From: lnorton@acsu.buffalo.edu (Louis Norton)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Best possible AC
Date: 29 Jul 92 16:10:17 GMT
Organization: UB
Originator: lnorton@hydrogen.chem.buffalo.edu


In article <156da7INN1ro@matt.ksu.ksu.edu>, reddrgon@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Red Dragon) writes:
>bc122@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Naveed Ihsanullah) writes:
>
>
>>In a previous article, dcarroll@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Dana Carroll) says:
>
>>>Here's a little puzzle to enrich your day:
>>>
>>>What is the best possible AC for the four basic character classes (Fighter,
>>>MU, Thief, Cleric) in the two editions of AD&D?
>>>
>>>The answers should use only natural dexterity (for any race), armor allowed
>>>for that class, spells that specifically apply to AC (i.e., no wish spells),
>>>items usable by that class that specifically apply to AC (again, no rings
>>>of wishes).  Basically, no "trick" answers.
>>>
>>>Then again, maybe trick answers should be allowed in a separate category.
>>>
>>>Also, what is the maximum AC you have personally seen in a real gaming session?
>>>I personally have run across an AC of -22, but that wasn't in a player 
>>>character.  (It was a Thri-kreen with some specialized items.)
>>>
>>>--Darrend the Saint, Town-Saver, Bringer of Justice
>>>
>
>>	OK, I'll have a go at this one, though my solution may fall more in
>>the realm of tricks then you wish.  First off, imagine a cleric wearing +5
>>enchanted great wyrm gold dragon armor.  The armour class for this is 1
>>greater than Monster Manual stat for great wyrm gold dragon armor (read
>>section on dragon armor under dragons).  I can't recal exactly what that AC
>>is so 'm guessing +5 armor is about AC -15.  With a maximum +4 bonus from
>>dexterity (18 or 19) that would place his/her AC at -19.  Boots of Speed
>>and a dusty rose ion stone give +3 total for -22.  If your DM allows
>>protective rings to work with magic armour like mine, a +6 ring of
>>protection would give you -28.
>>	Now for the trick part.  AC in regards to a particular enemy.  If
>>the enemy is an evil/good outer planar or summoned creature the player's
>>would be 7 better if they cast Dispel Evil/Good but don't use it.  Also protection
>>from evil/good will give +2 more, for an AC of -37.  And if they have
>>improved invisibility cast on them, they can fight with an AC of -41.  If
>>the enemy can see invisible, dust of dissapearance give the same bonus and
>>cannot be detected by an means but dust of appearance.  So -41 for a
>>cleric.  If it is a gnome/dwarf being attacked by a giant sized creature, -45.
>>BTW if your DM doesn't allow rings with magic armor, is -39 so
>>bad?
>
>>	How 'bout a wizard?  Bracers AC 2, Ring +6, Cloak +5, Dex +4, Staff
>>of Power +2, dusty rose ion stone +1 and boots of speed +2 for an AC of
>>-18, -22 if invisible, -24 if protection from good/evil applicable, -28 if
>>gnome or dwarf and attacked by giant sized creature.
>
>     Of course in the second edition, an armor class of -10 is the absolute
>best you can ever have.  As said on page 89, 1st column, last paragraph.

	If this is truw why are there monsters with ACs better than -10???
For example a great wyrm gold dragon? And what is the thacO limit?? Why
does bahamut have a -15 AC?? Inconsistent rules like these require adjustment.

Babbling DM
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd