Cap AC by level

[grodon9999]

It does entirely the opposite.

My making useful AC's achievable you encourage characters to achieve those AC's. This encourages people to wear a variety of armour types.
With useful AC's unachievable for 95% of people you should wear robes (instant change) and not use shields.

If max AC can be achieved without a total focus on it but by focusing in several areas then you encourage a variety of builds as builds will chose different routes to achieve this. If max ac is only achievable by focusing everything on AC then you have one build.

Max AC of 20 + (level*2). +10 for epic.

I'm afraid you couldn't be more wrong.

In non-epic content? how is this NOT achievable? It is, it's not that tough. My issue with it is that it requires splashing monk.

[Dendrix]

In non-epic content? how is this NOT achievable? It is, it's not that tough. My issue with it is that it requires splashing monk.

Do it without splashing monk. Now it is quite a bit tougher. But that is CHOICE

[grodon9999]

Do it without splashing monk. Now it is quite a bit tougher. But that is CHOICE

Talking about fighters/pallies as barbs just can't get good AC. The splash results in a DPS-loss of not having capstone and having to slot some gear towards non-offensive ends. I guess that is the balancing mechanism, but I'd still like to see a heavy-armor fighter without a shield get some way to break 60 AC if he chose to slot some gear and stay pure.

I like 60-65, it'll give decent protection in non-end game epic but isn't tank-level by a long shot.

[wonkey]

Yeah I get your point but there is a reason why nobody complains about DPS and lots of people complain about AC .
The reasons have been explained many times in the thread but as you are 2L2R

The reasons why AC is broken :
he Range of achievable AC is between 5-106
The Range of usable AC is limited to a 20 point spread
To make it so that AC 106 is not 95% immune to melee damage , you must give a monster +87 to hit
Once you give a monster +87 to hit , it hits everyone with AC less than 89 ,95% of the time .

Now as 106 is a silly number that can only be achieved by completly gimping the charachter in pretty much everyway accept AC ,nobody bothers .
So now there is a hypothetical HardCap that is so high that making any sort of AC usable is impossible .
AC is now irrelevant and may well be forgotten about .
So when Jo Fighter asks what type of Armour he should wear , he gets told "Whichever gives you the best abilities as the AC part of the equation is Irrelevant beyond mid-level ."

What is the issue with DPS that you think is comparable to this ?

It's actually a very similar issue, if you consider attack bonus, rather than DPS alone (because they largely go together right now) when you think about it.

Let me recap from a previous post why AC is broken.

Quote:
I think we can, at least, recognize the spirit of the first post, dealing with the following realities (even if he himself denies at least one of them):

A. Due to the nature of this game, a very high AC can be reached relatively easily.
B. Due to this being a D&D game, a D20 is used for attack rolls.
C. The higher the AC we are dealing with, the lower 20 is, as a percentage.
D. In order not to make maxed AC builds nigh invincible, the DMs have to scale monster to-hit to hit max AC.
E. In order that players without max attack bonus can hit ANYTHING, DMs have to scale monster AC to relatively low to-hit.
F. Without serious sacrifices that go beyond build decisions to simply gimping most everything else, getting within 20 AC of max AC is next to, if not absolutely, impossible.
G. For most players and monsters, therefore, AC is useless, and most players and monsters will hit just each other on a 2.
H. AC, which adds another element to the game, is largely irrelevant.

These are the realities of the brokenness of AC. The trick is to find a solution that is not too hard to implement, and won't cause nerd rage of epic proportions.
/End Quote

A cap to AC would help the Devs set monster to-hit so that player AC becomes relevant again.
A cap to player to-hit would allow Devs to set monster AC so that monster AC (and player to-hit) is relevant again.

The thing is that capping player to-hit would be a bigger deal, not only because it would cause epic nerd rage, but because it would effect a lot of the differences between classes, making the classes lose their flavor.

A simpler (not simple, but simpler) solution, and one already mentioned, that works for both AC and to-hit, is to increase the size of the die as you and the monsters advance in level. Say you're using a d50 rather than a d20 at epic, the devs can make it so that max AC builds would get hit maybe 5-6% of the time or so, but even an AC 40 points lower would mean something (very little). As the gap closes, the players AC gets more meaningful, so that a very wide range of AC means something, with lots of choice for where you will be on the scale.
The same thing fixes monster AC. If player to hit is also on a d50, you can scale monster AC to be meaningful again, so that max to-hit will almost always hit, and lower to-hits won't be useless, but also won't be hitting all the time.

This would be a big change, and would likely anger some people, but I think this would be a huge step forward for the game.

[Zenako]

The thing that bodes well for a sliding Dxx die roll is that it does not require any player to really alter their play style. Many may choose to, but it does not defacto require it.

Any number of simple rules could be devised to expand the die size.

Base die size = (20 + Char Level) for a d40 at cap.
Base die size = (20 + (Char level-5)*2) for a sliding range capping at d50

Base die size = (20 + CR level (for mobs)) etc etc etc

In PnP it was not too hard for a DM to make sure that encounters meant to matter ended up with monsters AC and To hits to be in the d20 range that matters. In DDO it is obviously a much larger challenge.

From the standpoint of a healer, even a 20% reduction in the RATE of damage taken can be a HUGE difference in the ability to keep an entire party up and somewhat healthy. It is when the RATE of damage is too high that wipes happen.

[wonkey]

One drawback that I thought of for increasing the die size would be that it might make it harder for quest design that is challenging across a range of levels.

B/c if you compare a level 8 to a level 10 for example, and use (die size = 20+[character level]), aside from the normal advantages, the level 10 also is using a d30 over the 8s d28. Of course, this problem gets less and less as levels progress.

The major challenge, I think, to ANY fix of AC is that doing so, especially something like changing the size of the die, which fixes both player and monster AC, requires the devs to go back and reset attack bonuses and AC for every quest, aside for other balancing issues.

But I think doing this would be a quantum leap in the game, not only fixing combat in general, but introducing a scalable mechanic that has lots of other potential advantages.


EDIT: another thought is crit range. The obvious ways to do this, for me, are
1)to give a set percentage of the roll for crit range (5% for axes, for example). The thing is that rounding gets weird.
2) to leave them as a certain number of possible rolls (1 for axe, for example - these would probably be scaled up some). This would give an interesting situation where crits would occur more often at lower levels. This might actually help with the issue I brought up before, but the lack of crits at the highest levels would really annoy some people.
3) have increases to crit range every few levels. So an axe might have 1 roll to crit (20) until level 10 or so, and then 2 for the rest of the game. A rapier might have 3 at level 1, 4 at 8, 5 at 15, and 6 at 20.
This might be a bit complicated, but I like the possibilities. I guess a simpler way would just be to stick to option 1 and round down, which is basically the same idea, with a bit of a different scale (eg axe would have only 1 chance to crit until 20).

[Cyr]

In non-epic content? how is this NOT achievable? It is, it's not that tough. My issue with it is that it requires splashing monk.

The issue isn't splashing monk, itemization options, or anything else in particular EXCEPT the limited options available by rolling a d20.

Once you get over a 20 point spread in reasonably achievable AC the d20 system starts to break down. In pnp this is much less of an issue because you have decreasing to hits with extra attacks and the actually real possibility of running into mobs with poor to hits and great to hits in the same gaming session (therefore creating more useful AC ranges during the entire gaming session).

Most people forget that the AC issue is not just an issue in epics (where the developers basically just set the to hits out of a reasonable range making AC a highly questionable choice), but it is an issue in most mid to end game content. Once you start having builds where a 20+ AC change does nothing for them you have an issue. With lower level content this is not yet true so even builds that classically (in DDO) dump AC have incentives to gear up their AC.

Practically in DDO what this means is that to really fix the AC issue you need a reason to increase your AC from 10 to 20/30/40...and a reason to increase it from 75 to 80/85...

[grodon9999]

The issue isn't splashing monk, itemization options, or anything else in particular EXCEPT the limited options available by rolling a d20.

Once you get over a 20 point spread in reasonably achievable AC the d20 system starts to break down. In pnp this is much less of an issue because you have decreasing to hits with extra attacks and the actually real possibility of running into mobs with poor to hits and great to hits in the same gaming session (therefore creating more useful AC ranges during the entire gaming session).

We have this in Amrath with the Orthons and the bearded devils. very good high-level game design on Turbine's part. Of course the "useful" AC thresholds are 60ish and 70ish respectfully, but this is hell and shouldn't be easy.

Most people forget that the AC issue is not just an issue in epics (where the developers basically just set the to hits out of a reasonable range making AC a highly questionable choice), but it is an issue in most mid to end game content. Once you start having builds where a 20+ AC change does nothing for them you have an issue. With lower level content this is not yet true so even builds that classically (in DDO) dump AC have incentives to gear up their AC.

Practically in DDO what this means is that to really fix the AC issue you need a reason to increase your AC from 10 to 20/30/40...and a reason to increase it from 75 to 80/85...

But it's because people don't pursue AC at all, much because of a false conception that it's useless (it is in epic). People are DPS obsessed with the common thinking being that that extra 1 point per swing is worth dumping everything else that a character can do.

[donfilibuster]

/not signed
for high ac make an ac build. armor is somewhat obsolete otherwise in a high magic world, just like with firearms in rl

[Alektronic]

I saw a cleric running around Gwylan's Stand the other day in robes (no shield), and he died. Maybe more than once, I don't care to remember. I, on the other hand, was wearing some silly mithral breastplate and a shield, and hardly got hit at all.

The point is, I think this AC argument is misleading. AC doesn't matter around mid level (12+), and specificallly when your fighting dragons, giants, and overall big@ss people (afaik the same rule applies to epic quests). If a 50-foot tall Stormreaver steps on you, it should take more than some silly platemail and cardboard shield to keep you in one piece. I understand this is a fantasy game (and I'm not from PnP), but let's think about it for a moment.

Why should ANYONE survive a direct bite from a dragon, just because they're wearing some shiny new +5 fullplate with alchemical ritual of blahdeblah? You better have some mackdaddy gear, crazy @ss hong kong phooey reflexes, or magic-to-move-mountains kind of build to withstand that kind of abuse. AC works when it does, and when it doesn't, you have to cheat >ahem< I mean use all the tools you have at your disposal.

Am I missing something here???

[BDog77]

This is wrong. Having a increasing or decreasing scale is functionally the same.

Wait....what?

I agree with you if the BAB is either set to the top or the bottom of the scale, but I'm not convinced that this is true. Also, someone said earlier that mobs don't get iterative bonuses to hit. Is this true? If this is true, then they could make a bigger range of AC matter by just lowering mob BAB and giving them the same bonuses as players.

Problem solved.

[donfilibuster]

Or by mr. miyagi's wisdom, you can either have max armor or zero armor, anything in between will get you killed.

[LuckyLuke2]

But it's because people don't pursue AC at all, much because of a false conception that it's useless (it is in epic). People are DPS obsessed with the common thinking being that that extra 1 point per swing is worth dumping everything else that a character can do.

Could not agree more on this.

Ran a hard/elite Relic PuG with a mid-level adventurer of mine (a hybrid DPS/tank experiment) yesterday evening (well ... early morning US I reckon). Turned out to be a full VIP/TR party who made the cleric's job pretty easy. Think all party members in this case had a good understanding about how to make DPS and AC match. I have witnessed "pure" DPS builds (stating that AC is useless) go down in mere secs in other PuG's in the same quest on the same difficulty. You can always blame it on the bad healing or bad party setup ofcourse ... .

[Zerkul]

Could not agree more on this.

Ran a hard/elite Relic PuG

Relic is not endgame content... for everything beyond epics AC is working enough in my humble opinion... you can almost reach invulnerability levels but for Epics even that invulnerability level is too low to be worth the dps sacrifice.

/Not Signed

I do not like CAPs to AC and to hit bonus... DEVs need to handle this another way other than cutting wings to builds. Being a DM of D&D epic games i can assure you need just to forecast the abilities of the players to do something balanced from DMs point of view: the more you forecast the more you can balance out the game and the quests. You just need to work more.

[Clay]

Relic is not endgame content... for everything beyond epics AC is working enough in my humble opinion... you can almost reach invulnerability levels but for Epics even that invulnerability level is too low to be worth the dps sacrifice.

/Not Signed

I do not like CAPs to AC and to hit bonus... DEVs need to handle this another way other than cutting wings to builds. Being a DM of D&D epic games i can assure you need just to forecast the abilities of the players to do something balanced from DMs point of view: the more you forecast the more you can balance out the game and the quests. You just need to work more.

Nicely stated... especially like the part in blue.

[LuckyLuke2]

Relic is not endgame content

Agreed. But a pure DPS build failing on mid-level elite content has a good chance to fail in endgame content as well in my humbliest opinion. All depends ofcourse where you set the boundaries for "endgame" : Shroud/HoX/VoD/ToD elite ? eDQ/eVON6/eChrono ? I am not convinced that the larger part of the L20's population succesfully completes difficult epics on a regular basis, so the game mechanics should "work" for the non-epic majority as well.

As a former DM of an epic D&D campaign there is one lesson that I learned : the greater the challenge, the greater the player commitment to succeed, but if a challenge becomes impossible to achieve players will abandon the campaign. In PnP this can be solved by 1/ flexibility in adapting the scenario (if a mob seems to be too hard, you scale it down) and 2/ improvisation (if you are killing off the party because the mobs are insane but the party really plays well, cheat on the rolls or simply modify it as it evolves).

[zealous]

Wait....what?

I agree with you if the BAB is either set to the top or the bottom of the scale, but I'm not convinced that this is true.

It's rather that the AC of the mobs is scaled to players to some extent. It's crazybroken on that end too. Take a turbine premade paths melee cleric vs a optimized kensai with full tod sets and all the twink you can think of. Pair the kensai with a halfling bard with full HC and songs as well as a destruction, imp destruction, sundering ooze, eagles claw monk. How large will the discrepancy in tohit be?

And to my knowledge they haven't rescaled lowlevel mob ACs to account for the addition of khortos items nor for the changes to the attack chain. Oh for the blackguards of days long gone past.

Also, someone said earlier that mobs don't get iterative bonuses to hit. Is this true?

Afaik, yes. Fairly anecdotal though. Read on the forums, tested roughly against a couple of different mobs anecdotal and quite some time ago to boot.

If this is true, then they could make a bigger range of AC matter by just lowering mob BAB and giving them the same bonuses as players.
Problem solved.

It would reduce the problem of a narrow range at least. The other problems, namely that AC doesn't protect from spikes and that it only serves to reduce tp/plat expenditure would remain though.

From the standpoint of a healer, even a 20% reduction in the RATE of damage taken can be a HUGE difference in the ability to keep an entire party up and somewhat healthy. It is when the RATE of damage is too high that wipes happen.

What is the maximum healing rate for a radiant servant healing a party of monk/paladins with 3x healing amp and 500hp, himself only having a mere 2x healing amp and 500hp?

Assuming pots are quaffed whenever mana gets low and that emp/max/emp heal is constantly used.

A party of 6 radiant servants?
Of 12 radiant servants?
Of 12 pale masters?

I have a hard time seeing any content in the game putting even two radiant servants under much preassure so I don't quite believe the RATE is any issue.

[Chette]

Why on earth should a run of the mill fighter in basic gear be able to have the same AC as my halfling wisdom based stunning/cursing monk?

/notsigned

[Undone1]

I don't know how to solve this in DDO. In PnP the solution was two fold, the already mentioned declining attack bonus and Power attack which gave you -2 damage for each AC you reasonably had that the monster couldn't PA.

Keep it the same, lower bonuses of most AC items by 1, Lower attack bonuses by 5, and add combat expertise enhancements to human and dwarf and a few other enhancements. Or just change nothing and create +9 armor bracers, +8 deflection items, exct that overpower current gear and be blatant power creep.