k but what if I choose my barbarian unarmored ac 17 for one attack and I want to lower my Ac so I choose my draconic resilience for ac 15 fr another attack? (5 con and 2 dex mods) (I know bad combo but it works for base ac, lizardfolk, loxodon, or wildshape natural armor. the point stands)
The attack action says you calculate player AC to see if the attack hits at character creation. Character creation armor class page 14 says you can choose, as does sage advice in the character creation section.
RAW I read this as everytime you call for an attack action that you need to calculate your ac. If you have multiple features or calculations then you choose.
The people I'm playing with tell me that's not how ac calculation works.
Obviously a creature needs to be able to choose which AC calculation to use when they don or doff armor at a minimum. If this were not the case armor would be meaningless as after a creature dons armor they would still be stuck with the AC calculation they were using before they donned the armor.
I feel the question that should be asked instead is why would you want to change AC calculations for every attack that targets you?
The why was I wanted a reaction attack to hit me when I walked by a NPC as a barbarian to keep my rage up.
So in my head when you attack you calculate your to hit and your ac and if one equals the other then boom hit.
I said I'm going to use my unarmored ac for this so it's 12 and I have a higher chance to get hit.
The way I always read the rules in my head was the trigger to calculating AC was done when it needs to be and one of those times in when the attack action is taken.
As you brought up when you don or doff armor you can change your calculations to.
The rules don't clearly specify when you calculate your AC but it should be whenever a new way to calculate your AC comes up, generally when you put or remove an armor or gain a feature letting you do so.
Picking which AC calculation method to use at-will between attacks in a combat seem counter-intuitive since generally a character calculate AC in the most beneficial way so all this book keeping would be to its detriment. But AC can change during combat under certain circumstances such as when a character no longer have aa shield or armor, such as when affected by a rust monster or Black pudding for example.
Player's Handbook: Some spells and class features give you a different way to calculate your AC. If you have multiple features that give you different ways to calculate your AC, you choose which one to use.
Sage Advice Compendium: These methods—along with any others that give you a formula for calculating your AC—are mutually exclusive; you can benefit from only one at a time. If you have access to more than one, you pick which one to use.
The only restriction that appears in the rules is:
"If you have multiple features that give you different ways to calculate your AC, you choose which one to use."
When is the AC of a charcter determined?
"If the total of the roll plus modifiers equals or exceeds the target’s Armor Class (AC), the attack hits."
The AC is determined when the attack is resolved. The AC can be modified by elements like cover.
"A target with half cover has a +2 bonus to AC and Dexterity saving throws."
Half cover does not provide a to hit modifier - it provides an AC modifier. This modifier can change every round and potentially even between attacks if the circumstances change. This indicates that the AC calculation CAN be recalculated all the time throughout the combat depending on circumstances.
So - since the rules say that a character can choose the formula used to calculate their AC (without stipulating when that choice occurs) AND the rules allow for the recalculation of AC during every round of combat and even between attacks due to effects like cover - it would seem reasonable that the choice of which AC formula to use can be made on an individual attack basis.
So, RAW, it is probably fine to choose which AC formula to use between attacks.
--------
HOWEVER :) ... doing so is very "meta" gamey ... from a character perspective, the character is deciding they want to be hit in order to continue raging since the conditions on that ability are make an attack or take damage.
Typically, a character would choose the highest AC available to them in order to avoid getting hurt. Would a raging character KNOW that they need to take some damage in order to continue raging? Is the character thinking, "I am engaging this enemy next to me but I want to run to dash to another part of the fight to help the wizard, but if I do that, I might lose my rage because I won't get hurt, I need to let the enemy hit me when I run away from them, so I will make it easier for them?" Personally, I don't really think that is a likely line of reasoning for a character affected by rage. Their choice is mostly to attack the adjacent enemy or run off to assist another character or perform another action and risk losing their rage.
Finally, the rules contain this comment:
"The AC of a character is determined at character creation, whereas the AC of a monster is in its stat block."
This is clearly incorrect since the AC of a character changes far more often than just at character creation. However, it could be read to mean that the choice of which AC formula a character wants to use is made at turning points in the character development when AC calculation methods may change. Without a clearer statement, the choice of AC formula could be made at any time, but I would probably disallow it in a game I was running since making yourself easier to hit during a combat would generally just not make sense from a character perspective. (It might be a great use of rules from a player perspective but isn't what a character would typically choose to do - "hurt me so I can stay angry while running away from you??").
Rage doesn’t last long enough to do that, it’s only 1 minute long at present. It’s essentially a single-encounter per use ability.
Exactly.. not seeing the point to this, so curious what the OP's reasoning is (legitimately curious, not criticizing)
my character needed to get to an enemy in battle and i couldn't get to them without using my dash as an action. it was half way through the fight so i needed my rage up and it was a viable tactic i could use with in game rules which my barbarian understands when it comes to battle.
other people have suggested that you wouldnt know to get hit to maintain your rage? but thats silly barbarians arnt dumb there keen and honed fighters "In battle, you fight with primal ferocity." no where does it say your INT WIS or CHA is lowered? you keep your senses you just cant concentrate on spells.
*edit to include quote cause when i clicked reply it didnt do that.
The only restriction that appears in the rules is:
"If you have multiple features that give you different ways to calculate your AC, you choose which one to use."
When is the AC of a charcter determined?
"If the total of the roll plus modifiers equals or exceeds the target’s Armor Class (AC), the attack hits."
The AC is determined when the attack is resolved. The AC can be modified by elements like cover.
"A target with half cover has a +2 bonus to AC and Dexterity saving throws."
Half cover does not provide a to hit modifier - it provides an AC modifier. This modifier can change every round and potentially even between attacks if the circumstances change. This indicates that the AC calculation CAN be recalculated all the time throughout the combat depending on circumstances.
So - since the rules say that a character can choose the formula used to calculate their AC (without stipulating when that choice occurs) AND the rules allow for the recalculation of AC during every round of combat and even between attacks due to effects like cover - it would seem reasonable that the choice of which AC formula to use can be made on an individual attack basis.
So, RAW, it is probably fine to choose which AC formula to use between attacks.
--------
HOWEVER :) ... doing so is very "meta" gamey ... from a character perspective, the character is deciding they want to be hit in order to continue raging since the conditions on that ability are make an attack or take damage.
Typically, a character would choose the highest AC available to them in order to avoid getting hurt. Would a raging character KNOW that they need to take some damage in order to continue raging? Is the character thinking, "I am engaging this enemy next to me but I want to run to dash to another part of the fight to help the wizard, but if I do that, I might lose my rage because I won't get hurt, I need to let the enemy hit me when I run away from them, so I will make it easier for them?" Personally, I don't really think that is a likely line of reasoning for a character affected by rage. Their choice is mostly to attack the adjacent enemy or run off to assist another character or perform another action and risk losing their rage.
Finally, the rules contain this comment:
"The AC of a character is determined at character creation, whereas the AC of a monster is in its stat block."
This is clearly incorrect since the AC of a character changes far more often than just at character creation. However, it could be read to mean that the choice of which AC formula a character wants to use is made at turning points in the character development when AC calculation methods may change. Without a clearer statement, the choice of AC formula could be made at any time, but I would probably disallow it in a game I was running since making yourself easier to hit during a combat would generally just not make sense from a character perspective. (It might be a great use of rules from a player perspective but isn't what a character would typically choose to do - "hurt me so I can stay angry while running away from you??").
i came to the same conclusion RAW as you did in my head i calculate AC on attack.
the next part is odd to me tho
as a trained and practiced fighter you would use whatever to maintain your edge. its not meta gamey to think your trained barbarian would just stop raging because they for some reason didnt think to get hit by an attack on purpose to the best of there ability. they have maintained there rage by being hit countless of times, they know it works so presenting yourself to get hit RAW makes perfect sense in the "meta" game and the RP game.
it makes sense if thats how the rules work and to the best of my knowledge we came to the same conclusion about the rules, but then for some reason you think that a Barbarian would not know on an instinctive level how combat works and to use that in game to there advantage because normally a character doesent want to be hit. a barbarian normally does want to be hit quite often to maintain there rage.
as i mention in another reply, a barbarian is just as smart wise and charismatic while raging they just are super strong and resilient and cant concentrate on spells. so they are just as tactical as anyone else.
*edit to include quote cause when i clicked reply it didnt do that.
Rage doesn’t last long enough to do that, it’s only 1 minute long at present. It’s essentially a single-encounter per use ability.
Exactly.. not seeing the point to this, so curious what the OP's reasoning is (legitimately curious, not criticizing)
my character needed to get to an enemy in battle and i couldn't get to them without using my dash as an action. it was half way through the fight so i needed my rage up and it was a viable tactic i could use with in game rules which my barbarian understands when it comes to battle.
other people have suggested that you wouldnt know to get hit to maintain your rage? but thats silly barbarians arnt dumb there keen and honed fighters "In battle, you fight with primal ferocity." no where does it say your INT WIS or CHA is lowered? you keep your senses you just cant concentrate on spells.
*edit to include quote cause when i clicked reply it didnt do that.
Frankly, imo this is a scenario where you just have to accept that you’re risking dropping Rage early. There’s a reason they set those end conditions on it. Plus, so long as you’d taken some damage over the past turn you’d be good. If you really ended up in a scenario where you had the choice between spending your Action on something that risked ending Rage early or attacking a creature within range, honestly them’s just the breaks from my perspective. Trying to toggle AC features mid combat to get around it is way too meta.
in the physical Essentials kit rule book it removed the "The AC of a character is determined at character creation, whereas the AC of a monster is in its stat block." in the making an attack section and just refers to "armor Class (AC)" in the same vernacular as Armor Class(AC) that comes up in the previous chapter. no more AC of a character is determined at character creation just a chapter with AC calculations and a making an attack that calls back to the AC calculation.
im assuming they did that because its clearly incorrect that its "only" calculated at character creation as most people assume. It means the essentials Kit backs up my assumption that The PHB is "calling back" to the character creation section to calculate the AC based on that calculation as its the only place in the book that has the AC calculation.
Obviously a creature needs to be able to choose which AC calculation to use when they don or doff armor at a minimum. If this were not the case armor would be meaningless as after a creature dons armor they would still be stuck with the AC calculation they were using before they donned the armor.
I feel the question that should be asked instead is why would you want to change AC calculations for every attack that targets you?
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
The only restriction that appears in the rules is:
"If you have multiple features that give you different ways to calculate your AC, you choose which one to use."
When is the AC of a charcter determined?
"If the total of the roll plus modifiers equals or exceeds the target’s Armor Class (AC), the attack hits."
The AC is determined when the attack is resolved. The AC can be modified by elements like cover.
"A target with half cover has a +2 bonus to AC and Dexterity saving throws."
Half cover does not provide a to hit modifier - it provides an AC modifier. This modifier can change every round and potentially even between attacks if the circumstances change. This indicates that the AC calculation CAN be recalculated all the time throughout the combat depending on circumstances.
So - since the rules say that a character can choose the formula used to calculate their AC (without stipulating when that choice occurs) AND the rules allow for the recalculation of AC during every round of combat and even between attacks due to effects like cover - it would seem reasonable that the choice of which AC formula to use can be made on an individual attack basis.
So, RAW, it is probably fine to choose which AC formula to use between attacks.
--------
HOWEVER :) ... doing so is very "meta" gamey ... from a character perspective, the character is deciding they want to be hit in order to continue raging since the conditions on that ability are make an attack or take damage.
Typically, a character would choose the highest AC available to them in order to avoid getting hurt. Would a raging character KNOW that they need to take some damage in order to continue raging? Is the character thinking, "I am engaging this enemy next to me but I want to run to dash to another part of the fight to help the wizard, but if I do that, I might lose my rage because I won't get hurt, I need to let the enemy hit me when I run away from them, so I will make it easier for them?" Personally, I don't really think that is a likely line of reasoning for a character affected by rage. Their choice is mostly to attack the adjacent enemy or run off to assist another character or perform another action and risk losing their rage.
Finally, the rules contain this comment:
"The AC of a character is determined at character creation, whereas the AC of a monster is in its stat block."
This is clearly incorrect since the AC of a character changes far more often than just at character creation. However, it could be read to mean that the choice of which AC formula a character wants to use is made at turning points in the character development when AC calculation methods may change. Without a clearer statement, the choice of AC formula could be made at any time, but I would probably disallow it in a game I was running since making yourself easier to hit during a combat would generally just not make sense from a character perspective. (It might be a great use of rules from a player perspective but isn't what a character would typically choose to do - "hurt me so I can stay angry while running away from you??").
i came to the same conclusion RAW as you did in my head i calculate AC on attack.
the next part is odd to me tho
as a trained and practiced fighter you would use whatever to maintain your edge. its not meta gamey to think your trained barbarian would just stop raging because they for some reason didnt think to get hit by an attack on purpose to the best of there ability. they have maintained there rage by being hit countless of times, they know it works so presenting yourself to get hit RAW makes perfect sense in the "meta" game and the RP game.
it makes sense if thats how the rules work and to the best of my knowledge we came to the same conclusion about the rules, but then for some reason you think that a Barbarian would not know on an instinctive level how combat works and to use that in game to there advantage because normally a character doesent want to be hit. a barbarian normally does want to be hit quite often to maintain there rage.
as i mention in another reply, a barbarian is just as smart wise and charismatic while raging they just are super strong and resilient and cant concentrate on spells. so they are just as tactical as anyone else.
*edit to include quote cause when i clicked reply it didnt do that.
If all the barbarian needs to do is get damaged to maintain their rage, and the character knows this and can take actions to ensure that they keep raging even when making a tactical move across the battlefield ... then why can't they stab themselves with a dagger or even a fork? What prevents a barbarian from keeping a razor blade at their belt for those times in combat when they want to move around without attacking but still want to rage (It could be an object interaction causing 1 hit point of damage)? Why would they have to try to let an opponent hit them by going to the extent of using a different and lower AC calculation for a specific attack?
If the rule was intended to operate as you suggest then the barbarian would have a method of self harm (or come up with one themselves) to maintain their rage even if someone else doesn't do damage to them and they don't attack.
The intent would appear to be that when the barbarian is in active combat every round, either attacking or being hit, that focus on combat fuels their rage. A brief lull, even for a few seconds, causes the rage to disappear which includes the barbarian taking actions that are tactical and remove them from the fight even for a brief time where they don't take damage or make an attack for a period of 6 seconds.
--------------
However, there is RAI and RAW. RAW, the barbarian just needs to take some damage.
Put a razor blade on your belt that you can use to cut yourself for 1 hp as an object interaction and keep your rage going if the character is doing something tactical. Or have a small knife handy to make an attack against yourself though this might take an attack action. Talk to your DM because RAW, the barbarian only needs to take some damage and there is no requirement that it is not self-inflicted or caused by environmental hazards. A raging barbarian could fall/jump off a 10' height taking d6 of falling damage keeping that rage going too.
Intentionally reducing the character's AC to make getting hit more likely is EXACTLY the same as self-inflicted damage. If you think it is ok for the barbarian to damage themselves to keep the rage going then there is no issue with reducing the character AC to make it more likely to take damage.
My personal take on it is that the damage taken by the barbarian is not intended to be self inflicted. However, the rules don't say that and perhaps the designers intended to allow self inflicted damage to sustain the character's rage but that is not explicit in the rules either way.
I would not let you change your AC on the fly like that, but I would allow you to let the attack hit you (you would have to declare this before the roll), just like you can choose to fail a save. I might give the attacker advantage, since you are leaving yourself open to attack, which realistically should allow crits more easily.
To all those questioning why: maybe the Barbarian chose to use his action to use a medicine kit on his downed party member or to swap weapons. There are plenty of ways to use your action. But the Barbarian would know (or at least think) that running past that Goblin is going to provoke an attack, keeping his rage up. You could also ask your party members to hit you, but they are very likely to be hitting harder than most monsters.
You can't choose to fail a save nor can you choose to let an attack hit you. Neither of these are options presented by the 5e rules.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
The only restriction that appears in the rules is:
"If you have multiple features that give you different ways to calculate your AC, you choose which one to use."
When is the AC of a charcter determined?
"If the total of the roll plus modifiers equals or exceeds the target’s Armor Class (AC), the attack hits."
The AC is determined when the attack is resolved. The AC can be modified by elements like cover.
"A target with half cover has a +2 bonus to AC and Dexterity saving throws."
Half cover does not provide a to hit modifier - it provides an AC modifier. This modifier can change every round and potentially even between attacks if the circumstances change. This indicates that the AC calculation CAN be recalculated all the time throughout the combat depending on circumstances.
So - since the rules say that a character can choose the formula used to calculate their AC (without stipulating when that choice occurs) AND the rules allow for the recalculation of AC during every round of combat and even between attacks due to effects like cover - it would seem reasonable that the choice of which AC formula to use can be made on an individual attack basis.
So, RAW, it is probably fine to choose which AC formula to use between attacks.
--------
HOWEVER :) ... doing so is very "meta" gamey ... from a character perspective, the character is deciding they want to be hit in order to continue raging since the conditions on that ability are make an attack or take damage.
Typically, a character would choose the highest AC available to them in order to avoid getting hurt. Would a raging character KNOW that they need to take some damage in order to continue raging? Is the character thinking, "I am engaging this enemy next to me but I want to run to dash to another part of the fight to help the wizard, but if I do that, I might lose my rage because I won't get hurt, I need to let the enemy hit me when I run away from them, so I will make it easier for them?" Personally, I don't really think that is a likely line of reasoning for a character affected by rage. Their choice is mostly to attack the adjacent enemy or run off to assist another character or perform another action and risk losing their rage.
Finally, the rules contain this comment:
"The AC of a character is determined at character creation, whereas the AC of a monster is in its stat block."
This is clearly incorrect since the AC of a character changes far more often than just at character creation. However, it could be read to mean that the choice of which AC formula a character wants to use is made at turning points in the character development when AC calculation methods may change. Without a clearer statement, the choice of AC formula could be made at any time, but I would probably disallow it in a game I was running since making yourself easier to hit during a combat would generally just not make sense from a character perspective. (It might be a great use of rules from a player perspective but isn't what a character would typically choose to do - "hurt me so I can stay angry while running away from you??").
i came to the same conclusion RAW as you did in my head i calculate AC on attack.
the next part is odd to me tho
as a trained and practiced fighter you would use whatever to maintain your edge. its not meta gamey to think your trained barbarian would just stop raging because they for some reason didnt think to get hit by an attack on purpose to the best of there ability. they have maintained there rage by being hit countless of times, they know it works so presenting yourself to get hit RAW makes perfect sense in the "meta" game and the RP game.
it makes sense if thats how the rules work and to the best of my knowledge we came to the same conclusion about the rules, but then for some reason you think that a Barbarian would not know on an instinctive level how combat works and to use that in game to there advantage because normally a character doesent want to be hit. a barbarian normally does want to be hit quite often to maintain there rage.
as i mention in another reply, a barbarian is just as smart wise and charismatic while raging they just are super strong and resilient and cant concentrate on spells. so they are just as tactical as anyone else.
*edit to include quote cause when i clicked reply it didnt do that.
Totally agree. People can be too fast on the draw to call something metagaming.
To be metagaming we'd have to accept several hard to swallow logic-pills.
• We'd have to accept that Barbarians don't understand what raging is.
• And they'd have not not know that the effects of raging are maintained when they're damaged.
That's... kinda nuts. You may as well try to tell us that wizards don't know what spells are. Or druids don't know what wildshape is.
Of course Barbarians know what raging is, and of couse they know it is maintained by sustaining damage.
That is their lived experience. They know it firsthand!!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
alot of people are focusing on my use case not my question talking about the Barbarian example that i was using and how they see my use case. that's not my question.
my question is when is AC calculated RAW. and does it preclude my use of the AC calculation for making an attack.
regardless of the barbarian thing (if rules help your class your class would know to take advantage of the world they live in to help themselves is the simplest explanation, you jump over a hole with the jump spell because you know the rules of the spell) I want to know when RAW AC is calculated.
If all the barbarian needs to do is get damaged to maintain their rage, and the character knows this and can take actions to ensure that they keep raging even when making a tactical move across the battlefield ... then why can't they stab themselves with a dagger or even a fork? What prevents a barbarian from keeping a razor blade at their belt for those times in combat when they want to move around without attacking but still want to rage (It could be an object interaction causing 1 hit point of damage)? Why would they have to try to let an opponent hit them by going to the extent of using a different and lower AC calculation for a specific attack?
If the rule was intended to operate as you suggest then the barbarian would have a method of self harm (or come up with one themselves) to maintain their rage even if someone else doesn't do damage to them and they don't attack.
The intent would appear to be that when the barbarian is in active combat every round, either attacking or being hit, that focus on combat fuels their rage. A brief lull, even for a few seconds, causes the rage to disappear which includes the barbarian taking actions that are tactical and remove them from the fight even for a brief time where they don't take damage or make an attack for a period of 6 seconds.
--------------
However, there is RAI and RAW. RAW, the barbarian just needs to take some damage.
Put a razor blade on your belt that you can use to cut yourself for 1 hp as an object interaction and keep your rage going if the character is doing something tactical. Or have a small knife handy to make an attack against yourself though this might take an attack action. Talk to your DM because RAW, the barbarian only needs to take some damage and there is no requirement that it is not self-inflicted or caused by environmental hazards. A raging barbarian could fall/jump off a 10' height taking d6 of falling damage keeping that rage going too.
Intentionally reducing the character's AC to make getting hit more likely is EXACTLY the same as self-inflicted damage. If you think it is ok for the barbarian to damage themselves to keep the rage going then there is no issue with reducing the character AC to make it more likely to take damage.
My personal take on it is that the damage taken by the barbarian is not intended to be self inflicted. However, the rules don't say that and perhaps the designers intended to allow self inflicted damage to sustain the character's rage but that is not explicit in the rules either way.
i did address this in another post.
but i appreciate your responses and your opinion is one i feel i should address directly as i care for you to continue giving it
you are equating if barbarians needed another way to maintain rage they would be given one, thats true but thats not my issue my issue is in how you use the existing rules to maintain rage. i can choose to run around 5 guys to provoke opportunity attacks to maintain my rage thats RAW and "meta" but fine. the same hold for making an attack and choosing my AC calculation as a barbarian i have that option RAW. just as "meta" and fine if thats how the RAW work in this world. i dont need to self harm altho i can punch myself or get someone to punch me that does not preclude using the world in clever ways to take damage. if theres a spike growth and i walk 5feet into it to take 1d4 damage then thats not "meta" thats using the rules of the world.
its not tho? "Intentionally reducing the character's AC to make getting hit more likely is EXACTLY the same as self-inflicted damage." self inflicting damage takes an action to make an attack on yourself, an AC calculation is a choice when you make your AC calculation.
my question is when is AC calculated RAW. and does it preclude my use of the AC calculation when making an attack.
regardless of the barbarian thing (if rules help your class your class would know to take advantage of the world they live in to help themselves is the simplest explanation, you jump over a hole with the jump spell because you know the rules of the spell) I want to know when RAW AC is calculated.
The question "When is your AC calculated" is the wrong question.
You AC is calculated whenever you first get something that says it does something to your AC. Put on armor? Immediately calculate AC. Hide behind cover? Immediately calculate AC. Gain a class feature that adds AC? Immediately calculate AC.
So you calc the AC any time, every time something adds or changes your AC.
But that isn't what you wanna know. Because you already know what your two AC scores are. And, to be sure, the barbarian does have two AC scores. Both of them should already be fully calculated.
You wanna know if you can swap between them. And the answer is: Yes. The rules says you get to pick which one you ise if you have more than one.
Which means... you get to choose which one to use.
This shouldn't be controversial. If it says you can choose which one, you do indeed get to choose which one. It really is that straightforward.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
k but what if I choose my barbarian unarmored ac 17 for one attack and I want to lower my Ac so I choose my draconic resilience for ac 15 fr another attack? (5 con and 2 dex mods) (I know bad combo but it works for base ac, lizardfolk, loxodon, or wildshape natural armor. the point stands)
The attack action says you calculate player AC to see if the attack hits at character creation. Character creation armor class page 14 says you can choose, as does sage advice in the character creation section.
RAW I read this as everytime you call for an attack action that you need to calculate your ac. If you have multiple features or calculations then you choose.
The people I'm playing with tell me that's not how ac calculation works.
Am I out to lunch?
Obviously a creature needs to be able to choose which AC calculation to use when they don or doff armor at a minimum. If this were not the case armor would be meaningless as after a creature dons armor they would still be stuck with the AC calculation they were using before they donned the armor.
I feel the question that should be asked instead is why would you want to change AC calculations for every attack that targets you?
While not exactly the same thing it is not unheard of for a DM to allow a creature to willingly fail a saving throw. - https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/708009718757720064
The why was I wanted a reaction attack to hit me when I walked by a NPC as a barbarian to keep my rage up.
So in my head when you attack you calculate your to hit and your ac and if one equals the other then boom hit.
I said I'm going to use my unarmored ac for this so it's 12 and I have a higher chance to get hit.
The way I always read the rules in my head was the trigger to calculating AC was done when it needs to be and one of those times in when the attack action is taken.
As you brought up when you don or doff armor you can change your calculations to.
The rules don't clearly specify when you calculate your AC but it should be whenever a new way to calculate your AC comes up, generally when you put or remove an armor or gain a feature letting you do so.
Picking which AC calculation method to use at-will between attacks in a combat seem counter-intuitive since generally a character calculate AC in the most beneficial way so all this book keeping would be to its detriment. But AC can change during combat under certain circumstances such as when a character no longer have aa shield or armor, such as when affected by a rust monster or Black pudding for example.
The only restriction that appears in the rules is:
"If you have multiple features that give you different ways to calculate your AC, you choose which one to use."
When is the AC of a charcter determined?
"If the total of the roll plus modifiers equals or exceeds the target’s Armor Class (AC), the attack hits."
The AC is determined when the attack is resolved. The AC can be modified by elements like cover.
"A target with half cover has a +2
bonus to AC and Dexterity saving throws."
Half cover does not provide a to hit modifier - it provides an AC modifier. This modifier can change every round and potentially even between attacks if the circumstances change. This indicates that the AC calculation CAN be recalculated all the time throughout the combat depending on circumstances.
So - since the rules say that a character can choose the formula used to calculate their AC (without stipulating when that choice occurs) AND the rules allow for the recalculation of AC during every round of combat and even between attacks due to effects like cover - it would seem reasonable that the choice of which AC formula to use can be made on an individual attack basis.
So, RAW, it is probably fine to choose which AC formula to use between attacks.
--------
HOWEVER :) ... doing so is very "meta" gamey ... from a character perspective, the character is deciding they want to be hit in order to continue raging since the conditions on that ability are make an attack or take damage.
Typically, a character would choose the highest AC available to them in order to avoid getting hurt. Would a raging character KNOW that they need to take some damage in order to continue raging? Is the character thinking, "I am engaging this enemy next to me but I want to run to dash to another part of the fight to help the wizard, but if I do that, I might lose my rage because I won't get hurt, I need to let the enemy hit me when I run away from them, so I will make it easier for them?" Personally, I don't really think that is a likely line of reasoning for a character affected by rage. Their choice is mostly to attack the adjacent enemy or run off to assist another character or perform another action and risk losing their rage.
Finally, the rules contain this comment:
"The AC of a character is determined at character creation, whereas the AC of a monster is in its stat block."
This is clearly incorrect since the AC of a character changes far more often than just at character creation. However, it could be read to mean that the choice of which AC formula a character wants to use is made at turning points in the character development when AC calculation methods may change. Without a clearer statement, the choice of AC formula could be made at any time, but I would probably disallow it in a game I was running since making yourself easier to hit during a combat would generally just not make sense from a character perspective. (It might be a great use of rules from a player perspective but isn't what a character would typically choose to do - "hurt me so I can stay angry while running away from you??").
Not sure why you feel the need to get hit; if you’re free to move, why can’t you attack to keep Rage up?
They more than likely want to keep rage up between fights.
dropping some armor from their AC just makes it easier for a friendly character to hit them and try to keep the rage going.
Rage doesn’t last long enough to do that, it’s only 1 minute long at present. It’s essentially a single-encounter per use ability.
my character needed to get to an enemy in battle and i couldn't get to them without using my dash as an action. it was half way through the fight so i needed my rage up and it was a viable tactic i could use with in game rules which my barbarian understands when it comes to battle.
other people have suggested that you wouldnt know to get hit to maintain your rage? but thats silly barbarians arnt dumb there keen and honed fighters "In battle, you fight with primal ferocity." no where does it say your INT WIS or CHA is lowered? you keep your senses you just cant concentrate on spells.
*edit to include quote cause when i clicked reply it didnt do that.
i came to the same conclusion RAW as you did in my head i calculate AC on attack.
the next part is odd to me tho
as a trained and practiced fighter you would use whatever to maintain your edge. its not meta gamey to think your trained barbarian would just stop raging because they for some reason didnt think to get hit by an attack on purpose to the best of there ability. they have maintained there rage by being hit countless of times, they know it works so presenting yourself to get hit RAW makes perfect sense in the "meta" game and the RP game.
it makes sense if thats how the rules work and to the best of my knowledge we came to the same conclusion about the rules, but then for some reason you think that a Barbarian would not know on an instinctive level how combat works and to use that in game to there advantage because normally a character doesent want to be hit. a barbarian normally does want to be hit quite often to maintain there rage.
as i mention in another reply, a barbarian is just as smart wise and charismatic while raging they just are super strong and resilient and cant concentrate on spells. so they are just as tactical as anyone else.
*edit to include quote cause when i clicked reply it didnt do that.
Frankly, imo this is a scenario where you just have to accept that you’re risking dropping Rage early. There’s a reason they set those end conditions on it. Plus, so long as you’d taken some damage over the past turn you’d be good. If you really ended up in a scenario where you had the choice between spending your Action on something that risked ending Rage early or attacking a creature within range, honestly them’s just the breaks from my perspective. Trying to toggle AC features mid combat to get around it is way too meta.
in the physical Essentials kit rule book it removed the "The AC of a character is determined at character creation, whereas the AC of a monster is in its stat block." in the making an attack section and just refers to "armor Class (AC)" in the same vernacular as Armor Class(AC) that comes up in the previous chapter. no more AC of a character is determined at character creation just a chapter with AC calculations and a making an attack that calls back to the AC calculation.
im assuming they did that because its clearly incorrect that its "only" calculated at character creation as most people assume. It means the essentials Kit backs up my assumption that The PHB is "calling back" to the character creation section to calculate the AC based on that calculation as its the only place in the book that has the AC calculation.
It is weird to quote a tweet that says no rules allow you to do a thing while presenting as if it was a tweet that allows you to do that thing.
You can't willingly fail a save.
Can a DM homebrew otherwise? Obviously yes. But not according to the rules. Which is what this tweet even confirms.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
If all the barbarian needs to do is get damaged to maintain their rage, and the character knows this and can take actions to ensure that they keep raging even when making a tactical move across the battlefield ... then why can't they stab themselves with a dagger or even a fork? What prevents a barbarian from keeping a razor blade at their belt for those times in combat when they want to move around without attacking but still want to rage (It could be an object interaction causing 1 hit point of damage)? Why would they have to try to let an opponent hit them by going to the extent of using a different and lower AC calculation for a specific attack?
If the rule was intended to operate as you suggest then the barbarian would have a method of self harm (or come up with one themselves) to maintain their rage even if someone else doesn't do damage to them and they don't attack.
The intent would appear to be that when the barbarian is in active combat every round, either attacking or being hit, that focus on combat fuels their rage. A brief lull, even for a few seconds, causes the rage to disappear which includes the barbarian taking actions that are tactical and remove them from the fight even for a brief time where they don't take damage or make an attack for a period of 6 seconds.
--------------
However, there is RAI and RAW. RAW, the barbarian just needs to take some damage.
Put a razor blade on your belt that you can use to cut yourself for 1 hp as an object interaction and keep your rage going if the character is doing something tactical. Or have a small knife handy to make an attack against yourself though this might take an attack action. Talk to your DM because RAW, the barbarian only needs to take some damage and there is no requirement that it is not self-inflicted or caused by environmental hazards. A raging barbarian could fall/jump off a 10' height taking d6 of falling damage keeping that rage going too.
Intentionally reducing the character's AC to make getting hit more likely is EXACTLY the same as self-inflicted damage. If you think it is ok for the barbarian to damage themselves to keep the rage going then there is no issue with reducing the character AC to make it more likely to take damage.
My personal take on it is that the damage taken by the barbarian is not intended to be self inflicted. However, the rules don't say that and perhaps the designers intended to allow self inflicted damage to sustain the character's rage but that is not explicit in the rules either way.
You can't choose to fail a save nor can you choose to let an attack hit you. Neither of these are options presented by the 5e rules.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Totally agree. People can be too fast on the draw to call something metagaming.
To be metagaming we'd have to accept several hard to swallow logic-pills.
• We'd have to accept that Barbarians don't understand what raging is.
• And they'd have not not know that the effects of raging are maintained when they're damaged.
That's... kinda nuts. You may as well try to tell us that wizards don't know what spells are. Or druids don't know what wildshape is.
Of course Barbarians know what raging is, and of couse they know it is maintained by sustaining damage.
That is their lived experience. They know it firsthand!!
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
alot of people are focusing on my use case not my question talking about the Barbarian example that i was using and how they see my use case. that's not my question.
my question is when is AC calculated RAW. and does it preclude my use of the AC calculation for making an attack.
regardless of the barbarian thing (if rules help your class your class would know to take advantage of the world they live in to help themselves is the simplest explanation, you jump over a hole with the jump spell because you know the rules of the spell) I want to know when RAW AC is calculated.
I would say your AC is calculated when you don or doff armor or an ability score changes so that your AC might change.
i did address this in another post.
but i appreciate your responses and your opinion is one i feel i should address directly as i care for you to continue giving it
you are equating if barbarians needed another way to maintain rage they would be given one, thats true but thats not my issue my issue is in how you use the existing rules to maintain rage. i can choose to run around 5 guys to provoke opportunity attacks to maintain my rage thats RAW and "meta" but fine. the same hold for making an attack and choosing my AC calculation as a barbarian i have that option RAW. just as "meta" and fine if thats how the RAW work in this world. i dont need to self harm altho i can punch myself or get someone to punch me that does not preclude using the world in clever ways to take damage. if theres a spike growth and i walk 5feet into it to take 1d4 damage then thats not "meta" thats using the rules of the world.
its not tho? "Intentionally reducing the character's AC to make getting hit more likely is EXACTLY the same as self-inflicted damage." self inflicting damage takes an action to make an attack on yourself, an AC calculation is a choice when you make your AC calculation.
my question is when is AC calculated RAW. and does it preclude my use of the AC calculation when making an attack.
regardless of the barbarian thing (if rules help your class your class would know to take advantage of the world they live in to help themselves is the simplest explanation, you jump over a hole with the jump spell because you know the rules of the spell) I want to know when RAW AC is calculated.
The question "When is your AC calculated" is the wrong question.
You AC is calculated whenever you first get something that says it does something to your AC. Put on armor? Immediately calculate AC. Hide behind cover? Immediately calculate AC. Gain a class feature that adds AC? Immediately calculate AC.
So you calc the AC any time, every time something adds or changes your AC.
But that isn't what you wanna know. Because you already know what your two AC scores are. And, to be sure, the barbarian does have two AC scores. Both of them should already be fully calculated.
You wanna know if you can swap between them. And the answer is: Yes. The rules says you get to pick which one you ise if you have more than one.
Which means... you get to choose which one to use.
This shouldn't be controversial. If it says you can choose which one, you do indeed get to choose which one. It really is that straightforward.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.