Incoming balance change: Parry AC bonus capping at +5

[Merry Munchkin]

What about my idea of simply changing the interval for AC bonuses from every 5 parry points to every 6, or maybe 7?  This change has the additional benefit that it impacts the entire playerbase equally (everyone is subject to the change), instead of the full burden of the change falling solely on anyone that has already capped out or exceeded the proposed cap on AC?

In other words, a character that has only 15 skill points (from any combination of feats, gear, or points) would have a +3 AC under the old system, but only a +2 under a 6 or 7 point system.  In contrast, a person with 30 skill points (+6 AC under the old system), would have only a +5 under a 6 point system, or a +4 under a 7 point system.  Everyone's AC gets nerfed a little bit, but not in any draconian way.

[Bad_Bud]

I'd like to see how +5 works first. It may seem arbitrary, but I like it for a number of reasons. It ensures some level of equality with shield users. Low level characters get to benefit earlier, rather than being punished for most of the game because the high end can be so extreme. Characters can choose to go over the cap number by dumping additional skills or feats into parry, that way maybe they can hit the number without buffs, or can maintain a maximum parry bonus even with drained dexterity (I like choices that offer convenience over power). With no "draconian" cap, it will always be a race toward the next highest number.

Look at some numbers on the unlimited system (at +1 per 5 parry). This is just a druid with barkskin, cat's grace, and a +3 shield. This is what a druid could reasonably achieve, without much effort, and without any buffs from other characters (there is no haste, magic vestment, shield of faith, mage armor, or even expertise).

Spoiler: show

When you can push those kinds of numbers, every point of AC pushes the untouchable fringe that much further.

In summary, +5 is a fair maximum. Shields are not obsolete, polymorphs are less out of control, lower level characters are not punished, +1 per 5 is a common theme among skills and easy to understand (tumble, spellcraft), and non-shield styles are still able to pull 5 AC out of a hat that otherwise would have never existed. The only drawback is that some characters will have extra feats chosen. Maybe those characters will get to change that at some point in the future, I don't know.

[qwertyuioppp]

Someone might just wanna update this post mentioning the cap.

[Merry Munchkin]

I'd like to see how +5 works first. It may seem arbitrary, but I like it for a number of reasons. It ensures some level of equality with shield users. Low level characters get to benefit earlier, rather than being punished for most of the game because the high end can be so extreme. Characters can choose to go over the cap number by dumping additional skills or feats into parry, that way maybe they can hit the number without buffs, or can maintain a maximum parry bonus even with drained dexterity (I like choices that offer convenience over power). With no "draconian" cap, it will always be a race toward the next highest number.

Look at some numbers on the unlimited system (at +1 per 5 parry). This is just a druid with barkskin, cat's grace, and a +3 shield. This is what a druid could reasonably achieve, without much effort, and without any buffs from other characters (there is no haste, magic vestment, shield of faith, mage armor, or even expertise).

Spoiler: show

When you can push those kinds of numbers, every point of AC pushes the untouchable fringe that much further.

In summary, +5 is a fair maximum. Shields are not obsolete, polymorphs are less out of control, lower level characters are not punished, +1 per 5 is a common theme among skills and easy to understand (tumble, spellcraft), and non-shield styles are still able to pull 5 AC out of a hat that otherwise would have never existed. The only drawback is that some characters will have extra feats chosen. Maybe those characters will get to change that at some point in the future, I don't know.

Ok.  I get it.  Polymorphed death slaad with a base 36 dex buffed to 42, for a dex bonus of +16.  Darn impressive AC for certain.  But other than a magically buffed druid or wizard using the shapechange spell, what other characters or classes on the server are pushing their parry so high that they are getting such monsterous AC bonuses?  No other class can get higher than a base dex of 27 in their normal shapes, and buffed with cat's grace you are looking at perhaps a dex of 31-32 or so (+10) so a max parry score with feats would be in the neighborhood of 39-40, for a +8 AC bonus (some gear might push you up to +9).  Any non-halfling or non-elf can max out at a 25 dex, so the AC bonus will likely be lower.  So the concern is over an extra +3 or +4 or thereabouts on AC on every other character, or the extra +4 or +5 parry AC on a buffed death slaad?  Would dropping that death slaad to an AC of 47 or 48 really make everyone feel that much better, or make that death slaad less god-like?   I completely understand the desire to make shield using not "obsolete", but if this type of build is the problem that we are trying to solve, I am not sure if tweaking parry is the solution.

More concerning to me is the fact that this polymorphed character is sporting 519 hp.  

I want to see that thread about druids being underpowered again.  

edited:  I misread the screenshot.  the death slaad actually has a dex bonus of +16 not +15

[Zwickelfaust]

How is that Slaad true neutral? that seems unlikely, as they come from a realm of chaos...... Booya! Trollin!

[Avatar6666]

I'd like to see how +5 works first. It may seem arbitrary, but I like it for a number of reasons. It ensures some level of equality with shield users. Low level characters get to benefit earlier, rather than being punished for most of the game because the high end can be so extreme. Characters can choose to go over the cap number by dumping additional skills or feats into parry, that way maybe they can hit the number without buffs, or can maintain a maximum parry bonus even with drained dexterity (I like choices that offer convenience over power). With no "draconian" cap, it will always be a race toward the next highest number.

Look at some numbers on the unlimited system (at +1 per 5 parry). This is just a druid with barkskin, cat's grace, and a +3 shield. This is what a druid could reasonably achieve, without much effort, and without any buffs from other characters (there is no haste, magic vestment, shield of faith, mage armor, or even expertise).

Spoiler: show

When you can push those kinds of numbers, every point of AC pushes the untouchable fringe that much further.

In summary, +5 is a fair maximum. Shields are not obsolete, polymorphs are less out of control, lower level characters are not punished, +1 per 5 is a common theme among skills and easy to understand (tumble, spellcraft), and non-shield styles are still able to pull 5 AC out of a hat that otherwise would have never existed. The only drawback is that some characters will have extra feats chosen. Maybe those characters will get to change that at some point in the future, I don't know.

Mind you , I understand what your saying Bad Bud but I know of only one full 20th level druid.

[Bad_Bud]

That was Shapechange not wildshape, so replace Druid with Wizard, Sorcerer, or any character with UMD and parry ranks.

[McNastea]

Not that it much matters, but I've found shapechange on Dante at least made him less powerful-lost saving throws, attacks per round and whatever energy resistance items benefit he had at the time. That being said, shapechange is really fun! But I think it makes a lot more sense for a spellcaster to use than a fighter type with umd and parry. A mage will gain an extra apr, two even if they aren't lvl 20 yet. The regen from slaad is pretty nice though. I'm drifting a bit off topic at this point though so I'll stahp 

[MJ_Johansson]

Mages dont get extra attacks from shapechange

[McNastea]

 

Well, it's still better for mages imo

[Merry Munchkin]

I'd like to see how +5 works first. It may seem arbitrary, but I like it for a number of reasons. It ensures some level of equality with shield users.

As I previously noted, I agree with the desire to make sure that shield users are not made inferior to parry users, but as a practical matter we can actually test this hypothesis with a thought experiment and see exactly where the disparity might be.

It is not entirely accurate to compare a parry AC bonus directly to a shield AC bonus, because the overall impact on the armor class regarding parry versus shield is going to be dependent on the base armor being used.  All spell buffs, potions, and gear are equally applicable to a shield character or a parry character, so lets take out all magical buffs out of the equation for the moment.  Likewise, magical gear and potions are available equally to everyone, so let's take that out of the equation for the moment.  If we were to take two naked mannequins and dress them out in armor and skills, you would get an objective measurement of what the practical AC differences might be based solely on parry.  With that in mind, let's run the experiment:

A base DEX build going for parry dresses out in leather armor (because that is the heaviest you can wear without any armor check penalty, which would count against his parry).  This guy will pour all his ability bonuses in to dex, and let's assume he starts at an 18.  His base AC is 10, +2 (leather), +4 (dex), for an AC 16.  His starting parry will be 4 points, +4 for dex, giving him 8 which provides a +1 to AC.  So his total AC going to be 17.

In contrast, our STR build is going to use a shield, so he will dress out in the heaviest armor he can get.  He will pour all his ability bonuses into STR, but let's at least assume he will take a 12 in DEX to take advantage of the +1 dex bonus he would be able to use.  He dresses out in full plate and tower shield.  His base AC is 10, +8 (full plate), +3 (tower shield), +1 (dex) for an AC of 22.  He may also put points into parry, but the skill level will only be 5, while his armor check penalty for the armor and shield are a -18, so he gets no advantage there.  Still, the shield build has the early AC advantage by a sizeable 5 point margin.

By level 20, these two naked mannequins have accumulated a lot of skills and feats, and our dex build has maxed out his parry skill and his DEX is now 25.  His top parry score unbuffed will be 23, +7 dex bonus, +4 improved parry, +3 skill focus, for a total skill of 37.  This will give him a parry bonus to AC of +7.  Thus, his unbuffed unmagical leather armor will give him a total AC of 10, +2 (leather), +7 (dex), +7 (parry) for a total of 26.

By level 20, our shield build could have gone a couple of routes -- he could have foresaken parry completely, or taken it and maxed it out.  If he foresakes parry completely, his base AC remains essentially unchanged at 22.  However, if he decides to max out his parry, his skill level is going to be 23, +1 (dex), +4 improved parry, +3 skill focus, giving him a total of 31.  However, he is dressed out in full plate, for an armor check penalty of -8 and a tower shield at -10.  This gives him a parry skill of 13, which is a +2 bonus to AC.  So, his full unbuffed unmagical AC in his armored shell is going to be 24.  If he were to ditch his tower shield, he would lose the +3 AC it provides, but gain back +10 parry points... but this only gives him +2 AC bonus, so keeping the shield actually is better for him.  His DEX is not high enough to take advantage of things like two weapon defense or improved two weapon defense. 

AC 26 versus AC 24 factoring only the parry skill differences between the two.  This does  not strike me as a huge disparity.  While a subset of characters may invest in all of the feats necessary to have two-weapon defense, and improved two-weapon defense, this results in only +1 and +2 AC respectively and is actually unrelated to the parry skill (i.e. a non-parry build could theoretically take them), and not every character except for rangers (who get the prerequisites for free) will be eligible to take them either because they don't have enough feats to spare, or they don't have a high enough DEX to qualify.  A non-ranger would have to devote 5 feats to get improved two weapon defense, and other than fighters, rangers, and wizards, everyone else gets only 14 feats to spare.

All the spell buffs can be cast on both.  Every potion can be consumed by both.  The magical gear that is available is a function of how the crafting and loot systems are set up, but if they are intended to be balanced, then both characters should have similar opportunities to get magical gear that provides equivalent enhancement bonuses on their armor and skills.  Thus, a max-parry build really only has a natural +2 AC potential advantage over a max-armor and shield build based on the parry skill alone, and that is by level 20.  If there are any serious disparities between shield builds and parry builds, it is because of factors (i.e. spells, gear, special defense feats) that have nothing to do with the skill itself.  I would point out that simply changing the parry progression from +1 per 5 levels, to +1 per 6 would reduce this disparity to only a one point difference.

If we are concerned about his +2 point disparity and want to incentivize shield usage, there ought to be a better way to address it (for example, you could make the feat "shield proficiency" give an automatic +1 bonus to AC when a shield is equipped) than by making anything above 25 skill points in parry completely superfluous, especially for characters that aren't going to have the luxury of self-buffing themselves into a death slaad. 

[MJ_Johansson]

One point to be noted, wearing a shield negates the parry AC bonus entirely. You either get shield AC or Parry AC, never both.

[camrik]

One point to be noted, wearing a shield negates the parry AC bonus entirely. You either get shield AC or Parry AC, never both.

+1. Merry, your comparison does not work because of that. Using your example, the level 20 shield user would still be at 22, but if he goes parry skill instead and use a pole arm he will be at 23! That is where the problem lies imho. Of course, enchanted shield provide more AC points but without some sort of cap on parry, the latter will always be better at high levels.

And the shield wielder wont be the one dealing out more damage...

[Merry Munchkin]

But is that one extra point of AC that much of an issue?  Is the solution to nerf parry for everyone else that doesn't wear heavy armor or use two-handed weapons?  If the real issue is the battle between warriors that use a shield versus warriors that use two-handed weapons, then why do all the other classes have to get swept up in the solution to this "problem" and have their AC take a hit?  If this is really a major issue then you can either beef up shields or nerf the two weapon defense feats if this is just some sort of fighter-equality issue at stake here.  Is it really the goal of "equality" to have a rogue with potentially half of the hit points of a fighter of similar level also be forced to have parity in AC with that fighter?

[camrik]

But is that one extra point of AC that much of an issue?  Is the solution to nerf parry for everyone else that doesn't wear heavy armor or use two-handed weapons?  If the real issue is the battle between warriors that use a shield versus warriors that use two-handed weapons, then why do all the other classes have to get swept up in the solution to this "problem" and have their AC take a hit?  If this is really a major issue then you can either beef up shields or nerf the two weapon defense feats if this is just some sort of fighter-equality issue at stake here.  Is it really the goal of "equality" to have a rogue with potentially half of the hit points of a fighter of similar level also be forced to have parity in AC with that fighter?

For me, intuitively, the fighter using shield should have the better AC. That's the trade off for doing less damage than the fighter using a two-handed weapon.

But also, the fighter in full plate + shield should also be the tankiest PC when pure melee starts (monk are another debate since their fighting style is so different).

So I dont know how this can be achieved and I'm not saying a cap limit of +5 is the best way to do it, I'm just saying that, imho, there is a problem is Shield + heavy armor do not give you the best protection when you go in a melee.

[Avatar6666]

Monks that used parry sorta got screwed off in this area, because If I use weapons as a monk I don't do nearly enough damage as my punch, so why would a monk who is one classed no PRC ever use weapons. I can see this at low levels but at high levels no way. Your fist damage is a lot and with this new parry system changed my character Chang by him  lossing like 3 ac, two from parry and one from a parry item. So his ac is lower and He can not wear armor.

[THE STREET WARRIOR]

Discipline should give shield peoples bonus AC on par with the way parry is setup.

[Ranjere]

Seems like parry is meant to be on par with magic vestement+tower shield.

Alternate solution: For every 5 ranks of discipline up to (arbitrary number) the character receives 1% physical damage immunity per base shield ac.
Edit: Question! If magic vestement/weapon are being capped at +4, is premonition still going to block +5?

[BahamutZ3RO]

Discipline should give shield peoples bonus AC on par with the way parry is setup.

Noooo way. Discipline is already highly sought after for KD resist. Parry in its old form was basically useless.

[Lucadia]

Funny that 52 ac is an issue your worried about when Sithicus requires dedicated tank with more ac then that to not be killed repeatedly

[RedwizardD]

Is the ability to add ac bonuses to shields via spells (something that doesn't work on parry users I think) also being taken into account in these arguments?

[McNastea]

Funny that 52 ac is an issue your worried about when Sithicus requires dedicated tank with more ac then that to not be killed repeatedly

Yeah.. I think the point is not that they're worried about 52 AC or any other arbitrary number-but that parry was vastly superior to shield use. However, I'd have to agree with what you're pointing out-Sithicus was built around people being able to get their AC up to those points as well as some other things that have been changed recently. As a whole this -3 to -4 points of AC and other changes unrelated to this thread aren't much but when you get to Sithicus every single point to AC you can squeeze out matter a ton. This does even things out a between parry and shield users, it also means that Sithicus just became that much less viable an option. Maybe increasing shield AC on crafted and/or enchanted shields instead would be another solution that wouldn't make the hardest places, which I've seen some of the strongest players around get wiped over and over -before- recent alterations. It doesn't seem to me that the issue has ever been that parry users can get their AC to x amount-just that they can get it so much higher than shield users. So why not just make shields better?

[BahamutZ3RO]

I'unno. Honestly, the only people I ever came across using Shapechange were actual wizards/sorcs with level 17+. I guess it's not unreasonable to want to nerf that aspect of things but if it's primarily a UMD problem then... maybe find a way to clinch the usage of UMD for shapechange and stuff. Parry in and of itself scales a little better than shield-users but it requires so much to get there that I don't really see how it's unbalanced. For example...

Sword-and-board:

+1 dex bonus (12 dex), +8 AC full plate, +3 tower shield, +5 from Shield of Faith = 17 AC
(No feats necessary)

Dex-based in studded leather

+6 dex bonus, +3 AC studded leather, +6 parry, +2 Improved Two Weapon Defense = 17 AC
(requires Imp. Parry, SF: Parry, Two-Weapon Fighting, Two Weapon Defense, Improved Two Weapon Defense)

Now, obviously parry can go higher than that but getting it above 30 will require both feats and items. And a person in robes or... naked could potentially get their AC even higher, but that comes at a cost too. You're looking at obscene requirements to get dex that high (+9 dex bonus would be 28 dexterity, which would require either losing a lot of other stat points in levels and/or probably an empowered cat's and someone with Aura of Vitality).

Now, here's the other part of it, and the part that rubs me wrong as a character who CAN parry tank. Your damage is atrocious if you're the one tanking. Chances are you've got a lot of rogue levels and you're not using them for sneak attacks if you're the tank. A sword-and-board guy generally has feats put into boosting damage via weapon spec, improved critical, et all and likely takes better advantage of str bonuses.

Another thing to consider is the type of AC involved. A parry tank loses almost all of his AC if he's caught flat-footed, and IIRC there are quite a few things that employ HiPS in harder dungeons. That can almost entirely negate a dex tank's AC.

Oh. I did forget to factor in tumble, though... but this still seems like a bit of a knee-jerk change just to stifle the potential that polymorph has in combat.

[Arael]

Sword-and-board:

+1 dex bonus (12 dex), +8 AC full plate, +3 tower shield, +5 from Shield of Faith = 17 AC
(No feats necessary)

Dex-based in studded leather

+6 dex bonus, +3 AC studded leather, +6 parry, +2 Improved Two Weapon Defense = 17 AC

You and many other people often forget about one point:

Two weapon users deals way more damage than Shield users. Now they can have same AC but they still have more damage output.

It's common in RPG games the malee and spellcasters which deals more damage is weaker in defense. This doesn't happen right now.

[Ranjere]

That's assuming the dual-wielders are rogues? Otherwise it's not way more damage because dex-based dual-wielders without sneak attacks aren't great.