Okay, Armor confuses me.

[Mockingbird]

This is going to sound really, really, really stupid, but here goes..
Why in the world does armor change how hard it is to hit you? In any case, it should make you easier to hit.

Heavy armor is weird. A set a full plate in Pathfinder gives you the same move speed penalty as Hide Armor. But how does 50 pounds of steel give you the same maneuverability as a layer of animal hided?

I really think that Heavy Armor should make you easier to hit, but give you Damage Reduction, and light armor should make you harder to hit, but take more damage..

Could someone explain how the original method makes sense? T_T

[Hiro Protagonest]

*sigh*

max dex bonus.

You can test how much easier it is to block a sword from hitting your legs in a breastplate than fullplate if you want.

[erikun]

Having solid metallic things inside your body is what you want to avoid. Successfully doing so means that you are "not hit", which actually means not being damaged.

Armor keeps the solid metallic things on the outside of your body, where they are supposed to be. If an attack that "missed" could have missed because you dodged it, because it your armor absorbed the attack, because your shield deflected it, or because magic warded the attack off. It also could be all of the above - a solid hit that might pierce a piece of armor could do nothing if the bearer twisted a bit and took the attack as a glancing blow. D&D tends to use the term "miss" as a shorthand for not successfully dealing damage; it does not mean that the character leapt out of the way at the last moment.

This is also why touch attacks ignore armor: because they only involve touching an opponent, not piercing throught their equipment.

[Fax Celestis]

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GameplayAndStorySegregation

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AcceptableBreaksFromReality

[Diefje]

It makes it harder to wound you. You have to hit the heavy armor in a weak spot, or hit it so hard that you can penetrate it. A lower AC armor either has more weak spots (breastplate vs fullplate) or is easier to penetrate (leather vs plate).

A "miss" can just as easily be "the blow glances off the armor" or "The player ducks" or " the shield deflects the swing". All of them don't miss the target, hey just fail to wound him.

[Nerd-o-rama]

Think of a miss as any attack that does 0 damage - because it missed you outright, or because your armor deflected the blow.

[Gullintanni]

Having solid metallic things inside your body is what you want to avoid. Successfully doing so means that you are "not hit", which actually means not being damaged.

Armor keeps the solid metallic things on the outside of your body, where they are supposed to be. If an attack that "missed" could have missed because you dodged it, because it your armor absorbed the attack, because your shield deflected it, or because magic warded the attack off. It also could be all of the above.

Pretty much this. D&D abstracts combat. When you're wearing armor, a miss doesn't mean they failed to hit you, it means they failed to hit you in such a way as to deal you any meaningful damage.

"The blade strikes you and clatters harmlessly off the layered plates that cover you."

That describes a miss.

"Your dodging and weaving allows you to avoid the cut of the enemy's blade."

This also describes a miss.

That's just the way D&D works. It's a bit inelegant, but it functions more or less as intended until high levels...at which point AC becomes useless anyway. If you prefer, there is a variant rule for using Armor as Damage Reduction.

Relevant SRD Link:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/armorAsDamageReduction.htm

[Big Fau]

This is going to sound really, really, really stupid, but here goes..
Why in the world does armor change how hard it is to hit you? In any case, it should make you easier to hit.

Heavy armor is weird. A set a full plate in Pathfinder gives you the same move speed penalty as Hide Armor. But how does 50 pounds of steel give you the same maneuverability as a layer of animal hided?

I really think that Heavy Armor should make you easier to hit, but give you Damage Reduction, and light armor should make you harder to hit, but take more damage..

Could someone explain how the original method makes sense? T_T

A lot of people advocate the "Armor as DR" variant in UA, but the problem is that it ends up being worse than the armor system normally is (and the normal armor system is pretty bad).


Truth is, the AC system in 3.5 was designed to streamline the mechanics from 1st and AD&D so it didn't take forever to figure out during combat. It isn't meant to be realistic, as D&D isn't supposed to be realistic to begin with.

[Anderlith]

I hate how people think plate armor is heavy/cumbersome. It's not. You can do sprints & tumbles & such in plate & it won't encumber you at all.

[Zombimode]

Truth is, the AC system in 3.5 was designed to streamline the mechanics from 1st and AD&D so it didn't take forever to figure out during combat. with.

Uhm, the math hasnt changed. In any edition, to hit a guy in Full Plate with no additional AC boni an attack roll of 18 or more is required. Only the form of writing things down has changed, not the actual mechanics.
But maybe thats what you meant.

[Tokuhara]

I hate how people think plate armor is heavy/cumbersome. It's not. You can do sprints & tumbles & such in plate & it won't encumber you at all.

Shown and proven in Deadliest Warrior Season 3: Joan of Arc vs. William the Conquerer

[PotatoNinja]

On my phone so I can't post links but

Running in plate armour requires about twice as much oxygen intake, there was a study done on it inlondon iirc not long ago.

Yes, you can do basic cartwheels and even a practiced flip in plate armour if it's not full plate, but it's much harder to do such acts. Olypic gymnists don't waer heavy armor, and for good reason.

[Spiryt]

A lot of people advocate the "Armor as DR" variant in UA, but the problem is that it ends up being worse than the armor system normally is (and the normal armor system is pretty bad).


Pretty much this.

If anyone wants armor as DR badly, he can add some in addition to normal rules. It should be just alright.

[Tokuhara]

Pretty much this.

If anyone wants armor as DR badly, he can add some in addition to normal rules. It should be just alright.

I agree with Spiryt. You will recieve 1d4 cookies in 2d6 days

[Spiryt]

I agree with Spiryt. You will recieve 1d4 cookies in 2d6 days

Thanks, but:


Shown and proven in Deadliest Warrior Season 3: Joan of Arc vs. William the Conquerer

Only thing that DW can prove is if new Hanwei blades line is better at cutting some stuff than previous. :smallwink:




Olypic gymnists don't waer heavy armor, and for good reason.

Because they don't do any fighting.

[PotatoNinja]

Tumbling is tumbling, regardless of weather or not it is in combat. To say that armor offers no encumberence is absurd.

[Anderlith]

On my phone so I can't post links but

Running in plate armour requires about twice as much oxygen intake, there was a study done on it inlondon iirc not long ago.

Yes, you can do basic cartwheels and even a practiced flip in plate armour if it's not full plate, but it's much harder to do such acts. Olypic gymnists don't waer heavy armor, and for good reason.

This is because of weight, not restricted movement. Which doesn't come into effect when making a max dex check or arcane spell failure. I can accept the armor penalty though.

[Lord of Sporks]

Tumbling is tumbling, regardless of weather or not it is in combat. To say that armor offers no encumberence is absurd.

Except armor does offer encubrence. Tumble is one of the many skills affected by our Armor Check penelty, and a skill that can't be performed at all if your speed has been reduced by armor.

[Tokuhara]

Only thing that DW can prove is if new Hanwei blades line is better at cutting some stuff than previous. :smallwink:


DW said that Fullplate offers a 15% mobility reduction vs Chainmail offering a 20%.

[Seerow]

Tumbling is tumbling, regardless of weather or not it is in combat. To say that armor offers no encumberence is absurd.

And that's what armor check penalties show!



Besides that, remember past the earliest levels, we're talking about guys with superhuman strength. The Fighter by level 20 is boasting 34-36 strength without trying too hard (heavy optimization gets you 60+, going into TO can get you infinite). A Fighter with 34 strength has a light load of 1165lbs. Yes, that's his light load. He can literally pick up more than a half a ton and run with it completely unencumbered. His maximum heavy load is 3500lbs. Nearly two tons that he can walk around with and just be a bit slower. He is actually capable of lifting 7,000 lbs, and can push/drag 17,500 lbs. So your average level 20 fighter can pick up 3 and a half tons, and push around about 9 tons.

Actually forget the "except at earliest levels" a level 1 Orc Barbarian has up to 26 strength, and considers 300 lbs a light load, and is capable of moving up to 4,600 lbs (over 2 tons!).

Do you seriously want to argue a guy with that kind of strength is bothered in the least by wearing 50lbs worth of armor? If anything, armor encumbrance is too high, and it should be figured based off of the encumbrance rules. (So a 10 strength guy wearing Full Plate has a Medium Load and takes movement/skill penalties for wearing it, but a guy with around 14-16 strength doesn't notice it, and a guy with 20+ str can get away with wearing stuff like adamantine mountain plate despite the huge weight without any penalties because he's that damn strong.

[gbprime]

technically, it's your TOUCH AC that determines how tough it is to land a blow on you. But your regular armor class also includes things like natural armor and armor that basically make that contact "not count".

So take a fighter with a 20 AC and a 13 Touch AC. Any blow that scores a 13 actually hits, but it has to make 20 to get through. Anything from 13 to 19 is absorbed by the armor/shield. In game terms this has no effect whatsoever, but if you're roleplaying it out, you get that satisfying clank of armor doing it's job. :smallwink:

[Dead_Jester]

DW said that Fullplate offers a 15% mobility reduction vs Chainmail offering a 20%.

But DW probably wasn't using real plate armor or real chainmail. Honestly, I don't think they have ever used a suit of chainmail that wasn't cheap butted mail with really heavy gauge. And where they wearing the chainmail the proper way?

As for as changing the movement speed, the actual physical encumbrance of the armor (as in, how it restricts your movement) has a much bigger impact on your movement speed with it than it's actual weight if the armor is worn correctly.

[Seerow]

As for as changing the movement speed, the actual physical encumbrance of the armor (as in, how it restricts your movement) has a much bigger impact on your movement speed with it than it's actual weight if the armor is worn correctly.


And why wouldn't armor be fitted in such a way that it doesn't hinder your movement? If it is physically possible at all for a normal person to move a short distance at a normal pace in heavy armor, then for a D&D character it should be possible to do so constantly because D&D characters are so far above the normal person it's laughable.

[Dead_Jester]

It makes sense if you consider armor out of the abstract d&d concept.

Some forms of armor are inherently more restrictive and/or cannot be very well adjusted. Take your average full coat of mail; even if tailored to the user, it can't stretch, and it's usually a single unit, so it's either pretty tight (limiting movement to an extent) or a little looser, adding weight and pocket of loose chain that interfere with your movement. Also, even with a good belt to help support the weight, a warrior with mail tends to be top heavy.

Most armor cannot allow completely free movement because to do that, you'd need to have joints that enable complete freedom of movement, joints that would probably be either impossible to make or would add weak points to the armor.

Finally, the fact that a d&d character is, on average, stronger does not make it so his armor doesn't make it hard to move; no matter how strong or agile you are, you can't bend down with most breastplate, and it's physically harder to run with plate or mail armor (you don't have as much freedom of movement, and even if you are used to it, it's probably not your optimal way of moving).

[Golden Ladybug]

This might interest you OP: Armor as Damage Reduction (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/armorAsDamageReduction.htm)

But other than that, I'll just echo what's already been said; heavier armor doesn't necessarily make you harder to hit, it just makes being hit matter signifigantly less.

[Greenish]

Olypic gymnists don't waer heavy armor, and for good reason.The good reason being that no one's coming at them with murder in their mind and three to four feet of solid steel in their hands. Also, because olympic gymnasts are interested in such minute differences in performance nobody in else would even notice.

AC system is an abstraction, yes, but as such it works pretty well.

[Aidan305]

This might interest you OP: Armor as Damage Reduction (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/armorAsDamageReduction.htm)
Alternately, there's a set of alternative rules for armour as damage reduction in the pathfinder supplement: Ultimate Combat

[Hiro Protagonest]

Alternately, there's a set of alternative rules for armour as damage reduction in the pathfinder supplement: Ultimate Combat

The Armor as DR rules from UC are crap. Face a creature of large or larger and you might as well be naked. Huge when your armor is magic. Gargantuan if it's adamantine, but mithral is of higher priority than that. So basically, face any creature that's huge or larger and be naked.

[herrhauptmann]

It makes sense if you consider armor out of the abstract d&d concept.

Some forms of armor are inherently more restrictive and/or cannot be very well adjusted. Take your average full coat of mail; even if tailored to the user, it can't stretch, and it's usually a single unit, so it's either pretty tight (limiting movement to an extent) or a little looser, adding weight and pocket of loose chain that interfere with your movement. Also, even with a good belt to help support the weight, a warrior with mail tends to be top heavy.

Most armor cannot allow completely free movement because to do that, you'd need to have joints that enable complete freedom of movement, joints that would probably be either impossible to make or would add weak points to the armor.

Finally, the fact that a d&d character is, on average, stronger does not make it so his armor doesn't make it hard to move; no matter how strong or agile you are, you can't bend down with most breastplate, and it's physically harder to run with plate or mail armor (you don't have as much freedom of movement, and even if you are used to it, it's probably not your optimal way of moving).
If you use the right pattern of rings, chain will 'stretch' to accomodate someone with a larger chest or belly. It just ends up quite a bit shorter.

If your armor looks like Elmer Fudds (http://daddytypes.com/archive/wod_1.jpg), just a trashcan with holes cut in it, then of course you won't be able to do much movement in it.
But if it's articulated properly, then you can start moving very well. At which point, it's just a matter of being slower because you're wearing 40 pounds of steel on your body.
Cartwheels in armor: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyCq9GLVZ2Q
More cartwheels: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm11yAXeegg&NR=1

Or if youtube doesn't sway you...
This August at an event, I ended up fighting a guy twice my weight (before armor). Who decided rather than hitting me, he'd just shove me with his shield. The shove put me back on my heels as I stumbled backwards, and tripped over the shins of my friend lying on the ground. I flew over my friend so that when I hit the ground, I landed shoulders first. And rather than lay there, I continued the backwards roll to land on the balls of my feet. I stood up, and charged the man who shoved me over.
All this while wearing the following: Poorly made breastplate (no articulating points in belly/sides/back), large steel shield (28 x 36 in) strapped to my right arm, and with a sword in my right hand. Didn't drop anything. And would've gotten the kill if I hadn't landed out of bounds.

Oddly though, I've found if someone is wearing 40 pounds of rigid armor, they're more agile than when they're carrying a 30 pound backpack.

As for running in armor, I don't see an appreciable difference in my top speed whether armored or not (though I'm not much of a runner). Of course, doing some sprint drills (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHjkY0w3aQg) in armor would be impossible. Trying to stop and reverse that quickly with that much unaccustomed weight will likely ruin your knees unless your knees/ankles are already in very good condition.


edit: Gotta stop taking so long to type...

On my phone so I can't post links but

Running in plate armour requires about twice as much oxygen intake, there was a study done on it inlondon iirc not long ago.

Yes, you can do basic cartwheels and even a practiced flip in plate armour if it's not full plate, but it's much harder to do such acts. Olypic gymnists don't waer heavy armor, and for good reason.
Royal Leeds armory, wasn't it? Read the report, feel there's some issues in their methodology actually. Anyway
Are you referring to gymnasts, or olympic fencers?
The fencers don't wear armor because they do not hit very hard, and must be clad in just cloth, otherwise they won't know when they've been tagged by the opponent.
If you mean actual gymnasts, well why not mention the fact that olympic swimmers and divers don't wear armor when they compete? I mean, they're more than strong enough swimmers that they could swim in armor.

[Dead_Jester]

I know you can do some pretty athletic stuff in armor (if I remember correctly, the guys at the Royal Armory managed to get someone to do a flip in plate harness), and a good plate harness is actually made to give the most mobility while maintaining your protection.

Also, you say you didn't see a noticeable drop in running speed (which is not very surprising), but what about endurance? In my experience, it's the long term endurance that tends to be reduced more than short term combat ability.

As for armor slowing you down less than a backpack, that's probably because well fitted armor spreads the weight much better than a normal backpack (which makes you back and top heavy). However, I wounder how wearing early viking or 11th century chainmail would compare. Even when properly adjusted and worn, there are historical records where the actual soldiers did not wear their armor because it was too uncomfortable.

[Prime32]

Note that well-constructed armor doesn't just act to reduce the force of blows head-on; it curves so that any attack that hits it will veer off at an angle.
(and this is why "feminine" armor is stupid, since it instead guides attacks into the centre of the wearer's chest)

[herrhauptmann]

I know you can do some pretty athletic stuff in armor (if I remember correctly, the guys at the Royal Armory managed to get someone to do a flip in plate harness), and a good plate harness is actually made to give the most mobility while maintaining your protection.

Also, you say you didn't see a noticeable drop in running speed (which is not very surprising), but what about endurance? In my experience, it's the long term endurance that tends to be reduced more than short term combat ability.

As for armor slowing you down less than a backpack, that's probably because well fitted armor spreads the weight much better than a normal backpack (which makes you back and top heavy). However, I wounder how wearing early viking or 11th century chainmail would compare. Even when properly adjusted and worn, there are historical records where the actual soldiers did not wear their armor because it was too uncomfortable.
Long distance/term wearing of the armor?
2 hour resurrection battle in the woods. (Go out, fight, die, go back to rez and start over. No more than 15 minutes resting for me the whole time) Wasn't too much more tired than if I'd done 4 hours of paintball in the woods (wearing significantly less equipment). And still had the energy to walk a mile and a half back to camp with my stuff. Biggest issue was my neck: I am still recovering from a neck injury, and I've got a heavy helmet. (Shouldn't have gotten back into armor in August, but I wasn't going to waste my vacation on the sidelines.)

As far as running/jogging for long distances/times armored vs unarmored? No idea. I'd have to know exactly what my endurance was while unarmored first. Unlike my siblings, I hate running.


Old chainmail, probably worse for moving than a french knight at Agincourt. Stuff had to hang loose to really be effective, so that's a lot of weight. Even with a belt to take some of the weight off your shoulders, it's still a lot.
In Hastings, did the soldiers have chainmail that went down to their knees or so, and bifurcated so they could walk/run/ride 'easier'? I can see how they'd rather carry than wear that stuff if going for long distances. Even if you can tolerate the weight, it's still annoying.

[herrhauptmann]

Note that well-constructed armor doesn't just act to reduce the force of blows head-on; it curves so that any attack that hits it will veer off at an angle.
(and this is why "feminine" armor is stupid, since it instead guides attacks into the centre of the wearer's chest)

Yeah, Female armor sucks (http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6550847/female-armor-sucks)

[PotatoNinja]

Alright, now that i have access to a computer i can properly explain.

To whomever said strength would eliminate encumbrance. It might reduce weight category, i will concede that point. This does not, however, address encumberedness in terms of constriction and agility.

To explain the Olympic gymnast statement. Who ever stated that it had anything to do with people attacking the gymnast, you have completely missed the point of my statement and i can't be arsed to look for your name.(no sore feeling though, just lazy tonight). It has to do with how restrictive Armour can be.

One man doing a few cartwheels does not impress me, nor does one man managing to pull off a single backflip. Such feats can be done in Armour, i already acknowledged this, the point of my argument is that such things are inherently harder to do because of the armor.

To say that wearing such armor does not inhibit these people at all is a gross misunderstanding on your part. Because it is still possible does not mean it is not harder to do. Again, this is reflected in the Armour check penalties, arcane spell failure chance, and max dexterity allotments on the Armour, and has almost no bearing on the AC bonus conveyed to the wearer.

[Seerow]

PotatoNinja: Most of the limitations you discuss come down to normal humans not having the endurance to wear that kind of weight without wearing down faster. A normal human can do a backflip no problem, can tumble around no problem, can fight without being significantly slower, etc. But doing it for prolonged periods of time they will be weighed down, that extra weight depletes their stamina faster, and they tire out more quickly.


Someone who could bench press semis isn't going to even notice 50 pounds of metal on him, so whether he has that there or not, he won't tire out any faster, he won't be weighed down making him run slower or not jump as high, because relative to the amount he actually can carry, the amount of weight in the armor is completely insignificant.

Con factors in there too, and at low levels might be a more defining factor, but any time you're carrying what amounts to a light load, then your endurance should be basically the same as if you're running around naked.

[Allanimal]

A normal human can do a backflip no problem,

I always knew I wasn't normal, but now I know why. Neither are most of the people I know, I guess.

[Knaight]

One man doing a few cartwheels does not impress me, nor does one man managing to pull off a single backflip. Such feats can be done in Armour, i already acknowledged this, the point of my argument is that such things are inherently harder to do because of the armor.

Such things also drastically exceed the level of acrobatic ability needed in actual combat. If they can be done - and they can, well past the level of " a few cartwheels" or "a single backflip", then armor doesn't really get in the way when actually fighting. It shouldn't make one significantly easier to hit, unless they are fighting in a waterlogged area or something. As such, the AC system mostly makes sense, as its harder to get past the armor due to fewer viable target areas, fewer viable strikes, so on and so forth. Granted, there are some oddities - something far bigger than you doesn't have to work around the armor, much as a human could stomp on a cockroach without bothering with little things like "chinks in the exo-skeleton", but given that D&D allows people to try and kill massive creatures with little sticks that should mildly irritate them at best without high doses of strong poison or similar, letting armor work against these things makes perfect sense.

[Zombimode]

Pretty much.
Arguing why max dex bonus, ACP, reduces speed are more "realistic" or that armors should even impose more hinderances for the same reason is not that different than trying to shoehorn "realistic" firearms into D&D (whether or not such attempts are actually more realistic; in most cases they arent).

Why should one part of the rules adhere to higher standarts of realism when the rest of the system obviously doesnt?

[Seharvepernfan]

Hide armor lets you sprint, full plate doesnt.

Also, armor does encumber you, its just a matter of how much. Realistically, anything encumbers you. I notice a distinct difference in sprinting speed/balance/jumping, based on which pair of tennis shoes im wearing, much less what kind of shoe, if I'm wearing pants or not, if im wearing a jacket or not, if i've got a backpack on (even an empty one), and I'm a pretty athletic person. If you're wondering about strength, I can lift a 130lb person over my head, so im no 8 str weakling.

All that said, I could run faster than some of my less athletic friends while wearing boots/pants/jacket/backpack than they can in sprint shoes/athletic shorts/light t-shirt.

It is harder to move in armor than out of it. It just all depends on how much, whether your strength, how much it weighs, how much you're carrying, or how restrictive it is (tight, rigid, etc.).

I like D&D's rules for it.

[Zombimode]

I like D&D's rules for it.

I would agree that they are reasonable for Str 12-14 people. But like someone alread pointed out: the Str 30 guy who can wear a backpack filled with a metric ton of leat has NO penalties whatsoever. But if he drops the backpack and dons a 50 pound (which would be btw. a really heavy plate mail) full plate suddenly his speed is reduced, he cant tumble anymore and suffers heavy penalties on lots of skills. The heck?

[Spiryt]

I would agree that they are reasonable for Str 12-14 people. But like someone alread pointed out: the Str 30 guy who can wear a backpack filled with a metric ton of leat has NO penalties whatsoever. But if he drops the backpack and dons a 50 pound (which would be btw. a really heavy plate mail) full plate suddenly his speed is reduced, he cant tumble anymore and suffers heavy penalties on lots of skills. The heck?

50 Pounds plate armor would be perfectly light one in fact. It would be pretty heavy for full mail though.

But forget about weight, character can theroitically carry a spear, sword, two bows (one normal, second one against elementals, or whatever), a lot of rope, and so on, and so on.... Without suffering any penalties, even if strength of his is pretty low, because mentioned stuff doesn't weight that much.

So yeah, that's D&D, and no reason to make it more complicated.

[Seerow]

50 Pounds plate armor would be perfectly light one in fact. It would be pretty heavy for full mail though.

But forget about weight, character can theroitically carry a spear, sword, two bows (one normal, second one against elementals, or whatever), a lot of rope, and so on, and so on.... Without suffering any penalties, even if strength of his is pretty low, because mentioned stuff doesn't weight that much.

So yeah, that's D&D, and no reason to make it more complicated.

So you're supporting dropping silly armor encumbrance rules and just making it all based on weight?

[Seharvepernfan]

I would agree that they are reasonable for Str 12-14 people. But like someone alread pointed out: the Str 30 guy who can wear a backpack filled with a metric ton of leat has NO penalties whatsoever. But if he drops the backpack and dons a 50 pound (which would be btw. a really heavy plate mail) full plate suddenly his speed is reduced, he cant tumble anymore and suffers heavy penalties on lots of skills. The heck?

Look, just imagine wrapping a blanket around each of your legs, even if each blanket weighed basically nothing, you still wouldn't be able to run as fast, move as nimbly, bend as far, etc.

[Spiryt]

So you're supporting dropping silly armor encumbrance rules and just making it all based on weight?

Never thought about it, really, but I wouldn't have much against it, I guess.

However, when I tried to DM, I had slightly different approach - with armor etc. encumbrance staying, and equipment of characters being at least roughly visualized - without " I shove this glaive and 12 pound tome to my inventory".

[Fouredged Sword]

Really what should happen more realistically is a penalty to the die roll for complicated tasks, but a mild one, followed by decreasing the die used to make the checks.

Full plate may give a -4 to the check and cap the die roll as a 1d20 to the check counting 17-20 as a 16.

The problem is that the weight of the armor provides some problem, but the really hard part is that armor has a maximum flexibility it allows. You don't notice if you are not doing really hard stuff, but even a pair of jeans will slow you down and prevent you from kicking much over your shoulder, much less plate mail leggings. The physical limits are in terms of maximums, not in just making something harder. No matter how flexible you are you cannot bend more than your armor can bend.

Maybe have the system cap the maximum ranks+stat you can use for the skill, rather than a cap of the die roll, with str based checks capped at ranks, and dex based checks capped at ranks+dex mod.