D&D (2024) Wrapping up first 2-20 2024 campaign this week, some of my thoughts

[Zardnaar]

It also says 'certain' magic items, and wearing them implies clothing items. I guess you technically wear swords when they're in a scabbard but for game purposes you wield them.

I agree was just wondering.

 

[Sulicius]

Thanks for sharing the experience! I think we can all agree that giving PC's free range on choosing items will always break the game.

It is one of my biggest disappointments that WotC didn't balance the game around PC's having magic items (or give more solid guidance), or balance item rarity better. Any weapon that deals additional dice in damage is WAY strong, stronger indeed than any legendary that doesn't give this damage boost.

If it's that obvious to me that a +3 shield will ruin encounters, why isn't it obvious to WotC?

 

[Zardnaar]

Thanks for sharing the experience! I think we can all agree that giving PC's free range on choosing items will always break the game.

It is one of my biggest disappointments that WotC didn't balance the game around PC's having magic items (or give more solid guidance), or balance item rarity better. Any weapon that deals additional dice in damage is WAY strong, stronger indeed than any legendary that doesn't give this damage boost.

If it's that obvious to me that a +3 shield will ruin encounters, why isn't it obvious to WotC?

How does a +3 shield ruin encounters?

 

[Sulicius]

How does a +3 shield ruin encounters?

In my experience, AC stacking makes a party unbalanced in their defenses, while the DM has to increase the challenge dramatically or be unable to threaten the AC-stacked PC.

Yes, I am aware of saving throws and other stuff. Whatever the case, high AC characters become far too strong too easily.

My current plan is to not have +AC items stack, and never handout +3 items until deep in tier 4.

 

[Zardnaar]

In my experience, AC stacking makes a party unbalanced in their defenses, while the DM has to increase the challenge dramatically or be unable to threaten the AC-stacked PC.

Yes, I am aware of saving throws and other stuff. Whatever the case, high AC characters become far too strong too easily.

My current plan is to not have +AC items stack, and never handout +3 items until deep in tier 4.

It's a late tier 2 or early tier 3 item.

Damagevis king in 5.5 great weapons and dual wielding are great. Sword and board not so much.

 

[Sulicius]

It's a late tier 2 or early tier 3 item.

Damagevis king in 5.5 great weapons and dual wielding are great. Sword and board not so much.

+3 AC at late tier 2 would ruin my encounter design.

Yes, damage is king, but I don't think you see how terrible every combat is when the monsters just can't hit a PC. It lowers the stakes and makes a fight boring. I have been there. Every fight I went through the motions of monsters "learning" that one character was too hard to hit and move on to the other PC's. Every. Fight.

I used saving throw based abilities, but because other PC's had more impact in the battle, I instead targeted them. The AC-stacked PC also always stayed within the aura of the paladin.

They just became a non-interactible in every combat to me. That was just unfun, and the player realized that the only thing they could do was soak up attacks. Then when I finally attacked the backline, the backline immediately dropped. And then the backline got healed up again by the AC-stacked PC, because they would never go down.

It was the most terrible repetitive pattern every combat, and I hated it.

I will never allow/hand out AC stacking like that again.

 

[Zardnaar]

+3 AC at late tier 2 would ruin my encounter design.

Yes, damage is king, but I don't think you see how terrible every combat is when the monsters just can't hit a PC. It lowers the stakes and makes a fight boring. I have been there. Every fight I went through the motions of monsters "learning" that one character was too hard to hit and move on to the other PC's. Every. Fight.

I used saving throw based abilities, but because other PC's had more impact in the battle, I instead targeted them. The AC-stacked PC also always stayed within the aura of the paladin.

They just became a non-interactible in every combat to me. That was just unfun, and the player realized that the only thing they could do was soak up attacks. Then when I finally attacked the backline, the backline immediately dropped. And then the backline got healed up again by the AC-stacked PC, because they would never go down.

It was the most terrible repetitive pattern every combat, and I hated it.

I will never allow/hand out AC stacking like that again.

As you level up there's more ways of bypassing AC.

If you're not handing out decent shields in effect you're nerfing an already weak style.

Less damage taken also means less healing required. Magical shields in 2024 are lower rarity than armor.

Basically working as intended.

 

[tetrasodium]

+3 AC at late tier 2 would ruin my encounter design.

Yes, damage is king, but I don't think you see how terrible every combat is when the monsters just can't hit a PC. It lowers the stakes and makes a fight boring. I have been there. Every fight I went through the motions of monsters "learning" that one character was too hard to hit and move on to the other PC's. Every. Fight.

I used saving throw based abilities, but because other PC's had more impact in the battle, I instead targeted them. The AC-stacked PC also always stayed within the aura of the paladin.

They just became a non-interactible in every combat to me. That was just unfun, and the player realized that the only thing they could do was soak up attacks. Then when I finally attacked the backline, the backline immediately dropped. And then the backline got healed up again by the AC-stacked PC, because they would never go down.

It was the most terrible repetitive pattern every combat, and I hated it.

I will never allow/hand out AC stacking like that again.

My experience with ac boosting gear in 5e was pretty much identical. It worked ok in 2e & 3.x since the math assumption was that monsters would probably still hit to some degree and because the backline Squishies would just get instantly wrecked after monsters got around the sticky Frontline on the grid∆. In 5e though it just leads to the gm being expected to run through a soul crushing loop of "let's all pretend we don't know to use fire on trolls" turned up to 11 with every fight and it doesn't matter one but when th monsters switch targets.

∆ before someone cites 2e phb2/dmg... yes 2e had some crunchier grid rules added in the player options combat and tactics book.

 

[Sulicius]

As you level up there's more ways of bypassing AC.

If you're not handing out decent shields in effect you're nerfing an already weak style.

Less damage taken also means less healing required. Magical shields in 2024 are lower rarity than armor.

Basically working as intended.

Your experience isn't the same as mine. I am happy this is not an issue at your table.

I don't care what is intended. I care about my experience at my table.

 

[Zardnaar]

Your experience isn't the same as mine. I am happy this is not an issue at your table.

I don't care what is intended. I care about my experience at my table.

Not taking damage Gia high ac is the trade off from not dual wielding or using a great weapon.

Do what you want. In you game I wouldn't bother using a shield I would pick another style.