Can't hit you, can't hurt you

Somewhere in these threads is a screenshot of a Monk with AC 50. Inspired, I thought I'd match or beat that, which required learning how Armor Class works in toee. Discovered some interesting things, namely which bonuses stack and which ones don't.
Bottom line: solo character doing his own crafting 16th level Elven Ranger 15/Mage 1 goes toe-to-toe, mano-a-mano with the Balor with an AC 0f 54, which means the Balor only hits on a natural 20 (which he does --along with the skeletons of Emriddy Meadows-- with uncanny frequency). The real trick is beefing up defense while still being able to hit an opponent with AC 37 (without using Scather).

Base Armor Class: 10
Armor Bonus: 11 (Bracers AC 5 and Padded +3; also weapon w/ Defending for +3 )
Shield Bonus: 7 (Shield spell AC 4 and mithril buckler +3)
Dexterity Bonus: 8 (limited to 8 by the Padded armor; DX 20 plus Gloves of Dexterity +6)
Natural Armor Bonus: 8 (Barkskin spell AC 3 and Amulet of Natural Armor +5)
Deflection Bonus: 3 (Ring of Protection +3)
Size Bonus: 1
Dodge Bonuses: 6 (Combat Expertise activated for +5 and Haste potion/Boots of Speed for +1)
...all this and still able to hit AC 37 with a die roll of 13 or higher. And beginning attribute scores of 17, 18, 15, 14, 16, 13.

The key was discovering that only and all Dodge bonuses stack (with one exception); access to Natural Armor (barkskin spell) is vital to achieving an AC 50+; and crafting Defending on a weapon does stack with the Armor bonus.

Conceivably, the highest AC for a solo character at 16th level would be a gnome cleric with plant domain fighting a Giant, with all other legit AC Bonuses for a total of AC63 or 64 depending on the Size factors. The problem then is this cleric would be in such a BAB deficit that only a natural 20 would hit on attack.

 

Eventually, getting 50 ac in this game isn't difficult if it's prioritized.

However, 3.5e Barkskin spell and ammy of natural armor shouldn't stack (they both provide enhancement bonus to natural AC - the only time barkskin would stack with Natural AC is if a creature has inherent Natural AC, i.e. lizardfolk, many animals, etc.) - that looks like a bug or misimplementation in the game engine if it's stacking.

 

Natural Armor Bonus: 8

is what he claimed.

 

toee apparently treats barkskin spell as the natural armor bonus for those creatures who don't already have lizard skin or whatnot, and the amulet of natural armor as the enhancement. Thus, they do stack in toee. I'm only describing what I've discovered and how to achieve a legit AC of over 50.

 

No biggie Ted. I'm just looking at the details listed by OP and wondering if there is an error with the game engine/ruleset (which, if it's the case hopefully C08 or Temple Plus can fix perhaps) or player/human error reporting.

 

I took a peek in the engine - Barkskin and Amulet of Natural Armor gives different bonus types (9 & 10 respectively), hence why they stack.
Righteous Might also gives bonus type 9 so that looks like the correct bonus type.
Could it be a 3.0 leftover? (Where the Amulet was supposed to provide a different bonus type)

Edit: on 2nd thought, the natural armor enhancement bonuses should be type 10, and the base natural armor bonus (such as: NPC AC Bonus, Tree Shape, Gaseous Form capper) should be type 9.

 

Can't Hit You Can't Hurt You, part deux:
try these spell combinations:

Mirror Image + Displacement, or
Mirror Image + Greater Invisibility, or
Mislead

Turns even a wimpy girl sorceress into a nemesis to be feared, no matter what her AC may be.

 

My understanding has always been that they should not stack per 3.5e rules. Like bonuses do not stack, and both of them being a source of natural armor, they shouldn't stack, right? I did a little googling on it and it turns out there are some pretty convincing arguments for why they do stack - per the 3.5e rules.

I can try to find the links, but the gist of the argument was that one of them (the amulet I believe) provides a special category of natural armor called an enhancement bonus to natural armor, where the spell provides a flat bonus to natural armor. I believe the latter does not stack with a creature's inherent natural armor though, which is not an enhancement bonus. I could have some of these backwards. I'm no rule guru, but I do believe the consensus was that the amulet of NA does stack with the spell barkskin, even though they both are sources of natural armor. I also believe the consensus was that they all stack with the enhancement bonus provided from bracers of AC, which is of course not a natural source.

Whether Troika initially agreed with this or whether this is an implementation bug I suppose is up for interpretation.