Level 1 AC 20?

[SovelsAtaask]

Just how problematic is this? I'm recruiting for a PbP game and one of the potential players has managed to get an AC of 20 using those two things from OA that stacks on top of normal armor? I'm just looking at stat blocks, and pretty much everything would need to roll a 17 or higher to touch her. Some things would need a natural 20. I'm already planning on telling them no 3e material, and I can tell it's unbalanced, but just how unbalanced?

[Mehangel]

AC 20 at level 1 is high, but it isn't game breaking, While it is true that most new level 1 characters wouldn't be able to afford most equipment that would grant that ac, it is well within the range of appropriate ac in my books.

[Sacrieur]

What are they stacking together?

[Alex12]

Heck, if you've got Wis 20 and Dex 20 (difficult but potentially possible depending on how you're generating stats and if you have a racial bonus to both), you can get 20 AC on a level 1 Monk.

[Afgncaap5]

I'd say it's problematic, but not impossible to work with. Goblins with well-placed feats who use tactics (flanking, Aiding Other, etc.) and special gear (emptying boiling oil from ceiling holes) can still be great challenges. Spell casters can cause problems ("Armor Lock" from Complete Scoundrel is a favorite of mine, but I don't think it'd be fair to use it too often, especially at level 1.)

So, I guess it depends on how you run encounters. If you want to just have a "general" combat with lots of traded blows, I'd probably ask the player to change gear and equipment. If you're fine with spending extra time devising unusual tactics or area-of-effect situations, though, you could probably be fine. And having said that, if you let the player have it... well, I'd recommend letting her get through a few fights without taking a scratch, at least at low levels. Players like their equipment purchases to be rewarded, after all, and if two orcs can't touch her (while the rest of the party takes a bit more damage than normal, perhaps...) she'll remember it well.

[SovelsAtaask]

I'm running a premade adventure (Sunless Citadel) and this is my first time DMing, so I'd rather not be forced to change too much other than what's necessary to convert things to 3.5.

The character I'm talking about is an Azurin Crusader with a Dex. of 14 and is wearing a chain shirt, dastana (OA), charhar-aina (OA), and a heavy wooden shield.

[Nifft]

The AC 20 itself isn't necessarily a problem, but...

That player seems to be pulling from some awfully diverse sourcebooks, one of which is from a previous edition (OA).

You mention this is your first time as a DM. Do you have a lot of experience as a player?

[Afgncaap5]

Yeah, if this is your first time DMing and you're using a module, my recommendation would be to scale back the books that the players can use a bit. You might ask the player if she'd be willing to work with core books, and maybe one or two others, just so that your first time DMing can be closer to the "standard" game.

[Rakoa]

Anyone with 16 Dex, a Heavy Steel Shield, and Chain armour has 20 AC at first level. It isn't hard to do.

[Kurald Galain]

AC 20 at level 1 is high, but it's not that big a deal.

Chainmail + large shield + dex 14 gives you an AC of 20.

Mage Armor + Shield spell + kobold or gathlain race also gives you an AC of 20.

I'm sure there's other combos.

[Yogibear41]

Its level 1, a high AC is the only thing that will keep things from just rolling over them anyway. Whats the point of playing a fighter type at low levels if some mook can just run up and whack you with a greatsword or something and gib you.

[SovelsAtaask]

I'm not terribly experienced as a player either. I've been playing off and on via play-by-post for around a year, but I wouldn't call myself experienced. I would ask people to scale back on the books, but I'm ending recruitment in two days and I have about a dozen people who've already made their characters. I can handle juggling a wide variety of classes and I have yet to see anything that looks too crazy. Now that I think about it, I think a big part of the issue is that they're boosting their light armor to medium strength without really taking any of the disadvantages that comes with medium armor.

[DarkSonic1337]

Tripping and Grappling only require touch attacks.

Tanglefoot bags only require touch attacks.

Most spells target touch AC or don't bother with AC at all.

Area effects.

Watch out for strength penalties/damage. They can make your armor too heavy to carry.

...simply target the players that are easier to hit (after having the enemy experiment enough to figure out who those characters are).

Work around the player's high AC. They built their character to be a tank, so let them have that and react like you would to a tank. You either ignore them in favor of other targets, or use less conventional avenues of attack that they may be particularly vulnerable to.

[Nifft]

I'm not terribly experienced as a player either. I've been playing off and on via play-by-post for around a year, but I wouldn't call myself experienced. I would ask people to scale back on the books, but I'm ending recruitment in two days and I have about a dozen people who've already made their characters. I can handle juggling a wide variety of classes and I have yet to see anything that looks too crazy. Now that I think about it, I think a big part of the issue is that they're boosting their light armor to medium strength without really taking any of the disadvantages that comes with medium armor.

A dozen players and unlimited books?

You're brave and ambitious.

I wish you success.

[Elkad]

It's a few points high at L1.
Rather than limiting books, you can limit their starting cash.
Or make sure you put in a "random' encounter when Mr AC20 is sleeping, so he has to run into the fight without all his armor.

By L2, I'd expect tanks to have AC20 anyway.

[SovelsAtaask]

A dozen players? Heavens no, I'm not crazy. I'm only going to have four players, but a dozen people applied. I could just not pick that player, but I'd rather get other people's opinions and possible alternatives to suggest to them rather than just writing them off for having nice stats.

[StreamOfTheSky]

It's fine. If anything, the problem at low levels is survivability, the hp just isn't that much compared to the damage foes can deal. If he's supposed to be the tank and went for a high AC, I'd say it's almost an occupational necessity. Either that or a reach weapon with Improved Trip or Stand Still and Combat Reflexes. Especially at low levels, surviving as a tank means not getting hit much at all, not being able to take a ton of punishment.

If it were a caster or psion who is pulling it off but plans to stay in the back anyway and use spells/powers, I'd honestly be far more annoyed.

[Urpriest]

It's not a problem in general, but the whole stacking char-aina and dastana thing is kind of independently obnoxious, especially if the player is expecting to be able to enchant them separately. It's not necessarily overpowered, mind you, but it would definitely be understandable if you objected to that aspect specifically.

[Darrin]

What are they stacking together?

Most likely, chain shirt + dastana + chahar-aina. You can get the combined armor bonus up to +6, one better than a breastplate. If you have an 18 Dex, that's AC 20. Could be even better... throw in an extreme shield (Races of Stone) and it could get up to AC 23.

Even better... Hengeyokai Sparrow in bird form has a +8 size bonus and a +6 Dex bonus for a nekkid AC of 24. If the sparrow is also a Warlock 1, then he gets the same bonus on his Eldritch Blasts (ranged touch attack).

[Necroticplague]

Considering the how easy it is to ignore AC and the fact that number could easily be higher (gnome with full-plate and tower shield is a few points higher), and how much mobility he's traded in, i don't see what the big deal is. If all else fails, the enemies fight smart to negate his advantage (trip him for a -4 to his AC while flanking him reduces his effective AC to 14, his low mobility could be exploited by archers,entangle could flat-foot him to lower it a couple points, entangle+trip+flank could easily render him basically at AC 12).

[Masakan]

Dude if your character is focused on fighting defensively, getting 20 ac at level 1 is laughably easy.

[SovelsAtaask]

Forgot to mention, they took the Shape Soulmend feat and have Astral Vambraces, so they have DR 2/magic. 4 if they invest a point of essentia. I'm not going to call shenanigans on that because they are supposed to be the tank and you can't be a very good tank if you're downed in one good hit, but I'd rather them not be incredibly hard to hit AND be able to negate the damage anyways.

[Mehangel]

Dude if your character is focused on fighting defensively, getting 20 ac at level 1 is laughably easy.

Yeah, but seriously, I wouldn't sweat having a level 1 character having 20 AC. If it was a level 1 character with 26+ AC, then I would be worried. But seriously 20 AC? Nah, dont sweat it.

[Mystral]

Just how problematic is this? I'm recruiting for a PbP game and one of the potential players has managed to get an AC of 20 using those two things from OA that stacks on top of normal armor? I'm just looking at stat blocks, and pretty much everything would need to roll a 17 or higher to touch her. Some things would need a natural 20. I'm already planning on telling them no 3e material, and I can tell it's unbalanced, but just how unbalanced?

AC 20 means that a monster with an attack bonus of +5 hits your player in 1/4 of attacks. That is how it should be for a dedicated tank.

AC 20 can be easily reached by a character wearing dexterity apropriate armor and a heavy shield, even easier for a small character.

There really isn't much of a problem here.

[ExLibrisMortis]

Forgot to mention, they took the Shape Soulmend feat and have Astral Vambraces, so they have DR 2/magic. 4 if they invest a point of essentia. I'm not going to call shenanigans on that because they are supposed to be the tank and you can't be a very good tank if you're downed in one good hit, but I'd rather them not be incredibly hard to hit AND be able to negate the damage anyways.
Compare that to a warforged crusader who took Adamantine Plating: not only do they have DR 2/adamantine, and a nice set of immunities, they have 19 AC with just their +1 dexterity bonus, add dastana/char-aina to taste.

Or compare it to a gnome who put an 18 in CON, then took Toughness, and used two flaws to get Roll With It twice. They have DR 4/-, stacking with other sources of DR. This gnome can be rocking 20 AC with small size, chain shirt, heavy shield and 16 dex, 22 AC with the additions from OA.

A crusader will be very powerful at level 1, even without especially high AC or DR, because of the delayed damage and constant heals. That's basically how the class - and the game - is designed.

[SovelsAtaask]

I guess I might have been wrong to freak out over the high AC, although I still feel iffy about it.

I still don't want OA material being used or weird stacking things, so perhaps I'll slip in a better suit of armor as treasure at some part of the dungeon.

[torrasque666]

I guess I might have been wrong to freak out over the high AC, although I still feel iffy about it.

I still don't want OA material being used or weird stacking things, so perhaps I'll slip in a better suit of armor as treasure at some part of the dungeon.
If you don't want OA material being used, don't allow it. You're the GM. You get to decide what material you are comfortable with using. No one else. They may make a case but you are under no obligation to concede to it.



Unless of course, play has already started...

[SovelsAtaask]

Nah, play hasn't started and I'm not going to let in OA stuff. But the way I phrased things when I was telling them about the issue made it seem like the high AC was the problem (well it was originally but I've learned since then).

[LudicSavant]

Just how problematic is this?

Not even slightly problematic. Getting AC20 at level 1 is neither hard to do, nor hard to counter. You can just as easily get attack bonuses that will bypass that (especially if the AC doesn't apply to both flat-footed and touch)... or, even more easily, simply use tactics that don't target AC.

[Snowbluff]

Mage Armor + Shield spell + kobold or gathlain race also gives you an AC of 20.


Wait, why kobold specifically? Halfings have +2 dex and +1 ac from size, for example. :smallconfused:

[Nifft]

Wait, why kobold specifically? Halfings have +2 dex and +1 ac from size, for example. :smallconfused:

Kobolds get all that, and another +1 Natural Armor.

Variant kobolds can get +2 ac from size via Slight Build.

[Solaris]

Dastana are also found in the Arms & Equipment Guide, which is less niche than OA (though still 3.0, the fact that it wasn't updated means it's still official). They're... they're not even remotely abusive or broken. Dastana actually do something the DM wants, which is to keep the PCs alive and able to continue adventuring. Even allowing enhancement bonuses to dastana to stack with bonuses from armor and shields isn't a bad thing, because if the player wants to invest that much of their WBL at low levels into pumping up their AC, why not let them? You have many, many means of challenging and threatening a character with a high AC, and the opportunity cost of them playing defense in a game that favors the offense is itself a greater punishment than anything you'd need to devise. I mean, the poor thing's using sword-and-board style, which is in the running for the single worst combat style in the game. Why not just let the player be good at what they want to be good at?

[Dusk Eclipse]

Kobolds have a +2 dex and are small sized too, but they also have +1 natural armour.

[urokia]

Level 1 20 ac isn't that hard, but if it's your first time DMing request players handbook only, with maybe one or two other books that you have to pre-approve.

[Scorponok]

If your world has a lot of spellcasters, it won't be a problem at all. Two Adepts casting Magic Missile at him for several rounds will make him realize AC isn't the be-all end-all of defenses. Throw a Scorching Ray in there a couple of times. Someone doing trip and disarm attacks or grappling can slow him down, as well as spells like Entangle. There are also a lot of touch attacks casters can do that can mess him up.

[Optimator]

Yeah, that AC wont be a problem at all. There's a lot more to the game than AC

[sovin_ndore]

It's not a problem in general, but the whole stacking char-aina and dastana thing is kind of independently obnoxious, especially if the player is expecting to be able to enchant them separately. It's not necessarily overpowered, mind you, but it would definitely be understandable if you objected to that aspect specifically.

I generally agree with this sentiment. The AC is high but within a perfectly reasonable range. Although they can't afford full plate at this level, seeing higher AC numbers are completely possible. A Jermiline Monk, for instance, would easily have a significantly higher than 20 AC naked (they have an 18 AC before point buy).

That said, I feel that dipping multiple sources for reasonably obscure/unique slotless armor is silly and I would not generally allow that sort of stacking. This is much more because the items break the established rules for armor stacking than because they are overpowered. Exceptions can always be made though. If for instance you were running a Sandstorm based game with all of the optional rules that make metal armor really suck, some minor ways to buff AC might be a completely reasonable option to keep tanks a bit more tanky.

Also, even if I did supply the PCs with one or both of the slotless items, I would not allow enchantment bonuses to AC from multiple items to stack even if their base Armor bonuses were specifically allowed to stack.

[Necroticplague]

Also, even if I did supply the PCs with one or both of the slotless items, I would not allow enchantment bonuses to AC from multiple items to stack even if their base Armor bonuses were specifically allowed to stack.

There's no such thing as an enchantment bonus to AC. Enchantment bonuses just increase the size of the base armor bonus provided by the item.

[sovin_ndore]

There's no such thing as an enchantment bonus to AC. Enchantment bonuses just increase the size of the base armor bonus provided by the item.
I did use the incorrect term there. There is an Enhancement Bonus applied to Armor which explicitly stacks with regular armor. This bonus is applied to AC.

Magic armor bonuses are enhancement bonuses, never rise above +5, and stack with regular armor bonuses (and with shield and magic shield enhancement bonuses)
The stacking rules for such bonuses are outlined here, noting that 'enhancement bonuses' from magic armor stack with 'regular armor bonuses'.
By RAW, the dastana notes it provides an "additional armor bonus" which stacks with the foundation armor. It is not noted that magical versions of dastanas provide an additional enhancement bonus that stacks with existing enhancement bonuses applied to other armor.

This pair of metal bracers can be worn in addition to some other types of armor to provide an additional armor bonus that stacks with both the foundation armor and any shield worn. You can wear dastana with padded, leather, or chain shirt armor. You need the Armor Proficiency (light) feat to wear dastana without penalty.
I will also point out that it also notes it works with "some other types of armor" giving this a RAW restriction which would need interpretation on whether it would stack with a particular type of armor.

Unfortunately I don't have immediate access to the text on char-aina, but I remember its text being written similarly.

[Nifft]

Yeah I agree that the AC 20 itself isn't a problem, but the stacking of many little things from obscure sources is a bit of a warning sign.

Hmm.

Maybe, can you ask this player to send you the full 20-level build outline?

Or ask everyone to do that, so you're being fair, and then post the build outlines here?

[Necroticplague]

The stacking rules for such bonuses are outlined here, noting that 'enhancement bonuses' from magic armor stack with 'regular armor bonuses'.
By RAW, the dastana notes it provides an "additional armor bonus" which stacks with the foundation armor. It is not noted that magical versions of dastanas provide an additional enhancement bonus that stacks with existing enhancement bonuses applied to other armor.

No, the enhancement bonus (I missed the minor misspelling too) it still applied to the armor, not to your AC. You missed the section detailing different types of bonuses:


Enhancement Bonus
An enhancement bonus represents an increase in the sturdiness and/or effectiveness of armor or natural armor, or the effectiveness of a weapon, or a general bonus to an ability score. Multiple enhancement bonuses on the same object (in the case of armor and weapons), creature (in the case of natural armor), or ability score do not stack. Only the highest enhancement bonus applies. Since enhancement bonuses to armor or natural armor effectively increase the armor or natural armor's bonus to AC, they don't apply against touch attacks.

The enhancement bonus is on the armor, not on you.

[Glorius Nippon]

Yea don't worry about the 20 AC, it's slightly above average, but that's to be expected for any sort of specialization.

The most important thing you need do tho, and something that most people in this thread are forgetting, is to not to specifically try to counter him at every step. Don't get me wrong, smart enough creatures would definitely try once they realized, groups would use tactics, ect., but it's not just the players that can metagame.

TLDR: Don't try to specifically counter him just because he has 20ac.

[Curmudgeon]

Anyone with 16 Dex, a Heavy Steel Shield, and Chain armour has 20 AC at first level. It isn't hard to do.
The Maximum Dexterity Bonus for Chainmail is 2, not 3, so you'd ignore 1 point of DEX bonus and have AC 19.


AC 20 at level 1 is high, but it's not that big a deal.

Chainmail + large shield + dex 14 gives you an AC of 20.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. A shield's bonus doesn't vary with size, though a Large character (presumably using an appropriately-sized shield) would have -1 to AC. This would be either AC 19 (with a heavy shield) or 21 (with a tower shield), before any size modifiers. Chainmail's armor bonus is 5.


A chain shirt (armor bonus 4), heavy wooden shield (shield bonus 2) and DEX 18 (+4 bonus) would yield AC 20. That would cost 107 gp; it's within the starting gold of most martial classes (Player's Handbook, page 111).

[Andreaz]

Forgot to mention, they took the Shape Soulmend feat and have Astral Vambraces, so they have DR 2/magic. 4 if they invest a point of essentia. I'm not going to call shenanigans on that because they are supposed to be the tank and you can't be a very good tank if you're downed in one good hit, but I'd rather them not be incredibly hard to hit AND be able to negate the damage anyways.
Relax. 20 AC and DR2/Magic is pitiful.

[Solaris]

The Chair-haina 'upgrade' the armor to medium. That's... significantly less good than a chain shirt and dastana, even with the added AC bonus.


I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. A shield's bonus doesn't vary with size...

Old versions of D&D used to call them small and large shields. I still get them confused, too, after a decade playing third edition.

[sovin_ndore]

Multiple enhancement bonuses on the same object (in the case of armor and weapons), creature (in the case of natural armor), or ability score do not stack. Only the highest enhancement bonus applies.
Necroticplague, I don't disagree regarding the enhancement bonus is on the armor, but I still read the 'same object' description to describe 'armor' as a single target for the purposes of enhancement bonuses.

That could be a suit of armor providing a set bonus or a suit of armor including optional components that provide an additional armor bonus. This would be much the same as how full plate is a series of components but all of these are part of the same 'suit'.


The suit includes gauntlets, heavy leather boots, a visored helmet, and a thick layer of padding that is worn underneath the armor.

You can't enhance these boots, then enhance the helmet, then enhance your padded armor, and expect all of those bonuses to stack... you enhance the suit. If you enhanced separate components or attempted to wear multiple suits of armor, I would expect the greater bonus to apply.

I don't see anything in what you are providing here that states that enhancement bonuses to different parts of your armor should suddenly stack just because you have special components that stack their own regular armor bonus.

Also, to reiterate. It is not the 20 AC that would bother me or cause me to remove these rules from the game, it is more because these items break the rules set down generally for item stacking and provide no opportunity cost (such as a feat surcharge by requiring Exotic Armor Proficiency).

[GreyBlack]

AC20 is not really problematic at all, though admittedly somewhat annoying for the DM when the wizard becomes tanky.

Easiest way I can think of to get AC20 as a level 1 character would be to play a wizard. Then, you stack Mage Armor (+4 Armor bonus), cast Shield (+4 Shield bonus), then get a +2 dex bonus. Assuming Elite Array, this is fairly simple: play an Elf, making the stat array: Str: 8 Dex: 16 Con: 13 Int: 15 Wis: 10 Cha: 12.

This would make your bonuses 10 Base +4 Armor +4 Shield +3 Dex = 21 AC. Good luck to the cat hitting!

[Nifft]

This DM mentioned that the players will be running through an adventure module, so presumably the monsters are already set -- and given the good reputation that the module has, I'd wager that the enemies will include creatures that target something other than AC.

- - -

The thing that's ringing my warning bells is just the variety of unusual source material.

It's an indication of high system mastery -- and that is NOT necessarily bad, but it does mean the DM might want to head off some specific problems early, and the best way to detect those problems is to talk to the players.

Specifically, I suggest that the DM ask these players what their intentions are for the next 10 levels (or more, if they know). Basically, "send me your career plan so I can try to work in whatever plot hooks you'll need".

Not only will this allow us to detect some potential issues, it'll also allow us to help suggest ways to make the characters shine, and help the players feel awesome about their characters.

[Sagetim]

Just how problematic is this? I'm recruiting for a PbP game and one of the potential players has managed to get an AC of 20 using those two things from OA that stacks on top of normal armor? I'm just looking at stat blocks, and pretty much everything would need to roll a 17 or higher to touch her. Some things would need a natural 20. I'm already planning on telling them no 3e material, and I can tell it's unbalanced, but just how unbalanced?

It's not a problem. Now, if they later try to enchant the add on bits separately for more ac, it quite simply doesn't work that way. For example, they can't slap a +5 enhancement bonus on the Dastana and another +5 enhancement bonus on the Chain Shirt and expect it to add up together. That's not how those little bits of equipment work. They add on to the base armor in question, and so cannot be separately enchanted.

To get back to level 1 potential problems: This isn't going to be a real issue. You're going to be attacking them a Lot more often than they are going to be attacking your monsters (at least, in a party of 4 that's the case. If you have a gang of 12 players running through things they're going to be murder hoboing their way through regardless of any one character's ac). 20 ac is nice, but as you mentioned, a 17 to 20 is still going to hit them. That's a 20% chance to hit with every single attack, and if those goblins are using daggers or short swords or something, two of those numbers are a crit threat. A critical can end a first level character. Not just 'oh, ****, I'm in negatives, save me' but 'oh, ****, I'm dead.'

Just be careful about allowing them to use iaijutsu focus. In the right hands, it serves as a means to have fighter type characters with a comparable damage output to other party members instead of just being meat shields. In the wrong hands, you get someone dual wielding and quick drawing and all kinds of other shenanigans and it just gets silly (mostly from a fluff standpoint).

There are other ways to get 20 ac at level 1. And if you want to just say blanket 'no 3.0 stuff' or 'no OA stuff' then that's fine*. When it comes specifically to the Chahar-aina and the Dastana, they impose a stacking -1 armor check penalty on top of the chain shirt's -2 armor check penalty. They also add a total of 15 pounds to the weight of the armor the character is wearing, so while they don't impose the 'medium armor speed penalty' they may well impose an encumberance penalty to movement. Additionally, if the character doesn't have medium armor proficiency, then they aren't proficient with the Chahar-aina, which means the armor check penalty for that (-1) is applying to attack rolls, skill checks, and so on.

*The Oriental Adventures stuff is for a variety of 'asian stuff'. Even if you set the game in Rokugan, the assumed campaign setting for OA, Chahar-aina and Dastana don't exist there. Like the Varanya and the Shaman class, they're not part of that setting. And that's within the same book. So if you want to say 'no OA stuff' you're well within your rights there.

Edit: Also, not sure if it was mentioned, but the Chahar-Aina and the Dastana cannot be used with anything other than their listed armors. Which specify: Padded, Leather, and Chain Shirt. So no, you can't slap these on an adamantine body warforged or someone in full plate or what have you. They wouldn't fit.

[Vulkan]

Got a player with high AC?
Hit his will power, reflex or fort saves or get him flat footed or use touch attacks on him.

But if you do this scenario set it up so other players will look awesome in this combat. But it's actually really easy to get 20 AC at level 1 but it comes at the price of damage usually.


That character also probably has like a -3 or -4 armor penalty for skill checks.... So just remember they're sacrificing allot then it seems...

Plus if they sleep in that armor they're going to take massive penalties that you can take advantage of~
*slurping noises*

[elonin]

Destana give a shield bonus so doesn't stack with shield.

[SovelsAtaask]

I'm not sure why so many of you are assuming I want to punish this player for having high stats. That's not the case, knock it off guys. I was just wondering if 20 was going to be an issue, and the general consensus is that it's not.

[Blackhawk748]

I'm not sure why so many of you are assuming I want to punish this player for having high stats. That's not the case, knock it off guys. I was just wondering if 20 was going to be an issue, and the general consensus is that it's not.

All is well. Honestly if my Fighter types dont have AC 18-20 at level 1 im concerned. Now that i think about it i dont think i've actually played a Fighter-y type who had less than that, then again im usually a Sword and Boarder.

Shield Specialization-Hide Shield (PHB II) + Shield Ward gets me a +4 AC and adds it to my Touch AC and as a bonus to a few other things. (this isnt RAW legal but every DM ive played under gives it the thumbs up) Combine that with Scale Mail (im level 1 ok :smalltongue:) and a 16 Dex. Boom 21 AC. However ive blown most of my money and two feats on this. Am i stupid hard to hit? Yes, but i dont hit significantly harder than anyone else.

Unlimited books first time DM though....you brave soul.

[Lhurgyof]

That said, I feel that dipping multiple sources for reasonably obscure/unique slotless armor is silly and I would not generally allow that sort of stacking.

Chahar-aina and dastana specifically stack with only very specific armor types, chain shirt being one of them. It's not really obscure when you consider that they are just an outer plate of armor and long armored bracers.

Oriental Adventures may not fit the flavor of a given campaign, but these two items are far from exotic. Hell, dastana are even in the Arms and Equipment guide.


I'm not sure why so many of you are assuming I want to punish this player for having high stats. That's not the case, knock it off guys. I was just wondering if 20 was going to be an issue, and the general consensus is that it's not.

I feel like rather than having banned the book, just take things on a case-by-case basis. But you already told the player no, so the point is moot. If I ever make a character that focuses AC or uses light armor and doesn't want to be insta-gibbed by orcs I make sure to go chain shirt + dastana + chahar-aina.

[SovelsAtaask]

Unlimited books first time DM though....you brave soul.

I've been reading the books for the past year or so, and while I can't claim to have memorized all that much I do have a least basic understanding of most subsystems.


I feel like rather than having banned the book, just take things on a case-by-case basis. But you already told the player no, so the point is moot. If I ever make a character that focuses AC or uses light armor and doesn't want to be insta-gibbed by orcs I make sure to go chain shirt + dastana + chahar-aina.

That's fine and dandy, but it's not a 3.5e book and I'd rather not have to worry about 3e stuff.

[Lhurgyof]

That's fine and dandy, but it's not a 3.5e book and I'd rather not have to worry about 3e stuff.

It has no 3.5e equivalent, therefore it can be used in a 3.5 game.

Much in the same way that Book of Vile Darkness and most of the Faerun books were never updated.

Edit: Oriental Adventures is updated to Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 via the Dragon #318 article "Oriental Adventures Update: Eastern Flavor" (32-48).

Edit edit: Here is the specific part of the update that refers to Dastana and Chahar-Aina. No other text in the update deals with them:

http://i.imgur.com/Z8L2z2Z.jpg

[Blackhawk748]

That's fine and dandy, but it's not a 3.5e book and I'd rather not have to worry about 3e stuff.

I can understand not wanting to deal with OA, its a good book, but if you havent read it it can be a pain.

[SovelsAtaask]

It has no 3.5e equivalent, therefore it can be used in a 3.5 game.

That doesn't really make any sense. Sure, I could use 3e material, but the way you're saying it makes it seem like I'm required to which is silly. To me, that's like playing Pathfinder and expecting your GM to allow 3.5 content just because.

[Lhurgyof]

That doesn't really make any sense. Sure, I could use 3e material, but the way you're saying it makes it seem like I'm required to which is silly. To me, that's like playing Pathfinder and expecting your GM to allow 3.5 content just because.

Not at all, there are many books released in 3.0 that the game designers either never updated or released small updates for to be playable in 3.5. Many of these books (including those released very close before 3.5 came out) are suitable for play in 3.5e.

Pick up a book like Ghostwalk or any of the Faerun books. Without consulting amazon, wikipedia, etc. to confirm what edition they're from could you tell what edition the book is?

Some were very obviously updated (and thusly outdated) like Complete Warrior superseding Sword and Fist or other small instances where a 3.0 prestiege class is found in a 3.5 book.

When the 3.5 update exists, saying no to it simply because "it's not 3.5" means nothing. If you don't want to deal with Oriental Adventures then say so. But don't say you don't want it because you're running a 3.5 game because it is perfectly legal in a 3.5 game when used with the updates from Dragon.

[ExLibrisMortis]

That doesn't really make any sense. Sure, I could use 3e material, but the way you're saying it makes it seem like I'm required to which is silly. To me, that's like playing Pathfinder and expecting your GM to allow 3.5 content just because.
3.5 is called 3.5, not 4.0, because it's an update of the 3.0 system, meant to be used with older 3.0 content. 3.0 books are explicitly part of the 3.0-3.5 edition of D&D, where they have not been specifically updated to 3.5.

You're meant to update 3.0 to 3.5 yourself, by removing skills like Intuit Direction and Scry, and the details may vary from DM to DM. That's why it's not always practical to assume a DM will allow a certain conversion of old 3.0 content. In this case, there is nothing to be changed, so it's perfectly good, RAW-legal 3.0/3.5 content.

[smcmike]

I'm not sure why so many of you are assuming I want to punish this player for having high stats. That's not the case, knock it off guys. I was just wondering if 20 was going to be an issue, and the general consensus is that it's not.

It's true, it won't be an issue, unless you let it be. And you should let him have a moment or two of glory, wading through hordes of goblins without a scratch.

Of course, you do need to make sure you have a way to snake him if he gets cocky.

[torrasque666]

When the 3.5 update exists, saying no to it simply because "it's not 3.5" means nothing. If you don't want to deal with Oriental Adventures then say so. But don't say you don't want it because you're running a 3.5 game because it is perfectly legal in a 3.5 game when used with the updates from Dragon.
Kinda does matter when the update exists in a magazine, which he may or may not have, and may or may not actually be able to find online or in print. Without those resources, the update is useless. Its far easier(though I still can't advise it) to find book in PDF/Print format than the magazines.

To reiterate: Without access to the specific Dragon Magazine issue detailing the updates to Oriental Adventures to make it 3.5 compatible, it's not 3.5 material.​ After all, you wouldn't tell him to allow Order of the Bow Initiate or Ur-Priest if he doesn't want to allow 3.0 material and he doesn't have access to Complete Warrior or Complete Divine as without those books, ​they aren't 3.5 material.

[Necroticplague]

Necroticplague, I don't disagree regarding the enhancement bonus is on the armor, but I still read the 'same object' description to describe 'armor' as a single target for the purposes of enhancement bonuses. How the heck could a dastana and chahar-aina be the same object as the armor they're helping out with, given how you could remove and interact with them seperately?




You can't enhance these boots, then enhance the helmet, then enhance your padded armor, and expect all of those bonuses to stack... you enhance the suit. If you enhanced separate components or attempted to wear multiple suits of armor, I would expect the greater bonus to apply.right. Because those items are an abstraction: they're addition or removal doesn't effect the statistics or the armor at all.


I don't see anything in what you are providing here that states that enhancement bonuses to different parts of your armor should suddenly stack just because you have special components that stack their own regular armor bonus. And here seems to be what the root of our differences are at; You view the dastana and chahar-aina as just more parts of the same armor (thus making them like the boots and helmet of plate armor), whereas I see them as more as entirely different objects that improve on the same statistic (thus making them more like shields, which can be enchanted separately from your armor).


Also, to reiterate. It is not the 20 AC that would bother me or cause me to remove these rules from the game, it is more because these items break the rules set down generally for item stacking and provide no opportunity cost (such as a feat surcharge by requiring Exotic Armor Proficiency).

Um, they do have an opportunity cost. Money. You need to spend money to put enchantments on these things. Money that could be spent elsewhere. So whatever that enchantment cost could have bought you is an opportunity cost If you have a +1 dastana, +1 chahar-aina, and +1 chain shirt, you're making a decision that the +3 AC for 3k GP is worth more than say, +1 attack and damage and several years worth of rations.

[TIPOT]

Just note that the Chahar-Aina and Dastana don't stack with each other as they both are armour bonuses (and don't specifically say they stack). Generally as well you'd be perfectly within your rights to rule that dastana are essentially shields.

edit: looking it up, shield bonuses weren't a thing in 3rd edition, so it may even be intended for dastana to give a shield bonus. They're really weird rules-wise.

[Necroticplague]

Just note that the Chahar-Aina and Dastana don't stack with each other as they both are armour bonuses (and don't specifically say they stack).

Hmmm....but they both stack with the base armor....so apparently, you get the base armor+(the higher of dastana or chahar-aina)? Still might be useful to lug the other around for a place to put armor enchantments (other than +X, of course), spikes, razors, and similar armor mods.

[sovin_ndore]

And here seems to be what the root of our differences are at; You view the dastana and chahar-aina as just more parts of the same armor (thus making them like the boots and helmet of plate armor), whereas I see them as more as entirely different objects that improve on the same statistic (thus making them more like shields, which can be enchanted separately from your armor).
I think this is closer to the point I was trying to make anyhow. Similar sources do not stack unless explicity stated otherwise. We have only two statements that contradict this where armor is concerned.

First, as we previously brought up, regular armor bonuses and magic armor/enhancement bonuses are mentioned to stack:

Magic armor bonuses are enhancement bonuses, never rise above +5, and stack with regular armor bonuses (and with shield and magic shield enhancement bonuses)
These are thus different types/sources of bonuses which can apply simultaniously.

Second, we have the explicit rules for these specific armor items tating they provide an "additional armor bonus" which stacks with the foundation armor.

I don't think we have any disagreement on these rules.

There is however a leap of intuition that you are making and which I am not seeing any RAW to support. That is your assumption that the stated 'additional armor bonus' stacking applies to both 'regular armor bonuses' and to any 'magic armor/enhancement bonuses' applied to the weapon despite these being differentiated and having separate stacking rules (as separate types/sources).

To have that be satisfied by RAW, I would expect it to be noted that magical versions of dastanas provide an additional enhancement bonus that stacks with existing enhancement bonuses applied to other armor. This is why I keep bringing up the general axiom that bonuses of the same type do not stack unless explicitly stated.


Um, they do have an opportunity cost. Money. You need to spend money to put enchantments on these things. Money that could be spent elsewhere. So whatever that enchantment cost could have bought you is an opportunity cost If you have a +1 dastana, +1 chahar-aina, and +1 chain shirt, you're making a decision that the +3 AC for 3k GP is worth more than say, +1 attack and damage and several years worth of rations.
What you are referring to as "opportunity cost" is actually a huge discount relative to paying for a +3 enhancement bonus on a single armor item or more realistically a +5 enhancement bonus (to include the value of the 'regular armor bonus' provided by the A&E/OA items). Usually, if you are recieving a more significant bonus than provided in core you are either purchasing feats/class features or you are paying more money for additional magical properties.

[AzraelX]

Why not just let the player be good at what they want to be good at?
In addition to everything else in your post, well said.

[Necroticplague]

I think this is closer to the point I was trying to make anyhow. Similar sources do not stack unless explicity stated otherwise. We have only two statements that contradict this where armor is concerned.

First, as we previously brought up, regular armor bonuses and magic armor/enhancement bonuses are mentioned to stack:

These are thus different types/sources of bonuses which can apply simultaniously.And we have another that states that


Since enhancement bonuses to armor or natural armor effectively increase the armor or natural armor's bonus to AC, they don't apply against touch attacks. So if you have a a +1 dastana and a +1 chain chirt and +1 chaha-aina, it's not 4armor(chain shirt)+1armor(dastana)+1armor(chahar-aina)+1(enhancement on chain shirt)+1enhancementd(enhancement on dastana)+1enhancement(enhancement on chahar-aina), which is a horrific violation of stacking rules. It would be 5(armor bonus from chain shirt)+2(armor bonus from dastana, stacks)+2(armor armor bonus from chahar-aina, stacks), which isn't (because the objects have a special exception that allows their armor bonus to stack).



There is however a leap of intuition that you are making and which I am not seeing any RAW to support. That is your assumption that the stated 'additional armor bonus' stacking applies to both 'regular armor bonuses' and to any 'magic armor/enhancement bonuses' applied to the weapon despite these being differentiated and having separate stacking rules (as separate types/sources).

To have that be satisfied by RAW, I would expect it to be noted that magical versions of dastanas provide an additional enhancement bonus that stacks with existing enhancement bonuses applied to other armor. This is why I keep bringing up the general axiom that bonuses of the same type do not stack unless explicitly stated. And from my point of view, you're making an arbitrary distinction I don't see any RAW support for. You're splitting up 'enhancement bonus' and 'base armor' when there is no such one. +5 Full-Plate doesn't provide a +8 armor bonus to AC and a +5 enhancement bonus to AC. It provides one +13 bonus to AC. Under your logic, a +5 tower shield and +5 full-plate only give a +17 to AC, instead of a +22 (because your math would go 8 armor plate+ 4 shield tower shield+5 enhancement bonus plate+5enhancement bonus shield). The dastana is one peice of armor, with its own armor bonus. You can wear a dastana and swap out the chain shirt underneath. Likewise with Chahar-aina. They do not become one object with the armor underneath them. They are still separate items to which the enhancement bonus is applied to. +



What you are referring to as "opportunity cost" is actually a huge discount relative to paying for a +3 enhancement bonus on a single armor item or more realistically a +5 enhancement bonus (to include the value of the 'regular armor bonus' provided by the A&E/OA items). Usually, if you are recieving a more significant bonus than provided in core you are either purchasing feats/class features or you are paying more money for additional magical properties.

Holding core up as the standard is a ridiculous concept on its face. The idea of exponential costs for linear benefits should have been like a stillborn child: dead on delivery. It still has an opportunity cost, it's just lower than the opportunity cost of some other action. Also, mentioning the bonus armor is somewhat disingenuous, as the use of the chahar-aina or dastana limits you to Chain Shirt at the heaviest, so if you weren't using this tactic, you could get the same regular armor benefit by just wearing a heavier armor. If you wore a chainmail armor instead of chain shirt+dastana+chahar-aina, you get the same armor bonus, but save 50 GP and 10 pounds encumbrance.

[sovin_ndore]

Since enhancement bonuses to armor or natural armor effectively increase the armor or natural armor's bonus to AC, they don't apply against touch attacks.Yep, it does define how you pair up the magic and mundane bonuses for purpooses of calculating touch AC. I do not disagree with this at all. The fact that they do explicitly state that enhancement bonuses are a separate type of bonus in this text would also support my understanding of the sources being different types of bonuses.


So if you have a a +1 dastana and a +1 chain chirt and +1 chaha-aina, it's not 4armor(chain shirt)+1armor(dastana)+1armor(chahar-aina)+1(enhancement on chain shirt)+1enhancementd(enhancement on dastana)+1enhancement(enhancement on chahar-aina), which is a horrific violation of stacking rules. It would be 5(armor bonus from chain shirt)+2(armor bonus from dastana, stacks)+2(armor armor bonus from chahar-aina, stacks), which isn't (because the objects have a special exception that allows their armor bonus to stack). And from my point of view, you're making an arbitrary distinction I don't see any RAW support for. You're splitting up 'enhancement bonus' and 'base armor' when there is no such one. +5 Full-Plate doesn't provide a +8 armor bonus to AC and a +5 enhancement bonus to AC. It provides one +13 bonus to AC. Actually, I would break it down exactly like it is broken down in the book: regular armor + magic armor + (regular) shield + magic shield. As a matter of fact, the way they break down the shield description without tagging 'regular' shield beside magic shield seems to imply that regular is not the type in the previous statment. Thus, it would make sense that it would be 'armor' and 'magic armor enhancement bonuses' just the same as it is 'shield' and 'magic shield enhancement bonuses'.

Magic armor bonuses are enhancement bonuses, never rise above +5, and stack with regular armor bonuses (and with shield and magic shield enhancement bonuses)
Once again, using this same line where RAW breaks the bonuses and their stacking down.
I would then apply the exception rule for these items that allow the regular armor bonuses to stack.
Note: In terms of stacking, it would be legal to wear unenchanted regular armor and Bracers of Armor and provide direct stacking (As Bracers of Armor only provide an Enhancement bonus).


Under your logic, a +5 tower shield and +5 full-plate only give a +17 to AC, instead of a +22 (because your math would go 8 armor plate+ 4 shield tower shield+5 enhancement bonus plate+5enhancement bonus shield). As I have quoted repeatedly; armor and armor enhancement is separate from shield and shield enhancement. So I would also end up with +22 AC just the same as you did.


The dastana is one peice of armor, with its own armor bonus. You can wear a dastana and swap out the chain shirt underneath. Likewise with Chahar-aina. They do not become one object with the armor underneath them. They are still separate items to which the enhancement bonus is applied to. My point through all of this is that regardless of if they are separate items, unless you arbitrarily combine their bonuses without assessing what type of bonus they are (and following stacking rules), they don't stack the way you want them to.


Holding core up as the standard is a ridiculous concept on its face.Well then, let me hold up every book and every item ever published in 3.X with the exception of the two items we are discussing. No matter how you try to cut this pie, these two items are unique in their stacking rules, I am referring to them as an exception for this reason.
Their mechanic explicitly breaks the rules used (in any definition of) elsewhere in the rules for stacking multiple armor items. That fact should not be a point of contention.


The idea of exponential costs for linear benefits should have been like a stillborn child: dead on delivery.The exponential cost of D&D for both XP and WBL is a self correcting mechanic. If a DM does poorly on wealth distribution at low levels, it will be subsumed by average distribution at higher levels. If you have ever looked at the math on LA buyoff or understand why that is useful, you probably have a good handle on why diminishing returns would work well for wealth and keep a DM that made mistakes early on from continuing to pay for those mistakes late into a campaign.


It still has an opportunity cost, it's just lower than the opportunity cost of some other action. Also, mentioning the bonus armor is somewhat disingenuous, as the use of the chahar-aina or dastana limits you to Chain Shirt at the heaviest, so if you weren't using this tactic, you could get the same regular armor benefit by just wearing a heavier armor. If you wore a chainmail armor instead of chain shirt+dastana+chahar-aina, you get the same armor bonus, but save 50 GP and 10 pounds encumbrance.An opportunity cost of 50 gp or 10 pounds encumbrance is completely inconsequential starting at about level 2 due to that exponential WBL we were just discussing. And the monetary cost even at level one is well outside the standard.

Just for a point of perspective, the Dastana provides +1 AC which does not take up a magic item slot and which stacks with regular armor, armor enhancement, and deflection. A similar item providing a +1 AC of a source which also stacks in the same manner (namely a Dusty Rose Ioun Stone +1 Insight) checks in at 5,000 gp. That is 100x the cost ... and there is only an encumbrance difference of 10 pounds!? Even with the restrictions of what sort of armor you put it on, many characters will end up opting for Chain Shirts due to armor proficiencies or max dexterity bonuses... even if circumstantial on which characters this is useful for, these items are a steal.

And this doesn't even get into how much of a discount allowing enhancement bonuses on them to stack would end up costing into lategame. I don't really see much point in opening that up to discussion, the reprocussions of that should be obvious.

[zergling.exe]

Have we pointed out that the Chahar-aina and Dastana don't stack with each other as they don't make exceptions for each other? Because that's another problem we have.

[sovin_ndore]

Have we pointed out that the Chahar-aina and Dastana don't stack with each other as they don't make exceptions for each other? Because that's another problem we have.It has been mentioned in here a few times. I have avoided discussing that aspect in my discourse as I don't think that is under debate... I did just realize that Necroticplague seems to still be trying to combine both so perhaps I was amiss in not bringing that up also.

[Necroticplague]

It has been mentioned in here a few times. I have avoided discussing that aspect in my discourse as I don't think that is under debate... I did just realize that Necroticplague seems to still be trying to combine both so perhaps I was amiss in not bringing that up also.
Actually, I did aknowledge this fact earlier with a reply. However, that was mostly tangental to the discussion of whether the +x dastana/+x chahar-aina stacks with a +x chain shirt. Even without combining them both, the question still remains for using one of them. Like you, I didn't believe it was under debate, and thus avoided re-bringing it up in our discussion.

Hmmm....but they both stack with the base armor....so apparently, you get the base armor+(the higher of dastana or chahar-aina)? Still might be useful to lug the other around for a place to put armor enchantments (other than +X, of course), spikes, razors, and similar armor mods.

Though come to think of it, I was really remiss in not adding 'armor crystals' to that list.