Famously, the Will-O-(The)-Wisp had a -8 Armor Class.
D&D 1E How do you play an illusionist?
- Thread starter Shades of Eternity
- Start date
Famously, the Will-O-(The)-Wisp had a -8 Armor Class.
James Gasik
We don't talk about Pun-Pun
No no, I understand, I got into the game at the tail end of 1e so a lot of my play experience is from 2e, and it was my fault dragging the 2e Red Dragon into the conversation. I had forgotten that, not unlike 5e really, they were really conservative about monster AC- though I think that actually sells my point about saving throws harder when it comes to high level chances of success for weapons vs. spells.
OTOH, 1e also had Magic Resistance set at 11th-level magic use, so at low levels MR was a nightmare, but at high levels it became much easier to handle- 2e really messed up by having MR be static and handing it out like candy to monsters.
James Gasik
We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Yeesh. The reason Magic Missile was invented.
I assumed -10 was the best but don't remember ever checking.
I think the Solar is supposed to be -9 (with the 9 being a typo; planetar was -7).
Checking now, Indra in Deities and Demigods shows -12 (wonder if it is a typo). Kishijoten is a -10.
Alzrius
The EN World kitten
I know you asked about 1E, but the lowest AC in AD&D 2E that I've ever come across (that I recall) was the entry for Falazure's avatar in DMGR4 Monster Mythology. It's a crazy -16!
Mannahnin
Scion of Murgen (He/Him)
I'm not going to be any use for finding the lowest published baddie, but I know that for walking-around AC, a PC in armor can get to -15 with just the DMG or -16 with UA. Plate Mail +5 for base of -2, add a shield +5 to get to -8, 18 Dex* to -12, dusky rose ioun stone gets us to -13**, Cloak of Displacement gets us to -15.
If Unearthed Arcana is in play you can swap the Plate Mail for Field Plate +5 or Full Plate +4 (there is no Full Plate +5 in the book.) Rings and Cloaks of Protection, and Bracers of Defense do not give a bonus to AC in conjunction with magic armor***
Unarmored characters can get to -14. Bracers of Defense AC 2, 18 Dex*, Ring of Protection+6, Cloak of Protection +5, and a dusty rose Ioun Stone.
The latter is probably better in actual play because shields are limited in how many attacks they can protect against in a given round. Though the first attack free miss from the Cloak of Displacement is nice, and if you're in UA Full or Field plate, those also give a little DR.
*You can get to 19 by being an Elf and bump that to 20 if you use a Manual of Quickness of Action, but per Deities and Demigods, those are still just a -4 defensive adjustment. You need a 21 Dex to get a -5.
**This could conceivably be ruled against as the ioun stone says it grants "+1 protection" but does not say anything about combining it with other protections. If the DM rules that it works like a Ring or Cloak of protection than it wouldn't stack with the armor.
***Cloaks do combine with Leather or magic Leather armor ONLY for some reason, but obviously that's not as good.
Last edited:
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
Boots of Speed can tack another down-2 on there in open ground.
And where are you seeing the bolded, that a Cloak of Displacement gives 6 AC points? My handy DMG tells me the Cloak only gives 2 points of AC, though the first attack that would hit the wearer always misses.
James Gasik
We don't talk about Pun-Pun
While this thought experiment is neat, are PC's allowed to go below -10 AC in 1e? (I went looking and while I found more fuel for the forgotten rules thread, I haven't tripped over a specific reference in the 1e rulebooks). I've been trying to remember which issue of Dragon it was where someone asked about being able to hit -11 AC because some dragons can (and go beyond), and the response was "if you lived for thousands of years, you could have an AC like that too". I mean obviously that would have been in the 2e era, but it was the first time I really recalled being cognizant that there was an actual limit. I mean, the rules had surely mentioned it somewhere, but it hadn't really clicked. I think it was the instruction manual for my NES port of Wizardry that defined AC -10 as being equal to tank armor, and in that game that was a hard limit.
And with Dragon magazine in hand, I didn't need to look up the rules, lol, I knew the secret lore! You couldn't have -11 AC as a player character! But of course, that didn't stop arguments.
I had a friend who truly, madly, deeply, insisted that the Dexterity defensive adjustment was somehow different from armor. "If you wear magic armor, it gets a +1 or higher bonus to your AC", he reasoned. "So a -2 from a 16 Dex is different, so if I have -9 from armor, I can have -11 with 16 Dex."
That's when we all started diving into the books, while he assured us "it's in the rules, I saw it", but we never found that. But what we did find was page 89 of the 2e PHB which said:
But surprisingly, that didn't stop the arguments. "Yeah, it says -10 is the best (very powerful magic armors), it doesn't mention Dex! And also, if -10 is the best, how can -11 be a thing?"
Eventually, the guy who DM'd the most for us all put his foot down and went with Dragon magazine. And he eventually revealed he did have immortal NPC's who were thousands of years old, and had AC's lower than -10, plus stats above 25 (as he'd started his campaign pre-AD&D when the rules about ability scores were more like they are today). And when Immortal-level play became a thing, he griped about TSR "stealing his ideas", lol.
Voadam
Legend
I really liked the pathfinder 1e version of incorporeal where instead of a 50 percent miss chance it was just half damage. Much less frustrating to experience at the table.Never liked the 50% miss chances. Just jack up the damn AC and have done with it.
Similar Threads
