Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pax" data-source="post: 434647" data-attributes="member: 6875">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.As for "extremely" situational ... I don't think so.  By and large: not flatfooted, and the benefits work.  None of the bonusses I cited as regularly there, are "extremely situational".  The only situation required is, "not flatfooted" (other than one, Off Hand Parry, which i listed seperately when calculating the final AC).First: Off Hand Parry was not counted in the final 85AC; you will note, I said "85 AC ... +2 more when making a full attack" ...And ... why do you say ALL of it goes away, even for JUST a ranged attack?  If the Duellist assumes a defensive posture, s/he gets a Dodge bonus equal to their Duellist level.  Nothing specifies this bonus is applicable only against melee attacks. 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; an archer could just as easily fight defensively, sacrificing ability to strike home, in order to reduce his odds of BEING struck in return.Oh, by the way, you forgot to count in the Dexterity/Intelligence combined bonus, which totals another 18 points.  So yes, when flatfooted, this fellow loses a LOT of armor class ... around 43 points of it, in fact.  But with the Improved Initiative feat, and his godlike Dexteroity, he has a +13 initiative modifier.  Flatfooted AC for him should be a rare event.But I defy you to show me an official ruling saying the cover and dodge bonusses woud be denied the Duellist (or anyone) solely because the attack is a RANGED attack.  The first shot of an archer from afar ... that's flatfooted, wether the attack is ranged or melee, therefor should not be cited seperately form the issue of being flatfooted.Eliminating the potion of Shield would be the house rule.  Brew Potion says ANY 3d level or lower spell, which targets a creature `or creatures.  Sine spellcasters are, by definition, "creatures which cast spells" -- thus, are creatures -- Shield is applicable.  The only catch is, the decision element is set when the potionis made; simply enough, decide the shield covers "my front half" ... so it's no good for attacks from behind.DMs and Players may not LIKE the idea, and they are welcome to feel that way.  But goign strictly "by the book" ... shield is a perfectly legitimate application of hte Brew Potion feat.  It is 3d level or less, and, targets a creature or creatures.As I allowed for in my restatement, reducing the AC from 85 to 80.Perhaps the Buckler's AC bonus, but not the Haste bonus.  That applies regardless of wehter or not you can defend with the buckler.  So, see above, 5 points of AC already subtracted, for a net of 80.  Losing the innate AC bonus of hte buckler does NOT negate good (or bad) effects of having the item equipped.The +4 Haste bonus originates form the effect of being hasted, not from the buckler itself.  It doesn't matter if the haste effect ITSELF comes from the buckler.  You lose only the buckler's OWN armor bonus (including all enhancements, ofc).100K-ish for the buckler, 50K tops for the amulet, perhaps 30K for ring, 75K for the dagger (more than enough), 65K for the bracers, 5K for the potion if you go with a metamagicked "Persistant" version, that's all RIDICULOUSLY within reach of a 20th level character's expected 760,000gp resource limit.  Just under HALF of it, in fact, just iusing the err-on-the-high-side estimates I've just cited.Except you're flat out wrong on many counts.  For one, #1 is no more "extremely situational" than any other measue of AC.  The character suffers more from being flatfooted, surely ... but with a +9 initiative from Dexterity alone, thats hould be relatively infrequent.  Also, 2 points of yoru #1 were already NOT counted into the final total, but instead were cited as a situational-dependant boost to the declared AC.Frankly, some of the silly objections you raised make it look like you did everything in your power to find ANY means to cut the AC down below 50, wether it was truly relevant, or not (and frankly, much of it was not).AT BEST, youv'e taken out 9 points, which is still an AC of 76 (78 during a full attack, or, 84 when avoiding AoO's prompted by moving through a threatened area).  The other 25, you discount as "extremely" situational ... bah, I say.  No more situational than the armor bonus of full plate, or the deflection bonus of a Mage Armor spell.  Funnily enough, even TAKING your objections at face value, I still come up with a 51 (as I've said, the 2 dodge form Off Hand Parry were -not- added into the stated AC of 85).As for the shield/bracer stacking, I -did- concede that point, andmerely mentioned in passing what IMC I did to correct what is IMO a flaw.  *shrug* make of that whatever you like.You've managed to knock down all of 5 points of AC, and point out (surprise surprise) that some of the AC isn't available all the time.  Well DUH; unless your RACE has an armor bonus other than Natural Armor, there's SOME way or other to bypass it (touch attacks, for example).  And even if your race DOES have such a bonus, it probably can -still- be bypassed in some situations.Please, do try again, only this time ... put some thought into it, and stay relevant, hm?</blockquote>

Verification