will for 1800 gp, for example. See also Potion of Shield.)

> No Wishes, either directly or through the Manuals. What Wizard in his right mind would spend 25 THOUSAND XP (that's more than a level, you know) to give a stranger some stat increases? The market value (137.5) may seem impressive, but it's still less than 20% of his assets at that level, and he could make far more money just enchanting some armor. These things should be really rare, not the sort of thing you can buy a few of. Too many characters end up being "Oh, I'll take a +5 to that stat, and a +5 to that one too...".
I'm tempted to make them Minor Artifacts IMC just to get players to stop asking for them.
(Okay, this one isn't a problem if you use level 15, but every level 20 discussion I've seen involved two or more +5 Manuals per person)

So, we want three different ACs:
Nearly Naked: Items only. Items with charges may only be counted if they renew each day (Boots of Speed for exampel)

Long-Haul: ...and spells lasting at least 1 hour/level, and any bonuses due to combat actions (like Expertise)

Anti-Tarrasque (hey, you named it): ...and any short-term I can cast on myself, including one-shot items I bought as part of my assets, X/day special abilities like Barbarian Rage/Defensive Stance, etc.

Also of interest: each of these when flat-footed, against touch spells, or against incorporeal attacks
 

Originally posted by Spatzimaus:
IMHO, if we start including one-shot items in the discussion, it just gets silly. For that matter, I could claim that I know an 80th-level Wizard who's researched a custom 16th-level spell that he cast on me before the fight that makes me utterly invincible. I mean, it's situational, and as long as the DM approved it it's okay, because there's nothing in the core books that says that spell isn't allowed.

I did specify, I used only off-the-shelf items, or items built within the parameters of the magic Weapons, magic Armor, and Brew Potion rules. Not custom spells and whatnot.

Or he could have just cast Extended Mage Armor the day before and have it last 40 hours. Extended twice (ooh, a 3rd-level spell), it lasts two and a half days!

Rendering that slot unavailable for use during those two and a half days; I forget the actual rules reference, but I am 100% certain, if spell duration extends intoa new day, that "slot" is considered "used" until the spell duration expires.

They're two different things, which is why they stack. Gotta love the stacking rules.

Clearly, they are not. The entry for Expertise specifies the Fighting Defensively as the "normally" entry, IOW, what people do who do NOT have this feat. That pretty directly indicates the two are not compatible; Expertise replaces Fighting Defensively when used.

As far as I know, there's no such thing as facing, anywhere in the core rules. Can you find anything that involves facing?

Here's a brief list:

Detect Animals or Plants
Spell; Druid 1, Ranger 1
(emphasis[ mine)
You can detect a particular type of animal or plant in a quarter circle emanating out from you in whatever directionyou face.

Detect Evil (and by reference, Detect Chaos, Detect Good, and Detect Law)
Spell, Cleric 1, Ranger 2
(emphasis mine)
Note: Each round you can turn to detect things in a new area.
Clear indication that the area is relative to where you are facing.

... in fact, nearly EVERY Detect spell involves the same general mechanic; a quarter-circle of X range, emanating from you, in the direction you face. Detect Poison is the only exception in teh PHB I am aware of.

The HIDE skill cares about wether or notpeole have their backs turned to you (since even casual observation prevents use of the skill).

In fact, I cannot offhand find where the rule say facing NEVER matters. Could you quote me that passage ... ?

As for your little contest: no thanks; I cited soemthing from memory, I'm not interested in doing another similar excercise.
 

Actually, spell duration has no influence of the spell slots used. Only if you cast a spell in the 8 hours before preparing is that slot already used.

(Or spells with the duration of "permanent until dispelled" would not be used at all...)
 

I'm only going to refer to my game in my post I guess, since the whole 'average AC' thing really threw me personally off as a GM.

The party I am currently running is 15th level or so. We had a huge debate about average AC's at their level. They argued theirs stunk, and was too low, while I argued it was too high.

The gist of it was, I looked at the back of the 'official' modules, to see what a roundabout AC was for 15th level. The module I used for the current party was 'Lord of the Iron Fortress'. The fighter had an ac of about 32 I believe. I don't have the book here, so bear with me.

In my party, before I evened it out (they WERE too low.. ack), their highest AC was their mighty-mini-cleric, the svirfneblin, with a 30 AC. Their ranger(main tank), only had a 26 AC, while the monk had a 29. This was mighty low, as even 1 AC can make a huge difference.

I then made available to them some newer and more powerful items. They had amassed a ton of cash in their travels (around 400k, yikes), and wanted to spend some of it, but I was being stingy as I didn't want to monty haul my game.

Long story short... Their ACs are now as follows:

Monk 31 (minor cloak of displacement too)
Fighter 30 (expertise feat to get up to 35 if needed)
Cleric1 28 (has multiple buffs to get it higher)
Cleric2 32
Wizard 19
Rogue 33

These are average ACs from what I can glean, at least at 15th level. Monsters will still hit them a lot. Critters they are fighting now have like +25ish to hit with their primary attack. Which is like a 50-75% chance to hit with their primary attack, dropping to 25-50%, then 0-25% on third if applicable. Those numbers are acceptable, especially when they love to cast mass haste to further reduce the numbers.

I keep having to remind myself that... The party is not supposed to get beat down on a CR14 creature, and is only supposed to take minor hits (25% of resources) on a cr 15 critter. It's hard, I've never run a game this high a level before. :)
 

Remove ads

Top