Sunday, 6 March 2005

Munchkin Armour Class

Following recent discussions with Roger, here's the build to optimise armour class. Some notes:

1) This assumes core rules only, using PHB races only, and only counting permanent bonuses. Higher values can be gained with feats and spells, but they are temporary, and so I haven't counted them.

2) The very best AC in the game can be achieved by a munchkin halfling Monk with 36 Dex and 29 Wis. However, a far more likely build is a Human Fighter with a base Dex of 13. He can reach a total of AC 46.

3) This assumes the highest armour class possible is the desired outcome. The character may well prefer to use a heavy shield instead of a tower shield, to avoid a -2 penalty to attack rolls. In this case, a mithral shield is not required.

4) There are two points at which this character must change armour: from scale to full plate, and from mull plate to mithral. The timing of these changes is tricky, since the character loses a lot of money in the change. Clearly, he should change to full plate at the earliest possible opportunity, but the change to mithral is more difficult to time. It looks like this should be done last, but only because of the sheer expense involved. Alternatively, a forward-thinking character might well prefer to make the change as soon as possible, changing the sequence below dramatically.

5) Likewise, the character needs to change to a mithral tower shield at some point. However, this should be done as soon as possible, as the cost difference is not so dramatic in this case.

6) The last two points are gained with Dex bonus. As this requires the use of mithral armour, the character can save a lot of money be ignoring this option.

7) This assumes that the character's armour and shield are for protection only. Adding other special abilities with a +1 or greater equivalent cost will vastly change the optimisations, as the costs of further upgrades change.

There are six ways to improve the character's armour class (unless I've missed something): Armour, Shield, Ring of Protection, Amulet of Natural Armour, an appropriate Ioun stone, and Gloves of Dexterity. Of these, an armour bonus is preferable to a shield bonus, since the character may elect to use a two-handed weapon at times, and so lose the shield bonus, and a ring is considered preferable to an amulet, as it applies to all AC types, and not only to the base and flat-footed AC.

The order of changes is as follows:

1) Start with Scale armour and tower shield. This is average for a 1st level fighter.
2) Switch to masterwork full plate.
3) Enchant full plate to +1
4) Add Ring of Protection +1 and Amulet +1
5) Switch to Mithral shield +1
6) Enchant armour and shield to +2 each
7) Add Ioun stone
8) Boost armour and shield to +3 each
9) Boost ring and amulet to +2 each
10) Boost armour and shield to +4 and then +5 each
11) Boost ring and amulet to +4 and then +5 each
12) Switch to mithral full plate +5 and add Gloves of Dexterity +2
13) Boost Gloves of Dexterity to +4

And there you have it. As far as I can tell, that's the most cost effective way to boost AC to obscenely high levels. To be honest, I think a character who's hell-bent on getting to the top AC should probably accept a lower AC for a while to get the mithral full plate earlier, but that's a judgement call.

But then, I also think a character would probably be better missing the top four points of AC entirely, forgetting the mithral armour and shield, not getting gloves of dexterity, and using a heavy shield rather than a tower shield. I would have though an AC of 42 was respectable.

4 comments:

  1. Of course, even with the mithral full plate +5, mithral tower shield +5, gloves of dexterity +4, amulet of natural armour +5, ring of protection +5 and the ioun stone, the character only has a touch AC ot 19. So it's not all that good.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I really wish DnD could be played at least for once without the ultimate munchkin in the back of your mind. that's why I liked exalted. If u did cool things which weren't necessarily the best things, you got rewarded for it.

    with dnd, everything falls flat on the face, cos u really have to max out your char, otherwise.... your char is simply crap and nowhere near as good as the other players' chars.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The thing is, though, that what I've posted is just the best way to optimise one aspect of a character. And, in fact, that doesn't even cover the whole story, since the player is likely to want to add fortification to his armour at some point, and probably a few other things. All of these change the trade-offs.

    Additionally, to get the best AC in the game, the character has to give up on using a two-handed weapon, which means he won't be doing the most damage possible. Essentially, there is no one "best" path, but rather many "best" paths. And I find that appealing.

    The other thing is that you don't have to always look for the optimal path in D&D. Yes, some steps are better than others, but the difference tends to be marginal (and the trade-off even less clear if the DM gives out appropriate magical treasures, which can then be used or traded).

    But, yes, munchkinism is always going to be a problem in d20.

    One more thing: I take issue with the notion that Exalted is any better in this regard. As with every game, there are paths that work better than others, and some players will gravitate towards those paths. In D&D, the problem seems greater because the system is so obviously mathematical, which means the trade-offs can easily be seen. However, the flip side of this is that there are fewer uncovered areas, which means there is generally less chance of finding a killer combo than in Exalted (unless, of course, you use lots of untested supplements, but that's a whole other problem).

    Basically, munchkinism is a fault of the players, not of the game itself.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I always thought that this was the reason creatures were introduced that destroyed armour rather than hurting the PC themselves? Obviously a mute point if they can't get past the AC.

    I've felt that D&D was always a victim of munchkin-ism due to the nature of the game and it's popularity. Maybe this is just another one of those things a DM has to think about with his adventures.

    ReplyDelete