If i may say so you have a very poor example, i was obviously talking about BG1 or early amn, not a fire giant.
The difference between AC 1 and AC -3 in BG1 is huge. Much better choice than +2 damage and +1 thac0. But if you got -8 AC in BG1 you really won't need those -4 as much to reach -12.
If you're up against a fire giant we're talking about -20 or -24.
And if we do follow the "Offense is the best defense" then you would need a pair of gloves with Thac0 +4 to replace the Gauntlets of Dexterity. While the damage is nice it's the Thac0 and AC that makes the difference here, as it's the difference between getting hit for 20 damage and actually taking a hit for 20 damage.
And i have noticed your skills when it comes to mathematics in earlier threads, which i have to say are very insightful and entertaining to read as well
@bengoshi mentioned TOB. Hence it is not unreasonable to use a TOB example. Neither did you explicity specify whether it is BG, SOA or TOB.
It is an egregious reasoning error to claim that you need THAC0 +4 gauntlets to replace AC -4 gauntlets. Monster THAC0 is matched against your AC. Your THAC0 is matched against monster AC. All four numbers are basically independent of one another. Hence, imposing a strict +1 for +1 bonus exchange ratio does not make sense. In short, your example is comparing apples to oranges.
As I mentioned earlier, due to inconsistent value of the +4 AC bonus to character defense, it is not unreasonable (emphasis mine) for a player to opt for offense gauntlets. A player needs to choose an equip depending on his assessment of the situation in his game, and AC may still be the better deal, depending on how the player sees it. It is not a "offense always better" or "AC always better" situation.
My point is simply that making a hard claim that the AC bonus is "obviously more useful", when it can be demonstrated that it is not "obviously more useful" in various circumstances, is not beneficial to enhancing understanding on both sides, nor does it promote experimentation.
But otherwise, I can agree with your conclusions by and large.
If i may say so you have a very poor example, i was obviously talking about BG1 or early amn, not a fire giant.
The difference between AC 1 and AC -3 in BG1 is huge. Much better choice than +2 damage and +1 thac0. But if you got -8 AC in BG1 you really won't need those -4 as much to reach -12.
If you're up against a fire giant we're talking about -20 or -24.
And if we do follow the "Offense is the best defense" then you would need a pair of gloves with Thac0 +4 to replace the Gauntlets of Dexterity. While the damage is nice it's the Thac0 and AC that makes the difference here, as it's the difference between getting hit for 20 damage and actually taking a hit for 20 damage.
And i have noticed your skills when it comes to mathematics in earlier threads, which i have to say are very insightful and entertaining to read as well
@bengoshi mentioned TOB. Hence it is not unreasonable to use a TOB example. Neither did you explicity specify whether it is BG, SOA or TOB.
It is an egregious reasoning error to claim that you need THAC0 +4 gauntlets to replace AC -4 gauntlets. Monster THAC0 is matched against your AC. Your THAC0 is matched against monster AC. All four numbers are basically independent of one another. Hence, imposing a strict +1 for +1 bonus exchange ratio does not make sense. In short, your example is comparing apples to oranges.
As I mentioned earlier, due to inconsistent value of the +4 AC bonus to character defense, it is not unreasonable (emphasis mine) for a player to opt for offense gauntlets. A player needs to choose an equip depending on his assessment of the situation in his game, and AC may still be the better deal, depending on how the player sees it. It is not a "offense always better" or "AC always better" situation.
My point is simply that making a hard claim that the AC bonus is "obviously more useful", when it can be demonstrated that it is not "obviously more useful" in various circumstances, is not beneficial to enhancing understanding on both sides, nor does it promote experimentation.
But otherwise, I can agree with your conclusions by and large.
The reason i brought up the Thac0 was that it's the only way those gloves will make a difference when it comes to "Offense is the best defense". While the damage is nice it's not going to make that much of a difference unless you're an archer.
There is no way you're sitting with 1 AC in ToB so it really is that obvious.
If you're going up against a golem or any powerful fighter those +2 damage isn't going to make a difference when you're both dealing 20-30 damage a hit, so it comes down to AC and Thac0. In this case the Gauntlets of Dexterity on for an example Keldorn would be much more useful than the gauntlets with +2 damage / +1 thac0.
And let's remember that if you're fighting against several creatures, you'll still only get +1 Thac0 +2 damage against ONE of them, while you'll have +4 AC vs all of them.
It depends on what type of gear you have to start with, and if you're in melee or an archer. But if you look at an early Keldorn or Ajantis the Gauntlets of Dexterity will be much more useful than +2 damage +1 Thac0.
Well this is going to be the last post for me when it comes to this subject.
I prefer not getting hit to taking damage so I would always max DEX. I also think the best form of defence is attack so I would rather wear Gauntlets of Weapon Expertise (THACO +1, Damage +2) and get the most from the weapons instead of wasting the slot on Gauntlets of Dexterity.
Moreover, even late in the game in ToB having a high AC matters. There are some pretty decent melee and ranged enemies there and just 2 points of AC can mean the difference between them having a 5% or 15% chance to hit your character.
Also, it worth mentioning that a 9 (or less) Dex thief is given some negative skills.
I agree with what you say other than the best form of defense is to attack.
You'll deal 2 more damage with those gauntlets.
The golem will hit you for 25+ damage every time it hits.
Doesn't take a mathematician to see how much more useful those 4 AC will be than that 2 damage.
I guess it depends on several factors, what your AC is from the start, who you're fighting etc.
Going from -8 to -12 AC isn't that big.
Going from 1 AC to -3 is critical.
[Edited] : Not to mention we can see with the mage/sorcerer that the best type of defense is actually to protect yourself, as they are the most powerful classes in the game because they can make themselves very hard to hit or even immune to things.
Yes but @Bengoshi said that he would max Dex at character creation so his charnames won't have use for the gauntlets fo dex and thus won't have have to decide between those gauntlets and the gauntlets of weapon expertise. On a less dexterous character I'd also use the gauntlets of Dex.
For fifteen years I have thought that gauntlets of dexterity had the additional feature of lowering AC, just not mentioned in description for some reason. Point and laugh, people. Point and laugh.
In fact, have Yoshimo and Valygar in the party for long enough and they start organising dance recitals (not really).
I would pay good money to see this.
What is that play format where the men play the female roles as well?
The mental image of Yoshimo and Valygar dancing a duet in tutus with Haer'Dalis providing background music... what has been seen in the mind... cannot be unseen -_-
In fact, have Yoshimo and Valygar in the party for long enough and they start organising dance recitals (not really).
I would pay good money to see this.
What is that play format where the men play the female roles as well?
The mental image of Yoshimo and Valygar dancing a duet in tutus with Haer'Dalis providing background music... what has been seen in the mind... cannot be unseen -_-
Osprey is the female half-elven cleric/mage with 16 strength btw, some strange stats there.
Osprey has the most off-the-wall stats in the game - high str, low dext, low wisd (despite being a cleric), and very low char (despite using a very attractive portrait and having a very pleasing voice). She also uses a portrait that has human ears (she's a half-elf) and wielding a sword (which clerics can't use), though I put that down mainly to shortcomings in the game mechanics - she uses a portrait that wasn't specifically intended for her, but is just a default portrait in general.
Having fought in plate mail for most of his life, I'm sure Keldorn never got to grips with more fluid fighting styles... I imagine him as someone who often gets knocked down in battle but just keeps on fighting. His ass bone has been broken many times in the service of justice.
I always felt that Keldorn's low dext was attributable to his age as much as anything else.
Also, I think that just like in real life, it makes sense that someone who is heavily muscled may not be as nimble or athletic as someone who is lithe and wiry - hence a trained dancer like Skie has much higher dext than musclebound warriors like Anomen or Ajantis. Just like in this video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8OywEmHA-g
Of course, also like in real life, there are also exceptional athletes who combine both traits - and NPCs like Kivan and Shar-Teel fit that mold.
Then again, I also suspect that steroid use is rampant in BG2, since there seems to be an uncanny number of NPCs who are both heavily muscled and incongruously athletic (Yoshimo, Valygar, Haer, etc.).
Despite being a cleric (often consigned to heavy plate mail), in the Underdark Viconia would probably have grown up wearing lightweight, unrestrictive chainmail, letting her develop dextrous skills.
Funny enough, I've always had trouble reconciling the fact that Viconia has such high dext. As someone who grew up in the Underdark and devoted herself to priestly studies, I have trouble imagining that she would emerge as an even more finely-tuned athlete than Skie.
Comments
On a less dexterous character I'd also use the gauntlets of Dex.
Point and laugh, people. Point and laugh.
Also, I think that just like in real life, it makes sense that someone who is heavily muscled may not be as nimble or athletic as someone who is lithe and wiry - hence a trained dancer like Skie has much higher dext than musclebound warriors like Anomen or Ajantis. Just like in this video here:
Of course, also like in real life, there are also exceptional athletes who combine both traits - and NPCs like Kivan and Shar-Teel fit that mold.
Then again, I also suspect that steroid use is rampant in BG2, since there seems to be an uncanny number of NPCs who are both heavily muscled and incongruously athletic (Yoshimo, Valygar, Haer, etc.). Edwin is just an un-athletic wimp, plain and simple. I believe that one of the Shadow Thieves in BG2 describes him as some kind of lazy fop. Funny enough, I've always had trouble reconciling the fact that Viconia has such high dext. As someone who grew up in the Underdark and devoted herself to priestly studies, I have trouble imagining that she would emerge as an even more finely-tuned athlete than Skie.