Question about that Con to AC Thing

[BHodges3]

I keep hearing people refer to this new feat for Barbarians that allows them to use their CON modifier or something. It is supposedly really powerful and just came out. I have just created my first 4E character and it is a Goliath Barbarian. What I need to know is does this feat require a specific level or something? If not, can I pick it up for my feat at second level?

FYI, I am wearing the normal hide armor. I thought I remember someone saying something about that being a requirement or something.

[sofawall]

It was Con to AC or some such thing. Not much of a 4e fan, so I know little about it. Just remember it coming up.

[oxybe]

it's a feat in the primal power sourcebook, i forget what it's called but it allows a primal character to substitute Con instead of Dex when wearing Hide armor.

[Optimystik]

It was Con to AC or some such thing. Not much of a 4e fan, so I know little about it. Just remember it coming up.

I'm glad its Con to AC. Con to attack makes no sense, unless you're falling on your enemies all the time or something.

[oxybe]

I'm glad its Con to AC. Con to attack makes no sense, unless you're falling on your enemies all the time or something.

well, warlocks in 4th ed use con on some of their attacks to hit, mostly those in the infernal path if memory serves.

[NeoVid]

I'm glad its Con to AC. Con to attack makes no sense, unless you're falling on your enemies all the time or something.

There's been a feat that lets you use Con (or any stat) for basic attacks for a while now.

And the defensive feat in question is Hide Armor Expertise, I believe. It's stupidly good for Barbarians. And it's heroic level.

[BHodges3]

Heroic level? Is that the level 11 and up one?

[Boci]

Heroic level? Is that the level 11 and up one?

Thats paragon. Heroic is 1-10.

[Optimystik]

well, warlocks in 4th ed use con on some of their attacks to hit, mostly those in the infernal path if memory serves.

That does make sense for warlocks, given that they got Con to damage even in 3.5 (via Hellfire Warlock, in a way.)

There's been a feat that lets you use Con (or any stat) for basic attacks for a while now.

STR and DEX I can understand, even INT and WIS. CON and CHA, not so much, "Elan's fancy prestige class notwithstanding."

[Xefas]

STR and DEX I can understand, even INT and WIS. CON and CHA, not so much, "Elan's fancy prestige class notwithstanding."

You can't see being able to use Charisma to make it easier to hit someone? What about feinting in 3rd edition? That used charisma (well, Bluff, but having a high charisma made it easier to hit them via a bluff modifier). Its just your ability to read body language, disguise your own, and fake them out.

Constitution...I can't think of off the top of my head.

[oxybe]

using con to attack is more like simply walking into the enemy's attack to get a better hit then anything else. i've seen it done in movies and other works where the hero simply takes a hit as to get the enemy inside his attack.

con based characters are a LOT tougher then any other, each pt of con gaining you 1 extra hp and every 2 points above 10 and extra surge. this kind of character can afford to be a bit more reckless with his attacks.

[Spiryt]

You guys are saying that that you don't see how good shape, endurance, efficiency, healthy body, limbs, lungs, blood system, pain endurance and all other stuff helps in:
waving axe around, lunging, pushing, jaunting, bashing, wrestling, and all other forms of intense physical recreations in fighting (especially in D&D when character often are doing this stuff all day around)?

Seems rather straightforward to me.

[The Glyphstone]

That's called HP and Fort saves though. Good shape, endurance, efficiency, healthy body, limbs, lungs, blood system, pain endurance and all other stuff helps you take hits better, but with the feat, it...makes you hit things more accurately?

Granted, I play a Dragon Magic Sorcerer, who kills people by flexing his awesome muscles at them, so I can't complain.

[Boci]

That's called HP and Fort saves though. Good shape, endurance, efficiency, healthy body, limbs, lungs, blood system, pain endurance and all other stuff helps you take hits better, but with the feat, it...makes you hit things more accurately?

I guess you could argue his pain endurance allows him to focus more...

[sentaku]

That's called HP and Fort saves though. Good shape, endurance, efficiency, healthy body, limbs, lungs, blood system, pain endurance and all other stuff helps you take hits better, but with the feat, it...makes you hit things more accurately?

Granted, I play a Dragon Magic Sorcerer, who kills people by flexing his awesome muscles at them, so I can't complain.

It's much easier to hit things when said things is holding onto his sword that's stabbed through your chest* since their mobility is limited.

*a flesh wound

[The Glyphstone]

It's much easier to hit things when said things is holding onto his sword that's stabbed through your chest* since their mobility is limited.

*a flesh wound

This explanation is acceptable to me.

[Spiryt]

That's called HP and Fort saves though. Good shape, endurance, efficiency, healthy body, limbs, lungs, blood system, pain endurance and all other stuff helps you take hits better, but with the feat, it...makes you hit things more accurately?

Granted, I play a Dragon Magic Sorcerer, who kills people by flexing his awesome muscles at them, so I can't complain.

When you think that way, many things about it don't make sense, and something else can be always applied...

But this ^ sentence can describe almost anything in D&D. I would say it doesn't have to be perfectly logical to be fun.

And won't be beacuse it's only simulation. And a very simple one.

[Noble Savant]

Combat in DnD has always been abstract. 4e has cut down on that a bit, but even now, an exchange of blows is a longer process then you would think. A character with a high Con can continue to fight at full vigor for much longer then his weak chested opponents. Thus, when they are tuckered out from the exchange of blows, he lands a solid hit.

[Kylarra]

I've always fluffed Melee Training (stat) feats to be you utilizing your power source to aid your combat prowess, much like self-buffing. So Melee Training (Con) for your infernal-warlocks is drawing upon eldritch power to guide your attacks, or somesuch.

[Dingle]

So... Shock trooper lets you trade ac for damage. AC can come from con twice (fist of the forest, deepwarden) or you can just use con for hp to take the hit.

[BHodges3]

Ok. Thanks for all of the replies. We just had another session as level 2 characters and completed a level 5 encounter... barely. We leveled up to 3 and as such didn't earn a feat. My question is this, when I use the Character Builder app, I am not seeing Hide Armor Expertise as an option for a future feat. Has is not been included in the updates yet?

[Kurald Galain]

STR and DEX I can understand, even INT and WIS. CON and CHA, not so much, "Elan's fancy prestige class notwithstanding."

It's about balance, not about realism.

Having a high str score doesn't have to mean your character is strong, it just means he is good at basic attacks and e.g. fighter powers. Conversely, a bard or warlock character can just say he's strong because he's got a high cha score; fluff is mutable, and cha means physical might if you say it does.

[Optimystik]

You can't see being able to use Charisma to make it easier to hit someone? What about feinting in 3rd edition? That used charisma (well, Bluff, but having a high charisma made it easier to hit them via a bluff modifier). Its just your ability to read body language, disguise your own, and fake them out.

Yes, but that sounds more like debuffing the enemy (read: lowering their AC) than buffing your own attack. The "Taunt" skill in NWN does something very similar. The result is mathematically identical, but fluffwise it makes more sense that way.

It's much easier to hit things when said things is holding onto his sword that's stabbed through your chest* since their mobility is limited.

*a flesh wound

Shouldn't the opposite be true, then? A character that's been hit and has a negative CON modifier becomes bleary-eyed with pain and can't hold his sword as well?

In addition, large amounts of pain can actually improve focus by staving off shock. How many fantasy novels have we seen where some elite fighter embraces their pain, and suddenly wins an otherwise insurmountable encounter?

EDIT:

It's about balance, not about realism.

Having a high str score doesn't have to mean your character is strong, it just means he is good at basic attacks and e.g. fighter powers. Conversely, a bard or warlock character can just say he's strong because he's got a high cha score; fluff is mutable, and cha means physical might if you say it does.

I don't know 4E very well. Does strength no longer correspond mechanically to the ability to lift things, bend bars and hit hard? I was speaking more about general D&D than just 4E anyway.

[Clementx]

This explanation is acceptable to me.

This is one of the few times I feel Naruto did something better (and earlier).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o85fg...eature=related

[Kurald Galain]

I don't know 4E very well. Does strength no longer correspond mechanically to the ability to lift things, bend bars and hit hard?

That depends.

Regarding lifting things, the player's handbook states that encumbrance from your equipment doesn't matter.

Bending bars would most likely be a skill check. While athletics (based on the str score) is a possible candidate, it is equally plausible for a character to attempt to bend bars using his thievery skill (based on dex) or his knowledge of dungeoneering (based on wis). It's not hard to think up a case for e.g. con or int, either.

Concerning hitting hard, fighters hit hard if they have a high str score. On the other hand, other classes are equally likely to hit hard if they have a high dex (e.g. rogues), con (e.g. warlocks), int (swordmages), wis (avengers) or cha (bards).

So overall, no ability score corresponds to the ability to lift things, and all ability scores correspond equally to bending bars and to hitting hard, depending on what character is trying to do that.

[hamishspence]

But it also states that the amount you can lift (in pounds) wiithout penalty is equal to 10 times your Strength, that the amount you can "just lift" with penalties, is equal to 20 times your strength, and so on.

So there is a reference to Strength (and only Strength) being involved in "lifting things"

[Optimystik]

That depends.

Regarding lifting things, the player's handbook states that encumbrance from your equipment doesn't matter.

By encumbrance, do you mean carrying capacity? Meaning a wizard in 4E can stuff, say, 8 shields in his mundane backpack without worrying?

Bending bars would most likely be a skill check. While athletics (based on the str score) is a possible candidate, it is equally plausible for a character to attempt to bend bars using his thievery skill (based on dex) or his knowledge of dungeoneering (based on wis). It's not hard to think up a case for e.g. con or int, either.

For the non-strength skills, you're not really bending the bars in those cases. Thievery would imply contorting or otherwise slipping your arm past them to whatever they might be guarding. Dungeoneering would tell you the best place to apply your strength (or dexterity,) but that's it. Knowing the optimal place to lift a barbell doesn't help me much if its simply too heavy for me.

Concerning hitting hard, fighters hit hard if they have a high str score. On the other hand, other classes are equally likely to hit hard if they have a high dex (e.g. rogues), con (e.g. warlocks), int (swordmages), wis (avengers) or cha (bards).

Warlocks in 4E (from what I've read) basically turn their life force into laser beams. CON to damage therefore makes sense for them.

A barbarian can't do that, which was my original confusion with the now-altered OP's post. Your other examples - swordmage, avenger etc. - do make sense to me, as knowing where to hit an enemy can translate both to a greater chance to hit and a greater amount of hurt applied. But CON seems to only make sense if applied via some paranormal means, like an eldritch blast.

[PhoenixRivers]

That's called HP and Fort saves though. Good shape, endurance, efficiency, healthy body, limbs, lungs, blood system, pain endurance and all other stuff helps you take hits better, but with the feat, it...makes you hit things more accurately?

Granted, I play a Dragon Magic Sorcerer, who kills people by flexing his awesome muscles at them, so I can't complain.

It's a phenomenon known as "gassing" in MMA. You see it often. Fighters that aren't as well conditioned pushing too hard, and wearing themselves out quickly. Then their attacks turn to the type that rookies can block.

And you see people with supreme endurance, pushing harder, throwing more energy into the fight, forcing the enemy to do the same, until he starts to tire... Until his hands drop just a bit. Then they capitalize on the opening.

In other words, Con to hit is about putting more energy into the feints, so that the feint strikes sting, drain a little energy at a time out... You can take the sting. You do it to expose that weakness, so you can capitalize.

[Asbestos]

Not this argument again! I like the bit about melée training representing using your powersource to help you fight in the more basic sense. Also, using Dungeoneering or Thievery to bend bars??? Maybe to find a weakness in those bars, but not to physically bend them.

Btw, isn't the only class that uses CON as thier primary attack stat the Warlock?

[Kurald Galain]

By encumbrance, do you mean carrying capacity? Meaning a wizard in 4E can stuff, say, 8 shields in his mundane backpack without worrying?

Yes. I'd say it beats the 2E system, where you have a movement rate of 12 until you carry 100 points, then 11 until you carry 120 pounds, then 10 and so forth until zero.

For the non-strength skills, you're not really bending the bars in those cases.

Sure it would, MacGyver style. If I use ropes, pulleys and a crowbar to bend bars, it's easy to make this a legit use of the thievery skill. Incidentally, this usage of thievery also gets the rest of the party through.

Knowing the optimal place to lift a barbell doesn't help me much if its simply too heavy for me.

Sure. But if your task is lifting a barbell, then you can also accomplish that using e.g. endurance (con) or bluff (cha). You can also make a case for acrobatics (dex), heal (wis) and history (int) as well, perhaps as an assist.

The point is that it is never just one attribute, or only one skill, that can be used to bypass an obstacle: because that means that the characters that do not possess that attribute or skill cannot participate in that challenge, and it means that parties lacking that attribute or skill will be unable to pass it.

Warlocks in 4E (from what I've read) basically turn their life force into laser beams.

Really? I'm not sure where you read that, because none of their powers acts like a laser beam, and very few of those powers actually drain their life force. But yes, it's paranormal. But then, all characters are assumed to be not normal, because they're the heroes. A dwarf defensive fighter could conceivably take a feat to use his con score for his basic attack rolls, while remaining a purely martial (non-arcane) character.