I was looking for the statement of how to deal with when there are multiple ways to compute AC, and found only the rules in the multiclassing section:
If you have multiple ways to calculate your Armor Class, you can benefit from only one at a time. For example, a Monk/Sorcerer with a Monk’s Unarmored Defense feature and a Sorcerer’s Draconic Resilience feature must choose only one of those features as a way to calculate Armor Class.
Does that mean this only applies if you are multi classed? I doubt that is the intent. As of now, in purely 2024 rules maybe the only ways to calculate armor classes differently come from different classes, but there are species that give other ways in older sourcebooks too.
Most rules' contextual place indicates what they apply to. i.e. multiclassing rules only apply to multiclassing character just like druid rules only apply to druid characters, etc.
I was looking for the statement of how to deal with when there are multiple ways to compute AC, and found only the rules in the multiclassing section:
If you have multiple ways to calculate your Armor Class, you can benefit from only one at a time. For example, a Monk/Sorcerer with a Monk’s Unarmored Defense feature and a Sorcerer’s Draconic Resilience feature must choose only one of those features as a way to calculate Armor Class.
Does that mean this only applies if you are multi classed? I doubt that is the intent. As of now, in purely 2024 rules maybe the only ways to calculate armor classes differently come from different classes, but there are species that give other ways in older sourcebooks too.
It's also a general rules in the Glossary for Armor Class,:
Armor Class
An Armor Class (AC) is the target number for an attack roll. AC represents how difficult it is to hit a target.
Your base AC calculation is 10 plus your Dexterity modifier. If a rule gives you another base AC calculation, you choose which calculation to use; you can’t use more than one. See also “Attack Roll.”
Again, the question isn’t about that. The question is “Where is the statement of this rule for characters other than multi-classed characters?” Plague answered it.
I do not misunderstand the rules for how each AC is calculated or whether they stack. But in the old rules, that same type of statement I posted in the OP is in the general rules of the game. Now it isn’t in the text of how to play or how to make a character, and I didn’t realize it was in the glossary. I wondered if it only appeared in the multiclass rules.
It doesn’t matter that you don’t think you need that rule, it is a rule anyway, and it is there for someone. Whether AC calculations stack is an often asked question on these forums. Just like whether Extra Attack stacks. Yet we still have that rule.
Anyway, thanks again to Plague for understanding the assignment.
I am with Ace on this while the specfication that you can only use one calculation is mostly there for clarity. The class / race features make stacking impossible, the extra information makes it clear that if you have two different ACs you can choose which calculation to use rather than having an undefined AC if the calculations concradict.
For example a monk it says: "While you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a Shield, your base Armor Class equals 10 plus your Dexterity and Wisdom modifiers." So if a monk has Dex 18 and Wis 16 whenever thay are not wearing armr their AC is 17.
For an Autognome it says "While you aren’t wearing armor, your base Armor Class is 13 + your Dexterity modifier.", it does not say you can add 3 to your AC it says it is 13+dex.
The potential issue then becomes an Autognome Monk with Dex 18 and Wis 16 has one feature that says their AC is 17 and one feature that says their AC is 16, but it can not be both 16 and 17 at the same time so the rules contradict. This contradiction is resolved by the rule Plague ponted to saying you can choose which rule ot use. The point that you cannot benefit by more than one calculation is strictly speaking unnecessary but does clarify because people like you have got confused when it isn't there.
I do not misunderstand the rules for how each AC is calculated or whether they stack.
I was asking if a statement that was meant for every character only appears in the multi-class rules because I hadn't seen it in a place that applies to everyone. Plague showed me where it appears for all characters.
I'm surprised at how many responses here don't get what the question is about.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I was looking for the statement of how to deal with when there are multiple ways to compute AC, and found only the rules in the multiclassing section:
Does that mean this only applies if you are multi classed? I doubt that is the intent. As of now, in purely 2024 rules maybe the only ways to calculate armor classes differently come from different classes, but there are species that give other ways in older sourcebooks too.
There’s nothing in the wording that is specific to multiclassed characters, so it looks like the intent is the same as the 2014 rule.
Most rules' contextual place indicates what they apply to. i.e. multiclassing rules only apply to multiclassing character just like druid rules only apply to druid characters, etc.
It's also a general rules in the Glossary for Armor Class,:
It doesn't actually matter if there's a specific piece of text saying it. Abilities that set your base AC are inherently contradictory.
What you are saying is the rule is redundant, which isn't what I asked.
Luckily Plague was around to deal with the actual question at hand.
Rule Zero, 2024 version: don’t forget the Gloasary!
What is being said is that no matter how you attempt to phrase the question, you cannot stack multiple AC formulae.
Again, the question isn’t about that. The question is “Where is the statement of this rule for characters other than multi-classed characters?” Plague answered it.
I do not misunderstand the rules for how each AC is calculated or whether they stack. But in the old rules, that same type of statement I posted in the OP is in the general rules of the game. Now it isn’t in the text of how to play or how to make a character, and I didn’t realize it was in the glossary. I wondered if it only appeared in the multiclass rules.
It doesn’t matter that you don’t think you need that rule, it is a rule anyway, and it is there for someone. Whether AC calculations stack is an often asked question on these forums. Just like whether Extra Attack stacks. Yet we still have that rule.
Anyway, thanks again to Plague for understanding the assignment.
I am with Ace on this while the specfication that you can only use one calculation is mostly there for clarity. The class / race features make stacking impossible, the extra information makes it clear that if you have two different ACs you can choose which calculation to use rather than having an undefined AC if the calculations concradict.
For example a monk it says: "While you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a Shield, your base Armor Class equals 10 plus your Dexterity and Wisdom modifiers." So if a monk has Dex 18 and Wis 16 whenever thay are not wearing armr their AC is 17.
For an Autognome it says "While you aren’t wearing armor, your base Armor Class is 13 + your Dexterity modifier.", it does not say you can add 3 to your AC it says it is 13+dex.
The potential issue then becomes an Autognome Monk with Dex 18 and Wis 16 has one feature that says their AC is 17 and one feature that says their AC is 16, but it can not be both 16 and 17 at the same time so the rules contradict. This contradiction is resolved by the rule Plague ponted to saying you can choose which rule ot use. The point that you cannot benefit by more than one calculation is strictly speaking unnecessary but does clarify because people like you have got confused when it isn't there.
I was asking if a statement that was meant for every character only appears in the multi-class rules because I hadn't seen it in a place that applies to everyone. Plague showed me where it appears for all characters.
I'm surprised at how many responses here don't get what the question is about.