D&D 5E Charlaquin’s revised weapon and armor tables

[Charlaquin]

prices way too low

Note that with my conversion rates, copper is equivalent to RAW silver, orichalcum is equivalent to RAW electrum, silver is equivalent to RAW gold, electrum is worth 10x it’s RAW value, and gold is equivalent to RAW platinum. So prices are actually pretty much the same as RAW, with the only exceptions being that you can get equivalent AC to half-plate for 450 standard units of currency and full plate for 630. These are significant discounts on the highest tier armors compared to RAW, but how often have you seen someone actually buy half plate or full plate rather than just finding a set while adventuring anyway?

 

[commandercrud]

Bounded accuracy is preserved. The highest possible AC you can achieve with this system is 25 (11+5 base from quilted jack and 20 Dex, +2 from breastplate, and + 2 from plate guards, +5 from a kite shield).That’s 1 less than the maximum you can achieve by RAW with +3 magic plate armor and a +3 magic shield, and it requires both 15 Strength and 20 Dex, which is a hell of an ability score investment. Plus you’d have disadvantage on stealth checks on a Dex-based character.

+3 magic items are extremely rare. There's your difference.

 

[Charlaquin]

+3 magic items are extremely rare. There's your difference.

+3 magic items are explicitly as common or rare as the DM decides. Yes, they are rare if you use the RAW treasure tables, but the DMG is clear that it is up to the DM to decide if and how to distribute magic items, which means +3 must be within the system’s expected tolerance for accuracy. Also keep in mind that achieving the equivalent of +3 armor requires heavy armor proficiency and at least 2 ability score improvements, so no one is getting it before 8th level, and later if they don’t invest heavily in both strength and Dex at character creation and/or don’t have heavy armor proficiency from 1st level. And since one of my design goals was to make Strength and Dexterity both important for all martial characters, I’d say this is working as intended.

I agree that kite shields probably make the equivalent of a +3 shield too easily accessible. Like I said, that’s something I’ve gone back and forth on a lot, and is likely to change with playtesting. Thank you for the feedback.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

In my games, large shields give +2 AC with the Warding property: grant 3/5 cover against ranged attacks. It requires 13 str and give disadvantage to stealth roll. Shields were moved from Armors to Weapons and given a 1d4 damage roll.

I also have helmets, which gives +1 AC and disadvantage to perception checks.

I might steal your armor rules, I love the mini-game it adds.

 

[Charlaquin]

In my games, large shields give +2 AC with the Warding property: grant 3/5 cover against ranged attacks. It requires 13 str and give disadvantage to stealth roll. Shields were moved from Armors to Weapons and given a 1d4 damage roll.

I like that a lot. I might steal that.

I also have helmets, which gives +1 AC and disadvantage to perception checks.

This is very cool, but I’ve already pushed AC as high as I’m comfortable doing.

I might steal your armor rules, I love the mini-game it adds.

Please do! At this point what I really need is feedback based on actual play, so if you or anyone is interested, I would love for you to try them out and let me know how they work for you.

 

[Laurefindel]

I’ll grant that kite shields probably make the equivalent of a +3 shield too easily accessible.

I think it does. Or at the very least, it makes the equivalent of a +3 shield available a lot earlier and more reliably than what the game expects.

My intuition is that...
+3 weapons (and monsters?) would need to be frequent enough to "compensate"
The balance between wearing a shield and wielding a two-handed weapon would be compromised.
+5 to Reflex saves is huge. +2 is already a big bonus. At 1st level, it's the equivalent of being proficient, or expertise in Reflex save. 3/4 cover is the equivalent of proficiency for a 13th level character.

So despite the shifting of properties and damage dice and AC bonuses, you seem to be respecting RAW in all regards except for shield, which get a straight boost. Either because they can get used as weapons, or they grant a bonus to saves as well. Now than can be a design goal, and I'm ok with that, but at the moment by RAW that +2 AC is precariously balanced against two-weapon fighting and two-handed weapon fighting. Your shield rules (including parry property) upset that balance.

Potential solutions could include linking kite shield's AC to proficiency bonus. Or one may need to spend an action or bonus action to "raise shield" and get the cover bonus.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think it does. Or at the very least, it makes the equivalent of a +3 shield available a lot earlier and more reliably than what the game expects.

My intuition is that...
+3 weapons (and monsters?) would need to be frequent enough to "compensate"
The balance between wearing a shield and wielding a two-handed weapon would be compromised.
+5 to Reflex saves is huge. +2 is already a big bonus. At 1st level, it's the equivalent of being proficient, or expertise in Reflex save. 3/4 cover is the equivalent of proficiency for a 13th level character.

So despite the shifting of properties and damage dice and AC bonuses, you seem to be respecting RAW in all regards except for shield, which get a straight boost. Either because they can get used as weapons, or they grant a bonus to saves as well. Now than can be a design goal, and I'm ok with that, but at the moment by RAW that +2 AC is precariously balanced against two-weapon fighting and two-handed weapon fighting. Your shield rules (including parry property) upset that balance.

Potential solutions could include linking kite shield's AC to proficiency bonus. Or one may need to spend an action or bonus action to "raise shield" and get the cover bonus.

Yeah, you are 100% right about this. I think I got too attached to the idea of making enarmed and center grip shields mechanically distinct and let myself get too carried away. I’ll put some more thought into how I want to handle shields between now and the campaign I plan to use these item lists in.

 

[Laurefindel]

The core idea is sound, its the execution that may require a bit more work. Strapped shields were indeed more like a portable cover that you move in the right place, and center grip shields more like an "active" defense where you attempt to parry with the boss (the rest of the shield is there to protect from arrows and the deflected blow you just parried).

I think that you could add to shields without going overboard. Spend action and/or reaction to gain half-cover (effectively gaining +2 Dex save*) with heather shield isn't out of line. Neither would bossed shield be if they could also be used as weapon say, in exchange for their AC bonus for that round maybe?

I think you could also up the benefits of weapons and/or armour as well on the same scale. From the other thread you mentioned preferring the carrot over the bat in regards to low ability scores, so some of these new properties could be tied to stats. Like a parry ability granting +1 AC as reaction with a rapier, but you need 13 STR for that (I know you don't have the rapier; its a theoretical example).

 

[Charlaquin]

The core idea is sound, its the execution that may require a bit more work. Strapped shields were indeed more like a portable cover that you move in the right place, and center grip shields more like an "active" defense where you attempt to parry with the boss (the rest of the shield is there to protect from arrows and the deflected blow you just parried).

I think that you could add to shields without going overboard. Spend action and/or reaction to gain half-cover (effectively gaining +2 Dex save*) with heather shield isn't out of line. Neither would bossed shield be if they could also be used as weapon say, in exchange for their AC bonus for that round maybe?

The idea initially came from my experimentation with the facing rules. Since shields only provide their bonus to AC against attacks from the front arc and the side arc of the hand they’re equipped to, I thought granting cover would be a good way to compensate for the lack of protection from
The other two arcs. That lead to the idea of kite/tower shields that gave 3/4 cover, and the Parry mechanic came from a desire to differentiate center grip shields from enarmed shields. Then I never toned them back down for use without the facing rules.

How about this: Shields don’t add to AC when equipped. When you are hit by an attack or forced to make a Dexterity saving throw and you have a shield equipped, you can use your reaction to gain your shield’s cover bonus against the attack or the effect that you are saving against. Change the name of Round Shield to “Targe” to avoid confusion with Shields. Maybe make Parry add the weapon’s damage die to AC instead of a flat +2, and reduce the targe’s damage die to 1d4 and the buckler’s to 1.

I think you could also up the benefits of weapons and/or armour as well on the same scale. From the other thread you mentioned preferring the carrot over the bat in regards to low ability scores, so some of these new properties could be tied to stats. Like a parry ability granting +1 AC as reaction with a rapier, but you need 13 STR for that (I know you don't have the rapier; its a theoretical example).

I think that is more complexity than I’m aiming for.

 

[Shadowdweller]

Bottom of the heap? Spears May have a small base damage die, but Reach and Versatile is a powerful combination of features! Combine that with polearm master and sentinel and you’ve got a very effective character!

Combine any suitable weapon with PAM and Sentinel and you've got an extremely effective character. Without those feats, the small damage die results in the spear rapidly being outdamaged by more or less any other weapon. The idea that a spear would be outdamaged by a club is utterly nonsensical; as for that matter the idea that a flail is outdamaged by a mace. And again, contrary to established history.

Could you give me an example of these nonsensical results? I don’t see any combinations that don’t make sense.

Sure - imagine two identically armored characters in a breastplate, all the plate pauldrons, greaves, helmet, and the like. Except that one is wearing only cloth underneath it all rather than mail...and yet somehow is better armored.

Bounded accuracy is preserved. The highest possible AC you can achieve with this system is 25 (11+5 base from quilted jack and 20 Dex, +2 from breastplate, and + 2 from plate guards, +5 from a kite shield).That’s 1 less than the maximum you can achieve by RAW with +3 magic plate armor and a +3 magic shield, and it requires both 15 Strength and 20 Dex, which is a hell of an ability score investment. Plus you’d have disadvantage on stealth checks on a Dex-based character.

WRONG. That's 25 before anything like Shield of Faith or other spells, blur, any sort of magic armor or shield, the protection fighting style, or any further buff. 25 AC itself breaks bounded accuracy - that's higher than the strongest demon lords, the most ancient dragons; that's better than creatures made entirely of armor, or wind, or metal. If your system allows a common soldier to beat Demogorgon's AC with only mundane gear, you've gotten something wrong.