Armour houserule proposition (3.5)

[Greenish]

SRD lists a dozen of mundane armour types, but beyond lowest levels (or poor NPCs), only three or so really see use, so the system is needlessly detailed, and could certainly use some more abstraction. In addition, heavy armour tends to be the refuge of the people who couldn't or wouldn't get a decent Dex score, and is, in general, less awesome than it really should (because heavy armour is awesome). So, here's an idea for a fix. It doesn't change the fact that attack bonuses scale faster than AC, but that'd require a bit larger overhaul.


There are only two types of armour: light and heavy. Added special materials as their own armours. When wearing light armour, the character adds his Dexterity modifier to his AC as normal. When wearing heavy armour, however, the character adds his Constitution modifier to AC instead. This is lost in the same conditions as Dexterity, and the cap from encumbrance rules applies to it. Classes that formerly had proficiency with medium armours or better are proficient with heavy armours, and class features that previously only worked in medium or lighter armour now work on heavy armour. Classes that previously ignored ASF in medium armour can now ignore it in heavy armour (if you know any example of class this would break, please let me know). Whether you wear heavy or light armour, it does not cap your bonus.

Wearing heavy armour does not slow you down, unless the weight pushes your encumbrance to medium or higher. It never did make much sense that carrying your plate armour in your arms made you faster and more maneuverable than wearing it properly.

Now, as I mentioned, in the default rules the other armours are relegated to those who can't afford better, and help DMs not overload their PCs with wealth. That niche is a useful thing, so I've preserved it. The following table thus lists two versions of either type of armour. Note that the "deluxe" armours, as well as mithril and adamantine, are by default masterwork, while the cheap armours aren't (and are unlikely to ever be).

The table of available armours:


Armour
Cost
AC
ACP
ASF
Weight


Cheap light armour

20 gp

3

-3

20%

20 lb.


Deluxe light armour

250 gp

4

-1

15%

15 lb.


Mithral light armour

7,000 gp

5

0

10%

10 lb.


Cheap heavy armour

250 gp

6

-6

40%

50 lb.


Deluxe heavy armour

1,600 gp

8

-5

35%

45 lb.


Adamantine heavy armour

12,000 gp

10

-4

40%

60 lb.



Cheap light armour: This represents the meager, easy to obtain armours such as cuir boulli or rawhide.

Deluxe light armour: This represents the well-crafted, light armours such as chain shirt or elven scale mail.

Mithril light armour: Made from mithril, also known as truesilver, this represents the pinnacle of light armours. Mithril armour is lighter and tougher than any steel. The wearer of mithril light armour may add his armour bonus to touch AC.

Cheap heavy armour: This is the mass-produced armour, such as one-size-doesn't-fit-anyone breastplate and greaves.

Deluxe heavy armour: This is custom well-fitted armour such as full plate or breastplate, helmet, greaves, bracers and gauntlets. Non-magical heavy armour must be made to fit the wearer. Magical armour automatically molds to fit any wearer with the same size and general physiology (by DM's judgement).

Adamantine heavy armour: Made from the heavy and extremely durable adamantine, this armour provides the best protection the money can buy. In addition to it's armour bonus, the adamantine armour provides it's wearer with Hardness of 5, which increases by one point for each point of the armour's enhancement bonus. Non-magical adamantine armour must be made to fit the wearer. Magical armour automatically molds to fit any wearer with the same size and general physiology (by DM's judgement).


I welcome any comments, and I'd be particularly grateful for real examples of each type of armour. What the stats ultimately represent is for each player and DM to decide, but I'd like to offer examples.


[Edit(29.3.)]: Added mithril and adamantine armours. The exact numbers are still somewhat in the air, and I'm not sure how well adamatine stacks up with mithril's admittedly awesome quality. I'm still considering adding lesser_minion's suggestion for trivial armour (detailed here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=14985461&postcount=15)). So, have I gone totally off my rocker, jumped the shark, or the like?
[Edit]: Tinkered with weight and ACP. Small enough stuff to not really matter, but eh.

[Ashtagon]

My list of armour types, from my own project

Cloth Armour (TL0): This includes all forms of linen and textiles, either layered, padded, fur-lined, stuffed with cotton or wool, quilted, or otherwise reinforced. It is not only good for retaining warmth (useful in cold weather), but also excellent at retaining fleas and lice, which is perhaps not so useful. This armour type includes simple furs worn by Stone Age warriors, as well as tanned (but not hardened) leather armour.

Rawhide Armour (TL0): This has identical statistics to hard leather armour, except that if it gets soaked (an hour of heavy rain, or a minute of immersion in water), it is ruined, and must be taken to an armourer to be repaired.

Leather Armour (TL2): This consists of leather that has been soaked in hot water to soften, moulded to shape, then left to dry in a warm space (often in direct sunlight or a low oven), and finally waxed, soaked in oil, or covered in resins. The resulting armour is quite hard, water-proof, and shatter-proof. It is also known as cuir-bouilli armour. Leather scale armour uses similar statistics.

Brigandine Armour (TL4): Brigandine armour consists of a soft leather or heavy cloth coat that has an array of small overlapping metal plates riveted to it. Usually, the metal plates would be inside the leather coat, and the array of rivets visible from the outside gave the armour its alternate name of studded leather armour. The jack of plates (TL2) was an early form of brigandine. The primary difference was in construction technique. With brigandine armour the plates were riveted in place, but with jack armour, the plates were sewn in place.

Chain Mail Armour (TL2): This armour consists of a series of interlocking metal rings, providing an ideal combination of flexibility and toughness. It is perhaps the most successful pre-modern armour in history.

Scale Armour (TL1): Scale armour consists of small metal plates laced together in rows that overlap. These plates are then attached to a cloth or leather backing. Lamellar armour is similar, but the armour plates are laced to each other rather than to a backing material. The samurai of Japan wore a heavy version of this armour.

Banded Armour (TL2): Also known as segmented plate armour. Perhaps the most famous example of this is the lorica segmentata used by Roman legions. It consists of overlapping curved metal bands that wrap around the protected areas. The plates were typically laced together.

Plated Mail Armour: This consists of mail armour which has been reinforced by small metal plates covering the wider flatter body areas, leaving joints protected by the mail. Splint armour uses the same mechanics, but was constructed by metal splints covering straight limbs (it rarely was used on other body areas). It was first used in early 15th century Iran, and spread to Russia, India, and East Asia. It did not see much use in western Europe, which only had a short transitional period in which splint armour was used on limbs with brigandine or mail body armour.

Plate Armour (TL4): This is the armour worn by the “knight in shining armour” of myth and legend. Together with armoured heavy cavalry, they were an unstoppable military force in the Middle Ages.

Regarding your ideas...

Dropping medium armour as a category removes some options for characters, because some classes specifically allow features to work for light or medium armour but not heavy, while others are light only (and still others are no armour).

The idea of adding Constitution modifier is interesting. However, I'd be more inclined to make it grant a DR X/- rather than bonus AC. Medium AC could then grant half Dex bonus to AC and half Con bonus to DR.

Also, it makes perfect sense to me that wearing armour can be more limiting than carrying properly-stowed armour. Worn armour places definite limits on the freedom of movement on your joints, which limits your ability to move around, regardless of your actual encumbrance. Finding ways to armour the knees, hips, waist, elbows, and shoulders while allowing freedom of movement was a major engineering challenge in its day.

[Spiryt]

This system is definitely very simple and meager, but without doubt still better than default system that's poor and all, but pretends to be ample.


I'm not sure if Constitution to AC is that good of an idea, though.


I would just rule it as 'allows half of Dexterity bonus'.

Would be simple and elegant - dexterity would be sensibly useful to everyone, at more 'mundane' levels heavy armor would be all around more potent at keeping someone in one piece, while at more inhumane levels of agility light armor could still have advantage.

Dishing stupid, arbitrary caps like "+2 bonus from Dex" is definitely good.

[Greenish]

My list of armour types, from my own project

Cloth Armour (TL0): This includes all forms of linen and textiles, either layered, padded, fur-lined, stuffed with cotton or wool, quilted, or otherwise reinforced. It is not only good for retaining warmth (useful in cold weather), but also excellent at retaining fleas and lice, which is perhaps not so useful. This armour type includes simple furs worn by Stone Age warriors, as well as tanned (but not hardened) leather armour.

Rawhide Armour (TL0): This has identical statistics to hard leather armour, except that if it gets soaked (an hour of heavy rain, or a minute of immersion in water), it is ruined, and must be taken to an armourer to be repaired.

Leather Armour (TL2): This consists of leather that has been soaked in hot water to soften, moulded to shape, then left to dry in a warm space (often in direct sunlight or a low oven), and finally waxed, soaked in oil, or covered in resins. The resulting armour is quite hard, water-proof, and shatter-proof. It is also known as cuir-bouilli armour. Leather scale armour uses similar statistics.

Brigandine Armour (TL4): Brigandine armour consists of a soft leather or heavy cloth coat that has an array of small overlapping metal plates riveted to it. Usually, the metal plates would be inside the leather coat, and the array of rivets visible from the outside gave the armour its alternate name of studded leather armour. The jack of plates (TL2) was an early form of brigandine. The primary difference was in construction technique. With brigandine armour the plates were riveted in place, but with jack armour, the plates were sewn in place.

Chain Mail Armour (TL2): This armour consists of a series of interlocking metal rings, providing an ideal combination of flexibility and toughness. It is perhaps the most successful pre-modern armour in history.

Scale Armour (TL1): Scale armour consists of small metal plates laced together in rows that overlap. These plates are then attached to a cloth or leather backing. Lamellar armour is similar, but the armour plates are laced to each other rather than to a backing material. The samurai of Japan wore a heavy version of this armour.

Banded Armour (TL2): Also known as segmented plate armour. Perhaps the most famous example of this is the lorica segmentata used by Roman legions. It consists of overlapping curved metal bands that wrap around the protected areas. The plates were typically laced together.

Plated Mail Armour: This consists of mail armour which has been reinforced by small metal plates covering the wider flatter body areas, leaving joints protected by the mail. Splint armour uses the same mechanics, but was constructed by metal splints covering straight limbs (it rarely was used on other body areas). It was first used in early 15th century Iran, and spread to Russia, India, and East Asia. It did not see much use in western Europe, which only had a short transitional period in which splint armour was used on limbs with brigandine or mail body armour.

Plate Armour (TL4): This is the armour worn by the “knight in shining armour” of myth and legend. Together with armoured heavy cavalry, they were an unstoppable military force in the Middle Ages.What does TLn stand for, here? Oh, technology level?


Dropping medium armour as a category removes some options for characters, because some classes specifically allow features to work for light or medium armour but not heavy, while others are light only (and still others are no armour).I believe I addressed that, though maybe not quite in necessary detail. The idea was that you could use everything you can now use in medium armour while in heavy armour.


The idea of adding Constitution modifier is interesting. However, I'd be more inclined to make it grant a DR X/- rather than bonus AC. Medium AC could then grant half Dex bonus to AC and half Con bonus to DR.Hmm, I tried (not very hard, mind, but I did) to figure a role for medium armour. DR might be an interesting option, but (and I may be in the minority here) I quite like how AC abstracts things into "blows that hurt you" and "blows that didn't hurt you".


Also, it makes perfect sense to me that wearing armour can be more limiting than carrying properly-stowed armour. Worn armour places definite limits on the freedom of movement on your joints, which limits your ability to move around, regardless of your actual encumbrance. Finding ways to armour the knees, hips, waist, elbows, and shoulders while allowing freedom of movement was a major engineering challenge in its day.I have no practical expertise whatsoever about any armour, but as it currently stands, carrying the armour on your hands while running is easier than having it strapped on. Also, I have some trouble figuring how full plate could be "properly stowed" (short of extradimensional storage) with less effect than it'd had when properly fastened.


I'm not sure if Constitution to AC is that good of an idea, though.Is this from a balance point of view, or from verisimilitude?


I would just rule it as 'allows half of Dexterity bonus'.

Would be simple and elegant - dexterity would be sensibly useful to everyone, at more 'mundane' levels heavy armor would be all around more potent at keeping someone in one piece, while at more inhumane levels of agility light armor could still have advantage.Half of Dex bonus would probably end up being pretty near what the armour currently offer, for most characters. I'm not quite against the idea, but my goal was to make heavy armours better than they were.


Dishing stupid, arbitrary caps like "+2 bonus from Dex" is definitely good.Well, my suggested rules are arbitrary enough, but I'm glad you feel this way. :smalltongue:


Also, no ideas for mithril?

[Wargamer]

Have you considered a system akin to what WFRP does?

Here's the basic idea:

Light Armour: AC +3, ACP -1, ASF 10%, Weight 10lbs.
Medium Armour: AC +3, ACP -2, ASF 15%, Weight 15lbs.
Heavy Armour: AC +3 ACP -2 ASF 15%, Weight 15lbs.

All three of these armour types are stackable. For example, "Full Plate" armour would be achieved by wearing light, medium and heavy armour all at once, giving a cumulative bonus of +9 AC, -5 ACP, 50% ASF and a whopping 40lbs weight.

It also means there is no incentive to jump straight into heavy armour without working up through the lower tiers. There is no benefit to skipping straight to platemail, as without the leather and chain underlayers that light and medium provide your armour will be full of vulnerable spots.

The only tricky bit would be balancing enchantments and AC boosts due to magic. One option is to say that the outer layers "suppress" the inner ones, so if you wear +1 Light under mundane medium you have AC +6, not +7. This in turn means heavy infantry are compelled to grab masterworks of their light and medium, but actively seek out enchanted heavy armour.

[Greenish]

Have you considered a system akin to what WFRP does?

Here's the basic idea:

Light Armour: AC +3, ACP -1, ASF 10%, Weight 10lbs.
Medium Armour: AC +3, ACP -2, ASF 15%, Weight 15lbs.
Heavy Armour: AC +3 ACP -2 ASF 15%, Weight 15lbs.

All three of these armour types are stackable. For example, "Full Plate" armour would be achieved by wearing light, medium and heavy armour all at once, giving a cumulative bonus of +9 AC, -5 ACP, 50% ASF and a whopping 40lbs weight.I'm not familiar with WFRP, but that's an interesting take on it.


It also means there is no incentive to jump straight into heavy armour without working up through the lower tiers. There is no benefit to skipping straight to platemail, as without the leather and chain underlayers that light and medium provide your armour will be full of vulnerable spots.

The only tricky bit would be balancing enchantments and AC boosts due to magic. One option is to say that the outer layers "suppress" the inner ones, so if you wear +1 Light under mundane medium you have AC +6, not +7. This in turn means heavy infantry are compelled to grab masterworks of their light and medium, but actively seek out enchanted heavy armour.It would work, yes, but I'm not sure what it would achieve, aside from having useful medium armour (which I'm not sure is really necessary).

[Ashtagon]

What does TLn stand for, here? Oh, technology level?

Yep, tech level. Those numbers refer to gurps TLs, but I will revise it to fit my own TL system (which has a few more levels of detail).


I believe I addressed that, though maybe not quite in necessary detail. The idea was that you could use everything you can now use in medium armour while in heavy armour.

Considering that this means barbarians gain access to full plate armour by this change, I'm not sure I like it from a verisimilitude perspective.



I have no practical expertise whatsoever about any armour, but as it currently stands, carrying the armour on your hands while running is easier than having it strapped on. Also, I have some trouble figuring how full plate could be "properly stowed" (short of extradimensional storage) with less effect than it'd had when properly fastened.


The individual plates of full plate armour can be separated from each other, then nested within each other according to size. Of course, this requires disassembling the armour. Carrying an assembled set of full plate is roughly as bulky as carrying a person (and personally, I count bulk as well as weight when figuring encumbrance).

[Greenish]

Considering that this means barbarians gain access to full plate armour by this change, I'm not sure I like it from a verisimilitude perspective.Well, the idea was that you could fluff the armour like you wanted (within bounds of reason), so it doesn't have to be a fully-articulated gothic plate. It could also be a breastplate, helmet, and greaves (which they could currently wear), or rhinoceros hide reinforced with mammoth bones.


The individual plates of full plate armour can be separated from each other, then nested within each other according to size. Of course, this requires disassembling the armour. Carrying an assembled set of full plate is roughly as bulky as carrying a person (and personally, I count bulk as well as weight when figuring encumbrance).I was under the impression that a fitted suit of plate armour wasn't a terrible hinderance to the wearer, but I yield to your expertise and retreat to the gamist argument that the heavy armour does not really warrant such penalties, balance-wise.

[Spiryt]

Is this from a balance point of view, or from verisimilitude?


Both really, although I wasn't even worrying about verisimilitude... Just feels clunky to leave all in all, fighting characters with no use for dexterity, because they donned 'heavy' armor.

Would do weird stuff to builds as well, as far as I can imagine.

As far as verisimilitude goes, there's no real endurance/cardio/tiring mechanism in 3.5, so trying to introduce it in such limited scope will make even less sense.


Half of Dex bonus would probably end up being pretty near what the armour currently offer, for most characters. I'm not quite against the idea, but my goal was to make heavy armours better than they were.

Standard issue fighter in plate with 18 dexterity would be already better off than in 3.5, but I can see a point.

But generally, if improving armor is your goal, then I would just improve armors in general - more AC, perhaps some minor DR in addition.

[Greenish]

Both really, although I wasn't even worrying about verisimilitude... Just feels clunky to leave all in all, fighting characters with no use for dexterity, because they donned 'heavy' armor.Well, they'd still use dexterity for such key things as initiative, attacks of opportunity (via combat reflexes), and reflex saves.


Standard issue fighter in plate with 18 dexterity would be already better off than in 3.5, but I can see a point.Well, yes, but 18 Dex is a pretty big investment already, isn't it. I don't expect most fighter types to match that, let alone surpass it.


But generally, if improving armor is your goal, then I would just improve armors in general - more AC, perhaps some minor DR in addition.But doesn't Con to AC offer more AC to great many defensive builds? Certainly I see people dipping Deepwarden for it.

[Deepbluediver]

Simplifying armor has merit, the bigger reason that I don't think most of it sees a lot of use is that it's just not very good.

Anyone who wants is probably going to be able to afford your Deluxe Heavy armor by 3rd level (unless you are also changing the WBL table), and then what do we do for the rest of the game? Just keep piling on enchantments?

I have my own armor fix (the link is in my extended sig), but basically I can boil it down pretty simply: armor should also provide DR (and not just a trade off for AC like in Unearthed Arcana), and special materials for making armor (mithral, etc) should do more than just improve the ACP.

In other words, I think players would consider more varieties of armor if it actually was worth it when compared to just buying items to Boost Dexterity.


Edit: The RAW lists 12 types of armor, 4 in each category. Ashtagon manages to get it down to just 9, and we could probably go even further, or just include different specific types under 1 heading (example, combine scale and banded plate armor).

Edit2: I decided to ask the Real World weapons and armor thread to weigh in on a question or two (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=14977333&postcount=1115), if the aim to be "realistic" has any bearing on your design plans.

[Greenish]

Anyone who wants is probably going to be able to afford your Deluxe Heavy armor by 3rd level (unless you are also changing the WBL table), and then what do we do for the rest of the game? Just keep piling on enchantments?Everyone who wants can afford full plate by 3rd level, too. I see no problem.


special materials for making armor (mithral, etc) should do more than just improve the ACP.Yeah, that's something I want to look at, too. I might make mithril apply armour bonus to touch AC, but I'd probably have to boost the price, too, at least for light armour. Adamantine could give you Hardness instead of DR. Hmm…


In other words, I think players would consider more varieties of armor if it actually was worth it when compared to just buying items to Boost Dexterity.They might, but what does that ultimately achieve but more fiddling?


The RAW lists 12 types of armor, 4 in each category. Ashtagon manages to get it down to just 9, and we could probably go even further, or just include different specific types under 1 heading (example, combine scale and banded plate armor).Yeah, I wrote a proposal quite like that. You can see it here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=277809).


Edit2: I decided to ask the Real World weapons and armor thread to weigh in on a question or two (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=14977333&postcount=1115), if the aim to be "realistic" has any bearing on your design plans.Heh, not really. My idea was more that armour has stats X, and then you'd figure out what it represent ("this cheap light armour is cuirboulli, this deluxe heavy armour is elven scale mail coat" etc.).

[Carl]

Not how i'd do it, though you've raised some interesting extra idea's for me :smallwink:. And it is a god attempt all the same, so well done.

The only complaint i have is that i think medium armour is necessary. No armour or light is for the squishes. Medium is for the standard martial types. Not squishe, but not excessively tough. Heavy is for the real tough guys and dedicated meatshields. So i feel medium is necessary for that separation.

But otherwise well done :smallcool:.

[Greenish]

And it is a god attempt all the same, so well done.As a mere mortal, I'd say I've exceeded myself, then.


The only complaint i have is that i think medium armour is necessary. No armour or light is for the squishes. Medium is for the standard martial types. Not squishe, but not excessively tough. Heavy is for the real tough guys and dedicated meatshields. So i feel medium is necessary for that separation.Hmm, medium armour seems more popular than I thought (I can't remember ever using it). Not sure how to add it as a valid option, though.

[lesser_minion]

The fun part about D&D's system for armour is that most of the detail is pure fabrication, not actually intended to have anything to do with realism at all.

In general, there's not much you can really do to distinguish armour constructed using 'conventional' technologies, at least not within a particular 'tier'. Get two otherwise-identical dudes, dress one in scale and the other in mail, then make them fight each other to the death and you wouldn't be able to detect any difference.

A guy in plate will have a clear advantage over one in mail, but that's just one of several reasons why plate might not be the best thing to incorporate into a setting like those D&D uses (it's also an extremely advanced technology for a culture and setting that has clear access to alternatives).

IMHO the best way to handle this is pretty much what you've hit upon -- just have 'partial armour', 'armour', and 'heavy armour', handling unconventional armours (including special materials) as their own, new armour types.

As far as encumbrance is concerned, basically any clothing or armour is less cumbersome when worn than when carried. However, if you're carrying armour or clothes around, that's really a separate issue to what the game's encumbrance rules should be handling. The moment a fight or other action scene starts, any non-suicidal characters will ditch anything that doesn't help them -- this means that only combat gear should actually be affected by any sort of encumbrance mechanic, and then only the combat gear that the character intends to actually use or have available to use in combat (note that aside from the realism argument, non-combat gear clearly doesn't need anything to counterbalance its combat usefulness).

As for constitution modifiers to AC, I'd advise against that unless you're also taking steps to make constitution less important for hit points. There's nothing unrealistic about letting characters apply their full dexterity bonus no matter the armour they wear.

IIUC, medium armour is basically useless under RAW. A fix might make it more interesting, although since my personal approach essentially guts heavy armour and renames medium armour as heavy, I'd suggest that the new category be called "trivial" armour, and essentially cover heavy (or otherwise protective) clothing and characters who do things like wear bracers and greaves, but don't bother with body armour for whatever reason.

[Greenish]

IMHO the best way to handle this is pretty much what you've hit upon -- just have 'partial armour', 'armour', and 'heavy armour', handling unconventional armours (including special materials) as their own, new armour types.Now that solves that. Mithril armour can be light armour with better AC, and Adamantine can be heavy armour with, uh, slightly better AC and DR (or maybe Hardness).


As for constitution modifiers to AC, I'd advise against that unless you're also taking steps to make constitution less important for hit points.Hmm, explain.


There's nothing unrealistic about letting characters apply their full dexterity bonus no matter the armour they wear.I was less concerned with realism than with making heavy armour better, honestly. Though Constitution isn't quite unrelated, either, as it can be seen as the endurance to keep using the heavy armour to it's full effectiveness.


IIUC, medium armour is basically useless under RAW. A fix might make it more interesting, although since my personal approach essentially guts heavy armour and renames medium armour as heavy, I'd suggest that the new category be called "trivial" armour, and essentially cover heavy (or otherwise protective) clothing and characters who do things like wear bracers and greaves, but don't bother with body armour for whatever reason.Trivial armour, I'll take under advisement. I'd probably use it also to stealth-boost monk and the like who normally can't wear armour, by allowing them trivial armour.

[Deepbluediver]

There's nothing unrealistic about letting characters apply their full dexterity bonus no matter the armour they wear.

...I'm going to have to disagree with you there. I'm not an expert on medieval armor, but there's a reason that gymnasts and athletes don't compete in suits of chainmail. Even if the armor is well-fitted and doesn't weigh to much (both big "ifs"), it will still restrict movement of your joints.

If you didn't like the Dex-cap setup, I could see an alternate version where heavy armor instead reduced your Dex Bonus to 1/2 normal or something similar instead.

[Spiryt]

...I'm going to have to disagree with you there. I'm not an expert on medieval armor, but there's a reason that gymnasts and athletes don't compete in suits of chainmail. Even if the armor is well-fitted and doesn't weigh to much (both big "ifs"), it will still restrict movement of your joints.


One is not doing gymnastics in mail. He is fighting. That's the difference.

If gymnasts and athletes had to fight against spears and knives, they would wear mail.

Obviously, due to sheer weight and encumbrance, mobility will be reduced, for example, so theoretically ability to completely dodge something would be reduced, and in fantasy world there's plenty of threats one would want to avoid altogether...

But that would get very complicated, and D&D is simple, any attempts at 'more realism' would only screw martial characters more, and that's precisely pointless.

[Ashtagon]

One is not doing gymnastics in mail. He is fighting. That's the difference.

If gymnasts and athletes had to fight against spears and knives, they would wear mail.

Fighting is actually an incredibly athletic activity. The idea that "they don't need to move - they're fighting!" is ridiculous. Knights didn't sit around in their tents drinking beers on their sedans while watching live naked mud-wrestling before donning their armour and standing still while their mates wailed at them with an axe. They were some of the most physically fit men of their day.

[Lord_Gareth]

...I'm going to have to disagree with you there. I'm not an expert on medieval armor, but there's a reason that gymnasts and athletes don't compete in suits of chainmail. Even if the armor is well-fitted and doesn't weigh to much (both big "ifs"), it will still restrict movement of your joints.

If you didn't like the Dex-cap setup, I could see an alternate version where heavy armor instead reduced your Dex Bonus to 1/2 normal or something similar instead.

Hey, guy who's worn medieval armor here.

You can do gymnastics in plate. Frankly you can (and people have) scale a building by free-climbing the outside, sneak in, kill a man and then leave the way you came. Plate is custom-fitted to the wearer and as a result is capable of astounding mobility; chain is flexible, so likewise. The problem with heavier and heavier armor is weight and heat, not movement.

[Spiryt]

Fighting is actually an incredibly athletic activity. The idea that "they don't need to move - they're fighting!" is ridiculous. Knights didn't sit around in their tents drinking beers on their sedans while watching live naked mud-wrestling before donning their armour and standing still while their mates wailed at them with an axe. They were some of the most physically fit men of their day.

Uh, punch the strawman some more, perhaps? :smallconfused:

Nobody here had written any of this, especially that fighting is not athletic activity, which is ridiculous.

The point is that fighting is not about elaborate gymnastic figures, or extremes of attainable athletic results, like in running, jumping or whatever - and armor was obviously considered invaluable asset in combat - absolutely worth of loses in agility, endurance, mobility etc. it causes.

And classical 'knights' in feudal systems were very numerous and very varied group naturally, some of them were very out of shape, Geoffroi de Charny apparently wrote quite a few treatises complaining about knight bunglers who could barely move in their armors.

[Lord_Gareth]

Uh, punch the strawman some more, perhaps? :smallconfused:

Nobody here had written any of this, especially that fighting is not athletic activity, which is ridiculous.

The point is that fighting is not about elaborate gymnastic figures, or extremes of attainable athletic results, like in running, jumping or whatever - and armor was obviously considered invaluable asset in combat - absolutely worth of loses in agility, endurance, mobility etc. it causes.

And classical 'knights' in feudal systems were very numerous and very varied group naturally, some of them were very out of shape, Geoffroi de Charny apparently wrote quite a few treatises complaining about knight bunglers who could barely move in their armors.

But, hey, see my post above. The use of heavy armor involves a lot of maneuvering and, yes, even dodging - because even in plate, it's always better to not get hit at all if you can possibly avoid it.

[Ashtagon]

Uh, punch the strawman some more, perhaps? :smallconfused:

Certainly. With the armour they are wearing, they can't use their Dexterity bonus, making them easy targets :smallbiggrin:

[Greenish]

...I'm going to have to disagree with you there. I'm not an expert on medieval armor, but there's a reason that gymnasts and athletes don't compete in suits of chainmail. Even if the armor is well-fitted and doesn't weigh to much (both big "ifs"), it will still restrict movement of your joints.Gymnasts and athletes don't compete in armour because of ACP. :smalltongue:

The problem with heavier and heavier armor is weight and heat, not movement.That's basically what I have gone for. Of course, I really didn't think adding Sandstorm-style heat exhaustion rules would add much to the game, but the weight of the armour adds to your encumbrance, so that you'd need 13+ Str to treat heavy armour (sans all other equipment) as light encumbrance. Going for medium or heavy encumbrance would still instill a Dex (or Con, better clarify that) cap and movement reduction.


[Edit]:
Knights didn't sit around in their tents drinking beers on their sedans while watching live naked mud-wrestling…I like to imagine they also did that.

[Deepbluediver]

Ok, look, I never said you couldn't, shouldn't, or wouldn't, move around, dodge, and otherwise avoid attacks when fighting in armor.

But it DOES slow you down somewhat. You can look up videos on you tube of guys doing cartwheels in plate armor. You can also look up videos of people doing gymnastics. Who makes it look easier?

I've never been in a swordfight. But it seems to make sense that from a defensive standpoint, armor might be better overall but it would still reduce your agility by some amount.


From a game design standpoint, there are a couple of options; I actually discussed most of them in my own armor-fix thread. (I'm now working on an updated/simplified version, but the old thread is still there if you want to see it).

A flat cap on Dex may not seem very realistic, but a straight up dex-penalty is also troublesome, because that in turn reduces the creatures AC, and the armor will need to have an even higher AC bonus to compensate. That's why I suggested the "half-max" idea, and there are probably a few more we can throw around. For example- no cap/limit on light armor.

From a game designer's standpoint, (and this is something another poster pointed out to me) in core, AC boosts from armor are effectively equal to the boosts from Dex that you can get (without being overly cheesy). So essentially, the light weight dancing-about-dodging rogue character had the same chance to avoid getting hit as did the solid, stalwart paladn.
Perhaps the problem with that goal was that it limits how good armor is. Maybe if you want people to use more armor, then you need it to be more "realistic" in the sense that almost any armor is undeniably better than having no armor.

Personally, I like the idea of adding Damage Reduction to armor as well as AC. That seems "realistic" to me. The biggest problem though, is that while a +1 boost to AC will stay relatively effective for all 20 levels, a DR 1/- doesn't. As I'm sure you are aware, damage at low levels is on the 1d4+4 to 2d6+4 scale, while at upper levels the range spreads out drastically, hitting 30, 60, even 100+ depending on how cheesy you are. Basically, it makes balancing tricky, since there is a fine line between "effective against dragons" and "totally invincible against anything else".


Since we can make up whatever properties we want for fantasy metals, maybe one way to incorporate some of the "heavily armored but still agile" theme is to use mithral or adamantive to have a higher Dex cap, lower ACP, etc. And you can flavor it as being dependent on weight, design, or whatever else you want.
Which looks like it's already been done, to a degree.


D&D doesn't really focus on fatigue-as-part-of-combat rules, and frankly, I'm not sure that nod to realism is necessary. Fantasy novels (and RL history) talk about battles that go on for hours, and exhaustion is definitely a factor, but unless you can to start adding something like Fort-saves or Con checks to every round of combat for a fight that takes less than "30 seconds" I'm not sure what you can do about it.

[Spiryt]

But, hey, see my post above. The use of heavy armor involves a lot of maneuvering and, yes, even dodging - because even in plate, it's always better to not get hit at all if you can possibly avoid it.

Use of heavy armor involves a lot of maneuvering, but generally maneuvers that won't be that hindered by heavy armor. One couldn't do gymnastics in mail, long jump record would probably get dropped by half.
One will always tire way faster than in t-shirt.

But in actual use in fighting with medieval-ish weapons, the 'athletic cost' of armor is way less hindering, which was pretty much my original point. :smalltongue:

And heavy armor will also often mean that 'dodging' will need to be way less radical - if one is in clothes, he needs to get all the way out of sword strikes.

If someone is in mail, he, for example, only needs to get fingers out of the way - those are delicate and break easily - and can safely get whacked to the forearm instead.

[Spiryt]

And just for a bit of contradiction, and because it's crazy:

Starts at 0:50 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwn4bOtCKIg)

I had a gif, but I lost it.

[Greenish]

A flat cap on Dex may not seem very realistic, but a straight up dex-penalty is also troublesome, because that in turn reduces the creatures AC, and the armor will need to have an even higher AC bonus to compensate. That's why I suggested the "half-max" idea, and there are probably a few more we can throw around. For example- no cap/limit on light armor.You'll note I haven't actually tossed the max Dex cap away, I've just relegated it to the weight. An average human (ie. Str below 13) would find himself slowed down by wearing a heavy armour, but the extraordinary to semi-divine heroes sporting much higher Str scores could wear heavy armour as a second skin (well, almost, there's still the ACP, though I'm actually starting to think it may not be necessary).


From a game designer's standpoint, (and this is something another poster pointed out to me) in core, AC boosts from armor are effectively equal to the boosts from Dex that you can get (without being overly cheesy).With the obvious exceptions that AC from Dex has none of the drawbacks piled on AC from armour: no ACP, no slowed movement, applies to touch attacks, doesn't cost anything (except for the Dex-boosters at later levels).

So, yeah, I wanted to make people wear heavy armour without gimping themselves. I like to think I didn't go too far off.


Personally, I like the idea of adding Damage Reduction to armor as well as AC. That seems "realistic" to me. The biggest problem though, is that while a +1 boost to AC will stay relatively effective for all 20 levels, a DR 1/- doesn't. As I'm sure you are aware, damage at low levels is on the 1d4+4 to 2d6+4 scale, while at upper levels the range spreads out drastically, hitting 30, 60, even 100+ depending on how cheesy you are. Basically, it makes balancing tricky, since there is a fine line between "effective against dragons" and "totally invincible against anything else".Which is why I didn't go for it, with the exception of adamantine.

Which reminds me, any comments on the special material armours and their effects? I'm worried mithril may be too good, and adamantine may not be good enough.

[lesser_minion]

With the obvious exceptions that AC from Dex has none of the drawbacks piled on AC from armour: no ACP, no slowed movement, applies to touch attacks, doesn't cost anything (except for the Dex-boosters at later levels).

Everyone needs constitution. Only a few characters have a use for dexterity. Spending a bit of money is a lot less of a cost than pumping a stat, especially when you have no other need for that stat.

This is why I don't like the Con to AC thing -- it attaches even more importance to an ability score that's already considered essential to nearly every character.

Ideally, I think heavy armour should just give you a respectable AC score on its own (with no need to pump any stat), and leave you with the option to build dex for extra tankiness (or if you want to be an archer).

[Greenish]

This is why I don't like the Con to AC thing -- it attaches even more importance to an ability score that's already considered essential to nearly every character.Well, I went for it because it's important to every character. Since it's a scaling score everyone will have, it's easy to link AC to it to get some scaling with minimum effort.


Ideally, I think heavy armour should just give you a respectable AC score on its own (with no need to pump any stat), and leave you with the option to build dex for extra tankiness (or if you want to be an archer).But I don't want everyone to wear heavy armour (if only for the sake of all the fantasy archetypes who don't), and I'm not a big fan of most of the methods that's usually achieved with.

[Spiryt]

But I don't want everyone to wear heavy armour (if only for the sake of all the fantasy archetypes who don't), and I'm not a big fan of most of the methods that's usually achieved with.

Inherent and heavily emphasized violence of 3.5 system is the biggest problem here, probably.

In theory, heavy armor would be pretty big problem for anyone who would want to explore, roam the forests, climb, stealth, pass trough the mountains and generally adventure. Especially rangers and other bum-types. :smallwink:

In 3.5 those problems are pretty much hand-waved and somehow minor, the combat being treated more seriously.

[Deepbluediver]

Well, I went for it because it's important to every character. Since it's a scaling score everyone will have, it's easy to link AC to it to get some scaling with minimum effort.

But I don't want everyone to wear heavy armour (if only for the sake of all the fantasy archetypes who don't), and I'm not a big fan of most of the methods that's usually achieved with.

If you want AC to scale with level even without armor, a better method, IMO, is to change the rules for calculating base AC so it's not just a flat 10. Personally, I prefer an across-the-board method like changing it to 5+ 1/2 HD.
The other common change it to tie it to BAB, using any number of variable calculations, like 10 +1/2 BAB.


If you want some stat to contribute to AC other than Dex, Strength might be a better option. When I was reworking the weapon/combat style feats another poster suggesting having one of the Sword n' Board feats let your Str replace Dex to represent knocking aside or pushing away attacks rather than avoiding them.



And just for a bit of contradiction, and because it's crazy:

Starts at 0:50 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwn4bOtCKIg)

I had a gif, but I lost it.

Haha, this looks awesome!

Did you see that one guy drop-kick the other one? He hit him out of nowhere, Bam-Pow!

Damn, I'd watch more wrestling or MMA if it was like this. :smallcool:

[Greenish]

If you want AC to scale with level even without armor, a better method, IMO, is to change the rules for calculating base AC so it's not just a flat 10. Personally, I prefer an across-the-board method like changing it to 5+ 1/2 HD.
The other common change it to tie it to BAB, using any number of variable calculations, like 10 +1/2 BAB.The problem with both of those is monsters, which almost always have more HD than CR, sometimes to a ridiculous extent.

Granted, many monsters also have high Con, but then, not all of them wear armour.



If you want some stat to contribute to AC other than Dex, Strength might be a better option. When I was reworking the weapon/combat style feats another poster suggesting having one of the Sword n' Board feats let your Str replace Dex to represent knocking aside or pushing away attacks rather than avoiding them.Not a bad idea. I might let someone add their Str to AC (in addition to Dex/Con) if they hold a shield. Animated needs to go, though.

[Deepbluediver]

The problem with both of those is monsters, which almost always have more HD than CR, sometimes to a ridiculous extent.

Granted, many monsters also have high Con, but then, not all of them wear armour.

Depending on what kind of game you want to run, that may not be a bad thing. You can hack at a giant's ankles all day but if it had really high AC that just represents that its really hard to hit it in a way that actually is significant.

Plus, I think part of the reason that some monsters have hugely inflated numbers of HD is so that they can survive more than 1 round in combat. Make them harder to hit and you could probably level out the HD to some extent.


If neither of those float your boat then just make AC vary based on CR/ECL instead. I realize that's a little bit more abstract, but so is the whole HP system.

[lesser_minion]

But I don't want everyone to wear heavy armour (if only for the sake of all the fantasy archetypes who don't), and I'm not a big fan of most of the methods that's usually achieved with.

If you don't want everyone to wear heavy armour, then you need to work out something that ensures that light armour wearers aren't shafted by comparison.

Preferably, something more substantial than just having certain character classes limited to light armour because they arbitrarily lose their class features if they wear anything heavier.

[Greenish]

If you don't want everyone to wear heavy armour, then you need to work out something that ensures that light armour wearers aren't shafted by comparison.

Preferably, something more substantial than just having certain character classes limited to light armour because they arbitrarily lose their class features if they wear anything heavier.And my current idea doesn't provide that?

[Deepbluediver]

If you don't want everyone to wear heavy armour, then you need to work out something that ensures that light armour wearers aren't shafted by comparison.

Preferably, something more substantial than just having certain character classes limited to light armour because they arbitrarily lose their class features if they wear anything heavier.

There's actually a whole group of armor-proficiency feats.

No one ever takes them because
(A) core armor is mediocre at best
(B) every class gets exactly as much armor as it can use without interference anyway

I think if you want more players actually making a choice on what kinds of armor they wear, you need to:

Improve armor's base stats
Reduce the amount of armor you can use dependent on your class
Change armor so that it has more tradeoffs that players need to consider



Im my version of things, this means that most moderate combat classes (rogues, rangers, druids) get Light Armor, the big melee classes (Fighter, Paladin, Barbarian, etc) get Medium Armor, and casters (Wizards, Bards, etc) get no armor.
And if a player wants more, they can "buy" access via a feat.

All armor gets it's AC boosted, with some varieties getting extra AC or DR, or other special qualities.

In addition, Heavy armor still causes a speed-penalty, but I reasigned Medium armor to have a lesser penalty, between Heavy and normal.
Also, ACP now applies to Iniatiative checks as well.


I don't claim that it's terribly realistic, but wearing armor is mostly beneficial, and it makes heavily armored characters feel more solid and "tanky" as compared to Dex-based classes or even lighter-armored heavy meleers.