Talk:Custom Carts (5e Equipment)

On the chance that someone objects to AC increasing with size: AC is actually only a representation of how hard it is to damage something, regardless whether you "hit" it or not. This is why heavier armor increases your AC, rather than granting the damage reduction we normally see in video games. It isn't making you harder to hit, it's making you harder to injure. These rules assume that, no matter what size or material it is made of, the craftsmen will construct the vehicle in a structurally sound fashion for its size. Thus, a larger cart will always be sturdier. Additionally, as the vehicle grows in size, the less any given part of the structure matters to its overall integrity. So, while a character may be able to chop a small cart's railing in half with one swing, a larger cart may have much thicker, larger guarding systems, taking many more swings to do as much damage. --Kydo (talk) 23:43, 22 October 2015 (MDT)

Size has never been a factor in D&D AC, except in 3rd edition in which your AC decreases the larger you are (because you are easier to hit). Good armor increases your AC because you are not your armor: the armor is taking the "hit" for you. In the case of structures like carts, if I attack a small wooden cart and a big wooden cart, I have the same chance of hitting and I hit with the same force. However, the large cart has more hit points so it takes a proportionally lesser wound (the equivalent of where you say "as the vehicle grows in size, the less any given part of the structure matters to its overall integrity. ")

The material that the structure is made from does effect AC. Look at the siege equipment in the DMG. Large and Huge wooden structures both have AC 15. The metal structures (cannon, couldron) have AC 19. The Huge objects have more HP than the Large objects. Marasmusine (talk) 06:46, 23 October 2015 (MDT)

I know size is not typically a factor in AC, hence the need for an explanation for the reasoning being used here. I disagree about your point on the concept behind armor AC, but that would be a tangent, and probably a very long one, and one D&D players have discussed to death. I am of the opinion that "you hitting me in the armor" is still "you hitting me", whether it hurts me or not. This is mostly a difference of style/philosophy between you and me as DMs, and really has no impact on the game itself, or this system, and discussing it much further is unlikely to sway either of our opinions or make any difference.

What I will say is that, game-play-wise, slowly scaling AC with the size of the cart along with smaller HP growth (unsurprisingly) turned out to be much more effective at increasing the overall durability of the cart than dramatically increasing HP, and it did so in a much more believable way. I had it the other way around at first, with the smallest cart having 20AC, and the largest having 1, but the consequence was so dramatic and unrealistic, it inspired me to invert the system. The problem with AC based on difficulty of being hit, is that basically all objects would, realistically, have 0 AC, with an AC bonus based on range and speed if it is moving, and a penalty based on size. That's a pain in the arse. I needed a way to make wrecking a cart take more swings without doing any real damage to it.

Have you ever struck a solid block of steel with a sledge hammer? I have. It does nothing. Depending on the quality of the steel, you might dent or scratch it a little. A low quality hammer head might even shatter before it ever deals any real damage to a solid steel object. Weapons in D&D do not display these kinds of properties, but scaling AC can emulate this effect. The tougher the material is, the more swings it takes, and these rules assume that, by necessity, bigger=tougher. To do the same thing using HP alone would require HP to scale exponentially with size, and would require a different formula for calculating HP for each base material that could be used in construction. The largest of carts would have nearly a thousand HP. It would be both overcomplicated and outrageous. --Kydo (talk) 07:53, 23 October 2015 (MDT)

There's some guidelines for object AC and HP in the DMG p. 246-247, again AC is tied to material and HP is tied to size (and resilience) Marasmusine (talk) 08:31, 23 October 2015 (MDT)

I am aware. I did reference that material while building this and chose to deviate from the standard, as it produced unsatisfactory results. --Kydo (talk) 09:01, 23 October 2015 (MDT)

Besides, if I stuck to the standard, there wouldn't be much room for people to make up individual carts of their own, as the difference between an original creation and the product of this system would be minimal. I don't want this to be the alpha-and-omega of land vehicles in D&D, so much as one approach to rapidly creating many variations of a common form. In particular, it allows crafty players to engineer and build their own unique vehicles. --Kydo (talk) 09:21, 23 October 2015 (MDT)

I have to point out that in your Body part you said the maximum length was 3* the maximum width but in the next paragraph you said the largest cart would be a 40*60 cart. This lead to confusion on my part should it be 3* the with of a draft animal or 40*120, i personally think that 40*120 is a little outrageous so i think the correction should be 3* the width of the draft animal. also wouldn't skies be able to go over sand as it is vary slimier to snow. Great artificial otherwise--104.219.137.251 19:39, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

You are correct. That is an error. Thank you. --Kydo (talk) 08:41, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

I found a small discrepancy in the section on speed of the cart based on the draft animals. Using your current system, unless I personally misread it, it seems that the draft animal's size or strength has no effect on the final speed of the cart. For example, a mastiff and a draft horse have the same speed statistic, so essentially they would have the same final speed on a cart of the same size. Having two mastiffs tow a cart side by side or 2 draft horses in tandem would, in the end, both result in the same final speed for the same given cart. Looking at this as a DM using it in a campaign brought this up. I am planning on introducing it but am unsure how you would implement the speed relative to the size and/or strength of the draft animals. --UlynSilverstone (talk) 04:26, 13 August 2017 (EDT)

I wouldn't. That was intentional. To quote the section on draft animals, "This system does not make any assumption in regards to appropriate draft animals. Use Tarrasques if you want." --Kydo (talk) 15:13, 14 February 2018 (MST)

Weight

The actual weight of the cart is noted at the start of the article. It's not clear which number is the construction modifier, although it can be deduced by being in lbs. The calculation for the total weight of the cart seems to be missing.

Weird, make-believe idea that draft animals can't work in threes or wider rows

I made changes to the draft animals section to remove the arbitrary restriction on draft animals to being hitched in rows no wider than two abreast. This seems to be the idea of someone with limited knowledge of animal-based haulage based on seeing some pictures, as 1-by-X or 2-by-X hitching is certainly the norm, but also certainly not required. The three-abreast troika was developed in the 1600s (primarily, but not exclusively, for drawing sleighs/sleds) and made for "a very high speed on land for vehicles in the 17th–19th centuries, making the troika closely associated with the fast ride." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troika_(driving)) Perhaps it should reasonably be more challenging to control a vehicle hitched to a troika team, but that's beyond the scope of the changes I made.