Shield Miss Chance?

[PraxisVetli]

So, I've heard of a houserule where shields grant miss chance, or something along those lines.
Can anyone elaborate on that?
Does it still grant the AC bonus?
How much miss chabce?

[Calimehter]

I haven't heard of any one particular house rule like this . . . but it would make sense to translate the shield's AC bonus (as a percentage of a D20) into a miss chance. A heavy shield would grant a 10% miss chance, for instance, since its normal 2 point AC bonus would normally give you a 10% chance of being missed on an attack.

The straight up miss chance then gives you the same result as a normal attack roll, but is superior in certain circumstances like touch attacks.

[Blackhawk748]

Giants and Graveyards uses this rule. Its a homebrewed 3.5 that pretty much puts everybody at T3 or T4. I think it translates over to 5% per +1 shield bonus and ya you still keep the AC.

[KillianHawkeye]

I've heard of house-rules for using a shield as Cover, but this is the first one I've heard that involved miss chances. IMO, using the Cover rules makes more sense to me.

[Heliomance]

I haven't heard of any one particular house rule like this . . . but it would make sense to translate the shield's AC bonus (as a percentage of a D20) into a miss chance. A heavy shield would grant a 10% miss chance, for instance, since its normal 2 point AC bonus would normally give you a 10% chance of being missed on an attack.

The straight up miss chance then gives you the same result as a normal attack roll, but is superior in certain circumstances like touch attacks.

That's... not how it works. If you have an AC of 10 and I have +15 to hit, getting +2 AC doesn't give you a 10% chance to not be hit. If you have an AC of 30 and I have +5 to hit, getting +2 AC doesn't give you a 10% chance to not be hit. In fact, I think the only time it does give exactly a 10% chance to not be hit is when my to hit exactly equals your AC without it.

[Averis Vol]

The way I do it in my game is:

Bucklers give 10%, light shields 20%, heavy shields 30%, tower shields 50%. It is also important to point out that animated doesn exist in my game, I want people to sword and board, not two hand behind the floating riot shield. The ac bonus also goes to reflex saves. Take it as you will, it works okay in my games.

[PraxisVetli]

The way I do it in my game is:

Bucklers give 10%, light shields 20%, heavy shields 30%, tower shields 50%. It is also important to point out that animated doesn exist in my game, I want people to sword and board, not two hand behind the floating riot shield. The ac bonus also goes to reflex saves. Take it as you will, it works okay in my games.

Looks pretty solid.
Has there been any balance issues?

[Deadtissue]

So, I've heard of a houserule where shields grant miss chance, or something along those lines.
Can anyone elaborate on that?
Does it still grant the AC bonus?
How much miss chabce?

I house ruled that a sheild provides the AC bonus with a (10% Buckler/Small Sheild, 25% Heavy Shield, 35% tower sheild) chance of blocking any reasonable attack (No AE or DM discretion). Gaining this required the user to be proficient and use a move action to gain it (Without the Move Action you just gain the AC as normal). This represented the effort of actually blocking with the shield instead of just holding it in front of you.

It worked well balance wise and was well received as it gave characters more of a reason to go sword an board. There were enchantments you could get to raise the block chance 5-10% but Animated shields just provide AC for those who wanted them.

YMMV

[sonofzeal]

That's... not how it works. If you have an AC of 10 and I have +15 to hit, getting +2 AC doesn't give you a 10% chance to not be hit. If you have an AC of 30 and I have +5 to hit, getting +2 AC doesn't give you a 10% chance to not be hit. In fact, I think the only time it does give exactly a 10% chance to not be hit is when my to hit exactly equals your AC without it.

It gives a 10% chance not to be hit any time your attack bonus is "reasonable" compared to their AC.

If your attack bonus is +10, their AC can be from 10 to 28 and it'll work out. That's a pretty reasonable range there, at the levels when you might expect a +10 total attack bonus.

[kernal42]

It gives a 10% chance not to be hit any time your attack bonus is "reasonable" compared to their AC.

If your attack bonus is +10, their AC can be from 10 to 28 and it'll work out. That's a pretty reasonable range there, at the levels when you might expect a +10 total attack bonus.

That's not correct.

If my attack bonus is +10 and your AC is 28, I hit on a roll of 18, 19, or 20, so 15% of the time.
Now if that +2 AC from the shield is instead a 10% miss chance: I hit on a roll of 15-20, or 25% of the time, but 10% of those would-be hits miss because of the shield, so instead I hit 22.5% of the time.

With automatic misses on a natural 1, there is no situation where -2 AC = 10% miss chance.

Cheers,
Kernal

[sonofzeal]

That's not correct.

If my attack bonus is +10 and your AC is 28, I hit on a roll of 18, 19, or 20, so 15% of the time.
Now if that +2 AC from the shield is instead a 10% miss chance: I hit on a roll of 15-20, or 25% of the time, but 10% of those would-be hits miss because of the shield, so instead I hit 22.5% of the time.

With automatic misses on a natural 1, there is no situation where -2 AC = 10% miss chance.

Cheers,
Kernal

Er.... yes. Of course. A separate 10% miss chance is not the same as adding 10% to an existing miss chance. That's why it's a houserule.

You do bring up a valid point in that, except in corner cases, this houserule is a nerf rather than a buff. I'd recommend increasing all of the values slightly to compensate.

[LTwerewolf]

Can always give shields both the +2 (which is really nothing) and the miss chance.