Parry Shield AC

[Cabarcos]

Base Attack Bonus Required Hard Parry Skill Required Shield AC Bonus Notes
5 5 +1 Possible at level 5
10 10 +2 Possible at level 10
15 15 +3 Possible at level 15
20 20 +4 Possible at level 20
21 25 +5 Possible at level 22
21 30 +6 Possible at level 27

I've a 23 level char (19 rogue/4 ranger) with 18 AB and the shield AC is +3, so you really get useful AC at the last levels.
You are tempted to use a shield until to get near level 30. In my case I'm not because the char is missing a hand.
I think that the requisites could be adjusted a bit, maybe to every +4 in AB, and even with same the skill requeriment in parry it will make more sense to me:

+1 4 AB
+2 8 AB
+3 12 AB
+4 16 AB
+5 20 AB
+6 21 AB

You can get a +1 large shield at level 3 quite easily, but will need to get to level 15 to get the same +3 AC.
Starting as a rogue you need to get to level 7 to get your first point in shield AC, and even with 6 ranger levels, I'll get the +6 AC at level 30, +3 AC in a 3 levels if I'm not mistaken.

[LovelyLightningWitch]

I think Parry Shield AC was meant more to complement Swashbucklers than rogues - a high BAB frontliner whose class fantasy often involves the image of fighting with a single rapier, saber, cutlass or what have you and an empty off-hand.

Granted, even with that allowance, it pales against the dueling buckler until high epics.

[Elaetheus]

I am glad this mechanic exists, it always puzzled me that full-plated characters would have to carry huge chunks of metal on their left arm as well. I agree that for a levelling character, the mechanic kicks in somewhat late, so the AB progression could be modified. I'll also post some different feedback, relating to Parry AC on fighters.

From what I see, running 1hand + parry AC puts a fighter, especially a 25+ one, at a disadvantage compared to the 1hand + shield one, the only (major !) reason being the aesthetic perhaps. Maybe the "shield bonus" of fighter should stack with Parry AC, at least if wearing heavy armour -- after all, running an addy tower or better on 25 fighter would still give more benefits than simple 8AC.

[Itikar]

The 21 bab limit is a bit annoying, because several builds cannot hit it.

I would really like if medium ab classes could reach maximum parry ac without dipping.

[Mattamue]

You might not have been here or remember, but parry ac did used to stack and do more, and be more available to low ab classes. That had to be adjusted for balance reasons. Parry ac is fine for what it is. It isn't meant to be competitive with a tower shield with magic vest and stat dweomer

[Subtext]

It's nowhere near that competitive even if lower AB classes get it.
It's still a full skill investment and you don't get any of the potential stat, skill or immunity improvements of actual shields. There's some faint use for it if you can't fit shield proficiency into your build but if you can't, there's a good chance you don't have the necessary AB for the full bonus too.

Likewise, parry is...kind of a trap. The riposte AB and damage are nice but you're still relegated to 3 riposte per round at max...and only if you get hit. Other defensive tools like concealment are sort of counterproductive there since if you don't get hit to begin with, nothing happens.
It also doesn't synergize well with edodge. If edodge procs, so does parry.

I don't think parry is a good choice for most builds...and for concepts where I do, I don't think the BAB requirement is necessary at all. Folks with 15 or less BAB pre epic already gimped themselves in other regards due to missing an attack per round. Let them have the AC at least.

[-XXX-]

You might not have been here or remember, but parry ac did used to stack and do more, and be more available to low ab classes. That had to be adjusted for balance reasons. Parry ac is fine for what it is. It isn't meant to be competitive with a tower shield with magic vest and stat dweomer

I was wondering about this a while back. What builds/classes became troublesome with uncapped parry AC?
As it is right now it reads to me more like "this is for melee builds, your wizard must not have AC no matter what becasuse reasons"

[AstralUniverse]

You might not have been here or remember, but parry ac did used to stack and do more, and be more available to low ab classes. That had to be adjusted for balance reasons. Parry ac is fine for what it is. It isn't meant to be competitive with a tower shield with magic vest and stat dweomer

I was wondering about this a while back. What builds/classes became troublesome with uncapped parry AC?
As it is right now it reads to me more like "this is for melee builds, your wizard must not have AC no matter what becasuse reasons"

yeah so... monks

Later, div sorc, iirc? Think about anything that doesnt want to have ab and would also rather not have a shield for casting reasons or monk dip reasons.

[-XXX-]

yeah so... monks

Later, div sorc, iirc? Think about anything that doesnt want to have ab and would also rather not have a shield for casting reasons or monk dip reasons.

Disable div dip for sorcs* and make parry work only with a non-monk weapon equipped in the main hand.
A full parry bonus would make it possible for wizards to bump their AC to 50s and more importantly, it'd make those everpresent ugly offhand clubs go away.


*it's been said time and again that div dip sorcs were bad - I doubt that extra 3 AC were making such a big difference.

[Elaetheus]

You might not have been here or remember, but parry ac did used to stack and do more, and be more available to low ab classes. That had to be adjusted for balance reasons. Parry ac is fine for what it is. It isn't meant to be competitive with a tower shield with magic vest and stat dweomer

I have precisely mentioned fighters, and even excluded dex-based builds (though I do not see how 23+ dex ftr is a menace with this change). On a fighter, taking 30 parry amounts to spending 30 skillpoints on a low-skillpoint class to get 2-3 less AC and no extra other stats (not to mention that -twohand switching seems to be AB-penalising, unlike shield un/equipping, but maybe I am missing something).

I do not know about what parry AC is "meant to be", but we had times when there was no such AC bonus at all. I do not see how the proposed modification makes the types of str-based ftr 25/wm5 stronger than they are with tower shields. As for other classes, I have only really played a spellsword on Arelith, and I am not sure they need any shield AC stacking given their otherwise very powerful kit.

[Mattamue]

I do not know about what parry AC is "meant to be"

What builds/classes became troublesome with uncapped parry AC?

search.php?keywords=parry&terms=all&aut ... mit=Search

The update was originally around June 2020. Have fun!

[AstralUniverse]

yeah so... monks

Later, div sorc, iirc? Think about anything that doesnt want to have ab and would also rather not have a shield for casting reasons or monk dip reasons.

Disable div dip for sorcs* and make parry work only with a non-monk weapon equipped in the main hand.
A full parry bonus would make it possible for wizards to bump their AC to 50s and more importantly, it'd make those everpresent ugly offhand clubs go away.


*it's been said time and again that div dip sorcs were bad - I doubt that extra 3 AC were making such a big difference.

it's been a while, but I'm pretty sure monk was disabled from the start, but still worked in some circumstance. spellsword's bonus shield (empty off hand) ac back in the day also unintentionally stacked with parry ac. I think there were suggestions back then to just disable it for mages altogether but those suggestions were not taken I suppose.

[Elaetheus]

I do not know about what parry AC is "meant to be"

What builds/classes became troublesome with uncapped parry AC?

search.php?keywords=parry&terms=all&aut ... mit=Search

The update was originally around June 2020. Have fun!

I do not see STR level 20+ fighters in that search. Still, the whole debate passes as passively agrro to me, so it is probably better not to take it any further. My opinion on parry on high level fighters persists.

[Seven Sons of Sin]

I totally agree it feels like too high an investment just to be mechanically equivalent to something much easier to obtain (a tower shield) while designed to fulfill a "fantasy."

Parry deserves something "more."

[AstralUniverse]

I dont see a huge problem in reducing the bab requirement to only mostly exclude mages and not 3/4 bab classes, but please do not buff Parry's effects. It's good enough for 1 skill investment for what it does. The mode itself is not useless at all either.

[Elaetheus]

please do not buff Parry's effects. It's good enough for 1 skill investment for what it does. The mode itself is not useless at all either.

I cannot speak from the experience of DEX-characters where I believe the main mode is actually useful. My comment was mostly about STR characters where the competition is a +4 tower shield and extra AC bonus from fighter levels. This would in fact not modify parry globally, just on fighters (in heavy armour if needed), as I said myself even for 1hand spellswords it is not a big deal. I guess if the devs see this thread now they will have a few viewpoints to take from.

[TurningLeaf]

Actually activating Parry seems to work best for PvE on a melee sneaker without access to Improved Expertise. Parry has synergy with winning initiative. The ideal sequence goes, flank sneak attack on big baddie, who quickly turns to face you, but you click Parry after starting your attack. The baddie only got one or two of their lower-ab attacks against you before the start of the next round. Now you are parrying them but your companion(s) are attacking them and will draw their attention again in another round or two. Then you turn Parry off and start the cycle over. Note that if you didn't win initiative the big baddie gets to attack you first in the next round after your sneaks, before your Parry skill activated.

Improved Expertise seems to be better in almost every situation. But of course things don't always work out for having 13 int.