D&D 5E DMG - breaking bounded accuracy already?

[Psikerlord#]

The only one that concerns me is Shield & Armour stacking - since arrows are individually magic items their use will be memorable rather than breaking.

yeah ammunition appears to be single pieces, so no problem.

Magic shield and magic plate could be a problem, although not so much if you use the flanking and/or facing rules.

I think the devs foresaw this issue however - while magic shields appear early in the random magic item tables, +1 plate is exceedingly rare, much rarer than other +2 armours. I really like this distribution to be honest - it gives sword and board a needed boost, and doesnt give the GWF's easy access to the highest ACs.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

This thread has given me an evil idea... I'm going to throw a complete set (all 6 stats) into my game at level 5, although they will have been used with in the last 10 years...

It will be the best set of books, in 90 years.

 

[mach1.9pants]

This thread has given me an evil idea... I'm going to throw a complete set (all 6 stats) into my game at level 5, although they will have been used with in the last 10 years...

It will be the best set of books, in 90 years.

The Half-Orcs and Humans will be miffed!

 

[Minsc]

I love games that are very low-magic items. I remember having a fighter with a +1 sword who felt like he hit the lotto.

 

[aramis erak]

I love games that are very low-magic items. I remember having a fighter with a +1 sword who felt like he hit the lotto.

The magic items list is pretty darned close to what I'd been doing in Cyclopedia - nothing past +3.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

The magic items list is pretty darned close to what I'd been doing in Cyclopedia - nothing past +3.

the only item I wish went past 3 was the defender... having it be +1 to hit +2 AC is cool, but one of my first characters had a +5 one in 2e and I used to keep 3pts in AC and 2 in attack/damage... I was a multi classed Wizard/Thief and it was awesome.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I am personally OK with any game breaking stuff even in ridiculous quantity so long as the use of such is prefaced with ; "my DM says this is fine."

 

[keterys]

The only ones that really bugged me were the belt of giantkind and shields getting enhancement bonuses (over +1).

Belt because:
1) it's only one stat out of all the stats, making for class balance disparity
2) it replaces your existing stat entirely, negating expenditure of stat bumps
3) it goes enough over the normal range as to throw bounded accuracy and/or balance out of whack (like enabling the -5 to hit +10 damage option)

Instead we could have gotten a - still very powerful and flavorful variant that dodged those issues, like:
Belt of Giantkind: You gain advantage on all Strength checks and saves. Your carrying capacity is multiplied by 10. You can hurl improvised missiles (such as boulders, carts, and tables) with proficiency up to 120 feet for 2d6 damage.


For shields:
1) It makes the AC gap too much. This is a strike against bounded accuracy, but also against party dynamics. (If your AC is that high, the monsters shouldn't even target you with attacks)
2) It unbalances the fighting styles, but at a much later point in the campaign. 2-handed vs twf vs 1h has some real choices, but when shield gives +2 vs +5 is a very different choice. One is "I take 20% less damage" say and the other is "I take half as much damage" say.

 

[ExploderWizard]

The only ones that really bugged me were the belt of giantkind and shields getting enhancement bonuses (over +1).

Belt because:
1) it's only one stat out of all the stats, making for class balance disparity
2) it replaces your existing stat entirely, negating expenditure of stat bumps
3) it goes enough over the normal range as to throw bounded accuracy and/or balance out of whack (like enabling the -5 to hit +10 damage option)

Instead we could have gotten a - still very powerful and flavorful variant that dodged those issues, like:
Belt of Giantkind: You gain advantage on all Strength checks and saves. Your carrying capacity is multiplied by 10. You can hurl improvised missiles (such as boulders, carts, and tables) with proficiency up to 120 feet for 2d6 damage.


For shields:
1) It makes the AC gap too much. This is a strike against bounded accuracy, but also against party dynamics. (If your AC is that high, the monsters shouldn't even target you with attacks)
2) It unbalances the fighting styles, but at a much later point in the campaign. 2-handed vs twf vs 1h has some real choices, but when shield gives +2 vs +5 is a very different choice. One is "I take 20% less damage" say and the other is "I take half as much damage" say.

I think the belts would work fine if treated just like the one from OD&D. While wearing a belt of giant strength your attack bonus and damage are equal to that of a giant of the belt's type. Simple.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I think the belts would work fine if treated just like the one from OD&D. While wearing a belt of giant strength your attack bonus and damage are equal to that of a giant of the belt's type. Simple.

Yep. And I admit I have a hard time understanding the problem of being upset for wasting stat bumps. I guess on the surface I can understand it, I just don't view it as a big deal. In my head, I don't see it as a waste any more than when you rolled 4d6 and assigned your stats, putting a high value in STR in AD&D. I certainly don't recall anyone who put a 17 in strength get upset when they found a belt of giant strength. Everyone was pretty happy. I do recall one time where I had an 18/40ish% fighter who decided to not take the belt, and give it to the cleric in exchange for his +2 platemail we had found earlier.

That, and belts can be lost or destroyed or stolen.