PDA

View Full Version : Question about that Con to AC Thing



BHodges3
2009-11-06, 04:21 PM
I keep hearing people refer to this new feat for Barbarians that allows them to use their CON modifier or something. It is supposedly really powerful and just came out. I have just created my first 4E character and it is a Goliath Barbarian. What I need to know is does this feat require a specific level or something? If not, can I pick it up for my feat at second level?

FYI, I am wearing the normal hide armor. I thought I remember someone saying something about that being a requirement or something.

sofawall
2009-11-06, 04:35 PM
It was Con to AC or some such thing. Not much of a 4e fan, so I know little about it. Just remember it coming up.

oxybe
2009-11-06, 04:50 PM
it's a feat in the primal power sourcebook, i forget what it's called but it allows a primal character to substitute Con instead of Dex when wearing Hide armor.

Optimystik
2009-11-06, 04:57 PM
It was Con to AC or some such thing. Not much of a 4e fan, so I know little about it. Just remember it coming up.

I'm glad its Con to AC. Con to attack makes no sense, unless you're falling on your enemies all the time or something.

oxybe
2009-11-06, 04:59 PM
I'm glad its Con to AC. Con to attack makes no sense, unless you're falling on your enemies all the time or something.

well, warlocks in 4th ed use con on some of their attacks to hit, mostly those in the infernal path if memory serves.

NeoVid
2009-11-06, 04:59 PM
I'm glad its Con to AC. Con to attack makes no sense, unless you're falling on your enemies all the time or something.

There's been a feat that lets you use Con (or any stat) for basic attacks for a while now.

And the defensive feat in question is Hide Armor Expertise, I believe. It's stupidly good for Barbarians. And it's heroic level.

BHodges3
2009-11-06, 05:02 PM
Heroic level? Is that the level 11 and up one?

Boci
2009-11-06, 05:04 PM
Heroic level? Is that the level 11 and up one?

Thats paragon. Heroic is 1-10.

Optimystik
2009-11-06, 05:08 PM
well, warlocks in 4th ed use con on some of their attacks to hit, mostly those in the infernal path if memory serves.

That does make sense for warlocks, given that they got Con to damage even in 3.5 (via Hellfire Warlock, in a way.)


There's been a feat that lets you use Con (or any stat) for basic attacks for a while now.

STR and DEX I can understand, even INT and WIS. CON and CHA, not so much, "Elan's fancy prestige class notwithstanding."

Xefas
2009-11-06, 05:12 PM
STR and DEX I can understand, even INT and WIS. CON and CHA, not so much, "Elan's fancy prestige class notwithstanding."

You can't see being able to use Charisma to make it easier to hit someone? What about feinting in 3rd edition? That used charisma (well, Bluff, but having a high charisma made it easier to hit them via a bluff modifier). Its just your ability to read body language, disguise your own, and fake them out.

Constitution...I can't think of off the top of my head.

oxybe
2009-11-06, 05:22 PM
using con to attack is more like simply walking into the enemy's attack to get a better hit then anything else. i've seen it done in movies and other works where the hero simply takes a hit as to get the enemy inside his attack.

con based characters are a LOT tougher then any other, each pt of con gaining you 1 extra hp and every 2 points above 10 and extra surge. this kind of character can afford to be a bit more reckless with his attacks.

Spiryt
2009-11-06, 05:27 PM
You guys are saying that that you don't see how good shape, endurance, efficiency, healthy body, limbs, lungs, blood system, pain endurance and all other stuff helps in:
waving axe around, lunging, pushing, jaunting, bashing, wrestling, and all other forms of intense physical recreations in fighting (especially in D&D when character often are doing this stuff all day around)?

Seems rather straightforward to me.

The Glyphstone
2009-11-06, 05:33 PM
That's called HP and Fort saves though. Good shape, endurance, efficiency, healthy body, limbs, lungs, blood system, pain endurance and all other stuff helps you take hits better, but with the feat, it...makes you hit things more accurately?

Granted, I play a Dragon Magic Sorcerer, who kills people by flexing his awesome muscles at them, so I can't complain.

Boci
2009-11-06, 05:37 PM
That's called HP and Fort saves though. Good shape, endurance, efficiency, healthy body, limbs, lungs, blood system, pain endurance and all other stuff helps you take hits better, but with the feat, it...makes you hit things more accurately?

I guess you could argue his pain endurance allows him to focus more...

sentaku
2009-11-06, 05:43 PM
That's called HP and Fort saves though. Good shape, endurance, efficiency, healthy body, limbs, lungs, blood system, pain endurance and all other stuff helps you take hits better, but with the feat, it...makes you hit things more accurately?

Granted, I play a Dragon Magic Sorcerer, who kills people by flexing his awesome muscles at them, so I can't complain.

It's much easier to hit things when said things is holding onto his sword that's stabbed through your chest* since their mobility is limited.

*a flesh wound

The Glyphstone
2009-11-06, 05:54 PM
It's much easier to hit things when said things is holding onto his sword that's stabbed through your chest* since their mobility is limited.

*a flesh wound

This explanation is acceptable to me. (http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/comic.php?date=20040903)

Spiryt
2009-11-06, 07:07 PM
That's called HP and Fort saves though. Good shape, endurance, efficiency, healthy body, limbs, lungs, blood system, pain endurance and all other stuff helps you take hits better, but with the feat, it...makes you hit things more accurately?

Granted, I play a Dragon Magic Sorcerer, who kills people by flexing his awesome muscles at them, so I can't complain.

When you think that way, many things about it don't make sense, and something else can be always applied...

But this ^ sentence can describe almost anything in D&D. I would say it doesn't have to be perfectly logical to be fun.

And won't be beacuse it's only simulation. And a very simple one.

Noble Savant
2009-11-06, 07:17 PM
Combat in DnD has always been abstract. 4e has cut down on that a bit, but even now, an exchange of blows is a longer process then you would think. A character with a high Con can continue to fight at full vigor for much longer then his weak chested opponents. Thus, when they are tuckered out from the exchange of blows, he lands a solid hit.

Kylarra
2009-11-06, 07:20 PM
I've always fluffed Melee Training (stat) feats to be you utilizing your power source to aid your combat prowess, much like self-buffing. So Melee Training (Con) for your infernal-warlocks is drawing upon eldritch power to guide your attacks, or somesuch.

Dingle
2009-11-06, 07:28 PM
So... Shock trooper lets you trade ac for damage. AC can come from con twice (fist of the forest, deepwarden) or you can just use con for hp to take the hit.

BHodges3
2009-11-09, 09:18 AM
Ok. Thanks for all of the replies. We just had another session as level 2 characters and completed a level 5 encounter... barely. We leveled up to 3 and as such didn't earn a feat. My question is this, when I use the Character Builder app, I am not seeing Hide Armor Expertise as an option for a future feat. Has is not been included in the updates yet?

Kurald Galain
2009-11-09, 09:31 AM
STR and DEX I can understand, even INT and WIS. CON and CHA, not so much, "Elan's fancy prestige class notwithstanding."
It's about balance, not about realism.

Having a high str score doesn't have to mean your character is strong, it just means he is good at basic attacks and e.g. fighter powers. Conversely, a bard or warlock character can just say he's strong because he's got a high cha score; fluff is mutable, and cha means physical might if you say it does.

Optimystik
2009-11-09, 09:34 AM
You can't see being able to use Charisma to make it easier to hit someone? What about feinting in 3rd edition? That used charisma (well, Bluff, but having a high charisma made it easier to hit them via a bluff modifier). Its just your ability to read body language, disguise your own, and fake them out.

Yes, but that sounds more like debuffing the enemy (read: lowering their AC) than buffing your own attack. The "Taunt" skill in NWN does something very similar. The result is mathematically identical, but fluffwise it makes more sense that way.


It's much easier to hit things when said things is holding onto his sword that's stabbed through your chest* since their mobility is limited.

*a flesh wound

Shouldn't the opposite be true, then? A character that's been hit and has a negative CON modifier becomes bleary-eyed with pain and can't hold his sword as well?

In addition, large amounts of pain can actually improve focus by staving off shock. How many fantasy novels have we seen where some elite fighter embraces their pain, and suddenly wins an otherwise insurmountable encounter?

EDIT:


It's about balance, not about realism.

Having a high str score doesn't have to mean your character is strong, it just means he is good at basic attacks and e.g. fighter powers. Conversely, a bard or warlock character can just say he's strong because he's got a high cha score; fluff is mutable, and cha means physical might if you say it does.

I don't know 4E very well. Does strength no longer correspond mechanically to the ability to lift things, bend bars and hit hard? I was speaking more about general D&D than just 4E anyway.

Clementx
2009-11-09, 09:52 AM
This explanation is acceptable to me. (http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/comic.php?date=20040903)
This is one of the few times I feel Naruto did something better (and earlier).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o85fgQf2cW4&feature=related

Kurald Galain
2009-11-09, 10:09 AM
I don't know 4E very well. Does strength no longer correspond mechanically to the ability to lift things, bend bars and hit hard?
That depends.

Regarding lifting things, the player's handbook states that encumbrance from your equipment doesn't matter.

Bending bars would most likely be a skill check. While athletics (based on the str score) is a possible candidate, it is equally plausible for a character to attempt to bend bars using his thievery skill (based on dex) or his knowledge of dungeoneering (based on wis). It's not hard to think up a case for e.g. con or int, either.

Concerning hitting hard, fighters hit hard if they have a high str score. On the other hand, other classes are equally likely to hit hard if they have a high dex (e.g. rogues), con (e.g. warlocks), int (swordmages), wis (avengers) or cha (bards).

So overall, no ability score corresponds to the ability to lift things, and all ability scores correspond equally to bending bars and to hitting hard, depending on what character is trying to do that.

hamishspence
2009-11-09, 10:12 AM
But it also states that the amount you can lift (in pounds) wiithout penalty is equal to 10 times your Strength, that the amount you can "just lift" with penalties, is equal to 20 times your strength, and so on.

So there is a reference to Strength (and only Strength) being involved in "lifting things"

Optimystik
2009-11-09, 10:21 AM
That depends.

Regarding lifting things, the player's handbook states that encumbrance from your equipment doesn't matter.

By encumbrance, do you mean carrying capacity? Meaning a wizard in 4E can stuff, say, 8 shields in his mundane backpack without worrying?


Bending bars would most likely be a skill check. While athletics (based on the str score) is a possible candidate, it is equally plausible for a character to attempt to bend bars using his thievery skill (based on dex) or his knowledge of dungeoneering (based on wis). It's not hard to think up a case for e.g. con or int, either.

For the non-strength skills, you're not really bending the bars in those cases. Thievery would imply contorting or otherwise slipping your arm past them to whatever they might be guarding. Dungeoneering would tell you the best place to apply your strength (or dexterity,) but that's it. Knowing the optimal place to lift a barbell doesn't help me much if its simply too heavy for me.


Concerning hitting hard, fighters hit hard if they have a high str score. On the other hand, other classes are equally likely to hit hard if they have a high dex (e.g. rogues), con (e.g. warlocks), int (swordmages), wis (avengers) or cha (bards).

Warlocks in 4E (from what I've read) basically turn their life force into laser beams. CON to damage therefore makes sense for them.

A barbarian can't do that, which was my original confusion with the now-altered OP's post. Your other examples - swordmage, avenger etc. - do make sense to me, as knowing where to hit an enemy can translate both to a greater chance to hit and a greater amount of hurt applied. But CON seems to only make sense if applied via some paranormal means, like an eldritch blast.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-09, 10:30 AM
That's called HP and Fort saves though. Good shape, endurance, efficiency, healthy body, limbs, lungs, blood system, pain endurance and all other stuff helps you take hits better, but with the feat, it...makes you hit things more accurately?

Granted, I play a Dragon Magic Sorcerer, who kills people by flexing his awesome muscles at them, so I can't complain.

It's a phenomenon known as "gassing" in MMA. You see it often. Fighters that aren't as well conditioned pushing too hard, and wearing themselves out quickly. Then their attacks turn to the type that rookies can block.

And you see people with supreme endurance, pushing harder, throwing more energy into the fight, forcing the enemy to do the same, until he starts to tire... Until his hands drop just a bit. Then they capitalize on the opening.

In other words, Con to hit is about putting more energy into the feints, so that the feint strikes sting, drain a little energy at a time out... You can take the sting. You do it to expose that weakness, so you can capitalize.

Asbestos
2009-11-09, 10:35 AM
Not this argument again! I like the bit about melée training representing using your powersource to help you fight in the more basic sense. Also, using Dungeoneering or Thievery to bend bars??? Maybe to find a weakness in those bars, but not to physically bend them.

Btw, isn't the only class that uses CON as thier primary attack stat the Warlock?

Kurald Galain
2009-11-09, 10:39 AM
By encumbrance, do you mean carrying capacity? Meaning a wizard in 4E can stuff, say, 8 shields in his mundane backpack without worrying?
Yes. I'd say it beats the 2E system, where you have a movement rate of 12 until you carry 100 points, then 11 until you carry 120 pounds, then 10 and so forth until zero.


For the non-strength skills, you're not really bending the bars in those cases.
Sure it would, MacGyver style. If I use ropes, pulleys and a crowbar to bend bars, it's easy to make this a legit use of the thievery skill. Incidentally, this usage of thievery also gets the rest of the party through.


Knowing the optimal place to lift a barbell doesn't help me much if its simply too heavy for me.
Sure. But if your task is lifting a barbell, then you can also accomplish that using e.g. endurance (con) or bluff (cha). You can also make a case for acrobatics (dex), heal (wis) and history (int) as well, perhaps as an assist.

The point is that it is never just one attribute, or only one skill, that can be used to bypass an obstacle: because that means that the characters that do not possess that attribute or skill cannot participate in that challenge, and it means that parties lacking that attribute or skill will be unable to pass it.



Warlocks in 4E (from what I've read) basically turn their life force into laser beams.
Really? I'm not sure where you read that, because none of their powers acts like a laser beam, and very few of those powers actually drain their life force. But yes, it's paranormal. But then, all characters are assumed to be not normal, because they're the heroes. A dwarf defensive fighter could conceivably take a feat to use his con score for his basic attack rolls, while remaining a purely martial (non-arcane) character.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-09, 11:00 AM
Also, using Dungeoneering or Thievery to bend bars??? Maybe to find a weakness in those bars, but not to physically bend them.
Hmm... That crack in the cave wall looks like a stress fracture. Tap the ceiling just right, and some of the pressure shifts to the bars... Not enough for a cave in, but look as the weight of the cave system bends those steel bars.

Yay 300 tons of rock and using existing forces!

Optimystik
2009-11-09, 11:03 AM
Yes. I'd say it beats the 2E system, where you have a movement rate of 12 until you carry 100 points, then 11 until you carry 120 pounds, then 10 and so forth until zero.

But from Hamish's post, Strength does matter for lifting. It may not affect you until you hit the limit, but it does set the limit. So having a high STR score does mean your character is strong (and vice versa), unless I misread his post.


Sure it would, MacGyver style. If I use ropes, pulleys and a crowbar to bend bars, it's easy to make this a legit use of the thievery skill. Incidentally, this usage of thievery also gets the rest of the party through.

Well, if you rely on tools that amplify your existing strength (like pulleys, levers, etc.) then yes. But I was referring to bending bars unaided.

A high dungeoneering skill is great at bending bars if you have the tools to apply it. If you don't, then all that knowledge is useless.


Sure. But if your task is lifting a barbell, then you can also accomplish that using e.g. endurance (con) or bluff (cha). You can also make a case for acrobatics (dex), heal (wis) and history (int) as well, perhaps as an assist.

Endurance can help you hold it up once lifted; I don't see how it can get it up in the air in the first place. Bluff and acrobatics, I don't see at all. Heal could maybe help you regulate your breathing a bit, or even know what to inject yourself with, but in the latter case we're introducing external support again. History... weightlifting books?


The point is that it is never just one attribute, or only one skill, that can be used to bypass an obstacle: because that means that the characters that do not possess that attribute or skill cannot participate in that challenge, and it means that parties lacking that attribute or skill will be unable to pass it.

I don't have a problem with this point, but it neglects a key fact; the ability to apply knowledge is as important as the knowledge itself, and without the right tools, the primary attribute (strength in these examples) is the only way of applying that knowledge.


Really? I'm not sure where you read that, because none of their powers acts like a laser beam, and very few of those powers actually drain their life force. But yes, it's paranormal. But then, all characters are assumed to be not normal, because they're the heroes. A dwarf defensive fighter could conceivably take a feat to use his con score for his basic attack rolls, while remaining a purely martial (non-arcane) character.

My mistake, I was confusing them with 3.5 Warlocks concerning the blast. (Do 4E Warlocks not possess a ranged ability like that anymore?) Whether it drains their life force isn't what I meant - their life force is still the source of their powers, in the same way that a Psion's power source is his mind, but using his powers doesn't make him any dumber.

I'm sure that such a feat (CON to attack) exists for any class; my point was that I can't rationalize it's existence for mundane fighters. Unless your dwarf somehow tosses himself at all his enemies (pouncing sumo?) I can't see how his constitution would help his offensive abilities.

EDIT:


Hmm... That crack in the cave wall looks like a stress fracture. Tap the ceiling just right, and some of the pressure shifts to the bars... Not enough for a cave in, but look as the weight of the cave system bends those steel bars.

Yay 300 tons of rock and using existing forces!

Emphasis mine. How are you going to tap the ceiling (or in some cases, even reach it) enough to set those existing forces in motion, without either a tool of some kind or being pretty strong in the first place? In which case you're still relying on your strength, just to a lesser degree than bending the bars yourself.

It is not impossible that a situation would exist where the lightest of taps would set your scenario in motion, but a greater force as the catalyst is more likely.

mikeejimbo
2009-11-09, 11:05 AM
My mistake, I was confusing them with 3.5 Warlocks concerning the blast. (Do 4E Warlocks not possess a ranged ability like that anymore?) Whether it drains their life force isn't what I meant - their life force is still the source of their powers, in the same way that a Psion's power source is his mind, but using his powers doesn't make him any dumber.

They still have Eldritch Blast. And a couple of other things that could be laser-like, if you wanted them to.

Kylarra
2009-11-09, 11:07 AM
But from Hamish's post, Strength does matter for lifting. It may not affect you until you hit the limit, but it does set the limit. So having a high STR score does mean your character is strong (and vice versa), unless I misread his post.
p 222 of the PHB, but you're reading it correctly. 10x your str score is a normal load. 20x is the maximum you personally can lift. 50x is the most you can push/pull/drag.

PhoenixRivers
2009-11-09, 11:08 AM
Well, if you rely on tools that amplify your existing strength (like pulleys, levers, etc.) then yes. But I was referring to bending bars unaided. Because it's common practice to go into a dungeon naked? Hm.


I don't have a problem with this point, but it neglects a key fact; the ability to apply knowledge is as important as the knowledge itself, and without the right tools, the primary attribute (strength in these examples) is the only way of applying that knowledge. Again, what kind of adventurer goes into a cave naked?


I'm sure that such a feat (CON to attack) exists for any class; my point was that I can't rationalize it's existence for mundane fighters. Unless your dwarf somehow tosses himself at all his enemies (pouncing sumo?) I can't see how his constitution would help his offensive abilities.
Setting the dynamic tempo of the fight. Those with less endurance tire and make mistakes. You capitalize because it's easier to hit people that are feeling winded from trying to keep up with your tempo and pace.


Emphasis mine. How are you going to tap the ceiling (or in some cases, even reach it) enough to set those existing forces in motion, without either a tool of some kind or being pretty strong in the first place? In which case you're still relying on your strength, just to a lesser degree than bending the bars yourself.

It is not impossible that a situation would exist where the lightest of taps would set your scenario in motion, but a greater force as the catalyst is more likely.
How does your fighter fight without a sword? Or armor. I can't rationalize armor to AC here. It's a tool. People should calculate their AC unaided.

The greater force as a catalyst? Knowledge and skills are all about using the things around you. And a spelunking adventurer will likely not invest points in climbing and dungeoneering without having climbing and dungeoneering tools to effectively use those skills.

...Just as a fighter won't specialize in a longsword, a shield, and heavy armor, and then go into combat naked.

Kurald Galain
2009-11-09, 11:19 AM
Well, if you rely on tools that amplify your existing strength (like pulleys, levers, etc.) then yes. But I was referring to bending bars unaided.
I'm sure that having the right tool for the job should grant you a circumstance bonus. But there's no reason why a character shouldn't be able to try it without that. You are a hero, after all.

In a RPG system that attempts to accurately model a realistic world (e.g. GURPS), you would be right. But 4E has different design goals than that.


(Do 4E Warlocks not possess a ranged ability like that anymore?)
Yes they do, but it doesn't have much of anything in common with a laser beam. :smallbiggrin: However, the "laser cleric" is one of the classic builds of 4E.

Kylarra
2009-11-09, 11:22 AM
I'm sure that having the right tool for the job should grant you a circumstance bonus. But there's no reason why a character shouldn't be able to try it without that. You are a hero, after all.

In a RPG system that attempts to accurately model a realistic world (e.g. GURPS), you would be right. But 4E has different design goals than that.
Well, technically there are climbing tools/thieves tools which do give you that "circumstance bonus" to their respective checks.

BHodges3
2009-11-09, 12:11 PM
Wow. All of this because I had the title incorrect. *wince* Back to my question, is there a reason I can't find this feat when I use the Character Builder Application?

Kylarra
2009-11-09, 12:16 PM
Wow. All of this because I had the title incorrect. *wince* Back to my question, is there a reason I can't find this feat when I use the Character Builder Application?Yes. Primal power won't be in the character builder until the third tuesday of the month when they update it.

Optimystik
2009-11-09, 12:29 PM
Because it's common practice to go into a dungeon naked? Hm.
Again, what kind of adventurer goes into a cave naked?

None, but there are many, many unpleasant ways in which to lose your tools (or have them taken from you) before you need them. Needing to bend the bars in a dungeon for instance would generally imply that your character is incarcerated. His jailers would be rather foolish to leave all his gear in the cell with him. But being sufficiently strong means you can get through those bars without having pulleys, rope, crowbars and what have you available.

And even if you have those tools, what about the leverage you need to use them? A small or irregularly-shaped cell would mean you don't have as much room to rig up your Rube Goldberg escape mechanism - therefore, you have to rely more on your strength to make up for it.


Setting the dynamic tempo of the fight. Those with less endurance tire and make mistakes. You capitalize because it's easier to hit people that are feeling winded from trying to keep up with your tempo and pace.

That's still approaching the issue backwards. If both fighters are fresh (i.e. neither is tired) then CON is not an issue in terms of landing blows. But such a feat would apply even from the outset of battle. How can that be rationalized?


How does your fighter fight without a sword? Or armor. I can't rationalize armor to AC here. It's a tool. People should calculate their AC unaided.

Ah, but fighters CAN fight without swords and armor - it's called "unarmed strike."

A sword or armor is a convenience to a fighter; it helps him do his job, but is not mandatory to the act of fighting even if the fighter isn't strong. If Kurald's claim is correct, the same logic should apply to bending a bar unaided. But if the bender isn't strong, he needs pulleys and other tools to get the job done. The knowledge alone is not enough.


The greater force as a catalyst? Knowledge and skills are all about using the things around you. And a spelunking adventurer will likely not invest points in climbing and dungeoneering without having climbing and dungeoneering tools to effectively use those skills.

...Just as a fighter won't specialize in a longsword, a shield, and heavy armor, and then go into combat naked.

As said before, you are assuming all of the above tools will always be available to the user. But just because you enter a dungeon with some gear, doesn't mean they will always be available to you. It is the times when you are bereft of your items that strength becomes important, and more importantly that all the knowledge in the world becomes much more difficult (if not outright impossible) to apply.

Person_Man
2009-11-09, 12:46 PM
Meh, 3.X is littered with X to Y stuff (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125732). It's not surprising, or mechanically unsound, that they would include it in 4E. It's just unfortunate that the fluff on so many things is so thin and nonsensical.

A good alternative would be to have each of the six stats be equally useful and balanced, and then ban all X to Y abilities. Essentially, every build would have to pick 2 things they are good at, and would by definition be mediocre or weak in 4 things, including at least 1 Defense. But that would require reworking the entire system.