Talk:Fencing Cloak (5e Equipment)

I love this kind of thing. It's kind of on the exotic side and it really allows for variety in character flavor. This isn't the most impressive stat-wise but it's the most impressive thing i have seen in a long time just through pure flavor and personality. :) - a HEMA enthusiast.

Wow, thanks! Marasmusine (talk) 17:25, 23 August 2015 (MDT)

+1 against piercing ONLY

this is only used against any piercing attacks; it's vulnerable against Slashing and useless at Bludgeoning attacks.--116.233.107.177 10:06, 16 June 2016 (MDT)

There are treatsies that say a cloak was effective against broadsword cuts if the whole cloak was wrapped around the arm. The AC bonus also represents using the cloak in a distractive way. Marasmusine (talk) 10:32, 16 June 2016 (MDT)

Quality Article Nomination

This article is a current quality article nominee as of 09:28, 9 March 2020 (MDT). Quality articles exemplify D&D Wiki's very best work, and therefore must meet the quality article criteria. Please discuss the page's merits below.

Historical item useful for vanilla campaigns, stable and balanced. Marasmusine (talk) 09:28, 9 March 2020 (MDT)

• Support — A more interesting and thematic way of acquiring a shield substitute than just making a +1 shield. Whether that is enough to make this a quality article may be up to some debate, but for me it is enough. --Blobby383b (talk) 21:19, 26 November 2021 (MST)

• Support — This is a very cool take on +1 shield, and I love the interactions implied by the fencing instruction rules. --Malachai (talk) 19:54, 13 August 2022 (MDT)

• Support - As an occasional fencer in real-life, I have actually used a fencing cloak in bouts. Its a lovely addition to someone's game. --Calidore Chase (talk) 20:04, 13 August 2022 (MDT)

• Oppose — First off, this is not a +1 shield. This is a makeshift shield that grants a +1 bonus against melee weapon attacks. Which is to say, half the bonus that an actual shield grants, and only against some attacks. Gaining proficiency with this makeshift shield also requires a very specific form of training. This makes it much harder to gain this proficiency than standard shield proficiency, which every Fighter, Paladin, Cleric, and even Druid gets access to. This is a strictly worse alternative to a shield, and the theme alone is not enough to carry it. --Kappatechy (talk) 00:24, 15 February 2023 (MST)

• Comment — Above makes a fair point. A +1 shield is a good idea, and making it a fencing cloak is also a good idea. However, limiting it to melee attacks *and* making it require some form of specific training seems to detract from the basic idea. There is some evidence of greek shields that used draped fabric to foul incoming arrows, so I think it would be okay to handwave that as justifying a flat +1 shield. As for training, I would either A) specify that proficiency in rapier or shortsword means you've trained in fencing, and so are proficient with this, or B) require shield proficiency, but include a mechanic that lets you switch between shield and no-shield for fewer actions —Salasay ♄ 08:04, 29 March 2023 (MDT)

1) What if, under the fencing instruction page, I include a list of backgrounds that would be considered to include fencing instruction? This would be Noble and Charlatan from the PHB.

2) It doesn't matter if it is "strictly worse" than a shield unless all you are doing is dungeon crawls. There are occasions where you have to go into an establishment without your honking great platemail and shield. Maybe you've been perfoming on stage, or you've broken out of your jail cell and haven't found your stuff yet, or you're at the grand ball, etc. Marasmusine (talk) 13:41, 30 March 2023 (MDT)

That still overcomplicates it for my taste. I would literally tie proficiency in the fencing cloak into proficiency with normal fencing *weapons*, like rapier, saber (scimitar), and smallsword (shortsword). My issue of it "being strictly worse" is that, if it's both mechanically inferior and more complicated to get proficiency with, I can't see the occasional roleplay advantage being worth it's inclusion. The niche I see for it in the current vanilla equipment is a shield that's +1 instead of +2, but has a much easier proficiency to get your hands on as a rogue or something and roleplay advantages. —Salasay ♄ 13:47, 31 March 2023 (MDT)

I am a bit split on this. You do bring up some great points Salasay, but I am also thinking it doesn't matter if this is worse to use for those who have proficiencies with shields as they can simply use a shield outside of roleplaying situations. My main worry for this is that I don't necessarily want an easily obtainable bonus to AC for spellcasters and rouges. I could see perhaps changing this cloak so those with proficiency with shields are also considered proficient with the cloak, that way those without shield proficiencies still have to go out of their way to gain a bonus to AC. --Blobby383b (talk) 21:56, 14 January 2024 (MST)