I would love for there to be different types of shields in 5e. Not a ton. Just two other types. The current 5e shield would be a "medium shield," a "small shield" would be called a buckler and not take up a hand, and a "large shield" would be a tower shield.
The buckler would give a +1 to AC, and anyone could use it, the tower shield would require a certain Strength score to use (16, maybe), and would grant a +3 to AC.
Ideally, there would also be rules for blocking attacks as a reaction with shields, and stuff like that.
Bucklers were traditionally held in the hand. It should be as easy to drop pickup as any weapon though.
Okay, maybe "bucklers" aren't a good name for them. However, these "bucklers" would be the shields that can be strapped to the forearm instead of having to be held.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Ok, maybe asking the question I did wasn’t a smart idea on my part. I created a thread where I posed the earlier stated question as I genuinely do not want to be part of the reason this thread gets locked by derailing the actual topic.
Okay, maybe "bucklers" aren't a good name for them. However, these "bucklers" would be the shields that can be strapped to the forearm instead of having to be held.
I think it was Inquisitive Coder who originally put together a document I pigjacked bits of for my own games, who cut out the 'Parry' reaction from the Defensive Duelist feat and assigned it to different items or class abilities instead. Buckler shields didn't provide any base AC, but if you were proficient with them (proficiency with light armor gained buckler proficiency, as well), you could use them to Parry. He treated Parry as, basically, a sort of weapon property that could be attached to other items, such as parrying daggers, rapiers, or certain specific magic items. I like the idea a great deal, and my game still uses some of those parry-based items.
Okay, that could work then. What would bucklers do differently from 5e shields?
For a Buckler I would treat it as a one-handed item that provided +1 AC and could be dropped or equipped just like a weapon, but could also be disarmed.
I'm going to be taking some of my suggestions from this thread and others and type them up in a Xanathar's Guide of Everything-style format and put it in the DMs Guild product that I've been working (Levistus's Codex of Curiosities).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Yep all species should get a feat at the start imo. It seems silly that only variant humans can for example have the two weapon fighting from session 1.
I would give everyone (including Variant Humans) an extra feat at level 1. However, the feat that the races get must be one tied to their race, background, or class (halflings could get Lucky, Squat Nimbleness, Second Chance, or Bountiful Luck, Soldiers could get Martial Adept, Charger, Durable, an Armored Feat, or Weapon Master, Artificers could get Skilled, Heavily Armored, or Artificer Adept, and so on). This would make your choices for class, background, and species even more important to you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Yep all species should get a feat at the start imo. It seems silly that only variant humans can for example have the two weapon fighting from session 1.
Indeed! Humans should get ... what exactly do they get besides a feat up front again?
Variant Humans get an extra skill, +1 to 2 Ability Scores, a feat, and an extra language.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I think that "Minor feats" and "Major feats" should exist. Minor feats are less powerful and more RP/flavor oriented, like linguist. Everyone would get a minor feat at level one. You would have to sacrifice and ASI to get a Major feat. Variant Humans could choose to take a Major Feat at level one instead of the usual Minor.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
I would make some "feat trees." Not actually like previous editions or other systems, where you have to take 3 or 4 different feats beforehand to get more powerful feats, just some improvements of feats that already exist. For example, I would like some improved versions of the Elemental Adept feats that require you to have a certain damage type of that feat to gain specific features, one for each damage type. Or, there could be a feat that improves Two-Weapon Fighting, but requires the Dual Wielder feat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Yep all species should get a feat at the start imo. It seems silly that only variant humans can for example have the two weapon fighting from session 1.
Indeed! Humans should get ... what exactly do they get besides a feat up front again?
Variant Humans get an extra skill, +1 to 2 Ability Scores, a feat, and an extra language.
And other races get no skills, no ability score bonuses and never get any extra languages? The complaint is that every race should get a feat up front. If that happens, toss humans away?
I never said that. I would suggest that you go back about 5 posts and read what I recommended for how to make Variant Humans still valid while allowing for everyone to get a free feat at level 1.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Yep all species should get a feat at the start imo. It seems silly that only variant humans can for example have the two weapon fighting from session 1.
Indeed! Humans should get ... what exactly do they get besides a feat up front again?
Variant Humans get an extra skill, +1 to 2 Ability Scores, a feat, and an extra language.
And other races get no skills, no ability score bonuses and never get any extra languages? The complaint is that every race should get a feat up front. If that happens, toss humans away?
I never said that. I would suggest that you go back about 5 posts and read what I recommended for how to make Variant Humans still valid while allowing for everyone to get a free feat at level 1.
You seem to have said it should be a racial or background related feat, but (a) that still leaves variant humans net down a feat since they could pick anything you suggest already and (b) 'background related' can be pretty much anything.
If you are referring to some other suggestion you made, I can't see it, at least not on a cursory skim-through...
I would say instead of the Variant Human option, they get the base package (+1 to everything) and a Feat
I would allow all races to get a feat tied to their species/background/class, including Variant Human, and Variant Humans would get any feat of their choice, with no restrictions besides the normal prerequisites.
Also, a "background related feat" can't be "pretty much anything." A Sage would not be able to take Great Weapon Master, but they could take Keen Mind, Linguist, Magic Adept (Wizard), and the like. An Entertainer could take Skilled, Magic Initiate (Bard), Actor, and other feats like that. That's what I meant by "background-related" feat. It is tied to your background, not your backstory.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
It would be the vast majority of feats (excluding racial ones) you could get from your background this way, but you wouldn't be able to get Great Weapon Master, Sharpshooter, Elemental Adept, Spell Sniper, War Caster, Mage Slayer, or other feats like that, and you would have to specifically take background to get access to those feats. The feats you could get would be the more minor ones.
Yes, that is true. I'm not sure why that is being brought up, but it is accurate.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Edit: What if the sage specializes in knowledge of martial techniques? An entertainer needs to know how to portray realistic swordplay. Do not underestimate how 'related' any given feat can be. (In real life this kind of thing comes up in respect to what counts as work related studies for professions such as accounting or litigator. Knowing such things, even though they may seem unrelated to accounting knowledge or theory or to the law can help understand clients and situations involving those fields).
That's not what sages are. . . This is what the PHB says sages are:
You spent years learning the lore of the multiverse. You scoured manuscripts, studied scrolls, and listened to the greatest experts on the subjects that interest you. Your efforts have made you a master in your fields of study.
Thus, that would not be a valid option.
An entertainer who uses swords (gladiator) could possible take the Martial Adept or Weapon Master feat. There would be limitations based on the background. An athlete wouldn't be able to take Magic Initiate (Warlock) or Tracker (UA), but could take the Athlete feat. If the backgrounds were all so vague and undefined, there would be no purpose in having different backgrounds that give skills and other proficiencies.
I brought it up because it makes certain already popular backgrounds (such as soldier or similar for a melee) even more desirable than they already are. Thus I do not really see it as any actual limitation.
It is a limitation as much as being a Soldier Fighter that grants the Athletics and Intimidation skills is a limitation.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Bucklers were traditionally held in the hand. It should be as easy to drop pickup as any weapon though.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Okay, maybe "bucklers" aren't a good name for them. However, these "bucklers" would be the shields that can be strapped to the forearm instead of having to be held.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Ok, maybe asking the question I did wasn’t a smart idea on my part. I created a thread where I posed the earlier stated question as I genuinely do not want to be part of the reason this thread gets locked by derailing the actual topic.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/general-discussion/86407-what-is-the-spirit-core-baseline-foundation-of-d-d
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Characters for Tenebris Sine Fine
RoughCoronet's Greater Wills
Those were called “Lantern Shields.”
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Okay, that could work then. What would bucklers do differently from 5e shields?
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I think it was Inquisitive Coder who originally put together a document I pigjacked bits of for my own games, who cut out the 'Parry' reaction from the Defensive Duelist feat and assigned it to different items or class abilities instead. Buckler shields didn't provide any base AC, but if you were proficient with them (proficiency with light armor gained buckler proficiency, as well), you could use them to Parry. He treated Parry as, basically, a sort of weapon property that could be attached to other items, such as parrying daggers, rapiers, or certain specific magic items. I like the idea a great deal, and my game still uses some of those parry-based items.
Please do not contact or message me.
For a Buckler I would treat it as a one-handed item that provided +1 AC and could be dropped or equipped just like a weapon, but could also be disarmed.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I'm going to be taking some of my suggestions from this thread and others and type them up in a Xanathar's Guide of Everything-style format and put it in the DMs Guild product that I've been working (Levistus's Codex of Curiosities).
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
No Variant Human with starting feat but every race gets a feat at level 1.
Yep all species should get a feat at the start imo. It seems silly that only variant humans can for example have the two weapon fighting from session 1.
I would give everyone (including Variant Humans) an extra feat at level 1. However, the feat that the races get must be one tied to their race, background, or class (halflings could get Lucky, Squat Nimbleness, Second Chance, or Bountiful Luck, Soldiers could get Martial Adept, Charger, Durable, an Armored Feat, or Weapon Master, Artificers could get Skilled, Heavily Armored, or Artificer Adept, and so on). This would make your choices for class, background, and species even more important to you.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Variant Humans get an extra skill, +1 to 2 Ability Scores, a feat, and an extra language.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I think that "Minor feats" and "Major feats" should exist. Minor feats are less powerful and more RP/flavor oriented, like linguist. Everyone would get a minor feat at level one. You would have to sacrifice and ASI to get a Major feat. Variant Humans could choose to take a Major Feat at level one instead of the usual Minor.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
I would make some "feat trees." Not actually like previous editions or other systems, where you have to take 3 or 4 different feats beforehand to get more powerful feats, just some improvements of feats that already exist. For example, I would like some improved versions of the Elemental Adept feats that require you to have a certain damage type of that feat to gain specific features, one for each damage type. Or, there could be a feat that improves Two-Weapon Fighting, but requires the Dual Wielder feat.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I never said that. I would suggest that you go back about 5 posts and read what I recommended for how to make Variant Humans still valid while allowing for everyone to get a free feat at level 1.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I would say instead of the Variant Human option, they get the base package (+1 to everything) and a Feat
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I would allow all races to get a feat tied to their species/background/class, including Variant Human, and Variant Humans would get any feat of their choice, with no restrictions besides the normal prerequisites.
Also, a "background related feat" can't be "pretty much anything." A Sage would not be able to take Great Weapon Master, but they could take Keen Mind, Linguist, Magic Adept (Wizard), and the like. An Entertainer could take Skilled, Magic Initiate (Bard), Actor, and other feats like that. That's what I meant by "background-related" feat. It is tied to your background, not your backstory.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
It would be the vast majority of feats (excluding racial ones) you could get from your background this way, but you wouldn't be able to get Great Weapon Master, Sharpshooter, Elemental Adept, Spell Sniper, War Caster, Mage Slayer, or other feats like that, and you would have to specifically take background to get access to those feats. The feats you could get would be the more minor ones.
Yes, that is true. I'm not sure why that is being brought up, but it is accurate.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
That's not what sages are. . . This is what the PHB says sages are:
Thus, that would not be a valid option.
An entertainer who uses swords (gladiator) could possible take the Martial Adept or Weapon Master feat. There would be limitations based on the background. An athlete wouldn't be able to take Magic Initiate (Warlock) or Tracker (UA), but could take the Athlete feat. If the backgrounds were all so vague and undefined, there would be no purpose in having different backgrounds that give skills and other proficiencies.
It is a limitation as much as being a Soldier Fighter that grants the Athletics and Intimidation skills is a limitation.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Wait since when does a feat at level 1 make humans pointless?
Regular humans already don't have a feat at level 1, so this would be a buff to humans same as all other species.