TwoSix
Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer
I like all of this table; I'm just not sure I see the need to have a scaling feature linked to proficiency bonus in it. Unless there's a belief that AC should be scaling in base 5e, of course.
D&D General Decoupling Ability Scores from Offense
Low level characters have inferior armor. High level don't. That is 1 point of AC scaling.
Light armor PCs in dex usually gain +2 AC from level 1, so a +3 swing.
Medium armor PCs gain 0 to 1 AC, and 1-2 from armor quality, so a +2-3 swing.
Heavy armor PCs gain 2-4 AC from armor quality.
The proficiency calculation there is on the same order of magnitude as the existing swings. The stats I chose (except heavy armor) are low enough that a level 1 PC can probably hit them. Heavy armors 15 str/con is intended as a neat stretch, and is the best AC for a low-dex PC.
But sure, I can strip out the proficiency bonus.
Light Armor: 12 AC, +4 AC if 15 or higher Dexterity.
Medium Armor: 14 AC, +1 AC for each of 13 Strength or Dexterity
Bulky Medium Armor: 15 AC, +1 AC for each of 13 Strength or Dexterity (disadvantage on stealth)
Heavy Armor: 16 AC, +1 AC for each of 15 Strength or Constitution (disadvantage on stealth)
"Superior" versions of each armor is worth +1 AC.
Superior Leather is studded
Superior Medium is a breastplate
Superior Bulky Medium is half-plate
Superior Heavy is full plate
Baseline at level 1:
12 AC in light
14 AC in medium
15 AC in bulky medium
16 AC in heavy
this ensures that "heavier armor" for a class is actually a feature. Also, if you don't invest in physical attributes, medium is better than light.
Optimal:
15 Dex: 17 AC in superior light
13 Dex/13 Str: 17 AC in superior medium
Disadvantage Stealth:
13 Dex/13 Str: 18 AC in superior medium
15 Str/15 Con: 19 AC in superior heavy
also, heavier armor gives more AC.
If you invest in dexterity and care about stealth, medium armor isn't useful, as intended.
Losing stealth gives you 1 point of AC, and heavy armor gives you another. Getting the bonus AC from heavy armor requires more physical training.
A 15 strength/10 con/10 dex PC will get more protection from heavy armor than from medium, however.
At 15 strength/13 dex/10 con, medium matches heavy. You lack the endurance to wear heavy enough armor, and your dexterity is best suited to less weight to move around better.
At 15 strength/15 con heavy wins, regardless of dexterity.
Last edited:
jmartkdr2
Hero
I find these numbers a bit high - medium armor wearers (IME) usually have a 14 Dex and start with scale mail, and will go up to half-plate at some point. Only a +1 change, unless you assume magical armor will be available.
Heavy armor really only ranges from chain to plate, for a +2 shift. (No starting package includes ring mail).
If we want the new armor math to be simple, I'd probably go with proficiency or dex (or str for heavy) on a base:
Light 11 + mod, minimum 12
Medium 11 + mod, minimum 14
Heavy 12 + mod, minimum 16
If, on the other hand, you want to scale AC to average attack bonuses against you, adding full prof to all of them makes a lot more sense (and I would go with the prof or ability mod rule for armor too)
UngeheuerLich
Legend
I think the start of this thread was great.
But then some fiddly bits were inserted and then you could ask, why you don't leave it as is.
I think using attributes strictly for skill usage and item minimums (at stat 13 or so) seems like a great way to go.
The rest, offense and defense should be determined by class and level only.
But then some fiddly bits were inserted and then you could ask, why you don't leave it as is.
I think using attributes strictly for skill usage and item minimums (at stat 13 or so) seems like a great way to go.
The rest, offense and defense should be determined by class and level only.
Tales and Chronicles
Jewel of the North, formerly know as vincegetorix
I think I'll try this system next time I get to start a 5e game, which shouldnt be too long, fingers crossed.
Offensive Rolls:
1d20 + prof + item's Aspect bonus (aka quality modifier) + magic bonus (if any)
- damage: 1 x weapon die + prof + Aspect
Armor Class:
Armor's Aspect Bonus + Prof + magic bonus (if any)
Skill checks
1d20+ability mod+prof+ item Aspect bonus (if any. Example: a pair of masterwork boots can have an Aspect of 2 to acrobatic checks. Basic equipment have an Aspect of +0).
Features' DC
8+prof+Aspect
Saves:
1d20+abilities+prof (if any)
Aspect
At the DM's discretion, they can modify the Base Aspect by a certain number to represent varying qualities of product.
Base Aspect for armament as presented in the PHB have an Aspect of 2 or 3 for most weapons, and armors have a Base Aspect equal to their AC. Unarmored PC have an AC of 9+Prof.
Offensive Rolls:
1d20 + prof + item's Aspect bonus (aka quality modifier) + magic bonus (if any)
- damage: 1 x weapon die + prof + Aspect
Armor Class:
Armor's Aspect Bonus + Prof + magic bonus (if any)
Skill checks
1d20+ability mod+prof+ item Aspect bonus (if any. Example: a pair of masterwork boots can have an Aspect of 2 to acrobatic checks. Basic equipment have an Aspect of +0).
Features' DC
8+prof+Aspect
Saves:
1d20+abilities+prof (if any)
Aspect
At the DM's discretion, they can modify the Base Aspect by a certain number to represent varying qualities of product.
Base Aspect for armament as presented in the PHB have an Aspect of 2 or 3 for most weapons, and armors have a Base Aspect equal to their AC. Unarmored PC have an AC of 9+Prof.
Undrave
Legend
I think this is a good idea...
Actually, you could simplify things and rather than have an AC formula, you just need to check what armor you're wearing (do you qualify for its STR requirement and are you willing to take its downsides) and then it just... TELLS your your AC. That's it. Maaaybe a bonus from your class at certain levels for certain classes and from feats (and certain classes would gain bonuses based on thematic choices).
Same way with weapons. Your class tells you if you're proficient, and then you'd have STR/DEX requirements and then the weapon tells you the ATK bonus and Damage formula (we could go back to previous edition where stronger weapon were less accurate) and then your class could give you certain bonuses at certain levels.
Heck, you could even have an interesting system too where you could be proficient in PROPERTIES as well! So anyone with the proper STR can wield a Pike or a Spear, but only certain class get to use the Reach properties and maybe you could just ignore the whole 'simple/martial/exotic' classifications instead? Want a Wizard with an Axe and plate armor? Just pump up that STR bro!
Similarily, your spells known and spell slot would be based on the casting stat, but the spell itself and your class would give you the numbers you need to roll. I also like the idea that you get Cantrips based on your Casting modifier. Druid wth +3 WIS? You start with 3 Cantrip! Wizards actually get a bonus one so with +3 INT they get 4.
and then your ability scores would round out your character.
And you could have races or even classes that give you a bonus to your STR requirement for equipment or your casting requirement.
And this system could also totally ignore the ability score and just have the pure modifiers instead.
It would also make monsters way easier to stat and build.
Actually, you could simplify things and rather than have an AC formula, you just need to check what armor you're wearing (do you qualify for its STR requirement and are you willing to take its downsides) and then it just... TELLS your your AC. That's it. Maaaybe a bonus from your class at certain levels for certain classes and from feats (and certain classes would gain bonuses based on thematic choices).
Same way with weapons. Your class tells you if you're proficient, and then you'd have STR/DEX requirements and then the weapon tells you the ATK bonus and Damage formula (we could go back to previous edition where stronger weapon were less accurate) and then your class could give you certain bonuses at certain levels.
Heck, you could even have an interesting system too where you could be proficient in PROPERTIES as well! So anyone with the proper STR can wield a Pike or a Spear, but only certain class get to use the Reach properties and maybe you could just ignore the whole 'simple/martial/exotic' classifications instead? Want a Wizard with an Axe and plate armor? Just pump up that STR bro!
Similarily, your spells known and spell slot would be based on the casting stat, but the spell itself and your class would give you the numbers you need to roll. I also like the idea that you get Cantrips based on your Casting modifier. Druid wth +3 WIS? You start with 3 Cantrip! Wizards actually get a bonus one so with +3 INT they get 4.
and then your ability scores would round out your character.
And you could have races or even classes that give you a bonus to your STR requirement for equipment or your casting requirement.
And this system could also totally ignore the ability score and just have the pure modifiers instead.
It would also make monsters way easier to stat and build.
CubicsRube
Hero
Not quite what you were looking for, but I wrote a post about D&D without ability scores last year:
Post in question
Unfritunately 5e intertwines ability scores with so many features and sub rules that removing it or reducing it has dozens, if not hundreds of knock on effects that I'm frankly not interested in putting serious effort into!
Post in question
Unfritunately 5e intertwines ability scores with so many features and sub rules that removing it or reducing it has dozens, if not hundreds of knock on effects that I'm frankly not interested in putting serious effort into!
CubicsRube
Hero
I've been tempted to create a one pages core system that only has skills that covers all things from feats of strength, saves, abilities in combat, diplomacy etc.
Skill progression would be based on skill points and would be 0>5>9>12>14>15
So spending a skill point to go from 14 to 15 is quite an expensive way to do something when you could use that point to go from 0 to 5 on an untrained skill.
Resolution is then just 1d20+skill.
Skill progression would be based on skill points and would be 0>5>9>12>14>15
So spending a skill point to go from 14 to 15 is quite an expensive way to do something when you could use that point to go from 0 to 5 on an untrained skill.
Resolution is then just 1d20+skill.
Xeviat
Hero
The only fiddly bit I'm considering along side the simple patch is what to do about feats. Feats may overtake ASIs as the preferred choice, so I may want to remove ASIs and turn all feats into "half feats", or some other change, to embrace the change fully.
Undrave
Legend
Half feats seem like a good idea. Just make some generic flat bonus ones, spread a few +1s and it should work out fine. Since stats aren't as powerful you can afford to bump them more freely.
You could also have a 'feat' that's just an ASI, just so the choice is there. Say if you want to bump your STR to use a bigger weapon or better armour, that +2 is gonna be the fastest way to do it.
