Difference between revisions of "Talk:Tower Shield(5e Armor)"

From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Added rating.)
 
m
Line 3: Line 3:
 
|rating=oppose
 
|rating=oppose
 
|reason=With the RNG the way it is, +4 AC is too much, especially with how easy it is to get shield proficiency on characters who do not attack using their own attack rolls or other casters.
 
|reason=With the RNG the way it is, +4 AC is too much, especially with how easy it is to get shield proficiency on characters who do not attack using their own attack rolls or other casters.
 +
}}
 +
 +
{{Rating |rater=TK-Squared
 +
|rating=oppose
 +
|reason=Bounded Accuracy - the way that accuracy works in D&D5e - is definitely not compatible with a +4 bonus to AC - that's on top of armour calculations, of course. A Shield that grants +4 to AC is a '''Very Rare''' item after all. Then, we can also mention that D&D 5e is not all that compatible with just doling out penalties - like a -2 penalty to attack - in the majority of its workings. It just increases unnecessary complexity.
 
}}
 
}}

Revision as of 22:13, 16 March 2019

Ratings

RatedOppose.png Ghostwheel opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
With the RNG the way it is, +4 AC is too much, especially with how easy it is to get shield proficiency on characters who do not attack using their own attack rolls or other casters.


RatedOppose.png TK-Squared opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
Bounded Accuracy - the way that accuracy works in D&D5e - is definitely not compatible with a +4 bonus to AC - that's on top of armour calculations, of course. A Shield that grants +4 to AC is a Very Rare item after all. Then, we can also mention that D&D 5e is not all that compatible with just doling out penalties - like a -2 penalty to attack - in the majority of its workings. It just increases unnecessary complexity.
OpposedGhostwheel + and TK-Squared +