Arms & Armour:

[Tathkar Eisgrim]

Arms and Armour -- An Arelith Introspective
(How hard should it be to hit someone?)

Thoughts on Good Setting Design:

Obtainable Armour Class:

* If obtainable Armour Class values are too high / too low does it make for a fun experience for PvE?
* If obtainable Armour Class values are too high / too low does it make for a fun experience for PvP?

Maximum Obtainable Armour Class:

* What is a maximum desireable Armour Class?

Maximum Obtainable Attack Bonus:

* What is a maximum desireable Attack bonus?
* Comparing Max AC to Max AB, what desireable proportion of 1-20 attack rolls should hit?

Armoured AC versus Unarmoured AC:

* If an individual wearing Armour can consistently be defeated by a foe not wearing Armour, why does Armour culturally exist within the game setting? Logically and culturally, it is technologically redundant. Any warrior-society aware of the deficiency would take strides to overcome / recognise the redundancy.

Weapon Damage versus Armour Class & Hit Points:

* If an individual wielding the strongest weapon available within the game setting can consistently be defeated by a foe not using the strongest weapon (being reliant on Armour Class & Maximum Hit Points) why is that weapon not superceded? Any warrior-society aware of the deficiency would take strides to overcome the deficiency.

If AC & Hit Points are superior we might say the game world is "Defensive Dominant." If Weaponry is superior we might say the world is "Offensive Dominant."

* Comparing desireable proportion of hits and strongest weapon to maximum Hit Points achievable by weakest / average / toughest class / hit die what can we determine as a desireable amount of maximum hit points?

* How many rounds of combat make for a fun and exciting PvE confrontation?

* How many rounds of combat make for a fun and exciting PvP confrontation?

GAME SETTING:

* With regards to the Arms Race of Offence vs. Defence, is the game world intended to be at a fixed point in history? Or subject to change and upon a journey?

* With regards to the Arms Race of Offence vs. Defence, is the game world intended to be dominated / represented by a specific real-world equivalent culture or fantasy ideal?

* If the Arms Race balance is required to be subject to intended IC change, how is that change to be represented?

* If the Arms Race balance is required to be subject to change, how is the setting intended to be protected from Power Creep?

Mundane & Magical Concepts:

* What role should magic play in the design of game systems of Arms and Armour?
* What is the ideal balance within the game setting between Mundane and Magical inputs / outputs (modifiers and results)?

The Imperfect Setting:

* Is it permissable for the game setting to linger for a time in an imperfect state, representative of a power struggle between Arms / Armour, Mundane / Magic?

* If an In-game society / city / culture can be recognised to be suffering an Arms or Armour deficiency, what does this mean for its political stability?

* Are their merits / weaknesses such an imperfect setting could have in promoting / encouraging roleplay?

* What tools would a playerbase require to IC roleplay through such an imperfect balance, in the hope of re-balancing the current dominance?

Comments:

I've had it in the back of my mind for a while now that, from a cultural perspective, Arms and Armour and how they are understood and subject to change could make for a good discussion -- both to these forums -- and IC. If a character is a Mage they might be sat comfortably to their armchair at night supping brandy, thinking magic is "dominant", whereas more mundane knights might be frowning over tactician's maps wondering as to their next step. Or vice versa.

So I thought I'd put a few thoughts down on how that might be mechanically assessed. To aid good setting design. And also, so players and Dev's and DM's can consider the ramifications of the current state of affairs: it might make for thoughtful concepts on how the server progresses - or how individual character's progress.

Some Personal Views:

* The game setting might be more *interesting* if intentionally fluid. From time to time the variables could shift so that Arms is dominant or Armour is dominant.

* Importantly however -- Power Creep should be avoided at all costs.

* "Magic" could be used to explain the variation of Arms & Armour dominance.

* The Forgotten Realms is a mish-mash of Arms & Armour concepts representative of different historical cultures and time-points.

* The Arelith setting might benefit from "grounding itself" within a particular culture and time period (and then potentially being fluid).

* For Arelith to be "fun" for both Offender and Defender, it must fulfill the power-fantasy of both, but not to excess. An Offender must reliably be able to hit; a defender must reliably be able to defend. Player skill and preparedness and intrepid intervention should be able to overcome "static" reliance.


-- Tath.

[NPC Logger Number 2]

Armor is not that good as a source of AC. When it comes to your high AC builds they get most of it from wards, ability score bonuses, feats, and class features. A dex monk spellsword with epic mage armor, armor skin, and improved expertise in dex/wisdom gear is going to have a lot more AC than a fighter in adamantium full plate armor. I'm talking a solid 20-25 points more. The full plate addy fighter won't even be able to hit them while they'll still be hitting the fighter 50% of the time. You can completely take gear out of the equation and have everyone fight naked with their bare fists and the high AC builds will still have high AC regardless.

[Tathkar Eisgrim]

Armor is not that good as a source of AC. When it comes to your high AC builds they get most of it from wards, ability score bonuses, feats, and class features. A dex monk spellsword with epic mage armor, armor skin, and improved expertise in dex/wisdom gear is going to have a lot more AC than a fighter in adamantium full plate armor. I'm talking a solid 20-25 points more. The full plate addy fighter won't even be able to hit them while they'll still be hitting the fighter 50% of the time. You can completely take gear out of the equation and have everyone fight naked with their bare fists and the high AC builds will still have high AC regardless.

Thank you for supplying the numbers. This is ultimately is what concerns me, in a nutshell.

If a naked monk spellsword exists, why does any armour exist? It's redundant in any warrior society.

My own approach to this -- is to look at the social-cultural aspects. I am not a statistician by any means. To my own eyes the numbers are "out-of-control". They don't make sense, to the detriment of good balance, fun, and fair play.

As stated above, armour is irrelevant (in certain circumstances). Anyone spending thousands of coin on adamantine armour is potentially being hoodwinked, if you start peeking behind the curtain.

Now that, is not to say I am opposed to Dexterity builds or Monk builds -- but rather an effort should be made to make numbers represent "Arelith" and a sense of fair play.

[Nevrus]

There's a whole bunch of stuff in the calculation of this to take into account.

For the purpose of this calculation, we're going to ignore tumble, and assume that armor and no-armor both have them; we're also going to ignore natural AC, and assume both are using a +4 wand or potion. There's really a whole bunch of universally available potions that act as straight-up equalizers, so let's look at the base we're getting from gear.

Armor - Max of 9 (8+1)
Armor with Tower Shield - +6 (15)
Dex - Max of 15 (21 Start, +7 abil points)
Dex and Wis - Typical Max of 22 (26 Dex, 14 Wis)

Helmets are available to both so we're not counting them. +3 Armor is also on both, so we're ignoring that too. Unarmored Defense currently offers 7 AC over plate and tower shield (Or more depending on build). The intent is to give the wearer increased defense over their dex-only brethren, so having more seems fine.

Let's check some alternatives to this:
Level 15 Fighter in Plate, Tower Shield, and Helmet gets +3 AC, and falls down to only 4 behind. If they push it to 25 fighter (and then dip the rest for UMD or tumble) they wind up with +6 AC and are only 1 behind. A level 30 pure fighter gets another +3 but cross-classing into tumble only costs 3 AC so this becomes not a gain over 25/5 or 26/4.

Barbarians in chainmail get +4 AC while in medium or light armor, and with elven chain offering a max AC of 12 (which is the same as adamantine plate), which puts them effectively at the same, 3 behind a typical dex/wis character.

A charisma-focused Divine Shield character can activate an additional +10-+13 on top of their plate and shield, potentially exceeding (albeit temporarily) the capability of dex/wis characters.

High-level bards can get close with bard song and effectively more when also using Curse Song.

Palemasters can wind up with +1 to +6 AC depending on investment.

Earthkin Defenders can give themselves +4 AC which puts them on par.

Clerics can use max-level Magic Vestments and Shield of Faith to approach the AC par.

Additionally, specializing some training (feats) into defense can yield more AC regardless of armor worn or not worn.

There's an argument to be made that maybe adamantine heavy armor and plate shields should be giving +4 to equalize them better against dex-based strategies, but AC is widely available if you plan around it.

Now, AB... That's a future post for lunch-time in an hour and a half.

[Jagel]

One of the many things I liked about Mithreas Fixed Level experiment was the way armor was handled. Heavy armors did not grant much AC but instead a lot of damage resistance. Dex builds had more AC, str builds took less damage. This of course led to some silly things like palemasters and sneak/crit immune shapes with dr feats took almost no damage and it is in no way simply transferable to Arelith as it is but the idea was quite good.

[Tathkar Eisgrim]

One of the many things I liked about Mithreas Fixed Level experiment was the way armor was handled. Heavy armors did not grant much AC but instead a lot of damage resistance. Dex builds had more AC, str builds took less damage. This of course led to some silly things like palemasters and sneak/crit immune shapes with dr feats took almost no damage and it is in no way simply transferable to Arelith as it is but the idea was quite good.

What if the opposite approach was taken? Defining the detriments of having no armour or light armour?

[Seven Sons of Sin]

I think one of the significant changes to the Armour game was the addition of +1 uni saves to mithril. While you can still grind for the rune/5% on adamantine, the gap really shrunk from the traditional upgrade path of mithril -> adamantine. In fact, I'd wonder how expensive adamantine would be if it was disassociated from masterly damask (my theory is that it would be cheap).

Giving how the meta/knowledge has shifted, and people realize how important saving throws are, that +1 uni saves is arguably better than an additional +1 AC.

I would really like to know if anything would break if adamantine was bumped to +4. Or, if Adamantine Heavy Armours were given significantly higher damage resistance. Currently its 10%.

Would something break if it went 15%? 20%?

Is the better angle with armour to tackle AC, or Damage Immunities? I like the latter, purely from the aesthetic reason of making armoured fighters "tanky."

[Tathkar Eisgrim]

I think one of the significant changes to the Armour game was the addition of +1 uni saves to mithril. While you can still grind for the rune/5% on adamantine, the gap really shrunk from the traditional upgrade path of mithril -> adamantine. In fact, I'd wonder how expensive adamantine would be if it was disassociated from masterly damask (my theory is that it would be cheap).

Giving how the meta/knowledge has shifted, and people realize how important saving throws are, that +1 uni saves is arguably better than an additional +1 AC.

I would really like to know if anything would break if adamantine was bumped to +4. Or, if Adamantine Heavy Armours were given significantly higher damage resistance. Currently its 10%.

Would something break if it went 15%? 20%?

Is the better angle with armour to tackle AC, or Damage Immunities? I like the latter, purely from the aesthetic reason of making armoured fighters "tanky."

I do like the "tanky" reasoning.

What if No Armour / Light Armour had extra vulnerabilities attached?

(Rather than extending effects upwards through Armour variants you attached effects to the PC to show they were not wearing medium or above?)

* A Bleed Effect.
* A Susceptibility to being Stunned - that knocks you out of a stance.
* A Save Penalty.
* A susceptibility to fire.

A save penalty especially would have further effect, if you took into consideration the extra +1 Universal Saves of Mithril.

These could be countered of course by enchantments, or a spell or other investment but the point would be the lightest armour users would have to make an investment.

[Seven Sons of Sin]

There's a good video here of why you should buff instead of nerf, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsC8io4w1sY.

Going after "no armour / light armour" by adding vulnerabilities doesn't sound like a good idea at all, to be frank, because the sample size of those individuals is so vast in comparison to heavy-armour builds. (you have casters, healer clerics, monks, div dips, monk dips, dex-builds, and more)

The powers-that-be should look at the popular heavy-armour builds and focus on ways to make adamantine differentiate itself from mithril.

As well as take into account Nevrus' point.

The big problem I foresee is how buffs to heavy armour buff divine builds too. I don't know what clever way you could do to differentiate this (maybe add charisma penalties, idk).

But yeah, buff instead of nerf for stuff like this. "No armour / light armour" isn't overtuned or overpowered, its just that other circumstantial changes have been made (quarterstaff, monk dips, spellswords, save-meta) have disproportionately benefited some strategies over others.

We've been talking about for awhile how str-builds are slowly being left behind, looking at armour might be one way to counteract that. I think mithril vs. adamantine might be just one place to start.

[Nevrus]

The AB Game

This is a much harder game to play without putting yourself at high risk.

The server tends towards 27 being the typical 'base.' 20 base, 5 epic, 2 class.

Barbarians get +2 AB while raging, bringing them to 27.
Rogues get +2 AB with their specialty weapons at level 24. With 4 pre-epic fighter levels they typically wind up at 23.
23 Fighters get +2 AB with any melee weapon, hitting the 27 mark.
Heavily-invested paladins get +2 from their Bless Weapon (over typical +3 enhancement) and wind up at effectively 27.
Spellswords pulling 4 pre-epic fighter levels wind up with 21, with Epic Mage Armor pushing them to 25.

Only a few classes can breach this barrier without lots of windup.
Divine Champions can get +5-+9 from Divine Wrath depending on their investment, bring them to 30-34.
Arcane Archers that invest 19 levels wind up with +10 enhancement that isn't factored into the attack cap or bow enhancement, bringing them to 35.
A pure ranger winds up with a +7 favored enemy bonus and +2 effective bonus from Blade Thirst, which bumps them to 34. If they do a 3 or 4 dip they wind up with 33.

With windup:
Paladins can push an additional +5 with Divine Favor, an additional +2 from Bless and Prayer, and an additional +1 from Aid, putting them at 35 for a short time. Longer than Divine Champions, but it requires standing still and casting several spells.
Clerics can pull the same tricks in addition to Divine Power, putting them at the same footing for an even longer windup period.
Any class can pull off the Bless/Aid/Prayer combo, and even throw in a battletide for another +2, using only items, for a very brief window.

Finally, two-handing offers another +2 on top of all of this.

There's only a few ways to pull off these high AB combos while maintaining high AC without a lot of windup/personal buffing, and they mostly involve monk or rogue dips for tumble and wis AC. You can't use a shield with monk AC though, and you can't get the 2h benefits while using a shield, so pulling this off becomes a balancing act.

Typically achieving reliably high AB and high damage to make it meaningful enough to override squishy high-AC characters means you sacrifice your own AC and they might have a good chance of hitting you while they are in Imp Expertise.

There's a whole lot of stuff to consider, but without specific class builds, chasing that elusive AB cap is very difficult or leaves you vulnerable for long periods of buffing if your enemy has the initiative.

[Baron Saturday]

Quick correction: Ranger favored enemy only gives damage, not AB. Bane of Enemies does give +2 AB, however, so rangers end up with 29.

[Nevrus]

I stand corrected.

So, all of this considered, we factor in the +4 bonus from feats (Focus, Epic Focus, Prowess) and the typical +14 bonus from ability scores, and the +3 weapon, and we wind up with the following breakdowns:

Barbarians: 48
Fighters: 48
Paladins: 48
Spellswords: 46
Pure Monks: 48
Rangers vs Favored Enemy: 50
Rogue/Fighters: 44
Cookie-Cutter WM: 47

Divine Champions: 51-55
Arcane Archers: 56

Higher attack ability scores, which have costs in other scores, can make this higher.

Breaching the 70 AC benchmark is very difficult for all but two prestige classes without long periods of wind-up which can be exploited in a pvp environment, and which is only accessible to paladin and cleric, which typically have a lower attack ability score before-hand because of mental stat requirements.

This is all a thought experiment for myself in public at this point to understand why the balance is shaking out this way.

[Tathkar Eisgrim]

Alright then -- thanks for the link, Seven.

The crux of the matter appears then to be: how might we create more Fun. How might we fulfill the aim of:

Please forgive me quoting myself.

* For Arelith to be "fun" for both Offender and Defender, it must fulfill the power-fantasy of both, but not to excess. An Offender must reliably be able to hit; a defender must reliably be able to defend. Player skill and preparedness and intrepid intervention should be able to overcome "static" reliance.

The key words you may notice are "power-fantasy, but not to excess."

[Nevrus]

The problem with buffing AB is that it has cascading effects down the line.

Hitting 60 AB gives you a 50% chance to hit 70 AC but a 100% chance to hit 60 AC and a 100% chance to hit 55 AC at least twice, which then discounts these builds due to the fact that they can be cut to pieces quickly.

Right now everything is saved by sheer virtue of high AB builds being glass cannons usually, having sub-par AC in exchange for their extreme AB.

I'd like to see the gaps between base-line and optimized close up a bit, personally. Try to hit everyone towards a 52 AB and 65 AC with long-term buffs active. Exceeding either is a choice that stops you from exceeding the former.

Altering gear and improving some epic attack bonus feats could accomplish this with minimal fuss.

[Shrouded Wanderer]

Personally I dont see any glaring issues with the current AC /AB meta except Arcane Archers getting a ridiculous amount of AB coupled with the best survival mechanic of all-- HiPs

Not to rehash that HiPsdebate...

we seem to forget truestrike potions exist, as well as most of the builds that CAN hit post 70s AC usually do not have blind fight meaning they usually suffer a -4 to AC from stealth attacks which their natural counter is able to hit.


One problem I have with AA in itself is the Elf lock wherein in order to counter these post 70s build you have to be an elf/Haley which limits RP options.

I dont really mind it too much tBH. But I dont think AAs should have as much AB as they do,or if they did they should have far less damage output.

[Hunter548]

Personally I dont see any glaring issues with the current AC /AB meta except Arcane Archers getting a ridiculous amount of AB coupled with the best survival mechanic of all-- HiPs

Not to rehash that HiPsdebate...

we seem to forget truestrike potions exist, as well as most of the builds that CAN hit post 70s AC usually do not have blind fight meaning they usually suffer a -4 to AC from stealth attacks which their natural counter is able to hit.


One problem I have with AA in itself is the Elf lock wherein in order to counter these post 70s build you have to be an elf/Haley which limits RP options.

I dont really mind it too much tBH. But I dont think AAs should have as much AB as they do,or if they did they should have far less damage output.

Arcane Archers don't get HIPS without multiclassing to something that gets it.

[Shrouded Wanderer]

Personally I dont see any glaring issues with the current AC /AB meta except Arcane Archers getting a ridiculous amount of AB coupled with the best survival mechanic of all-- HiPs

Not to rehash that HiPsdebate...

we seem to forget truestrike potions exist, as well as most of the builds that CAN hit post 70s AC usually do not have blind fight meaning they usually suffer a -4 to AC from stealth attacks which their natural counter is able to hit.


One problem I have with AA in itself is the Elf lock wherein in order to counter these post 70s build you have to be an elf/Haley which limits RP options.

I dont really mind it too much tBH. But I dont think AAs should have as much AB as they do,or if they did they should have far less damage output.

Arcane Archers don't get HIPS without multiclassing to something that gets it.

Its standard to take for the class though. Semantics doesnt provide good feedback.

[Ork]

It isn't standard. Without AB the AA class would die off entirely. It is the literal only advantage it has over ranger archers.

[Tarkus the dog]

Yeah, arcane archers have two things going for them and that's AB and premo pierce. Without that they are just awful rangers that die very fast.

[dallion43]

The ~70AC builds get ~70AC when they turn on imp.exp, bringing the ab to anywhere between ~35-38.

23lvl/x/x fighter AC is ~51AC (10b+8arm+4arm.b+3shi+4shi.b+4hlm+2as+6tum+1dod.bot+1dex+4nat+4haste) pre imp.exp. ~61AC with imp.exp.
21barb/x/x barbarian is ~50AC (10base+3armor+5ar.bon+3deflect+1dod.bot+4barb.dod+6tumble+3bas.shield+3bon.shi+4dex +4natural+4hast.dod) pre imp.exp, ~60AC with imp.exp.
Similar ~58AC with imp.exp usually found on the rest of the str builds including WM.

If both turn imp.exp ->>
viewtopic.php?f=37&t=29271

P.C
dex monk spellsword.
10base+0armor+4ar.bon+4deflect(w)+1d(boots)e+6tumb+5ss.s+14dex+2AS+4natural+4hast.dod+8wiz = 62AC. 72AC post imp.exp.
In my humble opinion Sai and 5ss.s shouldn't be a thing, just like kama.
I honestly didn't build monk/ss for ages. Did I miss anything?

P.C.C
I am not saying str builds don't deserve a cookie. Lets just not blow this out of proportions :p.
Plus, 70AC is usually a trade-in in terms of: gear slots, damage, ab, stat spread(hp), saves and weapon treat range. It isn't as one sided as it is presented.

Additional 5% on ada.gear won't make a breaking difference, but 10%+ will.
+4Ada gear or lowering enchant req. on ada will buff div builds and they are in a good place already.
A feat requiring high str like overwhelming critical can be buffed. All hail Hips barb/WMs one rounding PCs!...eeee...nvm.
Etc.

All above is an imho of course.

[Scurvy Cur]

I'll probably swing back for a more substantive post later since some wrong things have been said on the internet, but don't have a lot of time now.

What I do have time for is the obligatory "Remove AC skleen and wild elf AC bonuses" plug.

One of the things that's currently pushing AC (especially dex build AC) into uncomfortable territory has been the slow addition of +1 AC here, +1 AC there beyond what builds get as a baseline. I'm guessing it's been caged in terms of "+1 AC isn't a lot, so we can probably safely add this" when it's been discussed.

There are two issues. The first is that 1 AC is a lot, especially if you're already sitting at a high AC value, because each point of AC you acquire is more valuable than the last, up until you get about ~78-80 or so. The second, of course, is that when you add several of these small +1 bonuses, builds that can neatly check several of the +1 bonus boxes will start ending up 2, 3, or 4 AC ahead of their peers.

There are two particularly easy boxes to check right now.

Shield AC skleen is pretty much +1 AC to all builds with monk levels, who really do not need it.

Wild elf is +1 AC that's pretty free on any build that could have any other sort of elf, and their stat line would be fine without it (mostly building a wild elf is an exercise in gifting int instead of con, and just being identical to any other elf but with free toughness and +1 AC).

Will be back later to talk AC and AB ranges.

[Dr. B]

Personally I dont see any glaring issues with the current AC /AB meta except Arcane Archers getting a ridiculous amount of AB coupled with the best survival mechanic of all-- HiPs

Not to rehash that HiPsdebate...

we seem to forget truestrike potions exist, as well as most of the builds that CAN hit post 70s AC usually do not have blind fight meaning they usually suffer a -4 to AC from stealth attacks which their natural counter is able to hit.


One problem I have with AA in itself is the Elf lock wherein in order to counter these post 70s build you have to be an elf/Haley which limits RP options.

I dont really mind it too much tBH. But I dont think AAs should have as much AB as they do,or if they did they should have far less damage output.

Arcane Archers don't get HIPS without multiclassing to something that gets it.

Its standard to take for the class though.

Some SD/AA builds that have circulated recently may have led you to believe that the class combo is popular when it is not. It is also much less effective now that the HiPs CD duration has been expanded.

[jomonog]

Without stating the obvious AC and AB aren't really the whole picture here anyway as you also need to factor in damage output to get an idea of the balance between melee classes.

[Jagel]

True but you generally (never, ever) focus on damage before figuring out how your build stacks up ac or ab.

[Shrouded Wanderer]

There is An amazing damage tool that you can use to visualize how much damage a build will do based on AB, AC and damage output


http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/nwn/


You'll find that higher Ab does more damage, naturally. But theres a disparagement between some weapons that cant seem to be rectified right now.