Remove/Replace Fortification.

[grodon9999]

Rework Grazing hits to hit different AC ranges over time... first one might hit a 20 AC, next a 60 AC, next a 40 AC, next an 80 AC...( if AC was Capped at 80 for this scale, well the high AC person is barely getting hit at all )

I think that's getting silly. If an 80 is a no hit a 20 should still be useless.

What's broken in DDO is useless AC doesn't make a useless character.

[Borror0]

What's broken in DDO is useless AC doesn't make a useless character.

To a degree, I agree but not completely. It would be alright for some characters to have zero Armor Class, if they have the hit points to make up for it. However, they should be drastically less easy to heal. In other words, there should be a drawback to having no AC. Currently, there is not in all practical senses.

[BlackSteel]

Specifically - what do you guys think should be the ACs needed for various areas to be effective?

I actually think most of the current values are fine. With AC being a worthwhile investment on trash (even on epic) but just barely possible to make a difference on bosses.

epic DQ should never ever have a 95% miss chance on a PC. being able to get a 20-30% avoidance is already considerable.

so with present numbers OK, then work should be given to making these numbers more accessible to more characters. Finish all the PrE's and introduce more loot with the same AC bonuses. Lets see dodge 1-4 on a larger variety of raid loot. or natural armor bonuses. A SnB character having access to Dodge 4 or a monk character picking up dodge 2. How about using epic slots for more effects: yellow slot: dodge 1, blue slot: dodge 2, red slot: dodge 3.

its still a tremendous tradeoff. those slots used for AC are slots that could have been used on altho useful effects.

rebalancing the attack bonuses and damage of every mob in the game; and changing how a large amount of the playerbase approaches combat just so a very small vocal part of the community can feel more useful is not going to work.

yes my main is a barbarian; and I typically main tank in raids, but if theres an intimitank thats capable of doing the same job I almost always pass the duty off to them. But the good ones are capable of both turtling up when needed, and filling a DPS role as well. I'm much happier filling that slot with another DPS character in a raid, if the intimitank is going to pike along the entire quest until the end boss.

[Emili]

We had a similar debate when grazing hits were being introduced... argument was - it's no fun for a PC not being able to hit the mob - and in reverse it's fine if a 70+ AC ranger with two weapons take more grazing damage then a 70+ AC SnB sops up in DR...

You all assume the mob base damage is high because they need to threaten a PC character while partially true but they also need "To Hit" a PC character ... this includes those PC's with a moderately high AC while grazing those closing in on the extreme AC. The Mob To Hit stat is also based on the strength of the mob much like our own PC... How does mob deliver grazes to said 80+ AC pc? Simply put it's To Hit is placed high enough and this also entails some of it's damage base.

Like a PC ... much the "To Hit"/Damage output of is proportional. Thus I ask how do you lessen the damage output of the mob without killing much of it's ability "To Hit" the 80 AC PC?

[grodon9999]

Like a PC ... much the "To Hit"/Damage output of is proportional. Thus I ask how do you lessen the damage output of the mob without killing much of it's ability "To Hit" the 80 AC PC?

Give them Weapon Finesse

[Oreg]

I would much prefer to see a damage mitigation system based on armor type. Makes much more sense especially if adding in bonuses for evasion or dodging wearing lighter armor.


But it is D&D and its not going to change.

[Ganolyn]

I would much prefer to see a damage mitigation system based on armor type. Makes much more sense especially if adding in bonuses for evasion or dodging wearing lighter armor.


But it is D&D and its not going to change.

That was the beauty of AC when originally invented way back when. It mixed how hard you are to hit and how hard you are to hurt in one convenient roll. They have completely warped that system now and it might be time for another approach.

[Oreg]

That was the beauty of AC when originally invented way back when. It mixed how hard you are to hit and how hard you are to hurt in one convenient roll. They have completely warped that system now and it might be time for another approach.

Yep. It has never made sense to me that a fighter in full plate takes more damage than a high AC ranger in leather if both are standing completely still and not defending themsleves. I'd love to see a system where each armor slot has mitigation attached to it like EQ2 but I don't ever see it happening.

[Lleren]

I think that's getting silly. If an 80 is a no hit a 20 should still be useless.

What's broken in DDO is useless AC doesn't make a useless character.

Example of that specific portion of the changes I would propose, not hard numbers. Numbers used only to make clear that the mob wasn't rolling a d20 to hit, but was hitting a predetermined range. There is a lot that is broken in a d20 system when you let your players go at it according to the rules. Lots of groups never have problems, some players however will come up with pun-pun.

That being said, its part of a whole slew that would need to be done together, and if all I get is thats sily and not screaming I'll be shocked.

[grodon9999]

Yep. It has never made sense to me that a fighter in full plate takes more damage than a high AC ranger in leather if both are standing completely still and not defending themsleves. I'd love to see a system where each armor slot has mitigation attached to it like EQ2 but I don't ever see it happening.

What high-AC Ranger is still wearing armor at all?

AC is broken in this game, might as well giving all armor some damage mitigation.

[grodon9999]

That was the beauty of AC when originally invented way back when. It mixed how hard you are to hit and how hard you are to hurt in one convenient roll. They have completely warped that system now and it might be time for another approach.

The problem is the improvement-creep that breaks most games. If things keep getting added to the game that allow players who grind for AC (like me) to have ACs of 70+ how can that possibly work with when more casual people can maybe hit 50?

[Cyr]

What's broken in DDO is useless AC doesn't make a useless character.

In your opinion a large number of characters should be useless then, including pretty much every barbarian. In epic, 95% of characters should then be useless.

This sounds like a great game you are proposing. Ideological beliefs about what should be a good toon as opposed to what actual is true in the game and then tailoring suggestions to accomplish this is only results in nerfing toons and lost revenue for Turbine.

[Cyr]

The problem is the improvement-creep that breaks most games. If things keep getting added to the game that allow players who grind for AC (like me) to have ACs of 70+ how can that possibly work with when more casual people can maybe hit 50?

The main problem with AC is that you fall off the dice. Without this concern there would be no AC issues really. Suggestions like A_D's tying fort to AC would be viable and actually useful. High AC toons would have value, while mid AC toons would too. It's all about falling off the dice. We can not ignore this when we suggest other changes, particuarly ones that use the AC system. A_D's suggestion would be neat if the AC system did not have the possibility of falling off the dice, but as it is (and you must assume it will not change as part of this since that would be just a massive amount of changes at once) it only serves to nerf a large variety of builds with low AC into oblivion.

[grodon9999]

In your opinion a large number of characters should be useless then, including pretty much every barbarian. In epic, 95% of characters should then be useless.

Only useless because a usable AC just isn't possible for them under current game mechanics. The fact that a toon can have zero defense - heck a party can have zero defense except for spammed-healing - and still be ideal screams "broken."

This sounds like a great game you are proposing. Ideological beliefs about what should be a good toon as opposed to what actual is true in the game and then tailoring suggestions to accomplish this is only results in nerfing toons and lost revenue for Turbine.

I am arrogant enough to say that my old PnP groups's house rules made much more sense than what is currently in DDO.

[grodon9999]

The main problem with AC is that you fall off the dice. Without this concern there would be no AC issues really. Suggestions like A_D's tying fort to AC would be viable and actually useful. High AC toons would have value, while mid AC toons would too. It's all about falling off the dice. We can not ignore this when we suggest other changes, particuarly ones that use the AC system. A_D's suggestion would be neat if the AC system did not have the possibility of falling off the dice, but as it is (and you must assume it will not change as part of this since that would be just a massive amount of changes at once) it only serves to nerf a large variety of builds with low AC into oblivion.

Only they they still remain low AC. People don't build defense into their toons because they don't need it or it is extremely difficult to get.

The whole system needs to be re-tooled. I don't expect any of this to happen. The to-hit and AC range of characters and mobs needs to be compressed to work within a D20 for any of these changes to work. If fort were a negative seeker and you still have ACs ranging from 20-80 at 20th level (and mobs have +50 attack bonuses) it absolutely would be broken.

[smatt]

Only they they still remain low AC. People don't build defense into their toons because they don't need it or it is extremely difficult to get.

The whole system needs to be re-tooled. I don't expect any of this to happen. The to-hit and AC range of characters and mobs needs to be compressed to work within a D20 for any of these changes to work. If fort were a negative seeker and you still have ACs ranging from 20-80 at 20th level (and mobs have +50 attack bonuses) it absolutely would be broken.

Oh nnnoooooooo here come sthe D100 system

Oh Bor???

[Borror0]

Oh Bor???

Yes?

I'm not even sure what the heck grodon9999 is talking about. Pretty sure I disagree with him, though.

[smatt]

Yes?

I'm not even sure what the heck grodon9999 is talking about. Pretty sure I disagree with him, though.

Well he's talking aobut the wide range of possible AC. Even within the I have real AC crowd... Consdering that you see AC builds that go from 60-90, which is clearly out of the D20 realm.... And I understand taht the attempts to repalce the fortification system are also aimed at least starting to address the many issues surrounding the vast Ocean, that is AC in DDO.... But he threw out that it will be impossibly hard to really fix it, and they should jsut drop the D20 system and go to a bigger dice..... At least for too hit situations...

[Borror0]

But he threw out that it will be impossibly hard to really fix it, and they should jsut drop the D20 system and go to a bigger dice

Beurk. No.

[smatt]

Beurk. No.

Well I agree...