The rule is:
Shields don't provide any passive AC bonus. Instead, they block a succesful hit on a roll of 6 on a d6 (before damage is rolled). This makes their relative AC be better or worse depending on the armor worn (as they are going to "work" more on lower ACs), according to this table.
|
AC (ascending) |
% to be hit at +0 bonus |
1/6 blocked by the shield |
+ ac equivalent (+1 in d&d) |
|
2 |
95 |
15'8 |
3'17 |
|
3 |
90 |
15 |
3 |
|
4 |
85 |
14'1 |
2'87 |
|
5 |
80 |
13'3 |
2'66 |
|
6 |
75 |
12'5 |
2'5 |
|
7 |
70 |
11'6 |
2'33 |
|
8 |
65 |
10'8 |
2'17 |
|
9 |
60 |
10 |
2 |
|
Unarmored (10) |
55 |
9'16 |
1'83 |
|
11 |
50 |
8'3 |
1'66 |
|
Leather armor (12) |
45 |
7'5 |
1'50 |
|
13 |
40 |
6'6 |
1'33 |
|
Chainmail (14) |
35 |
5'8 |
1'17 |
|
15 |
30 |
5 |
1 |
|
Plate Armor (16) |
25 |
4'1 |
0'83 |
|
17 |
20 |
3'3 |
0'66 |
|
18 |
15 |
2'5 |
0'5 |
|
19 |
10 |
1'7 |
0'33 |
As you see, this makes shields be a liiiitle better on leather and chainmail, not enough to make a big difference, but its a little treat to those fighting man who don't get plate as soon as they can. I want to open the possibility of using less armor in order to open more encumbrance. Not sure if this little boost would be enough.
Below this lines, you can see the same table but for a shield roll that prvented hits 1/3 of the time (5 or 6 on a d6)
|
AC (ascending) |
% to be hit at +0 bonus |
2/6 blocked by the shield |
+ ac equivalent (+1 in d&d) |
|
2 |
95 |
31'6 |
6'33 |
|
3 |
90 |
30 |
6 |
|
4 |
85 |
28'2 |
5'66 |
|
5 |
80 |
26'6 |
5'33 |
|
6 |
75 |
25 |
5 |
|
7 |
70 |
23'2 |
4'66 |
|
8 |
65 |
21'6 |
4'33 |
|
9 |
60 |
20 |
4 |
|
Unarmored (10) |
55 |
18'33 |
3'66 |
|
11 |
50 |
16'6 |
3'33 |
|
Leather armor (12) |
45 |
15 |
3 |
|
13 |
40 |
13'3 |
2'66 |
|
Chainmail (14) |
35 |
11'6 |
2'33 |
|
15 |
30 |
10 |
2 |
|
Plate Armor (16) |
25 |
8'3 |
1'66 |
|
17 |
20 |
6'6 |
1'33 |
|
18 |
15 |
5 |
1 |
|
19 |
10 |
2'5 |
0'66 |
As you can see, the relative AC of a shield is greatly improved from the original. It is remarkable that with this rule, they can a priori block natural 20s.
The point in which shields will really shine with this rule is when fighting monsters with high attack bonuses. A fighter in plate armor and a shield, for example, when fighting a red dragon with +8 attack bonus, would defend with an equivalent AC of 9 (17 -8).
By this rules, the 16 AC plate would become an 8, and then get the bonus from the shield: +2'17 for the 1/6th version and +4'33 for the 1/3 version; making it a factual AC of 10'17 and 12'33 respectivelly.
Not sure if implement this or on how. I like that the increment in AC can make up for the fact that I want to drop the attribute scores (and with it, the Con bonuses) and it seems appropiate that the con bonuses are more important at higher levels, just as when the monsters attack bonuses are higher and raise the effectivity of the shield. So in a way, the 1/3 version of the shield might not be as OP as it looks in comparison.
On the other hand, there is something so easy on giving normal shields 1/6 of effectivity, and have magical shields (that would be +1 as per the original rules) to work at 1/3.
Non-fighters have also the choice of using shields at a reduced armor rate. Be it taking the 1/6 instead of the 1/3, or using them at disadvantage (roll 2d6, keep lowest). I'm a bit reticent to hard-coded restrictions, and though it may sound ridiculous, the game feels more "real" to me if that kind of things are just severely handicapped instead.
The great downside of the shield roll is that it, of course, adds another roll. On its defence, I'd say that it only comes up on a succesful enemy hit. Personally in my current "D6 D&D rules" I pair it with my variant of Homebrew Homunculus D&D without damage dice, and with the damage rolls gone, I don't find the shield rolls tedious at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment