Adamantine or +1 Half-Plate?

[Dork_Forge]

I'd personally go +1 simply because a little part of me finds removing myself from the threat of crits to be a bit boring, but that's obviously not an optimizing opinion.

[Chronos]

Quoth Sigreid:

I'd go with the Adamantine. Whether the +1 mitigates more damage long term depends on how high the end AC is.

The only way the +1 would mitigate less damage, long-term, would be if your AC is already so high that things are only hitting on a natural 20 anyway, or if enemy attack bonuses are so high that, even with the +1, they're only missing on a natural 1 anyway. And both of those situations are extremely rare, in 5th edition's bounded accuracy.

[Mastikator]

The +1 basically always mitigates more damage over the long run. But that doesn't take into account max hp, and you know, dying to unlucky spike crit damage.

[Frogreaver]

AC can also protect against attacks with riders, like save vs prone or auto grapple, etc. So not only does it reduce a little more damage over the long run, but it also mitigates more effects than Adamantine. It's definitely the better choice for expected value.

That said Adamantine does fully mitigate the additional risks of being crit and you'll never fully mitigate such on hit effects as crits always hit. Crits can drastically change almost any encounter - so the Adamantine is likely the better risk adjusted choice.

But ultimately the expected value and risk adjusted values are just so close that the choice should be used more to make a statement about your character than as an opportunity to make the character perform better.

What statement do you want to make with the choice?

[Corran]

I'd keep the +1 armor. Spares you a little more damage on average, and all your armor bonuses you can stack synergize between them.

[llama-hedge]

You're choosing between a 5% chance either to turn a miss into a hit, or a crit into a regular hit. I would favour the +1 AC at lower levels, and the adamantine at higher levels where you're probably going to get hit regardless and the crits are much swingier.

[Osuniev]

I'd personally go +1 simply because a little part of me finds removing myself from the threat of crits to be a bit boring, but that's obviously not an optimizing opinion.

An important consideration indeed. Do you enjoy the thrill of fights where you feel you're close from death ? Or do you prefer the feeling of invincibility ?



Another consideration: does your GM often use swarms of low CR monsters ?

I've had 3 high-AC players in my 2 last campaigns. Both of them, I (DM) used groups of 10+ enemies pretty regularly.
Having a Tank Hasted, or using Shield, meant their AC was 24+, which for low CR monsters means ONLY THE CRITS matter. 24, 25 or 27 AC make no difference if the monster only has +4 to hit.

On the other hand, if your character Dodges or otherwise inflicts Disadvantage often, crits are 20 times rarer, and a +1 AC is much better then.


(We also Houseruled "critical do normal damage + max dice", which does make them way more deadly, si this might colour my opinion below :)

My experience ? critical hit is very, very often involved in character death.

I THINK :
a -1 AC makes a lot of fights a lot more tense
a vulnerability to Crits makes a FEW fights lethal.

I would go with the adamantine if you want your PC to go the full campaign. I would go with the +1 AC if you have another character you'd like to play when this one is dead.

[Master O'Laughs]

An important consideration indeed. Do you enjoy the thrill of fights where you feel you're close from death ? Or do you prefer the feeling of invincibility ?



Another consideration: does your GM often use swarms of low CR monsters ?

I've had 3 high-AC players in my 2 last campaigns. Both of them, I (DM) used groups of 10+ enemies pretty regularly.
Having a Tank Hasted, or using Shield, meant their AC was 24+, which for low CR monsters means ONLY THE CRITS matter. 24, 25 or 27 AC make no difference if the monster only has +4 to hit.

On the other hand, if your character Dodges or otherwise inflicts Disadvantage often, crits are 20 times rarer, and a +1 AC is much better then.


(We also Houseruled "critical do normal damage + max dice", which does make them way more deadly, si this might colour my opinion below :)

My experience ? critical hit is very, very often involved in character death.

I THINK :
a -1 AC makes a lot of fights a lot more tense
a vulnerability to Crits makes a FEW fights lethal.

I would go with the adamantine if you want your PC to go the full campaign. I would go with the +1 AC if you have another character you'd like to play when this one is dead.

Hmmm, so my character is rather reckless. I have a custom spell made by DM which as a reaction to myself or a party member getting attacked, I can switch places with them...

I did this when a dragon was attacking the party wizard who would have gone down.

There were also Gith pirates and I would provoke AoOs to get shots off without disadvantage.

He thinks he is more or less invincible (even though he isn't) and will probably continue to be reckless until it causes the party to almost wipe, or if it caused another PC to die (we have diamonds for rez so not permanent unless like disintegrated).

[Willie the Duck]

Another thing to consider is the psychological effects. If your AC gets too high, oftentimes the DM will believe they are making their encounters too weak, and tweak them upwards (throwing that one extra orc in there 'to keep up.' I've certainly seen this with DMs when a character start getting defensive fighting style with full plate and shield and access to the shield spell on a gish-build or the like -- they are missing, so clearly something is going wrong (even though the explanation is that the PC has dedicated every build choice to making to-hits be the one thing to which they are most resilient). The same is likely not the case for crit-negation, as I think everyone at the table is excited when someone gets to use their only-occasionally-useful fancy magic gear.

[Dork_Forge]

An important consideration indeed. Do you enjoy the thrill of fights where you feel you're close from death ? Or do you prefer the feeling of invincibility ?

Both, and I'd personally find it more satisfying to weather the crits, rather than ignore them. It feels far more satisfying.

Another consideration: does your GM often use swarms of low CR monsters ?

I primarily DM, when I play it's a mix of mobs and toughs, so yes?

I would go with the adamantine if you want your PC to go the full campaign. I would go with the +1 AC if you have another character you'd like to play when this one is dead.

I don't disagree that crits are where unexpected PC deaths can happen, but fundamentally disagree with how this advice is phrased. I'd wager statistically the vast majority of PCs that go all the way never had adamantine.

[Rukelnikov]

Maybe just ask your DM if you can use the interfusion with the Adamantine one, I'd allow it, having it be magical and shut off inside a dead magic area is the antithesis of how special materials have usually worked in the narrative.

[Master O'Laughs]

Maybe just ask your DM if you can use the interfusion with the Adamantine one, I'd allow it, having it be magical and shut off inside a dead magic area is the antithesis of how special materials have usually worked in the narrative.

Oh trust me, that was the first thing I asked and he said no. I assumed that was the RAW rules answer anyways. it just would have been an awesome perk.

I think I will ask if I could work towards crafting it into a +1 adamantine half plate through the use of time and resources.

[Rukelnikov]

Oh trust me, that was the first thing I asked and he said no. I assumed that was the RAW rules answer anyways. it just would have been an awesome perk.

I think I will ask if I could work towards crafting it into a +1 adamantine half plate through the use of time and resources.

Well, hope he allows that.

[Dr.Samurai]

My experience:
-Times someone has said "Gosh, I wish my AC was just 1 point higher": 0
-Times the party cleric said "No crits!" and was happy with her adamantine breastplate, despite having heavy armor proficiency: 8+ across 9 levels

Can confirm. My dwarf paladin avoided many crits in J-H's game, and while we weren't in person, I did get some dopamine every time J-H typed "No crit" next to the nat 20 that was rolled.

I do think it's different to with the +1 to AC. Like... I consider my AC score to be my AC score. If a monster rolls enough to just hit my AC, I don't think "I wish my AC were higher". It's more like "crap, the monster rolled enough to hit me".

Otherwise, I'd always be wishing my AC were higher. It is what it is. But avoiding crits, it's a different feel.

[Dork_Forge]

Can confirm. My dwarf paladin avoided many crits in J-H's game, and while we weren't in person, I did get some dopamine every time J-H typed "No crit" next to the nat 20 that was rolled.

I do think it's different to with the +1 to AC. Like... I consider my AC score to be my AC score. If a monster rolls enough to just hit my AC, I don't think "I wish my AC were higher". It's more like "crap, the monster rolled enough to hit me".

Otherwise, I'd always be wishing my AC were higher. It is what it is. But avoiding crits, it's a different feel.

My brain reading this:

"...WAIT IS DR SAMURAI TEADOR THE PALADIN?!"

[Telok]

Consider the rate at which you take hits and crits. If you take relatively few hits then crit reduction can be great. This is especially true on casters who may be able to avoid being attacked very often. If you take lots of hits then a reduction in the overall hit rate may be better as the crits make up a smaller precentage of the damage you're taking.

But for me the most bang for the buck has been good ac + LUCKY. Sure, it's only 3/day. But in about 2 years of every week using the feat to negate crits it's only failed twice (and once was when the character had used all the luck for the day). Plus you can sometimes use it to make an important save. Mind now, our party fighter on a night when the GM's dice are hot has seen six crits in a fight. So it's not a flat out, no questions asked, best option.

But if you're normally seeing about 3/day crits on you then consider the lucky feat and the magic armor.

[Osuniev]

Both, and I'd personally find it more satisfying to weather the crits, rather than ignore them. It feels far more satisfying.

I primarily DM, when I play it's a mix of mobs and toughs, so yes?

Sorry I was asking this question to the OP, and agreeing with you that Crits and the risk of them are a fun component

I don't disagree that crits are where unexpected PC deaths can happen, but fundamentally disagree with how this advice is phrased. I'd wager statistically the vast majority of PCs that go all the way never had adamantine.

Agreed, I should have phrased this better :

Adamantine armor seems a better choice if the survival of your character is a top priority. If you're ok with the scenario where your character dies (for whatever reason, but a common one is "I want to play my back-up character", it seems for OP it's "we can resurrect") that priority might be lower down your list, and it might be more fun to take the higher variance choice.

[Chronos]

Both of them obviously have "die less often" as their purpose. The question isn't "do you want to die less often?", because everyone wants that, and if they have it as a low priority, then they'll be doing something other than improving their armor at all. The question is "which will result in dying less often?". And that can depend on other factors, like how much the enemies you typically face deal per hit and how many HP you have.

If enemies typically deal a significant fraction of your HP total per hit, but don't hit very often (either due to low bonuses, or to not having very many attacks), then the most likely way to die is by a crit, and so you want to mitigate that. On the other hand, if enemies hit a lot of times (high bonus and/or many attacks), but for a small amount each time relative to your HP, then it's not any single hit that makes the difference, not even a crit: It's the total amount of damage taken, and the option that will keep you alive best is the one that negates the most total damage, which is the +1.

(and of course, to finish out the possibilities, if enemies hit seldom and for a small amount, you won't die anyway, and if they hit often for a lot, you'd better have that backup character no matter which armor option you go with)

[stoutstien]

You could also talk to your DM about making armor/shields out of adamantine. Remember, due to some very poor choice of wording, that armor is magical but not all armor made from that material is inherently magical.

Trying to keep magical armor and inherent material upgrades separate was a boneheaded decision. It has never worked in the history of the genre.

[da newt]

I'll second Telok's advice: Keep the +1 / +2 armor and max your AC and then pick up the LUCKY feat for crit mitigation and the best of both worlds.

As for flavor / RP: with a guy who recklessly decides to provoke attacks, I'd assume they also recklessly decide which armor to use, therefor I'd think they'd be more interested in being hit less often, and less concerned about the freak chance of a Crit and overconfident that they'd survive it anyway ...

[Segev]

The lower your hp, the more I would recommend the adamantine armor. The higher your hp, the more I recommend the +1 bonus to AC. This is because, with a higher hp count, you can absorb the occasional critical hit more easily. Plate mail is already going to have a reasonably good AC, so you're not being hit by every attack from every plinker when surrounded. The higher AC is nice, but the resistance to that lucky crit or two that owuld've gotten through anyway is better if you've got low hp.

That said, unless you've got an unusual build (I do have such a character), you likely do not have low AC if you're considering full plate armor. So it is more likely the +1 is going to serve you better.

[Unoriginal]

As for flavor / RP: with a guy who recklessly decides to provoke attacks, I'd assume they also recklessly decide which armor to use, therefor I'd think they'd be more interested in being hit less often, and less concerned about the freak chance of a Crit and overconfident that they'd survive it anyway ...

I see it the other way around: someone who recklessly provokes attacks expects to be able to handle the risks (overconfidently or not), but will likely concede that sheer freak chance could smile on their opponent one day and as such will like the option to prevent it.

But that's solely a RP concern, and solely how I see it.

[RSP]

Adamantine and either:

+1 AC for the Rogue

So, if you go with this, your party gets both as the Rogue benefits from the +1 AC, and you benefit from Crit Immunity.

Win-win.