AC sorting, which is more important Size or Dex?

I'm sure anyone reading the title to this thread, immediately says to themselves, "This guy is an idiot. He knows nothing about D&D 3.5E!" And you would be mostly correct, I don't know anything about 3.5E.

I am upgrading my Field Filters for All Libraries extension and I am trying to figure out how to sort the AC strings. I am using the 3.5E (Essentials) Monsters Manual as my data source. AC strings typically seem to have this format:
14 (+2 size, +2 Dex, +3 natural), touch 14, flat-footed 12

I was going to sort left to right, but sometimes the parts in parentheses, are missing the size parameter, or the Dex parameter, or the armor parameter. Sometimes the size and Dex might be in reverse order.

What I am wondering is, do the data items within the parentheses have an order of importance? Would it be better for me to sort first on Dex, then on size? Or visa versa? or maybe on the armor, as with the Gnoll:
15 (+1 natural, +2 leather armor, +2 heavy steel shield), touch 10, flat-footed 15

For these three AC strings:
14 (+1 size, +3 Dex, +3 natural), touch 14, flat-footed 12
14 (+2 size, +2 Dex, +3 natural), touch 14, flat-footed 12
14 (+2 size, +1 Dex, +3 natural), touch 14, flat-footed 12

Sorting first by size would yield:
14 (+1 size, +3 Dex, +3 natural), touch 14, flat-footed 12
14 (+2 size, +1 Dex, +3 natural), touch 14, flat-footed 12
14 (+2 size, +2 Dex, +3 natural), touch 14, flat-footed 12

But sorting first by Dex, would yield:
14 (+2 size, +1 Dex, +3 natural), touch 14, flat-footed 12
14 (+2 size, +2 Dex, +3 natural), touch 14, flat-footed 12
14 (+1 size, +3 Dex, +3 natural), touch 14, flat-footed 12

I realize that with a data set of three items, this appears insignificant, by with dozens and dozens of items, it becomes significant.

Hmm... I can't think of a use case that it would matter to me, but...
Size would probably be last. Since if I was curious about the size of a creature, I would be looking at it's size attribute, and not it's influence on AC. But, I wouldn't think to change the order they appear in; Size, Dex, Natural, Armor, Shield. I think that's the order they "normally' (majority?) appear in.

Oh wait, I see what you mean, when you sort all the AC "14" items, what should be the secondary sort criteria... hmm.... in that case, maybe size. Since I would eaitehr be looking for a creature based on its size or already know it size. But, wouldn't you want to sort by creature name after the AC rather than a factor that the AC is determined by?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordEntrails

But, wouldn't you want to sort by creature name after the AC rather than a factor that the AC is determined by?

---

Thanks LordEntrails for answering. As usual I have not concisely stated my question. I am sorting these data items to populate the dropdown combo box. They're sorted now, but it tends to be hap-hazard. Or so it appears. And more importantly, I'm wondering if some data Items are of more relevance in a sort than others.

Here is a screenshot of FFAL:
Attachment 25984

I've selected the highlighted item in the combobox to filter all the NPCs, then reexpanded the combobox to give a slight indication of the current simple sort by string (a basic alphanumeric sort). I opened the Monkey NPC to show the AC string in all its 3.5E glory.

There are several components to the AC string. which are of more interest, more relevance in a sort?

BTW, I am going to break the string apart so that a user can filter just by the touch part of the AC or the flat-footed part as well as the Base AC.

Oops. I am probably being very obtuse here. Maybe I should "distribute" the base armor class value into the components and then break the whole thing apart.

So for the Celestial Charger, AC = 24 (-1 size, +4 Dex, +6 natural, +5 bracers of armor +5), touch 13, flat-footed 20

I would populate the combo box with these six filter choices:
24 (-1 size)
24 (+4 Dex)
24 (+6 natural)
24 (+5 bracers of armor)
touch 13
flat-footed 20

This of course assumes I am interpreting this all correctly.

I get it, thanks for the image. I really don't know which is more important. I guess I can't say I would really care which factor is influencing the AC. But I'm sure someone does :)

Hopefully someone else will jump in with an opinion.

I really wouldn't have a need to go down to that level of granularity. If you have a couple of monster sources open the AC filter drop-down would be enormous based of all of the possible entries and the ones I'd be interested in selecting would be lost in the big long list of other "stuff". And would anyone need to have the ability to filter all creatures with AC "24 (+4 Dex)"?

I think, taking the example, three entries for this creature would be more than enough: 24, 20 (flat-footed) and 13 (touch)