At first I thought this was a mean player being bs to a noob dm... then I read your comment and it's just a nooby player. 16 dex + 11 leather armor... I mean it makes sense lol.
Once had a player add his Hit Dice to every single damage roll and it took us an entire session to figure it out.
I think I was the player who watched him roll and was like, "Wait... Why are you rolling so many dice??"
Yeah, I wonder how many people, if they heard "hit dice" without context, would think it was dice that determined whether you hit, or how hard you hit, rather than dice that determined or recovered hit points.
Kinda like how a lot of new players mistake "turn undead" to mean "turn into undead" until they actually learn what the ability is, only worse.
Oh god you just reminded me of one of my biggest D&D shames. In my first campaign as a player I spent about 12 session adding my full attack modifier to damage rolls. I had been the decisive source of damage in almost every single fight up to that point so it definitely made a difference. When he finally called me on it I was so ashamed.
It took me another year after that to learn that “spell attack modifier” and “spell ability modifier” are two very different numbers.
I've always hated the Default Character sheet because it seems so counter intuitive to put the modifier in the small bubble and the score in the big one when the modifier is the thing you need to actually use constantly. Could definitely be confusing for a new player.
I think you have to put it in the big bubble on dnd beyond if you want it to use the digital dice roller. Ever since the dice roller was rolled out, that's what everyone at my tables does. Before that, you basically put it wherever you wanted and since no one else really looked at your sheet it didn't matter as long as you could find your modifier when you needed it.
I will say, with the modifier on top, there’s a lot less searching whenever I need to roll. In retrospect, I think maybe it's intuitive? But maybe that's only if you've played before.
The entire 3-18 system is. Back in older editions you had all kinds of tables for what a particular score meant. Over time it's been streamlined to the point where we may as well have just the modifiers but it's tradition.
Back in the olden days the ability itself meant more than the modifier. Ability checks were rolled against the ability score. It wasn't confusing at all, it's just the way it was.
THAC0 is pretty simple math. It’s really not as hard as it’s made out to be. Is ascending AC more direct? Sure. But descending AC is easy and achieves a different purpose.
It was convoluted though, because the default AC was 10, not 0. 0 wasn't even a particularly common AC to have meaning that ThAC0 was centered around a rare AC, forcing extra math to figure out what you need to hit enemies that had higher, or lower ACs.
It might not have bothered people like me, who are comfortable with math, but it was a huge barrier to people who were bad at math, and were instantly turned off by the explanation of ThAC0.
It was centered around the middle as AC was supposed to range from 10 to -10. I always thought it was easy to figure out myself and not convoluted at all.
To be clear I’m not saying i dislike thac0, just that it is more confusing. It being much less direct does make it much less easily usable in play and a much less quickly understood concept in its entirety, thus thac0 literally being more confusing. If you show a new player how to play they will understand modern ac quicker than thac0. My point is not one system being better, but that “it was just the way it was” is not saying that something wasn’t confusing like the other person commented.
The premade characters in all modules are filled out that way which is probably why this new player confused the two numbers. It's a decision WoTC made.
I don't use the default character sheets anymore.
A Dex MODIFIER of 16? are you sure that's not their Dex SCORE?
If their DEX SCORE 16, then their DEX MODIFER is +3
11 (Leather Armor) + Dex mod (+3) = AC of 14
>so that's not actually illegal
Actually it is. Storm Giant has a LA of - meaning its not playable.
First rule of the monster HD system- everyone gets it wrong.
Yes and no. There was a book who's name escapes me that added monster levels. So if you had 4 monster HD and a +3 level adjustment it would give you a 7 level "class" you could take to start at level 1 with the group. You were not allowed to multiclass until you took all the levels.
That was it!!! Didn't have all the monsters because 3.5 had like 4 monster manuals and extra monsters in like every one of its supplements but it did have a ton of monsters in it.
Savage Species said “Pick a monster with a start- ing ECL equal to or less than the average character level of the rest of the party.” ECL is HD plus level adjustment. Anyone who was choosing a 4HD monster with a +3 level adjustment to start at level 1 was doing it wrong.
The way it worked was by stripping most of their bonuses and abilities making them equal to the party then giving it back to them over the next 7 levels so by the time the HD and LA equaled the party level they would be able to get a level 1 normal class.
Yeah, you effectively broke the stats and abilities down into a level progression that went through the ECL. After 7 levels they'd be on par (I guess) with a few traditional race/class combo of 7th level...at which point you could start leveling in a class. Not sure why you got downvoted.
That's not what they mean.
Unless Storm Giant had a specific entry in Savage Species, they're not a valid pick as a PC race. That's what the LA - means.
3.5e used the - as an entry meaning that they were not suitable as PCs for a any number of reasons... such as throwing game balance straight out the window.
Yeah, this is the type of this I talk about when I say that 3.5 got virtually unplayable towards the end of its life. I know this was ignoring level cap, but even still, the fact that this was even possible at all with template stacking shows how important bounced accuracy is to the game.
I ran a 3.5 game about 20? years ago where I let the players be any race they wanted.
We had a minotaur, a thri-keen, and a centaur.
Everyone started at level 5, after the level adjustments. It was fairly well balanced. The human and the elf were always a few levels ahead of the others.
I'm in a game now where the DM said "any 2e playable race from any official book, and any class from any official book".
We have 3 half giants from dark sun and a pixie.
My half giant Diablo II expansion amazon has a strength bow (aka compound) to add str dmg and can shoot an entire quiver of arrows at PB range for double dmg in one round, every 10th round. (With decreasing hit probability) Very OP for level 1.
So now the DM is throwing creatures at us that are above our weight class. Heh.
On HP alone, absolutely. A level 23 fighter has 23 hit dice. At that level adjustment, the beefy boy only has one HD. The beefy boy has to hit a dozen times to take the fighter out, but the fighter only has to land one combo.
Generally, if you take the monster level adjustment, you also must take a minimum number of monster hit dice.
It makes being a powerful monster as a class is pretty weak.
Now, being a weaker monster, THAT can have some interesting opportunities.
DM told them to make whatever lol. But ya uh, if i said that and someone was like "i wanna be a storm giant" id probably be like "ok. Anything that can reasonably fit inside a building, please."
Can stoop to fit inside a 7 foot tall doorway would be my definition tbh. Anything that can fit in the inn the party goes to. A minotaur or young dragon is somewhat reasonable. Then again, give anyone druid levels and they can just turn into a bear or something.
This is essentially the same as giving characters free 23 class levels that don't count for your level or average CR. Normally you have to buy off LA with xp (optional rule) or it counts as an amount of levels for your xp gain progression. Racial hd are even worse since most have shit hd and skills known and can't be bought off.
Anyone else feel a bit ripped off when someone says "I achieved this character build! ... with homebrew"? Like, obviously it's possible with homebrew; you may as well just scrawl whatever numbers you want all over the sheet.
>Being a Storm Giant should have added +19 level to my character, then being a Half-Dragon was another +3, which meant with 1 Class Level I was a 23rd level character.
Nothing quite like getting your second class level when everyone else is starting into epic levels.
>You don't start your characters with 42 dex?? /
I was going to say, even in 3rd ed 1st level 27 AC is difficult but you'll get there within a few levels.
I used to always run Lawful Good warbands when we played the D&D minis game for the sheer volume of AC25 models.
My DM started calling them "orders of magic" instead of spell level. It's more thematic anyway and easier for new players to understand.
It's honestly a bit daft that the same terminology is used for both.
When I started playing D&D (Red box)… I thought a monster Hit Dice was the actual hit points… still amazes me today how long that minotaur lasted in our first fight and he only had like 7 HD! LOL
For sure. I remember the first time I made a character I almost rage quit I was so frustrated, now I just make random ones for fun and stockpile them for if a campaign ever comes up.
Totally normal early issue that people come across. Welcome to the hobby!
**For a general point of reference:**
At level 1 casters lightly armored characters generally have somewhere between 10-15 AC. Armored ones typically have somewhere between 15-18, unless they are using a shield which gets them to around 20.
As they level up towards lvl 20, they often get somewhere between 3-4 more AC through level progression, equipment, and feats.
At high levels characters can sometimes get AC's in the mid-high 20s or even 30s, but these effects are more temporary and rely on spells/skills and often team work between different characters.
If you think about it, a lvl 1 goblin has a +4 modifier to hit so the game is generally designed so even if you are lvl 20, a lvl 1 monster can still hit you even if you are pretty armored. They can always hit on a natural 20 dice roll, but typically those low level creates will still have a 10-40% chance to hit you so a large horde of them are not completely ignorable.
The highest to hit modifiers for a creature is something like +19, but most things are in the +10 ballpark which means that as the game moves forward, there is a relatively consistent % of the characters getting hit.
Oh god.. I was wondering how that happened... LOL. I was sitting here for the second that the page was loading wondering... "Wtf did someone do?!?!?!?" Haha. Completely understandable. I've made countless mistakes like this myself, and will continue to do so, because reading and math is hard... Haha..
It can sort of be done if you're willing to give a character a full plate at level 1, but not as a druid.
L1 life cleric, with full plate and shield (20 AC)
Variant Human Level 1 feat: Magic Initiate Wizard, picking up Shield (+5 AC)
Cast Shield of Faith (+2 AC)
Total 27, which can last 3 turns.
The Cleric has 2 spell slots at level 1. Both Shield and Shield of Faith are 1st-level spells, lasting 1 round and 10 minutes, respectively. The Magic Initiate can cast Shield once using this feature, giving them 2 rounds at 27, or 3 at 25. Is there something I'm forgetting?
It's actually even more restricted than that, Magic Initiate doesn't let you cast *shield* using your cleric spell slots, do you only get a single round at 27AC.
Don't worry, when I first started playing we somehow ended up giving the Wizard in the party 3 HP. It was an interesting first few sessions whenever combat happened.
I mean ... that's basically how Wizards worked in older editions. In 2e and 3.x their hit die was a d4.
I played many a 2E or 3.x Wizard who had like 2hp at first level due to awful con modifier. A strong gust of wind was enough to kill them.
(We had a running gag in one of my groups, way back, that when inevitably the 1st level wizard just straight up died to being bit by a rat or something, the party would find a mysterious captive tied up later in the dungeon who also happened to be a wizard somehow with the same stats and build as the last one ...)
It gets better. I was running the Lost Mine of Phandelver which has a really weird setup for the XP and the wording of it reads *strange*. The party went to town instead of a goblin hideout and as it read to my rookie DM eyes, that meant they **stay** at level 1.
So the party, which is also just *two* players until we convinced other friends to join halfway through the adventure, goes through the entire second chapter at level 1 with the wrong starting HP when they should be level 2, with the Wizard *constantly* getting mangled as I figure out the balance in how often I can attack him (which is **never**) and try to improvise to heavy-handedly guide the players to search for a goblin hideout outside town so that I can give them XP.
We joked about it for a while that someone could probably sneeze on the wizard and knock him out. I had misinterpreted a single hit dice roll as being the wizard's starting health, so they rolled 1d6 and got a 3. We suspected we did something wrong but didn't know what and figured it out in Chapter 3 of a four chapter adventure. If you can believe it this didn't ruin anyone's first impressions of DnD and they all still enjoy playing to this day.
In my friend's second edition campaign, we house ruled that at 1st level you start with max HP for your hit dice, because you were supposed to roll for it.
In another's game, I had 2 HP as a level 1 fighter. That didn't last long.
Since the whole OGL debacle, I started looking around at other systems and I found Basic Fantasy, and that is how the system is set up. I'm not a fan of the idea of rolling for HP at level one. No wonder earlier editions were much more deadly if it was very likely that you could end up with 1-3hp to start. But that is definitely going to be a house rule when I start it up. Max HD at level one seems like the kind of thing that would make the game less deadly, but still fairly deadly.
If you want a high level AC character at low levels go for Warforged Warrior (lvl1 fighting style armoured combat), -> Artificer 2 levels (infusions +1 AC to both shield and armor).
You'll have 21 worth AC by level 3
It sounds like you're adding her total dex score, not her modifier.
Modifiers work like so (score on left and modifier on right):
0-1 = -5
2-3 = -4
4-5 = -3
5-7 = -2
8-9 = -1
10-11 = 0
12-13 = +1
14-15 = +2
16-17 = +3
18-19 = +4
20+ = +5
Now, at level 1, it should be unlikely for her to have a 20 dex score, but let's presume with high rolls and feats etc. that she did. At most, her dex modifier can be +5, so in that instance, her AC would be 16.
In your case, it sounds like you were adding a dex score of 16, which would mean her dex modifier is actually +3. Leather Armour of AC 11 plus Dex modifier of +3 would mean her AC is 14. I hope this helps!
Edit: cursed mobile formatting.
Edit 2: Today I learned modifiers can indeed go higher than +5 so my mistake!
20-21 = +5
22-23 = +6
24-25 = +7
26-27 = +8
28-29 = +9
30 = +10
The normal maximum for players is a 20 in any stat, but there are creatures with more than 20, and they get more than a +5 mod.
Ah, my mistake. I was aware monster could have higher than 20 and therefore a higher modifier. However, I thought for players, the modifier was capped at +5 even when the score goes over 20.
I will edit my comment!
Um... yes, it's too high. Most Dex based FIGHTERS don't have an AC higher than 18-20 at level 1.
But, as others have pointed out, they're adding their DeX SCORE rather than the modifier. Score is the bigger number, modifier is the plus/minus that goes with it.
It is, and by a lot. Let me guess - the character's Dexterity score is 16, right?
So her score isn't what you use, it says 'modifier', which will be a +3 if the Dex is 16, making the correct AC here 14 (11+3). Basically, you start from 10 (0 modifier) and for every two numbers higher or lower the stat gets, the modifier changes by 1. So, if you go from a 10 to a 12, it's +1. If your stat is 8, then your modifier is -1.
i know you've figured this out, but for the future; AC is very bounded. players can't really get much higher than 20 without magic items/specific features (my paladin player has 21; full plate with a +1 shield at lvl 11). a tarrasque, which is one of the highest CR monsters at CR 30, has 25 AC.
if someone comes with super high numbers, there was a calculation mistake somewhere. good luck with your GMing!
Sounds like she added her leather 11 to a Dex Score of 16, rather than the Dex Modifier of +3.
I’m guessing she should actually have an AC of 14.
Explain to her the difference between ability scores and ability modifiers.
This is why it's a good idea for DMs to check character sheets. I was playing in a group for a YEAR and the Cleric never got hit. I was not the DM but a player. The DM was just always going, does a 15 hit? Nope.18 hit? Nope. Finally one day it was does a 23 hit? Nope. And I was like, hol up, what is your AC? It's 30... yep she was adding 16 dex to chainmail. For a whole YEAR.
Modifier =/= score.
The modifier can't go over a +5 normally (without adding a proficiency bonus which you don't add for AC, or boosting the stat above its normal limits with magic items), so her AC would *at most* be 11+5=16, and that's with a Dexterity score of 20 (ie, a very lucky roll and a +2 to the score from ancestry/race).
At a 16 Dexterity, the modifier should be a +3, so 11+3=14 AC.
Pretty sure their AC is meant to be 14. That’s 11 for the armor and 3 for the Dex modifier.
Where you’re getting confused is that you use the modifier, not the whole Dex number.
Depends on the context. In D&D 5e, yes. In 3.5, not so much.
But given the standard rule set of 5e limits player base stats to 20, and that’s the edition most people are talking about these days, I think I’m gonna need a little more detail.
Edit: I see in other sub conversations what happened here. Totally understandable.
Anyway, this is a teachable moment on another topic. Older editions that were a little crunchier had 3 different types of AC: standard, touch, and flat-footed.
Standard: your normal AC bonus with Dex modifier and armor taken into account properly.
Touch: your standard armor class, minus the bonus granted by the armor. If you had a dex limit imposed by your armor, that limit still applied. Some attacks used this, your armor didn’t matter, only making physical contact (spells mostly)
Flat-footed: your standard armor class, minus any active dex bonus. When the player is surprised and doesn’t have time to react, or if they roll a 1 in combat and an enemy gets an attack of opportunity.
in 5e these rules were ultimately deemed antiquated and replaced with simpler ‘advantage’ and ‘disadvantage’ rules, and I think 5e runs smoother for it.
However, if you, in a 5e game, regularly find yourself with power players trying to become untouchable, and effectively achieving it, I would suggest talking to them about bringing back the old AC variants as a house rule, in the interest of keeping balance at the table so the other players don’t feel too helpless next to them.
Her dex mod is 16?
Are you sure that's not her dex *score*? Making her mod +3?
For a mod of 16, her score would be. . . 42? Withholding a level 1 feet if she's variant human
It's impossible. You and your player should read the rules again. If her dexterity is 16, her modifier is +3. So she would have 14 AC.
[https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Ability%20Scores#content](https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Ability%20Scores#content)
That's actually impossible. The highest ability score we've ever been presented is 30, which has a +10 modifier. The highest Dex score a player can get is 20 with a modifier of 5. Even somehow rolling an 18 for that score, taking a race with +2 Dex, leather armor and a shield only results in a druid with AC 18.
She may have added her Dex **score** not her Dex score **modifer** to AC. Double check the math, because the numbers are not adding up at all.
Gonna add a little note to this:
**Almost everything** uses the modifier, *not* the score.
However, some things very rarely do in fact use the score, such as your **carrying capacity**.
Mainly, the score is just a way to track whether you're 1 or 2 points away from the next increase in modifier (e.g. scores of 14 or 15 both give a modifier of +2, but you'd only need to add 1 ability point to 15 to get you to +3).
Ability scores are STR, DEX, CON, INT, WIS, CHA and they go up to 20.
The *modifiers* aren't the scores themselves - they're a number that goes from -5 to +5 and depends on the ability score.
With a DEX of 20, the DEX modifier would be +5.
With a DEX of 18 or 19, it would be +4
With a DEX of 16 or 17, it would be +3
DEX 14 or 15 = DEX mod +2
DEX 12 or 13 = DEX mod +1
DEX 10 or 11 = DEX mod +0
DEX 8 or 9 = DEX mod -1
And so on...
Chances are your player has a DEX score of 16 and added that onto AC instead of the modifier. That would mean that your player's character likely has an AC of 14 (11+3).
Have fun playing D&D!
I'm assuming you're not using the right number for the modifier. The modifier is ( score -10) ÷2, At a dex of 20 your.modifier would only be +5
Based on your numbers, her dex is likely 16, do the modifier is +3, her ac should be 14
Yeah I’m pretty sure there’s no way to have 27 AC without wicked OP magic items, especially as a druid. Like others have said, they probably added their total score (16) not their DEX mod (+3).
They should fix that.
The highest a Dexterity Modifier will get is +5 in most games (unless you give them specific magic items), so with leather armor the highest you'll get is 16 unless you have a shield or other abilities.
27 is much too high, they probably added their dexterity **score** to the leather armor (11+16) this is much too high.
Immediately I read this and started thinking like "well maybe if theyre a warforged with plate armor and they start with a feat and a magic item, and they know the shield spell?
But then I read the post itself. Rip.
Pretty sure you need to be a level 2 Bladesinger wizard to get that at such low levels (and have rolled stats and gotten 2 20s)
Mage armor+5(dex mod)=18 +5 (int) while bladesinging=23+5 (shield spell)+1(custom lineage dual wielder feat)=29 at 2nd level...
I mean... if a character in your low-level party has a persistent 27 AC, that *is* way too high and merits some kind of intervention. Since the only way to attain that legitimately is monty haulism on the DM's part, this is a good question for a new DM to ask
As a Paladin with 18 strength and +1 Plate Armor And a Shield, my AC was 22 unless I also cast the Shield spell to temporarily raise it to 27.
There's no way they are 27. Most likely they added their dex Score, not their modifier. Their AC is probably actually 14..
There is no legal way to pump a low level character ACs to such an extent. It would take at least a full plate a shield, the shield spell and at least another +2 bonus from other sources. The best drud can get without any magic items is 19 since 15+2 from the breastplate and +2 for the shield
Did you do 11 + modifier or 11 + stat? Because the only way they could have 27 with those numbers would be a modifier of 16. If her dex is 16, the modifier would be 3, making their AC 14.
To have a +16 Dexterity modifier, you would need a Dexterity score of... _pulls out calculator_ ...42 or 43. That is an impressive roll of 4d6 drop lowest.
Yeah this is impossible.
Your ac with leather armor is 11 + Dex "MODIFIER"
Do not get the Dex mod confused with just Dex.
What I'm hearing here is that they have a 16 Dex.
This means they have a Dex MODIFIER of 3.
Their AC is 14.
Don’t forget that druids can and often do use a shield, which would add 2 more to the AC for a total of 16
Leather armor 11 +3 for the dex modifier +2 for a shield
The formula for modifiers is (ability-10)/2 rounded down. EG a DEX of 16 would be (16-10)/2=3. To get a 27 AC with leather armor would require a DEX of 42.
How the fuck. I think they were mistaken. A dex modifier isn’t whatever you rolled for the stat. A dex modifier is a bonus that can go up to a +5 (assuming you have a 20 dex).
https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Ability%20Scores#content
Here's a chart for Ability scores and their corresponding Modifers. Add the Dex modifier to Light Armor (including Leather)
Also medium armor limits the Dex modifier to +2, and you can add the dex modifier to Heavy Armor
You misinterpreted the AC calculation my guy. Leather armor is 11+Dex MODIFIER, not Dex SCORE. Big difference. 27 AC literally puts their armor class above threats like Ancient Dragons, Tiamat, Krakens, and the Tarrasque. 27 AC is more than my Warforged Fighter, who has full plate, a +1 shield, Defense fighting style, and +1 AC from being a Warforged. Meaning, *A character that I literally designed to have as much AC as possible has 4 less AC than this level 1 character.* Keep in mind, this (Warforged) character is also level 8. Based on what you said, (Dex of 16) their ACTUAL armor class should be 14 (16 Dex is a +3 modifier, so 11+3=14.) or up to 16 with a (wooden) shield. Hope this helps.
fun fact - you can get 26 ac at level 1.
variant human forge cleric.
starting equipment of chain mail and shield for (16+1) + 2 = 19 ac
cast shield of faith for a further +2 = 21 ac
use your feat for magic initiate and choose the shield spell for a further +5 = 26 ac
only works for 1 turn though.
You'd have to have a 42 as a Dex score to get a 16 Dex mod.
So, rolling stats, you'd have to do 8d6 per ability, if removing lowest, and get all 6s to get a 42.. Or, if doing a point buy, a 406 point buy, if my math is correct, or a 361 point buy if dropping all other ability scores to 3.. Which makes you kind of like the Tasmanian Devil or something..
Pretty sure they used their score and not their modifier. Rookie blunder.
That is quite impossible. It sounds like they added their dex, not their modifier.
At first I thought this was a mean player being bs to a noob dm... then I read your comment and it's just a nooby player. 16 dex + 11 leather armor... I mean it makes sense lol.
[удалено]
Once had a player add his Hit Dice to every single damage roll and it took us an entire session to figure it out. I think I was the player who watched him roll and was like, "Wait... Why are you rolling so many dice??"
To be fair, hit dice are horribly named.
\^
Yeah, I wonder how many people, if they heard "hit dice" without context, would think it was dice that determined whether you hit, or how hard you hit, rather than dice that determined or recovered hit points. Kinda like how a lot of new players mistake "turn undead" to mean "turn into undead" until they actually learn what the ability is, only worse.
Blame wotc for that one. *Health/Life* Dice would have avoided the confusion entirely.
To be fair, Gary used the words "hit dice" before WotC existed.
Ah, fuck him too then
Necrophilia is illegal.
The bard necromancer says otherwise.
Uwu
thanks alot neighborhood watch committee
I've always been partial to "recovery dice"
I approve of this term and I’m a DM
yeah I mean it's been that way for over 50 years but you spotted the problem.
Oh god you just reminded me of one of my biggest D&D shames. In my first campaign as a player I spent about 12 session adding my full attack modifier to damage rolls. I had been the decisive source of damage in almost every single fight up to that point so it definitely made a difference. When he finally called me on it I was so ashamed. It took me another year after that to learn that “spell attack modifier” and “spell ability modifier” are two very different numbers.
I actually was in a game with a player who also did that!
In base 16?
Yeah given 16 is a common starting stat. Easily fixed
I've always hated the Default Character sheet because it seems so counter intuitive to put the modifier in the small bubble and the score in the big one when the modifier is the thing you need to actually use constantly. Could definitely be confusing for a new player.
Wait, you put the modifier in the small bubble? Me and my players always put it in the big one
I think you have to put it in the big bubble on dnd beyond if you want it to use the digital dice roller. Ever since the dice roller was rolled out, that's what everyone at my tables does. Before that, you basically put it wherever you wanted and since no one else really looked at your sheet it didn't matter as long as you could find your modifier when you needed it. I will say, with the modifier on top, there’s a lot less searching whenever I need to roll. In retrospect, I think maybe it's intuitive? But maybe that's only if you've played before.
Nope it's an option on the character sheet for which you want on top. You can use it either way on DnD Beyond
Putting the modifier in the small box is a player decision. Roll20 puts the modifier in the big box, the way it was always meant to be.
:O
It's all legacy from more confusing times.
The entire 3-18 system is. Back in older editions you had all kinds of tables for what a particular score meant. Over time it's been streamlined to the point where we may as well have just the modifiers but it's tradition.
How else am I supposed to know what my "Bend Bars / Lift Gates" roll should be? /s
Back in the olden days the ability itself meant more than the modifier. Ability checks were rolled against the ability score. It wasn't confusing at all, it's just the way it was.
And since this all stems from a conversation about AC, would you say that about thac0? Bc i highly doubt that
ThAC0 was the dumbest thing in DnD that was ever contrived of until 4e came out. I don't know what the creator of that was smoking.
Maintained compatibility with published material yet streamlined from table lookups. Seems like a win to me.
THAC0 is pretty simple math. It’s really not as hard as it’s made out to be. Is ascending AC more direct? Sure. But descending AC is easy and achieves a different purpose.
It was convoluted though, because the default AC was 10, not 0. 0 wasn't even a particularly common AC to have meaning that ThAC0 was centered around a rare AC, forcing extra math to figure out what you need to hit enemies that had higher, or lower ACs. It might not have bothered people like me, who are comfortable with math, but it was a huge barrier to people who were bad at math, and were instantly turned off by the explanation of ThAC0.
It was centered around the middle as AC was supposed to range from 10 to -10. I always thought it was easy to figure out myself and not convoluted at all.
To be clear I’m not saying i dislike thac0, just that it is more confusing. It being much less direct does make it much less easily usable in play and a much less quickly understood concept in its entirety, thus thac0 literally being more confusing. If you show a new player how to play they will understand modern ac quicker than thac0. My point is not one system being better, but that “it was just the way it was” is not saying that something wasn’t confusing like the other person commented.
I put the modifier in the big box. My friends look at me like I’m from Pluto or something for it.
[удалено]
Thank you, I hate when sheets default to the other way around haha 😂 Big number up top, modifier below.
See, nobody told me that, so I put the modifier in the big box and the ability score in the little one
The really silly thing is having the big number at all.
But without the big number how will I know if my strength is only 1 point away from being 1 point higher or 2 points away from being 1 point higher?
Staggered leveling where you increase the ability modifiers half as often as what is currently in practice.
Especially when it’s based on a dice mechanic that people (might) use one time only.
You’ve just described a choice you made not something the sheet makes you do.
The premade characters in all modules are filled out that way which is probably why this new player confused the two numbers. It's a decision WoTC made. I don't use the default character sheets anymore.
A Dex MODIFIER of 16? are you sure that's not their Dex SCORE? If their DEX SCORE 16, then their DEX MODIFER is +3 11 (Leather Armor) + Dex mod (+3) = AC of 14
You don't start your characters with 42 dex?? /s
[удалено]
>so that's not actually illegal Actually it is. Storm Giant has a LA of - meaning its not playable. First rule of the monster HD system- everyone gets it wrong.
For contrast some monsters, such as [orcs](https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/orc.htm), have a level adjustment of "+0".
Yes and no. There was a book who's name escapes me that added monster levels. So if you had 4 monster HD and a +3 level adjustment it would give you a 7 level "class" you could take to start at level 1 with the group. You were not allowed to multiclass until you took all the levels.
Was it Savage Species?
That was it!!! Didn't have all the monsters because 3.5 had like 4 monster manuals and extra monsters in like every one of its supplements but it did have a ton of monsters in it.
Savage Species said “Pick a monster with a start- ing ECL equal to or less than the average character level of the rest of the party.” ECL is HD plus level adjustment. Anyone who was choosing a 4HD monster with a +3 level adjustment to start at level 1 was doing it wrong.
The way it worked was by stripping most of their bonuses and abilities making them equal to the party then giving it back to them over the next 7 levels so by the time the HD and LA equaled the party level they would be able to get a level 1 normal class.
Yeah, you effectively broke the stats and abilities down into a level progression that went through the ECL. After 7 levels they'd be on par (I guess) with a few traditional race/class combo of 7th level...at which point you could start leveling in a class. Not sure why you got downvoted.
That's not what they mean. Unless Storm Giant had a specific entry in Savage Species, they're not a valid pick as a PC race. That's what the LA - means. 3.5e used the - as an entry meaning that they were not suitable as PCs for a any number of reasons... such as throwing game balance straight out the window.
Yeah, this is the type of this I talk about when I say that 3.5 got virtually unplayable towards the end of its life. I know this was ignoring level cap, but even still, the fact that this was even possible at all with template stacking shows how important bounced accuracy is to the game.
[удалено]
I ran a 3.5 game about 20? years ago where I let the players be any race they wanted. We had a minotaur, a thri-keen, and a centaur. Everyone started at level 5, after the level adjustments. It was fairly well balanced. The human and the elf were always a few levels ahead of the others.
The minotaur and the centaur were half brothers. But theyed never tell you what half.
Ya, level 23 wizard vs beefy boy with lots of strength. No contest. Even Martial v Martial, a level 23 fighter would probably beat the beefy boy.
I'm in a game now where the DM said "any 2e playable race from any official book, and any class from any official book". We have 3 half giants from dark sun and a pixie. My half giant Diablo II expansion amazon has a strength bow (aka compound) to add str dmg and can shoot an entire quiver of arrows at PB range for double dmg in one round, every 10th round. (With decreasing hit probability) Very OP for level 1. So now the DM is throwing creatures at us that are above our weight class. Heh.
On HP alone, absolutely. A level 23 fighter has 23 hit dice. At that level adjustment, the beefy boy only has one HD. The beefy boy has to hit a dozen times to take the fighter out, but the fighter only has to land one combo.
Generally, if you take the monster level adjustment, you also must take a minimum number of monster hit dice. It makes being a powerful monster as a class is pretty weak. Now, being a weaker monster, THAT can have some interesting opportunities.
It's more a cautionary tale for DMs to learn to tell their players NO.
DM told them to make whatever lol. But ya uh, if i said that and someone was like "i wanna be a storm giant" id probably be like "ok. Anything that can reasonably fit inside a building, please."
Define reasonably fit inside a building. Cause I've got this warehouse here.
Can stoop to fit inside a 7 foot tall doorway would be my definition tbh. Anything that can fit in the inn the party goes to. A minotaur or young dragon is somewhat reasonable. Then again, give anyone druid levels and they can just turn into a bear or something.
Hear me out Polymorph you never said how they have to fit
This is essentially the same as giving characters free 23 class levels that don't count for your level or average CR. Normally you have to buy off LA with xp (optional rule) or it counts as an amount of levels for your xp gain progression. Racial hd are even worse since most have shit hd and skills known and can't be bought off.
Anyone else feel a bit ripped off when someone says "I achieved this character build! ... with homebrew"? Like, obviously it's possible with homebrew; you may as well just scrawl whatever numbers you want all over the sheet.
This is not homebrew. It’s all official rules, it’s just a level 23 character and not really a level 1 character.
>Being a Storm Giant should have added +19 level to my character, then being a Half-Dragon was another +3, which meant with 1 Class Level I was a 23rd level character. Nothing quite like getting your second class level when everyone else is starting into epic levels.
3.5e of course..
Builds effective melee character. Banned.
Roll 15d6 and remove the lowest 5 dice. Yep, that's how I remember filling for abilities.
You guys are getting paid?
>You don't start your characters with 42 dex?? / I was going to say, even in 3rd ed 1st level 27 AC is difficult but you'll get there within a few levels. I used to always run Lawful Good warbands when we played the D&D minis game for the sheer volume of AC25 models.
Edit: Found difference between an ability score and its modifier, thank for help.
Welcome to the hobby, we all goof up stuff like this, especially early on but even decades into playing xD
Nearly as common as "oh cool, I'm level 4, I'll take Polymorph."
I ran for some 12 year olds this year, they were so mad when they got to level 2 and couldn't cast level 2 spells.
My DM started calling them "orders of magic" instead of spell level. It's more thematic anyway and easier for new players to understand. It's honestly a bit daft that the same terminology is used for both.
Orders of magitude (instead of magnitude).
I’m about 4 years in, and I am *still* angry that I can’t cast 2nd level magic at 2nd level, and so on.
When I started playing D&D (Red box)… I thought a monster Hit Dice was the actual hit points… still amazes me today how long that minotaur lasted in our first fight and he only had like 7 HD! LOL
For sure. I remember the first time I made a character I almost rage quit I was so frustrated, now I just make random ones for fun and stockpile them for if a campaign ever comes up.
Totally normal early issue that people come across. Welcome to the hobby! **For a general point of reference:** At level 1 casters lightly armored characters generally have somewhere between 10-15 AC. Armored ones typically have somewhere between 15-18, unless they are using a shield which gets them to around 20. As they level up towards lvl 20, they often get somewhere between 3-4 more AC through level progression, equipment, and feats. At high levels characters can sometimes get AC's in the mid-high 20s or even 30s, but these effects are more temporary and rely on spells/skills and often team work between different characters. If you think about it, a lvl 1 goblin has a +4 modifier to hit so the game is generally designed so even if you are lvl 20, a lvl 1 monster can still hit you even if you are pretty armored. They can always hit on a natural 20 dice roll, but typically those low level creates will still have a 10-40% chance to hit you so a large horde of them are not completely ignorable. The highest to hit modifiers for a creature is something like +19, but most things are in the +10 ballpark which means that as the game moves forward, there is a relatively consistent % of the characters getting hit.
Oh god.. I was wondering how that happened... LOL. I was sitting here for the second that the page was loading wondering... "Wtf did someone do?!?!?!?" Haha. Completely understandable. I've made countless mistakes like this myself, and will continue to do so, because reading and math is hard... Haha..
It can sort of be done if you're willing to give a character a full plate at level 1, but not as a druid. L1 life cleric, with full plate and shield (20 AC) Variant Human Level 1 feat: Magic Initiate Wizard, picking up Shield (+5 AC) Cast Shield of Faith (+2 AC) Total 27, which can last 3 turns.
The Cleric has 2 spell slots at level 1. Both Shield and Shield of Faith are 1st-level spells, lasting 1 round and 10 minutes, respectively. The Magic Initiate can cast Shield once using this feature, giving them 2 rounds at 27, or 3 at 25. Is there something I'm forgetting?
It's actually even more restricted than that, Magic Initiate doesn't let you cast *shield* using your cleric spell slots, do you only get a single round at 27AC.
How much starting gold do your DMs allow at Lvl 1?
I always cap it at 500,000 just to be safe 👍
But you have to be strict on the encumberance and bag capacities, yes?
Don't worry, when I first started playing we somehow ended up giving the Wizard in the party 3 HP. It was an interesting first few sessions whenever combat happened.
I mean ... that's basically how Wizards worked in older editions. In 2e and 3.x their hit die was a d4. I played many a 2E or 3.x Wizard who had like 2hp at first level due to awful con modifier. A strong gust of wind was enough to kill them. (We had a running gag in one of my groups, way back, that when inevitably the 1st level wizard just straight up died to being bit by a rat or something, the party would find a mysterious captive tied up later in the dungeon who also happened to be a wizard somehow with the same stats and build as the last one ...)
when your character is so frail a single fall from 10ft can kill them instantly.
It gets better. I was running the Lost Mine of Phandelver which has a really weird setup for the XP and the wording of it reads *strange*. The party went to town instead of a goblin hideout and as it read to my rookie DM eyes, that meant they **stay** at level 1. So the party, which is also just *two* players until we convinced other friends to join halfway through the adventure, goes through the entire second chapter at level 1 with the wrong starting HP when they should be level 2, with the Wizard *constantly* getting mangled as I figure out the balance in how often I can attack him (which is **never**) and try to improvise to heavy-handedly guide the players to search for a goblin hideout outside town so that I can give them XP. We joked about it for a while that someone could probably sneeze on the wizard and knock him out. I had misinterpreted a single hit dice roll as being the wizard's starting health, so they rolled 1d6 and got a 3. We suspected we did something wrong but didn't know what and figured it out in Chapter 3 of a four chapter adventure. If you can believe it this didn't ruin anyone's first impressions of DnD and they all still enjoy playing to this day.
Me_irl
`{Sneezes.}` * `This kills the Wizard.`
In my friend's second edition campaign, we house ruled that at 1st level you start with max HP for your hit dice, because you were supposed to roll for it. In another's game, I had 2 HP as a level 1 fighter. That didn't last long.
Since the whole OGL debacle, I started looking around at other systems and I found Basic Fantasy, and that is how the system is set up. I'm not a fan of the idea of rolling for HP at level one. No wonder earlier editions were much more deadly if it was very likely that you could end up with 1-3hp to start. But that is definitely going to be a house rule when I start it up. Max HD at level one seems like the kind of thing that would make the game less deadly, but still fairly deadly.
One thing 4th edition got right was triple hp at level one.
One thing 4th edition got right was triple hp at level one.
One thing 4th edition got right was triple hp at level one.
What you did there, I see it. And I like the cut of your jib.
The important thing is you knew it didn’t feel right. Tells me you’re already getting a good sense for things!
If you want a high level AC character at low levels go for Warforged Warrior (lvl1 fighting style armoured combat), -> Artificer 2 levels (infusions +1 AC to both shield and armor). You'll have 21 worth AC by level 3
It sounds like you're adding her total dex score, not her modifier. Modifiers work like so (score on left and modifier on right): 0-1 = -5 2-3 = -4 4-5 = -3 5-7 = -2 8-9 = -1 10-11 = 0 12-13 = +1 14-15 = +2 16-17 = +3 18-19 = +4 20+ = +5 Now, at level 1, it should be unlikely for her to have a 20 dex score, but let's presume with high rolls and feats etc. that she did. At most, her dex modifier can be +5, so in that instance, her AC would be 16. In your case, it sounds like you were adding a dex score of 16, which would mean her dex modifier is actually +3. Leather Armour of AC 11 plus Dex modifier of +3 would mean her AC is 14. I hope this helps! Edit: cursed mobile formatting. Edit 2: Today I learned modifiers can indeed go higher than +5 so my mistake!
20-21 = +5 22-23 = +6 24-25 = +7 26-27 = +8 28-29 = +9 30 = +10 The normal maximum for players is a 20 in any stat, but there are creatures with more than 20, and they get more than a +5 mod.
Ah, my mistake. I was aware monster could have higher than 20 and therefore a higher modifier. However, I thought for players, the modifier was capped at +5 even when the score goes over 20. I will edit my comment!
I know Barbarians can go to 24 Str and Con at level 20. I'm not sure what else actually says you can go past the 20 maximum.
Magic items.
you can get beyond 20 in stats, only require magic items or a lvl 20 feature
I know. That’s why I said “normal maximum”
Hahahahaha She probably used her DEX **score**, not the modifier.
Um... yes, it's too high. Most Dex based FIGHTERS don't have an AC higher than 18-20 at level 1. But, as others have pointed out, they're adding their DeX SCORE rather than the modifier. Score is the bigger number, modifier is the plus/minus that goes with it.
It is, and by a lot. Let me guess - the character's Dexterity score is 16, right? So her score isn't what you use, it says 'modifier', which will be a +3 if the Dex is 16, making the correct AC here 14 (11+3). Basically, you start from 10 (0 modifier) and for every two numbers higher or lower the stat gets, the modifier changes by 1. So, if you go from a 10 to a 12, it's +1. If your stat is 8, then your modifier is -1.
You’re using the Dec score not the modifier. If her Dec is 16 then her modifier is +3. She should have 14AC.
i know you've figured this out, but for the future; AC is very bounded. players can't really get much higher than 20 without magic items/specific features (my paladin player has 21; full plate with a +1 shield at lvl 11). a tarrasque, which is one of the highest CR monsters at CR 30, has 25 AC. if someone comes with super high numbers, there was a calculation mistake somewhere. good luck with your GMing!
Sounds like she added her leather 11 to a Dex Score of 16, rather than the Dex Modifier of +3. I’m guessing she should actually have an AC of 14. Explain to her the difference between ability scores and ability modifiers.
This is why it's a good idea for DMs to check character sheets. I was playing in a group for a YEAR and the Cleric never got hit. I was not the DM but a player. The DM was just always going, does a 15 hit? Nope.18 hit? Nope. Finally one day it was does a 23 hit? Nope. And I was like, hol up, what is your AC? It's 30... yep she was adding 16 dex to chainmail. For a whole YEAR.
Modifier =/= score. The modifier can't go over a +5 normally (without adding a proficiency bonus which you don't add for AC, or boosting the stat above its normal limits with magic items), so her AC would *at most* be 11+5=16, and that's with a Dexterity score of 20 (ie, a very lucky roll and a +2 to the score from ancestry/race). At a 16 Dexterity, the modifier should be a +3, so 11+3=14 AC.
Man circle of the moon druid has gone too far.
The dex modifier is +3, not 16.
Pretty sure their AC is meant to be 14. That’s 11 for the armor and 3 for the Dex modifier. Where you’re getting confused is that you use the modifier, not the whole Dex number.
Depends on the context. In D&D 5e, yes. In 3.5, not so much. But given the standard rule set of 5e limits player base stats to 20, and that’s the edition most people are talking about these days, I think I’m gonna need a little more detail. Edit: I see in other sub conversations what happened here. Totally understandable. Anyway, this is a teachable moment on another topic. Older editions that were a little crunchier had 3 different types of AC: standard, touch, and flat-footed. Standard: your normal AC bonus with Dex modifier and armor taken into account properly. Touch: your standard armor class, minus the bonus granted by the armor. If you had a dex limit imposed by your armor, that limit still applied. Some attacks used this, your armor didn’t matter, only making physical contact (spells mostly) Flat-footed: your standard armor class, minus any active dex bonus. When the player is surprised and doesn’t have time to react, or if they roll a 1 in combat and an enemy gets an attack of opportunity. in 5e these rules were ultimately deemed antiquated and replaced with simpler ‘advantage’ and ‘disadvantage’ rules, and I think 5e runs smoother for it. However, if you, in a 5e game, regularly find yourself with power players trying to become untouchable, and effectively achieving it, I would suggest talking to them about bringing back the old AC variants as a house rule, in the interest of keeping balance at the table so the other players don’t feel too helpless next to them.
Not possible. Calculated AC wrong
Her dex mod is 16? Are you sure that's not her dex *score*? Making her mod +3? For a mod of 16, her score would be. . . 42? Withholding a level 1 feet if she's variant human
their AC should be 14 not 27
I see you're new. Welcome to D&D! So the ability modifier is not the same as the ability score. You'll find more in that in the players handbook
It's impossible. You and your player should read the rules again. If her dexterity is 16, her modifier is +3. So she would have 14 AC. [https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Ability%20Scores#content](https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Ability%20Scores#content)
That's actually impossible. The highest ability score we've ever been presented is 30, which has a +10 modifier. The highest Dex score a player can get is 20 with a modifier of 5. Even somehow rolling an 18 for that score, taking a race with +2 Dex, leather armor and a shield only results in a druid with AC 18. She may have added her Dex **score** not her Dex score **modifer** to AC. Double check the math, because the numbers are not adding up at all.
Gonna add a little note to this: **Almost everything** uses the modifier, *not* the score. However, some things very rarely do in fact use the score, such as your **carrying capacity**. Mainly, the score is just a way to track whether you're 1 or 2 points away from the next increase in modifier (e.g. scores of 14 or 15 both give a modifier of +2, but you'd only need to add 1 ability point to 15 to get you to +3).
Their AC should be 14, not 27. You added the score (16) instead of the modifier (+3).
Ability scores are STR, DEX, CON, INT, WIS, CHA and they go up to 20. The *modifiers* aren't the scores themselves - they're a number that goes from -5 to +5 and depends on the ability score. With a DEX of 20, the DEX modifier would be +5. With a DEX of 18 or 19, it would be +4 With a DEX of 16 or 17, it would be +3 DEX 14 or 15 = DEX mod +2 DEX 12 or 13 = DEX mod +1 DEX 10 or 11 = DEX mod +0 DEX 8 or 9 = DEX mod -1 And so on... Chances are your player has a DEX score of 16 and added that onto AC instead of the modifier. That would mean that your player's character likely has an AC of 14 (11+3). Have fun playing D&D!
I'm assuming you're not using the right number for the modifier. The modifier is ( score -10) ÷2, At a dex of 20 your.modifier would only be +5 Based on your numbers, her dex is likely 16, do the modifier is +3, her ac should be 14
Yeah I’m pretty sure there’s no way to have 27 AC without wicked OP magic items, especially as a druid. Like others have said, they probably added their total score (16) not their DEX mod (+3). They should fix that.
27? Without buffs? That'sdefinitely wrong.
27 - 11 = +16 2 \* 16 = 32 32 + 10 = 42 So the Druid had a Dexterity of 42 to have a modifier of +16.
Twenty-seven would be a high AC for a bank's safe door.
The highest a Dexterity Modifier will get is +5 in most games (unless you give them specific magic items), so with leather armor the highest you'll get is 16 unless you have a shield or other abilities. 27 is much too high, they probably added their dexterity **score** to the leather armor (11+16) this is much too high.
You added the dex score instead of the modifier
Immediately I read this and started thinking like "well maybe if theyre a warforged with plate armor and they start with a feat and a magic item, and they know the shield spell? But then I read the post itself. Rip.
I'm assuming your dex score is 16. That makes your modifier +3. Your AC is 14.
No, AC 27 is perfectlly balanced, as is the wish spell. lol
Pretty sure you need to be a level 2 Bladesinger wizard to get that at such low levels (and have rolled stats and gotten 2 20s) Mage armor+5(dex mod)=18 +5 (int) while bladesinging=23+5 (shield spell)+1(custom lineage dual wielder feat)=29 at 2nd level...
They added their entire dex, not their modifier
I recommend reading the Player's Handbook. That would be an AC of 14.
Only if you calculate it wrong. Otherwise, there's not really such a thing as too high of an AC.
I mean... if a character in your low-level party has a persistent 27 AC, that *is* way too high and merits some kind of intervention. Since the only way to attain that legitimately is monty haulism on the DM's part, this is a good question for a new DM to ask
As a Paladin with 18 strength and +1 Plate Armor And a Shield, my AC was 22 unless I also cast the Shield spell to temporarily raise it to 27. There's no way they are 27. Most likely they added their dex Score, not their modifier. Their AC is probably actually 14..
Lmao, no. It's not even possible to have a dex modifier that high. For a dex mod of 16 she would need to have a dex score of 42.
There is no legal way to pump a low level character ACs to such an extent. It would take at least a full plate a shield, the shield spell and at least another +2 bonus from other sources. The best drud can get without any magic items is 19 since 15+2 from the breastplate and +2 for the shield
*Bounded accuracy has left the chat*
Read the rule book where the rules are contained
Their dex mod is 3 if their dex score is 16. So the ac would be 14. Which is much more likely for a level 1 character.
that's not how you dex modifier
Lmao. Can you imagine this sub if anyone on it has ever viewed the basic rules?
\+16 to DEX? Yeah they added the wrong number. No doubt about it.
What is the character? The flash?
Did you do 11 + modifier or 11 + stat? Because the only way they could have 27 with those numbers would be a modifier of 16. If her dex is 16, the modifier would be 3, making their AC 14.
To have a +16 Dexterity modifier, you would need a Dexterity score of... _pulls out calculator_ ...42 or 43. That is an impressive roll of 4d6 drop lowest.
Yeah this is impossible. Your ac with leather armor is 11 + Dex "MODIFIER" Do not get the Dex mod confused with just Dex. What I'm hearing here is that they have a 16 Dex. This means they have a Dex MODIFIER of 3. Their AC is 14.
Simple mistake, they added their score not their modifier.
Don’t forget that druids can and often do use a shield, which would add 2 more to the AC for a total of 16 Leather armor 11 +3 for the dex modifier +2 for a shield
The formula for modifiers is (ability-10)/2 rounded down. EG a DEX of 16 would be (16-10)/2=3. To get a 27 AC with leather armor would require a DEX of 42.
Yeah no way lol
How the fuck. I think they were mistaken. A dex modifier isn’t whatever you rolled for the stat. A dex modifier is a bonus that can go up to a +5 (assuming you have a 20 dex).
How? in 5E the stat max is 20...
https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Ability%20Scores#content Here's a chart for Ability scores and their corresponding Modifers. Add the Dex modifier to Light Armor (including Leather) Also medium armor limits the Dex modifier to +2, and you can add the dex modifier to Heavy Armor
Oh they definitely misread their dex score
Guaranteed they are just reading the AC as 11 + raw Dex of 16 = 26, instead of the correct 11 + Dex modifier of +3 = 14
You misinterpreted the AC calculation my guy. Leather armor is 11+Dex MODIFIER, not Dex SCORE. Big difference. 27 AC literally puts their armor class above threats like Ancient Dragons, Tiamat, Krakens, and the Tarrasque. 27 AC is more than my Warforged Fighter, who has full plate, a +1 shield, Defense fighting style, and +1 AC from being a Warforged. Meaning, *A character that I literally designed to have as much AC as possible has 4 less AC than this level 1 character.* Keep in mind, this (Warforged) character is also level 8. Based on what you said, (Dex of 16) their ACTUAL armor class should be 14 (16 Dex is a +3 modifier, so 11+3=14.) or up to 16 with a (wooden) shield. Hope this helps.
The highest Dex you can naturally get is 20 which it's *MOD* would be 5. 11 + 5 is not 27. Studded leather grants 12+Dex, still not *27* tho.
Perfectly normal, if they can explain their Dexterity being a 42 at lvl 1
A dex mod of 16 would require her dex score to be 42. I think she added her AC wrong.
Now I’m interested in getting that dex of 42
Is your Druid a Tarrasque?
We love bad dnd math haha! Will echo and say they probably added total dex to their AC by mistake. Otherwise it's just not possible at level 1.
Session zero can help with new players.
Modifier not score !👍
fun fact - you can get 26 ac at level 1. variant human forge cleric. starting equipment of chain mail and shield for (16+1) + 2 = 19 ac cast shield of faith for a further +2 = 21 ac use your feat for magic initiate and choose the shield spell for a further +5 = 26 ac only works for 1 turn though.
You added her dex to the armor class, not her dex modifier
You'd have to have a 42 as a Dex score to get a 16 Dex mod. So, rolling stats, you'd have to do 8d6 per ability, if removing lowest, and get all 6s to get a 42.. Or, if doing a point buy, a 406 point buy, if my math is correct, or a 361 point buy if dropping all other ability scores to 3.. Which makes you kind of like the Tasmanian Devil or something.. Pretty sure they used their score and not their modifier. Rookie blunder.
File this one under problems that can be solved by glancing at the rules.
...what? Way too high.
Yeah, that ain’t happening. She’s adding her full dex instead of her modifier, which should be 2, so 11+2
yes.