Rarity Value of this Flail? (5e)

[SociopathFriend]

Most guides I've seen use spells to figure out rarity but I don't know of a spell with this effect.

The Ruin Flail is a two-handed, heavy, martial weapon. 2d8 damage on a hit. It is magical and has +1 boost to hit. I haven't decided if it should have reach or not.
Edit: No longer has +1 to hit.

Its effect is that once per round when it successfully damages an armored opponent- it weakens their nonmagical armor and so reduces their AC by one. This effect is permanent unless Dispelled or Remove Curse is used on the armor. So you can keep reducing the AC over several rounds.

It cannot reduce a target's AC below their Unarmored value. It cannot reduce magic armor or Adamantine or Mithral armor.

I'm leaning towards Rare but I'd like a second opinion if-possible.

[nickl_2000]

I wouldn't go lower than very rare.

It does more damage than a frostbrand (very rare) or a flame tongue (rare) and neither of those has a +1.

Then you have the rider where it is going to reduce the AC of NPCs by 1 a round (assume 5e). Even in a 3 round combat that is substantial.

[SociopathFriend]

I wouldn't go lower than very rare.

It does more damage than a frostbrand (very rare) or a flame tongue (rare) and neither of those has a +1.

Then you have the rider where it is going to reduce the AC of NPCs by 1 a round (assume 5e). Even in a 3 round combat that is substantial.

Oh- I thought they had +1s. Alright- nixing that.

You are correct in it being 5e- I forgot to tag it and I dunno how to add tags on the phone after making the thread.

[nickl_2000]

Oh- I thought they had +1s. Alright- nixing that.

You are correct in it being 5e- I forgot to tag it and I dunno how to add tags on the phone after making the thread.

Even without the +1, I would put it as very rare. However you are closer to a rare at this point. I think if you reduced the extra damage to 2d6, you would be in a good place for a rare item.

[SociopathFriend]

Even without the +1, I would put it as very rare. However you are closer to a rare at this point. I think if you reduced the extra damage to 2d6, you would be in a good place for a rare item.

To be clear- it's just 2d8.

Not Flail damage die + 2d8.

Or put another way- I would have a two-handed Flail deal 2d8 because the one-handed Flail deals 1d8.

[nickl_2000]

To be clear- it's just 2d8.

Not Flail damage die + 2d8.

Or put another way- I would have a two-handed Flail deal 2d8 because the one-handed Flail deals 1d8.

That wasn't clear at all, I missed that in the reading of it. :) Then yes, rare is perfect for it

[SociopathFriend]

It occurs to me in hindsight that by lowering something's AC by 1- such a weapon would effectively become a +1 weapon after the first blow anyways.

[nickl_2000]

It occurs to me in hindsight that by lowering something's AC by 1- such a weapon would effectively become a +1 weapon after the first blow anyways.

Yes, but only against armored opponents. It wouldn't work against someone who is using Mage Armor or has natural Armor. Don't get me wrong, it is something you would need to watch out for to see how it does, but it may not be that bad.

[JNAProductions]

Yes, but only against armored opponents. It wouldn't work against someone who is using Mage Armor or has natural Armor. Don't get me wrong, it is something you would need to watch out for to see how it does, but it may not be that bad.

But it also extends that benefit to anyone else attacking them.

To the OP-not sure exactly what rarity I'd peg it at, but it's a neat item! :)

[oogaboogagoblin]

very rare at least, maybe even legendary. 2d8 damage is nothing to scoff at, but more importantly the ability to permanently reduce ac with no save is really powerful, especially in a drawn out battle.

[SociopathFriend]

very rare at least, maybe even legendary. 2d8 damage is nothing to scoff at, but more importantly the ability to permanently reduce ac with no save is really powerful, especially in a drawn out battle.

Only if the opponent:
1. Wears armor
2. Said armor isn't magical/adamantine/mithral/various magic metals

It's an armor-destroying weapon. Not an AC-destroying weapon.

For example there's no scenario where a Barbarian with only his bared chest and mighty abs for armor even notices the magic.

[oogaboogagoblin]

1. Wears armor
2. Said armor isn't magical/adamantine/mithral/various magic metals

It's an armor-destroying weapon. Not an AC-destroying weapon.

thats true, but most pvp and humanoid monsters have armour

[JNAProductions]

1. Wears armor
2. Said armor isn't magical/adamantine/mithral/various magic metals

It's an armor-destroying weapon. Not an AC-destroying weapon.

thats true, but most pvp and humanoid monsters have armour

PvP is not what the game is designed for, and is generally frowned upon, if not banned, at most tables.

Also, Mind Flayers don’t wear armor.
Nor do many outsiders.
The Martial Artist, from Volo’s.
And many have limited armor-giving +2 or +3 to AC. A nice little chunk of bonus, but not game-breaking.

Not to mention, you could be facing non-humanoid foes.