# Deepwarden's Con bonus to AC & armor



## Atherlos (Jan 13, 2005)

Deepwarden (RoS) gets the stonewarden ability at level 2, allowing them to use con bonus as AC modifier instead of dex. Is this bonus limited by armor? I'd say it isn't, but Id like to hear your opinions/rulings. If this has been discussed previously I'd be grateful for a pointer. 

-- Atherlos


----------



## Scharlata (Jan 13, 2005)

Atherlos said:
			
		

> Deepwarden (RoS) gets the stonewarden ability at level 2, allowing them to use con bonus as AC modifier instead of dex. Is this bonus limited by armor? I'd say it isn't, but Id like to hear your opinions/rulings. If this has been discussed previously I'd be grateful for a pointer.




Hi!
First: I don't like the idea of the change Dex/Con. , but if I'd ever allow a Deepwarden to grace my campaign, I'd make her follow all the Armor Class-related rules....

Kind regards


----------



## uzagi_akimbo (Jan 13, 2005)

Hmm, the whole idea of the Deepwarden class seems to be to emphasize solidity in defense, so adding a (unlimited by Armor Dex to AC restrictions ) CON Modifier instead of the DEX bonus seems fair. 
It's a supernatural (extraordinary by the rules) power after all - and if one's winning smile and smooth manners can save a paladin from immolation at the hands of a fireball or petrification by a medusa's gaze(CHA Bonus to Saves), I can certainly imagine someone being so tough, that he actually shrugs off blows like water, too.
As the class through its prequisites is aimed at dwarven or gnomish rangers, it will be used by lightly armoured dwarves in the first place - due to the light armour limit on combat tyle feats.

And the "stone warden" power lets the character replace DEX with CON for determining the AC bonus. As armour restrict physical movement, an thereby limits the amount of mobility which can be employed while wearing armour, there is no actual rule that limits any sort of bonus to AC derived from CON. Hence, the power as written "floats".

Although balance-wise, it makes the class rather front loaded in a way.


----------



## Lord Pendragon (Jan 14, 2005)

uzagi_akimbo said:
			
		

> Hmm, the whole idea of the Deepwarden class seems to be to emphasize solidity in defense, so adding a (unlimited by Armor Dex to AC restrictions ) CON Modifier instead of the DEX bonus seems fair.



So your argument here is "the PrC seems to be based on defense, so it should get unlimited defense"?  That seems an odd turn of logic to me.  Just because the Deepwarden is meant to be tough doesn't mean he's meant to be unrestricted in any way.  A Duelist is meant to have an intelligent defense, and his Int to AC is still limited.

Personally, although I agree with Scharlata about hating Con-to-AC, I'd still require it be restricted by the Max Dex Bonus of his armor.  He gets to use Con in place of Dex.  It's still the same AC modifier, resticted in the same ways.







> and if one's winning smile and smooth manners can save a paladin from immolation at the hands of a fireball or petrification by a medusa's gaze(CHA Bonus to Saves), I can certainly imagine someone being so tough, that he actually shrugs off blows like water, too.



A paladin's Divine Grace is just that, _Divine_ Grace.  The paladin isn't saved by his winning smile, he's saved by the _grace of god_.  Charisma, which also measures force of will, not only "smooth manners" is merely the means of measuring how much of his god's grace a particular paladin enjoys.


----------



## Scion (Jan 14, 2005)

Going by the wording of the feat it definately looks like it would bypass the max dex bonus on armor.

I dont really see any problem with it myself ::shrugs::

While the ability doesnt make a whole lot of sense it certainly doesnt seem to be based on movement, and it is useing 'his strengths to cover his weaknesses'.

Too bad the example isnt helpful.

Endurance is a prereq, along with being a dwarf. So pretty much everything from the wording of the ability to the apparent flavor of the class and ability all seem to point to it being able to bypass the max dex bonus.


----------



## Jeremy (Jan 14, 2005)

Having seen a deep warden in play in CotSQ, the ability works fine as written.  CON to AC not limited by max dex bonus is a powerful ability.  But no more powerful than any number of other abilities.

Call it divine mega super stonewarden if you like.  It's just a stat to AC.  Like any number of classes that get INT, CHA, WIS, or DEX to AC, Saves, Attack, whatever.  *shrugs*

It really never got much attention in the game, even though the dwarf in question had 24 or 26 CON.  Multiple ability score dependancy levels that advantage out very quickly.


----------



## Atherlos (Jan 14, 2005)

I got this reply from Wizards' Customer Service Department:

"All the Stone Warden ability does is allow you to transpose your
(better) Con modifier to your AC to replace a poorer Dex modifier.  The
same limitations to this AC modifier apply, including the Max Dex (Con)
modifier of armor."

On a different note, other classes that get int or wis to AC get them in addition to dex bonus, and can't use armor. For example a 5th level invisble blade could gain +5 int bonus, use bracers of armor +8, and still use dex. Monks have unlimited wis bonus. A deepwarden would use platemail for +8 armor bonus, +5 enhancement, and get con bonus instead of dex. With this in mind the ability doesn't seem overly unbalanced to me.

-- Atherlos


----------



## Atherlos (Jan 14, 2005)

By the way, would you let the con bonus apply to touch attacks?

-- Atherlos


----------



## Gez (Jan 14, 2005)

Yes. If it's restricted by armor, then it applies against touch attacks.

I wouldn't if it wasn't restricted by armor (I would consider it some sort of natural armor gained through the stonewarden's resolveful inertia).

But he's really using his Con instead of his Dex, so, it follows all the rules for the Dex bonus to AC.


----------



## Scion (Jan 14, 2005)

Atherlos said:
			
		

> I got this reply from Wizards' Customer Service Department:
> 
> "All the Stone Warden ability does is allow you to transpose your
> (better) Con modifier to your AC to replace a poorer Dex modifier.  The
> ...




Well, that is more than good enough for me to say that con modifier is definately not effected by the max dex of armor.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Jan 14, 2005)

Scion said:
			
		

> Well, that is more than good enough for me to say that con modifier is definately not effected by the max dex of armor.




Absolutely.  The best way to settle a rules argument is to find out what Customer Service says on the subject and do the opposite.


----------



## Lord Pendragon (Jan 14, 2005)

Gez said:
			
		

> Yes. If it's restricted by armor, then it applies against touch attacks.
> 
> I wouldn't if it wasn't restricted by armor (I would consider it some sort of natural armor gained through the stonewarden's resolveful inertia).
> 
> But he's really using his Con instead of his Dex, so, it follows all the rules for the Dex bonus to AC.



Interesting.

I'd have to say I agree with this.  Moreover, the point is making me consider just allowing it to supercede the Max Dex rules.  The loss of touch AC is certainly a balancing factor.







			
				Jeremy said:
			
		

> It really never got much attention in the game, even though the dwarf in question had 24 or 26 CON. Multiple ability score dependancy levels that advantage out very quickly.



How does MAD come into play?  A deepwarden is already going to want a high Con, so this ability doesn't mean he'd have more MAD than usual.  Does the Deepwarden in general create MAD?


----------



## Atherlos (Jan 14, 2005)

Avoiding MAD is a great reason to play Deepwarden. Starting with ranger, requirements are easy with 8 int, only stat needed besides con is str really. I'm mixing in a few other prestige classes to make a blacksmith (creating arms&armor at lvl 17) that gets strong will/fort saves and high bab/damage output. Deepwarden is icing on the cake really, but hey, I like ice.

-- Atherlos


----------



## Lord Pendragon (Jan 15, 2005)

Atherlos said:
			
		

> Avoiding MAD is a great reason to play Deepwarden. Starting with ranger, requirements are easy with 8 int, only stat needed besides con is str really. I'm mixing in a few other prestige classes to make a blacksmith (creating arms&armor at lvl 17) that gets strong will/fort saves and high bab/damage output. Deepwarden is icing on the cake really, but hey, I like ice.



Fair enough.  But Jeremy seemed to be claiming that MAD was a _detriment_ that quickly balanced out the _advantage_ of the Deepwarden's Con-instead-of-Dex ability ignoring Max Dex.  Your comment seems to contradict his, in the sense that for you, the Deepwarden is _reducing_ MAD, which is no penalty at all but a benefit.  And you can't balance a powerful benefit with another benefit.


----------



## John Bechtel (Oct 3, 2017)

What is MAD?


----------



## Celebrim (Oct 4, 2017)

John Bechtel said:


> What is MAD?




Multiple Attribute Dependency

Classes that need good scores in multiple attributes tend to be much weaker than classes that can get by with a good score in just one ability.


----------

