Page 8 of 8

Re: The Wizard Experience

Posted: Wed Dec 29, 2021 10:57 pm
by -XXX-
I've done some PGCC tinkering around arcanist AC and would like to add a few notes:

- if we're aiming to maximize a wizard's/sorcerer's AC, the EMA confers only 8 AC thanks to how AC stacking works. This means:
  • we'll end up with multiple gear pieces that have one of their property slots "blanked"
  • we are taking an epic feat and only getting 40% out of it.

- currently available ASF-less non-cloth armor pieces are:
  • spellthief's armor - that gives us pretty much a vanilla stutted leather with +3 spellcraft.
  • armor of immolation (mostly for sorcerers) - that has arguably much greater utility than spellthief's armor, but only gives us 1 AC. This one is more of a souped up robe than an actual armor.
Both options have a rather (for our intents and purposes) useless AC bonus property that only makes them 5% to basin (spellthief armor can at least be runed).

- STR based builds get to waive DEX and still get an access to AC7/8 armor with multiple fantastic craftable options. This allows them to go full STR.
For comparison, currently available ASF-less choices also require attention to DEX to get the most out of.


Perhaps some new and less awkward craftable armor options with 0 ASF might be good.

Re: The Wizard Experience

Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2021 7:45 pm
by malcolm_mountainslayer
-XXX- wrote: Wed Dec 29, 2021 10:57 pm I've done some PGCC tinkering around arcanist AC and would like to add a few notes:

- if we're aiming to maximize a wizard's/sorcerer's AC, the EMA confers only 8 AC thanks to how AC stacking works. This means:
  • we'll end up with multiple gear pieces that have one of their property slots "blanked"
  • we are taking an epic feat and only getting 40% out of it.

- currently available ASF-less non-cloth armor pieces are:
  • spellthief's armor - that gives us pretty much a vanilla stutted leather with +3 spellcraft.
  • armor of immolation (mostly for sorcerers) - that has arguably much greater utility than spellthief's armor, but only gives us 1 AC. This one is more of a souped up robe than an actual armor.
Both options have a rather (for our intents and purposes) useless AC bonus property that only makes them 5% to basin (spellthief armor can at least be runed).

- STR based builds get to waive DEX and still get an access to AC7/8 armor with multiple fantastic craftable options. This allows them to go full STR.
For comparison, currently available ASF-less choices also require attention to DEX to get the most out of.


Perhaps some new and less awkward craftable armor options with 0 ASF might be good.
That plus 8 armor from EMA adds up when you free up auto still feats and can also take armor skin. Also duration super long and undispellable.

I feel greensteel chain should be true ASF 0 nuch like how mithril chainshirt would be in table top(spelthief armor currently does this -1 ac).

With a dex score of 8 you can trans foci cat grace your dex mod that high without even using empowered

For now though, i think spellthief armor suffices for a no dex build as you can just empowered cast cats grace with a base dex 8 character and reach 7 ac which is what most non fullplate armors offer. ( 7 and 8 are the most common with 9 belonging only to fullplate and paddee with max dex bonus included.)

That being said, i would not be opposed to a special halfplate with no ASF as it would be in line with spellthief ac ( both work with 8 base dex) but halfplate would weigh more, not be suspectible to dispel debuff for dex lost and still require heavy armor proficiency with the ranger dip does not offer.

I think it's important we leave shields alone for now as it would vastly impact sorc div dips (where the halfplate option doesnt give them more ac)

*edit* i do feel you are downplaying howneasy ot is to get max dex on armor of immolation (onstill support half plate option) as lots of str builds are base dex 13 and armor of immolation requires base dex 14

Re: The Wizard Experience

Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2021 8:04 pm
by -XXX-
Accursed chains disallow the use of Dv Shield. That means ways to add nice stuff that would not work with div dip do exist.

Re: The Wizard Experience

Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2021 8:20 pm
by malcolm_mountainslayer
-XXX- wrote: Thu Dec 30, 2021 8:04 pm Accursed chains disallow the use of Dv Shield. That means ways to add nice stuff that would not work with div dip do exist.
True but thats a class themed around arcane armor wielding and still not fullplate. Ahaind id be for a halfplate option as its in line with the ac of spell thief armor if you has enough dex (which you can do as a low dex character) we can even throw on something useful for a mage on it as they still need a fighter dip instead of a ranger deep to have heavy proficiency. Neither of us are deciding but i feel that approach would better appeal to both sides.

*edit* the cursed chains when doing a hex pm biild makes mage armor not super stack with it since its plus value is mostly from a mod and its not as much base ac as fullplate

The way strength rangers wear light armor mages easily can too, but i feel a special halfplate would make things interesting. I feel keeping fullplate out of the mix is important as auto still doesn't become only for shield purposes.

Something like a no ASF halfplate + 3 and + 1/2 int

Re: The Wizard Experience

Posted: Thu Dec 30, 2021 9:29 pm
by -XXX-
I listed accursed chains to point out that the team has found a workaroud for the div dip problem. This opens up design space for potential craftable armor pieces intended for arcane spellcasters without the risk of them being used to reach ridiculous AC when combined with the div dip. That's all.

I wasn't suggesting to actually use accursed chains because, as mentioned, it's +7 AC becomes +2 AC when used with EMA.

Re: The Wizard Experience

Posted: Fri Dec 31, 2021 6:34 am
by malcolm_mountainslayer
I understand your intention/comment about workaround. I am not sure that because it is an option that it should be an explored option and I gave the reasons why I thought my proposed option was better, but alas I think we exhausted our feedback viewpoints at this point.