D&D 5E Alternate AC calculation

[Joel Spanky Gray]

Bolded emphasis mine, good point - 100% agree.
The problem with the spear and polearm is they are pretty lousy in a knife/dagger fight. I guess it all depends on the level of detail one is prepared to deal with. 5e likes to keep it simple - I try as best to stick to that, sometimes I fail miserably.

Good points, and DnD abstracts a lot of potentially important details. At close range, a knife is the best weapons - even more deadly than a sword or axe and more damaging. But manage to put a little distance between you and a foe and the spear has a HUGE advantage. So context always matters and the rules are pretty simple.

 

[Joel Spanky Gray]

My standard house rule question: What, specifically, are you trying to achieve ?

I like your solution. Simple. But it doesn't quite succeed at the problem I was trying to solve. My problem is that I feel - again based on my own sparring and research - that shields are significantly undervalued. But in heavy armor, shields are not used as often and not as beneficial as to a lightly armored fighter. And weapons are good for defense too. I realize the calculation is a bit complex for DnD, but it makes shields more important for lightly armored fighters and less so for heavily armored ones.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

These formulas seem to result in considerably higher ACs than the core rules. Is this intentional?

 

[CubicsRube]

Quite some time back i had suggested using your proficiency bonus instead of dex bonus and otherwise tresting it the same regarding armor limits etc.

The reasoning behind this is that many weapons have advantages at different ranges and d&d combat is not nuanced enough to distinguish between these particular advvantages. But the proficiency bonus represents improving footwork, understanding enemy positioning, and interposing scenery and your weapon between you and the enemy.

I do like the idea of a seperate ranged ac though, perhaps where range adds to ac?

In any case it isnt as detailed as your system however.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

I like your solution. Simple. But it doesn't quite succeed at the problem I was trying to solve. My problem is that I feel - again based on my own sparring and research - that shields are significantly undervalued. But in heavy armor, shields are not used as often and not as beneficial as to a lightly armored fighter. And weapons are good for defense too. I realize the calculation is a bit complex for DnD, but it makes shields more important for lightly armored fighters and less so for heavily armored ones.

A 5E-style solution might look something like:

Shields. Wielding a shield gives you a base armor class of 13 + your Dexterity modifier. When you are both wearing armor and wielding a shield, you get a +1 bonus to AC (regardless of which base AC you are using).
​

Actually, I'm half-tempted to make it 13 + Strength. Would make sense, and solve a lot of complaints about Dex being the god stat.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

I do like the idea of a seperate ranged ac though, perhaps where range adds to ac?

This concept is already covered by ranged weapons having disadvantage at long range. We should be careful not to double up on our simulation.

 

[CubicsRube]

This concept is already covered by ranged weapons having disadvantage at long range. We should be careful not to double up on our simulation.

Yep thats true. Ive not put thought into the ranged side and i think it would need a lot more rework of existing rules such as the sharpshooter feat.

D&d is a tricky beast to mess with as so many things are tightly wound together, so its hard to change one thing without unravelling something somewhere else.

For example replacing the dex bonus with the proficiency bonus above makes medium armor more viable up to level 8 or level 12 with medium armor master feat but can create high ac magic users at levels 12+. Since i mever play up that high it never bothers me but if i did and i was using that rule id have to introduce another rule to cap that.

 

[CubicsRube]

A 5E-style solution might look something like:

Shields. Wielding a shield gives you a base armor class of 13 + your Dexterity modifier. When you are both wearing armor and wielding a shield, you get a +1 bonus to AC (regardless of which base AC you are using).
​

Actually, I'm half-tempted to make it 13 + Strength. Would make sense, and solve a lot of complaints about Dex being the god stat.

Id thought about it, but adding strength in the mix makes it muddy when you add in the barbarians or the monks 2nd stat to ac abilities.

Instead ive thought of introducing more min strength requirements for items. A min 13 for shields for example. Using one for a minite is fine, but all day? You gotta train for that!

I dont track encumbrance and i dont know anyone that does, but putting min strength requirements for a lot og weapons and armor could make strength much more important again.

Anyway, I digress

 

[TheCosmicKid]

Id thought about it, but adding strength in the mix makes it muddy when you add in the barbarians or the monks 2nd stat to ac abilities.

The monk can't even think about using their Unarmored Defense when they're wielding a shield, and they all set base AC so they don't stack in any case.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I like your solution. Simple. But it doesn't quite succeed at the problem I was trying to solve. My problem is that I feel - again based on my own sparring and research - that shields are significantly undervalued. But in heavy armor, shields are not used as often and not as beneficial as to a lightly armored fighter. And weapons are good for defense too. I realize the calculation is a bit complex for DnD, but it makes shields more important for lightly armored fighters and less so for heavily armored ones.

I'd suggest a much simpler solution: Increase the AC granted by a shield.

In heavy armour, you're already bouncing most hits. Increasing your survivability at the cost of effective damage by using a shield rather than a two-handed weapon isn't the same cost/benefit analysis as the boost that a shield gives your AC if you're only wearing light armour.
(Yes, technically the higher your AC gets, the more effective in terms of survivability increasing it further is. However, what we're thinking in terms of is enough AC for your HP to last you the day.)

More nuances can be added: Doubling shield bonus against missile fire that you're aware of for example. Daggers dealing increased damage while grappling. Etc.