[3.5] Medium Armor - Point?

[Thurbane]

OK, aside from the ever popular mithril full plate (when you can eventually afford it), what is the point of medium armor?

Why would you take a hit to your speed for +5 AC (breastplate), when you can move at normal speed for +4 AC (chain shirt)?

Is there some non-core medium armor that makes things worthwhile?

Rule of thumb is whenever I'm not stomping around in full plate, I'm in a chain shirt. What am I missing?

Cheers - T

[limejuicepowder]

You're missing nothing, medium armor is crap. In fact, almost all armor is crap. Mundanes get to wear it after all, hence it must be crap.

[Hurnn]

OK, aside from the ever popular mithril full plate (when you can eventually afford it), what is the point of medium armor?

Why would you take a hit to your speed for +5 AC (breastplate), when you can move at normal speed for +4 AC (chain shirt)?

Is there some non-core medium armor that makes things worthwhile?

Rule of thumb is whenever I'm not stomping around in full plate, I'm in a chain shirt. What am I missing?

Cheers - T

pretty much nothing unless you make it out of mithral

[Mithril Leaf]

You're missing nothing, medium armor is crap. In fact, almost all armor is crap. Mundanes get to wear it after all, hence it must be crap.

Chain Shirt with the two accessory items isn't bad, since you get an extra two whole armor slots for enchantments and the like.

[Kraken]

Armor check penalty and cost. Further, while your total AC is higher with full plate, your touch AC is lower.

[OldTrees1]

Light to Heavy is a jump of +4 AC
Light to Medium is a jump of +1 AC
Medium to Heavy is a jump of +3 AC

The incentive to go from Medium to Heavy is stronger than the incentive to go to Medium in the first place.

[Harrow]

I've found it to be good at level 1 where it has a great armor/gold cost ratio and money is tight. After level 1, however, there isn't a lot of point to it, at least that I can see. If the run at X3 and the base movement penalties were switched around so only the former applied to medium armor and both to heavy, then it would probably see a lot more use. But as it is, it's rare that I can come up with a good reason for it.

[eggynack]

Armor check penalty and cost. Further, while your total AC is higher with full plate, your touch AC is lower.
I think you're missing the point a little. It's not that medium armor lacks advantages over heavy armor, because it does have advantages over heavy armor. It's that medium armor lacks advantages over light armor.

[Zharradan Marr]

They really should have introduced some kind of +6 Medium armor. And Medium should have reduced base speed from 30' to 25', not 20'.

[Kraken]

I think you're missing the point a little. It's not that medium armor lacks advantages over heavy armor, because it does have advantages over heavy armor. It's that medium armor lacks advantages over light armor.

Oh. Well, mounted characters don't care about the speed reduction, so there's that. There's a magic item in Tome of Magic that gets rid of the speed reduction for armor, too, but perhaps that's far afield for this discussion. If your dex mod is only 3, and you can deal with the ACP, there's not much reason to go with a chain shirt over a breastplate.

[HunterOfJello]

I think it just provides a nice buffer between Light and Heavy for the game once special materials start to get involved. Due to the way that the game is set up, a set of mithril full plate will still penalize your movement speed. Also, mithril armor of medium weight is definitely worth using. If the game was changed to only have Light and Heavy, then those things would get screwed up.

There is also the previously mentioned factor of price. Hide Armor is cheaper than Studded Leather while providing the same armor bonus. Scale Armor is half the price of a Chain Shirt while being only half the price. These can be good choices in a game where your characters are very low on starting cash and need to buy something to put in between themselves and an orc's sword.

The game was also designed to be realistic and an extrapolation on reality. Medium Armor makes sense in this context. The same complaints could be made of some of the weapons in the PHB. Many weapons are listed very close to weapons that are purely superior to them. Check out the Heavy Mace stats and then the stats for the Morningstar which is listed right beneath it. The Morningstar is lighter, cheaper, does an extra type of damage, and yet has the exact same stats as the heavy mace. The game gives you choices and lets you decide if you want something optimal, interesting, fun, intentionally stupid, or purely creative. One of the best parts of the game is the fact that you choose what you want and suffer the benefits.

[eggynack]

Oh. Well, mounted characters don't care about the speed reduction, so there's that. There's a magic item in Tome of Magic that gets rid of the speed reduction for armor, too, but perhaps that's far afield for this discussion. If your dex mod is only 3, and you can deal with the ACP, there's not much reason to go with a chain shirt over a breastplate.
Speed is usually going to be more important than +1 AC. Sure, you can construct situations such that breastplate's disadvantages will be mitigated, but it's still +1 AC. It's a lot of effort for very little gain.

[Mithril Leaf]

Oh. Well, mounted characters don't care about the speed reduction, so there's that. There's a magic item in Tome of Magic that gets rid of the speed reduction for armor, too, but perhaps that's far afield for this discussion. If your dex mod is only 3, and you can deal with the ACP, there's not much reason to go with a chain shirt over a breastplate.

Because Dastana are 25 GP and you get a cheaper result with better ACP, max dex, and equal armor?

[Kraken]

Speed is usually going to be more important than +1 AC. Sure, you can construct situations such that breastplate's disadvantages will be mitigated, but it's still +1 AC. It's a lot of effort for very little gain.

The whole post was supposed to be taken with regard to mounted characters. Otherwise I agree.

[madtinker]

The medium armors are metal and can be made of ironwood, and thus used by a druid. Making an ironwood chain shirt just doesn't make sense.

[JungleChicken]

I like how nobody has even touched upon characters and role playing.

Maybe the advantage is that it's what the character likes/is used to.
The culture that the character comes from doesn't have meta knowledge of the AC/max dex/ACF etc.

Maybe the character likes breast plate because he can walk around town and breath the fresh air and have his fancy shirt admired

[eggynack]

I like how nobody has even touched upon characters and role playing.

Maybe the advantage is that it's what the character likes/is used to.
The culture that the character comes from doesn't have meta knowledge of the AC/max dex/ACF etc.

Maybe the character likes breast plate because he can walk around town and breath the fresh air and have his fancy shirt admired
Probably because armor is kinda irrelevant in relation to roleplaying. Is there really some character concept that you have in which you couldn't find and replace "breastplate" for "chain shirt"? What, am I supposed to constantly be role playing the specific variety of armor my character has on? Armor doesn't even have the iconic value of something like a weapon, and even weapon types are pretty interchangeable. It's not like the katana that has been passed down in your family for generations, and that represents all you've left behind by adventuring, can't just be an ancestral guisarme or something.

[OldTrees1]

I like how nobody has even touched upon characters and role playing.

Maybe the advantage is that it's what the character likes/is used to.
The culture that the character comes from doesn't have meta knowledge of the AC/max dex/ACF etc.

Maybe the character likes breast plate because he can walk around town and breath the fresh air and have his fancy shirt admired

If I have a character concept that includes wearing a specific type of armor, then I refluff a Light or Heavy armor to match my armor concept.

[JungleChicken]

Probably because armor is kinda irrelevant in relation to roleplaying. Is there really some character concept that you have in which you couldn't find and replace "breastplate" for "chain shirt"? What, am I supposed to constantly be role playing the specific variety of armor my character has on? Armor doesn't even have the iconic value of something like a weapon, and even weapon types are pretty interchangeable.


Tell that to a Roman legionnaire, Samurai, Viking, or Frank

[eggynack]

Tell that to a Roman legionnaire, Samurai, Viking, or Frank
Alright, like, if I can find one. This stuff is all pretty mutable. My samurai character can use a greatsword instead of a bastard sword, if I want him to, and he can also use a guisarme. What weapon your character uses shouldn't be your character, because the weapon itself means far less than the meaning you ascribe to it. This is especially true in a fantasy world, where you can define the weapon-culture of the town you hail from such that your version of a samurai uses a guisarme. This is ultra-double true for armor, cause armor is way less iconic than weapons. Also, as OldTrees1 mentioned, refluffing the armor or weapon you want is pretty trivial.

[JungleChicken]

Alright, like, if I can find one. This stuff is all pretty mutable. My samurai character can use a greatsword instead of a bastard sword, if I want him to, and he can also use a guisarme. What weapon your character uses shouldn't be your character, because the weapon itself means far less than the meaning you ascribe to it. This is especially true in a fantasy world, where you can define the weapon-culture of the town you hail from such that your version of a samurai uses a guisarme. This is ultra-double true for armor, cause armor is way less iconic than weapons. Also, as OldTrees1 mentioned, refluffing the armor or weapon you want is pretty trivial.

ou realize that goes both was. Culture could be quite strict in it's adherence to a cultural nrom or mutable.

Bone Knights for example literally become their armor

[Abithrios]

Tell that to a Roman legionnaire, Samurai, Viking, or Frank

The first three would probably go with the best armor they could find, even if it looks weird and foreign to them.

[eggynack]

ou realize that goes both was. Culture could be quite strict in it's adherence to a cultural nrom or mutable.
What? The culture could be strict in adherence to a cultural norm, but you can pretty reasonably determine what that cultural norm is.


Bone Knights for example literally become their armor
I'm not entirely sure how this relates to anything. If you get to choose what that armor you become is, then you can make that armor anything you want within the parameters of the class.

[Knaight]

Tell that to a Roman legionnaire, Samurai, Viking, or Frank

That we find some of their armor iconic now doesn't mean it was found that way then, by all indications practicality is what was selected for. It's not like there was all around better armor available that these cultures specifically avoided.

[Erik Vale]

The first three would probably go with the best armor they could find, even if it looks weird and foreign to them.

Roman Legionary, individually maybe, as a man working for the army, no because he cant.

Samurai, you should have been writing in blue.

Viking, they need to swim in case they fall out of the boat. Fullplate isn't conducive to swimming.

[JungleChicken]

What? The culture could be strict in adherence to a cultural norm, but you can pretty reasonably determine what that cultural norm is.


I'm not entirely sure how this relates to anything. If you get to choose what that armor you become is, then you can make that armor anything you want within the parameters of the class.

You still have a base armor that you use. The armor doesn't change. As for cultural fluff, that's a choice. You think armor is irrelevant while another player/character may not.

[Zweisteine]

But a character does tend to get attached to his weapon, if roleplayed a certain way. A samurai who grew up using a guisarme will not want to use another weapon. To convert that to armor, maybe a barbarian from some barbaric tribe would wear hide armor because it's traditional, or exause it's a sign of your prowess to wear the hides of your slain foes, etc.

Medium armor is good for low-level characters stuck below heavy armor. Guess who falls into that category? Most NPCs with combat training. The city guard probaby wear breastplate or chainmail.


And here's a minor fix for the issue: add 1 to any basic medium armor's AC bonus (basic = normally medium, not mithral heavy or anything fancy like that). Maybe also bump up the price of hide armor to 20 or 30 gp.

[eggynack]

You still have a base armor that you use. The armor doesn't change. As for cultural fluff, that's a choice. You think armor is irrelevant while another player/character may not.
I just don't know why it would be relevant. For the most part, armor type is a rather fluffless thing, with the only important thing being what you make that armor mean to the character. Role playing the cool chain mail whose use represents a rite of passage into adulthood in your culture is pretty much identical to role playing the cool breastplate whose use represents a rite of passage into adulthood in your culture. Fluff is mutable, and there isn't even that much fluff here.


But a character does tend to get attached to his weapon, if roleplayed a certain way. A samurai who grew up using a guisarme will not want to use another weapon. To convert that to armor, maybe a barbarian from some barbaric tribe would wear hide armor because it's traditional, or exause it's a sign of your prowess to wear the hides of your slain foes, etc.
True, but you can make those things you're attached to whatever you want.

Edit: Also, it's rather trivial to just use armor with all the stats of chain mail, and say that it's breastplate.

[Baitdoll]

Probably because armor is kinda irrelevant in relation to roleplaying. Is there really some character concept that you have in which you couldn't find and replace "breastplate" for "chain shirt"? What, am I supposed to constantly be role playing the specific variety of armor my character has on? Armor doesn't even have the iconic value of something like a weapon, and even weapon types are pretty interchangeable. It's not like the katana that has been passed down in your family for generations, and that represents all you've left behind by adventuring, can't just be an ancestral guisarme or something.

This statement changes incredible if your only experience with this game isn't just pbp, where roleplaying is often ignored, and high roleplaying games still ignore roleplaying.

Armor and weapon have everything to do with real life dnd. You gonna drown cuz that swim check will come into play. You gonna break that sword to that rust monster, and the skele is gonna laugh at you poking him in the ribs with your rapier.

Flavor and such, is often ignored in pbp, but that's all you got on a REAL tabletop. Your armor is defintiely going to be pointed out. Their armor is going to be pointed out. Your weapon will be pointed out. These parts of the character, along with hair and cloak and other things become focal points. Dnd is a combat sim on paper, but around a table, you get lost in the world, and might not roll the dice except for a skill check for two solid hours.

We often have medium armors at our tables.
Just like we never see leap attack valorous pouncing totem barbarians, or 14 one lvl dip casters, because these metagame choices make no sense thematically or roleplay wise, and would never fly at a table in front of your peers.

[Seerow]

I think the whole point of including Medium Armor in the game was to have a buffer to keep Mithral from making Full Plate light armor.

There's really no other logical explanation.

[eggynack]

Armor and weapon have everything to do with real life dnd. You gonna drown cuz that swim check will come into play. You gonna break that sword to that rust monster, and the skele is gonna laugh at you poking him in the ribs with your rapier.
Those are mechanical impacts. If there's a mechanical advantage to having medium armor over light, then that's what the thread is looking for. The armor you choose is somewhat important for mechanical reasons. It's basically irrelevant for flavor purposes.


Flavor and such, is often ignored in pbp, but that's all you got on a REAL tabletop. Your armor is defintiely going to be pointed out. Their armor is going to be pointed out. Your weapon will be pointed out. These parts of the character, along with hair and cloak and other things become focal points. Dnd is a combat sim on paper, but around a table, you get lost in the world, and might not roll the dice except for a skill check for two solid hours.
It can be pointed out as much as you like, but that doesn't make the armor you choose relevant. Just about any role playing situation that can occur with breastplate can occur in a functionally identical manner with chain shirt. Your character's chain shirt isn't important because it's chain shirt. It's important because it was made by a legendary blacksmith who lives in a distant mountain, or because it was the armor you were wearing when your town was destroyed, or maybe just because you enjoy not being hit. There's not really much room for that role playing based functional equivalence to be breached.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

I think the important part about cultural armor choices is that the PHB armors reduce all the armors of history and represent them with under just eleven categories. That leaves a lot of room for finagling something that has the look you want with the stats you want.

If your group isn't flexible Gloryborn is cheap and explicitly lets you strip away an amount of material that should make armor nonfunctional.

[A_S]

This statement changes incredible if your only experience with this game isn't just pbp, where roleplaying is often ignored, and high roleplaying games still ignore roleplaying.
?????

A) Lots of the PbP games here are entirely centered around roleplaying, with little regard to optimization combat mechanics. And tabletop games are perfectly capable of munchkinry (Tippy only plays in person, I believe). I think your generalization about PbP games is unfounded.

B) I think your assumption that eggynack has never played D&D over a real tabletop is almost certainly incorrect.

(There was gonna be a point C but then eggynack swordsage'd me.)

[Another_Poet]

For low-level mounted characters, which I enjoy playing, I've found Medium armor to be a better choice than Light.

Otherwise, right, there is no point. Chain shirt all the way.

[eggynack]

B) I think your assumption that eggynack has never played D&D over a real tabletop is almost certainly incorrect.

I have indeed, though not as much as I'd like.

[TuggyNE]

I like how nobody has even touched upon characters and role playing.

Maybe the advantage is that it's what the character likes/is used to.
The culture that the character comes from doesn't have meta knowledge of the AC/max dex/ACF etc.

Maybe the character likes breast plate because he can walk around town and breath the fresh air and have his fancy shirt admired

This reminds me forcibly of the ad campaign "Body bags: one size fits all". When you're picking out something to save your life, putting aesthetics ahead of functionality is a foolish mistake that will probably cost you dearly.

And make no mistake, the tradeoffs of the various armor types would be known fairly well. It doesn't take metagame knowledge to measure how much armor restricts your attempts to jump, how well it protects against blows that glance off, or even to work out how much it limits your ability to dodge attacks completely. All it takes is competent armorers.

[Kraken]

I have only ever played at real tables, and over the years have met some pretty darned hardcore RP centric players (a handful of which could be prime Stormwind Fallacy examples). I can't think of a time where someone changed their armor for flavor reasons. Most adventurers aren't rank and file soldiers, and so strict uniforming doesn't really make sense aside from perhaps having a nation's crest somewhere on their chosen outfit if they do pledge allegiance to someone. With this in mind, it makes the most sense for armor to be chosen for utility. And quite frankly, from a fluff perspective, I'd wager few people I sit down with would even known the difference between half-plate, banded mail, and splint mail, for instance, further diminishing the odds of this ever being a concern.

[Averis Vol]

At some point in the game, my armor is going to become useless. Until then, I thematically like a breastplate. Seriously, I don't see why it matters in the long run, my AC will be decent, with work, until a certain level, then it will be used to stack useful enchantments.

[eggynack]

At some point in the game, my armor is going to become useless. Until then, I thematically like a breastplate. Seriously, I don't see why it matters in the long run, my AC will be decent, with work, until a certain level, then it will be used to stack useful enchantments.
What does it mean to thematically like a breastplate? As for why it matters, it matters because it impacts things beyond AC. You're facing a lower speed and a higher ACP by using breastplate over chain shirt, and those things remain relevant even after your AC stops mattering quite so much.

[maniacalmojo]

Mithril medium armor makes the armor count as light armor so you can have the bonuses of medium armor with the higher ac but have the lessened penalties because its mithril. For classess that use mostly light armor it helps a lot.

[Gwendol]

There are essentially 2-3 armors in the game that matters: chain shirt, full plate, and the mithral breastplate (because it counts as light armor). The rest are just filling, or possibly placeholders until you can afford the "right" armor.

Chain shirt+dastana is superior to breastplate in every possible way. Giving each +1 enhancements costs 2000 gp, giving the breastplate a +2 enhancement costs 4000 gp and you're still stuck with reduced movement.

[Thurbane]

They really should have introduced some kind of +6 Medium armor. And Medium should have reduced base speed from 30' to 25', not 20'.
This, 110%. I believe pathfinder has breastplates as +6, making them at least semi-relevant.

There are essentially 2-3 armors in the game that matters: chain shirt, full plate, and the mithral breastplate (because it counts as light armor). The rest are just filling, or possibly placeholders until you can afford the "right" armor.
Pretty much spot on.

People can argue about "RP opportunities" all they like, but when a focal point of your character's persona is his breastplate as opposite to full plate or a chain shirt? Really? Gear is gear is gear, IMHO - especially armor (weapons seem to be very much more evocative). Name any of a dozen fantasy iconics, and you'll be lucky if one or two are known even remotely by their specific type of armor (barring fairly rare examples, which I'm now certain people will search for). :smallbiggrin:

[hymer]

Medium armour was invented by dwarves. To them, it is a cost-effective way to get armor bonus to AC early on, so long as they don't care about ACP.

[Calimehter]

I'm away from my books, but doesn't Duskblade get arcane casting in Medium Armor at some point in in its progression?

[hymer]

I'm away from my books, but doesn't Duskblade get arcane casting in Medium Armor at some point in in its progression?

They do. But I think most duskblades will go for some other sort of armour anyway. Either the chain shirt, or the materially or magically lightened breastplate - or the materially or magically lightened full plate. They may wear armour that counts as medium, but it'll be heavy even so.

[Fouredged Sword]

For a long time I played in a game that the DM ruled that it only caused a -5ft move speed penalty, so it was half way between light and heavy armor.

It made sense that way. It took a reading of the rules much later for me to learn that it was a house rule.

[DeltaEmil]

They do. But I think most duskblades will go for some other sort of armour anyway. Either the chain shirt, or the materially or magically lightened breastplate - or the materially or magically lightened full plate. They may wear armour that counts as medium, but it'll be heavy even so.Heavy armor is alright for Duskblade if they take the Battle Caster feat from Complete Arcane, so that they can ignore the arcane spell failure chance from heavy armors.

[NNescio]

Roman Legionary, individually maybe, as a man working for the army, no because he cant.

Samurai, you should have been writing in blue.

Viking, they need to swim in case they fall out of the boat. Fullplate isn't conducive to swimming.

The samurai really liked European armor pieces, especially after guns were introduced.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d9/Kenshin_Uesugi%27s_armour.jpg/400px-Kenshin_Uesugi%27s_armour.jpg

Look up "Nanban dou" ('Western armor', Literally "Southern Barbarian armor")

Also guns, lances, and pretty much anything that works that they can acquire from trade. Look up the Takeda clan, Tanegashima matchlocks, and the Battle of Nagashino

[hymer]

@ DeltaEmil: Yes, another way to get away from using medium armour.

[lytokk]

Frankly, when I play, I just use the best armor I can pick up, be it medium, heavy or light. But, I've also played a character with 3 different sets of armor for different uses. All that being said, just going to list a few advantages medium has over heavy

Heavy armor requires help to put on, and 4 minutes, otherwise +1 to ACP and -1 to AC.

Medium armor comes off faster, which is useful in the case of say, drowning.

With the endurance feat, you can sleep in medium armor without being fatigued.

Medium armor is lighter. When using the encumbrance rules it can really play in.

Just my two cents as to why someone would pick medium over heavy.
Medium armor max dex is higher, so if you have a +2 or 3 dex bonus, and want to keep your touch AC as high as possible, you'd go with medium.

[Dread_Head]

Restful armour crystal costs 500gp and covers the donning of armour (never take it off) and sleeping in it. If your wearing heavy armour it doesn't matter your encumbrance unless its over heavy encumbrance and heavy armour wearers tend to be strong melee types anyway.

Additionally if you want to go medium over heavy for any of those reasons listed then you might as well go light over medium for the higher movement speed and lower ACP compared to the slightly lower AC.

[Segev]

The argument that "real role players" wear medium armor because "role playing" is the stormwind fallacy.

To illustrate, let's say that WotC came out with errata that said that Breastplate sets your AC to 0 and makes you able to only move 5 ft. per round, but is fluffed to be more maneuverable than full plate (even though it isn't, mechanically). Would a "real role player" wear this Breastplate for the same reasons he does so now?

Game mechanics are relevant. The problem with medium armor is that it really only has price as an advantage over heavy armor, and isn't enough better than light armor to make its trade-offs AND increased price worth it.

If the best light armors were increased in overall price, and maybe some small buffs were given to medium armor, it would begin to make it more of an actual choice. I think a more interesting thing, though, would be if Masterwork armor wasn't a flat +150 gp, but was instead a function of its base price. Maybe x10 or x20 or x50, or something. (I'm not looking at numbers right now so can't do a proper analysis.)

If +X enhancement-equivalents were ALSO a function of the base price of the armor, it would REALLY make the cheaper ones better for enhancement-stacking, and might make choice between Medium and Heavy more significant, as well. (Heck, if one isn't careful, one might make Heavy armor seem pointless due to the expense-increases.)

[OldTrees1]

The argument that "real role players" wear medium armor because "role playing" is the stormwind fallacy.

It also was never mentioned before your post. Try not to strawman.


The argument you misread was: "If I have a character concept that wears medium armor, then I might use medium armor in the build."

[Scow2]

It can be pointed out as much as you like, but that doesn't make the armor you choose relevant. Just about any role playing situation that can occur with breastplate can occur in a functionally identical manner with chain shirt. Your character's chain shirt isn't important because it's chain shirt. It's important because it was made by a legendary blacksmith who lives in a distant mountain, or because it was the armor you were wearing when your town was destroyed, or maybe just because you enjoy not being hit. There's not really much room for that role playing based functional equivalence to be breached.
Or it's a chain shirt because you like the aesthetic of a chain shirt. Though I prefer Scale armor, and am so glad every edition past 3.5 made Scale armor awesome ever since the art of 3.5 made it the most iconic armor (In 4e, it's the most mobile and second-strongest of the heavy armors. In D&D Next, it's the strongest of the Medium armors.

Medium armor supposedly has a place, but bad design made it obsolete... the bad design I'm thinking of is the "Chain Shirt", which offers Medium Armor protection without Medium Armor drawbacks.

Pathfinder does fix the armor math... sort of. It still makes the half-plate suck unnecessarily, though. At least the AC ranges are 1-3 (Except the grandfathered-in atrocity known as Chain Shirt) for Light, 4-6 for Medium, and 7-9 for Heavy.

[Gwendol]

Well, that is the point, right? In D&D 3.5 you more or less only use the chain shirt or the full plate. In other gaming systems I hope to find some more stratification.

[Chronos]

Quoth madtinker:

The medium armors are metal and can be made of ironwood, and thus used by a druid. Making an ironwood chain shirt just doesn't make sense.
You can also make a breastplate out of dragonhide, which is similarly druid-eligible. When I made my dwarven druid, a dragonhide breastplate was a no-brainer (I couldn't yet afford a monk's belt). It was mechanically better than any other armor I could wear in every way except price, and the price for mundane items is negligible past about level 3 or so.

[Segev]

It also was never mentioned before your post. Try not to strawman.


The argument you misread was: "If I have a character concept that wears medium armor, then I might use medium armor in the build."
I do try not to straw man. Thank you for clarifying your position.

My point stands about "what if your concept called for Breast Plate, but Breast Plate was actively worse in every way than any other kind of armor, or even no armor at all?"

That point being: "role-play" to use something that is just plain worse than alternatives equally available to you is either the stormwind fallacy, or it's punishing players for having a particular concept.

Saying "I'm wearing breast plate, but using the mechanics for Chain Shirt" is not going to hurt your role-play a whit. That you'd want to do this for a variety of good reasons - starting with "breastplate probably wouldn't be used when everybody has access to better for the same price in this setting" - means the design of breastplate is flawed, mechanically.

[JungleChicken]

What would stop a player from just saying
I'm not gonna wear armor because my flesh alone has all the benefits of chain shirt and none of the drawbacks

[sideswipe]

I want to point out that nobody has mentioned heavy plate from races of stone.
its +9 ac so with mithril it is the best medium armour (as mountain plate does not become medium from mithril).

[OldTrees1]

I do try not to straw man. Thank you for clarifying your position.

My point stands about "what if your concept called for Breast Plate, but Breast Plate was actively worse in every way than any other kind of armor, or even no armor at all?"

That point being: "role-play" to use something that is just plain worse than alternatives equally available to you is either the stormwind fallacy, or it's punishing players for having a particular concept.


The argument wasn't mine. Although I was glad to clarify it.

It is true that some character concepts are inherently unoptimal (non casters anyone?) and it is true that 3.5 does punish some players for having particular character concepts (Conan anyone?).


Saying "I'm wearing breast plate, but using the mechanics for Chain Shirt" is not going to hurt your role-play a whit. That you'd want to do this for a variety of good reasons - starting with "breastplate probably wouldn't be used when everybody has access to better for the same price in this setting" - means the design of breastplate is flawed, mechanically.

If I have a character concept that includes wearing a specific type of armor, then I refluff a Light or Heavy armor to match my armor concept.

This was the solution I proposed when the argument was mentioned.


What would stop a player from just saying
I'm not gonna wear armor because my flesh alone has all the benefits of chain shirt and none of the drawbacks
If this was a reply to using the fluff of 1 armor and the mechanics of a different armor:
Because using the mechanics of chain shirt means you accept the benefits AND the drawbacks.

[ericgrau]

The underestimation of a +1 and the lack of heavy armor proficiency, basically. If you are heavy melee getting hit 5 out of 20 times and drop that to 4 out of 20 times then that's just as good as adding on a 20% miss chance.

Plus once you add in dex all the armors are the same except for full plate, which is only 1 point better. You basically select whichever armor matches your dex bonus. And if it's +0 to +3 and and you don't have heavy armor proficiency, that means breastplate.

[sideswipe]

The underestimation of a +1 and the lack of heavy armor proficiency, basically. If you are heavy melee getting hit 5 out of 20 times and drop that to 4 out of 20 times then that's just as good as adding on a 20% miss chance.

Plus once you add in dex all the armors are the same except for full plate, which is only 1 point better. You basically select whichever armor matches your dex bonus. And if it's +0 to +3 and and you don't have heavy armor proficiency, that means breastplate.

not quite. mithril adds +2 to max dex. so with +3 dex i would get mithril full plate and get the whole bonus.

[ericgrau]

For a price. Magic is cheaper than mithral until very high level. You do have to sell your non-mithral for half later. But even if you are trying to plan for long term costs during 6 levels just to save what will be a pittance by the time you're done, a single resurrection or a single failed attempt at a challenge blows that all away. Assuming the campaign doesn't end as high level begins, like many do. Or even if you are thinking long term, you may want to jump straight into celestial armor which has an even higher armor + dex bonus which means you have to sell whatever you had before anyway.

Mithral is worth it on a chain shirt... if you have a 22 dex at low level. Which pretty much limits it to dex focused characters until very high level.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

What would stop a player from just saying
I'm not gonna wear armor because my flesh alone has all the benefits of chain shirt and none of the drawbacks

Your intent seems a bit straw manish, both by being extrme and because the player is asking for a free mechanical benifit which is not refluffing. I actually have played a Barbarian with Endurance who had tatoos with the stats of magical armor including price, max dex mod, and armor check penalty. In less extreme cases, like those most re-fluffers are proposing I can't see a reasonable DM refusing.

Can I have a scale shirt with Chain Shirt stats?

Can I have scale armor with heavy gauntlets, pauldrons, and greaves with the stats of platemail?

If the answer to such questions is no either the game in question is going to simulationist to the point where d20 is a very poor system for it or it will be so infused with Stormwind Fallacy that I wouldn't care to be anywhere near it.

[eggynack]

All that being said, just going to list a few advantages medium has over heavy.
As I mentioned above, the question is why medium is better than light, rather than why it's better than heavy. It's not much.

What would stop a player from just saying
I'm not gonna wear armor because my flesh alone has all the benefits of chain shirt and none of the drawbacks
Because the rules don't support it. I mean, I guess you can say that your flesh has all the benefits of chain shirt, but you're going to have to put on your non-existent chain shirt every morning, face the ACP of your non-existent chain shirt, and so on and so forth. This is refluffing. Not remechanicsing. None of the stuff I just listed makes any sense, so I almost certainly wouldn't allow it, but just letting someone change the name and aesthetics of their armor makes a whole lot of sense, so I almost certainly would allow it. It feels like you're trying to pull off a reductio ad absurdum here, but you're going about it in a rather illogical way.

[Thurbane]

I want to point out that nobody has mentioned heavy plate from races of stone.
its +9 ac so with mithril it is the best medium armour (as mountain plate does not become medium from mithril).
I find mithril Mechanus Gear armor better - +10 AC medium armor; possibly worse movement rate though.

[Deophaun]

Because the rules don't support it. I mean, I guess you can say that your flesh has all the benefits of chain shirt, but you're going to have to put on your non-existent chain shirt every morning, face the ACP of your non-existent chain shirt, and so on and so forth. This is refluffing. Not remechanicsing. None of the stuff I just listed makes any sense...
Unless you're some hideous skin-less monster that needs to flay his victims so he can look normal...

...still, how are you going to explain your request to the local enchanter to put light fortification on your flesh suit?

[eggynack]

...still, how are you going to explain your request to the local enchanter to put light fortification on your flesh suit?
"May you please put light fortification on my ridiculous flesh suit? Also, here is a large quantity of money."

[sideswipe]

I find mithril Mechanus Gear armor better - +10 AC medium armor; possibly worse movement rate though.

I don't acknowledge the existence of random home-brew, when talking about REAL character options.

here - i have some home-brew armour. made better because armour is for mundane characters and they need the extra help.

mithril awesome plate

+20 ac, +10 max dex, no move penalties, 0% arcane spell failure, 10 lb,
special-
+2 to all abilities
hardness and hp of adamantine

3000gp

see. home-brew. and you think i'm being ridiculous. but most people here have seen worse as a legitimate rule.

so again. Heavy plate as an official and therefore usable armour.

EDIT - the Internet is useless i googled 50 different variants to the questions about where mechanus gear was in a official book and all it came back with was the stupid home-brew variant on dndwiki. the one that for a few thousand gold makes you large, +2 str and a bunch of other ridiculous add ons, it doesn't reduce your move speed as much as normal mechanus gear.

you see my frustration. it seems as if that is the only mechanus gear talked about on forums or in armour talks.

[Karnith]

I don't acknowledge the existence of random home-brew, when talking about REAL character options.
Mechanus Gear can be found in the Planar Handbook, pp. 69-70.

[Thurbane]

Mechanus Gear can be found in the Planar Handbook, pp. 69-70.
Thank you, saved me from providing info on my "random homebrew" :smalltongue:

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/planar_gallery/82531.jpg

[sideswipe]

Thank you, saved me from providing info on my "random homebrew" :smalltongue:

I apologise, re- read my comment

[Thurbane]

I apologise, re- read my comment
No problemo - from the pic I edited into my post, I also love the look of Mechanus Gear, it's a bit "steampunk".

[Ansem]

The first three would probably go with the best armor they could find, even if it looks weird and foreign to them.

Roman soldiers were light equipped, with nothing more than a skirt, helmet and an iron vestment.
Despite the inaccuracies of this movie, they atleast got that right:
http://static.thecia.com.au/reviews/a/asterix-and-obelix-5.jpg
Because quicker and more movable is a big advantage for combat and besides, who needs armour when you got a bigass shield to cover you up.

[Reverent-One]

Huh, until I read this thread I hadn't realized that PF boosted the AC bonus of Medium Armor. Learn something new everyday.

[hymer]

Roman soldiers were light equipped, with nothing more than a skirt, helmet and an iron vestment.

There were about 2000 years of people calling themselves Roman soldiers. Anyway, you seem to be referring to late Republic, since Caesar is alive at the time of Asterix et al. At that time, the legionnaires had a big shield and wore chain mail and a good helmet.

[Captnq]

I'm frickin' insulted.

I go through all the trouble to write the complete guide to armor and nobody even remembers I exist. All that work, wasted.

Editor Observation: Why Does Medium Armor Exist?
The game’s view of armor is based on a simple mathematical assumption that the total of Base armor and potential dodge bonus from Dex would equal about 7-9, give or take. So, the higher your Dex, the lighter a suit of armor you can wear. However, as it stands, you usually wind up with really high dexterity characters with nightscale, or Thaalud Stone Armor. The fact is the actual base cost of the armor becomes increasingly irrelevant once you reach a certain point of WBL. The difference between 2,000 gp and 200 gp is nothing when your WBL is over a quarter of a million. So why take medium armor at all?

Simply put, medium armor is mostly for low level play when a moderate Dex boost is available as buffing, but you won’t have it all the time. Oh, there are some cool combos as well, and a number of suits of medium armor can be reduced to light with mithril. I’m a big fan of impact chain, myself. Also, it’s for wizards who can layer on a few arcane spell failure improvements. Finding -20% to arcane spell failure isn’t as hard as you think. Most wizards don’t maneuver much anyways. The reduced speed is meaningless, and you can still run at x4 speed if you need to get out of dodge. (Although for a wizard, drow chitin is a great choice if you have to get armor on the cheap.)

It also is thematic. There should be something in between light and heavy armor. As I’ve written elsewhere, you need items that suck in order for the awesome items to appear awesome, in comparison. So, your particular build may call for something unusual. Or you need something druid friendly. Or it’s the only thing available at the Armor Store. So while you may never use medium armor from a number crunching viewpoint, the armor must exist for the game to function.



Oh, and medium armor that doesn't entirely suck:
BREASTPLATE
CHAIN, IMPACT
CHITIN, SIEGE BEETLE
FULL PLATE, DRAGONCRAFT
THUNDERHIDE

And of course: CHAINMAIL + CHAHAR-AINA + DASTANA

[Coidzor]

Huh, until I read this thread I hadn't realized that PF boosted the AC bonus of Medium Armor. Learn something new everyday.

Same here. I'd looked over it several times, too. XD

Also, they added the Armored Kilt to go along with the Dastana and Chahar-Aina. XD

[Averis Vol]

What does it mean to thematically like a breastplate? As for why it matters, it matters because it impacts things beyond AC. You're facing a lower speed and a higher ACP by using breastplate over chain shirt, and those things remain relevant even after your AC stops mattering quite so much.

yea none of that really bothers me. I play high low op at most (We are iffy about dragonfire inspiration if that helps get the assumed level across), so I've never been crippled by the loss of 10 movement speed or a -2 to skill checks. We also play with a really strong stat array (18,16,16,14,12,10) so if I'm wearing much armor, the -2 doesn't terribly impact me.

Now, I doubt this philosophy holds for most games, but hey, thats how my group functions.

[eggynack]

yea none of that really bothers me. I play high low op at most (We are iffy about dragonfire inspiration if that helps get the assumed level across), so I've never been crippled by the loss of 10 movement speed or a -2 to skill checks. We also play with a really strong stat array (18,16,16,14,12,10) so if I'm wearing much armor, the -2 doesn't terribly impact me.
I suppose, but you can pretty much say that about any suboptimal thing. No, the speed loss won't cripple you, but it is a significant penalty, especially if you're running around in melee. Breastplate is worse than chain shirt, even if it's not the most massive difference.

[Scow2]

Again, the problem with Light Armor is that the penalties for medium armor are too stiff (Effectively as slow as a heavy armor user) and the Goddamn Chain Shirt exists, which offers Medium Armor protection without any of the drawbacks.

[Averis Vol]

I suppose, but you can pretty much say that about any suboptimal thing. No, the speed loss won't cripple you, but it is a significant penalty, especially if you're running around in melee. Breastplate is worse than chain shirt, even if it's not the most massive difference.

I'm not disputing that at all, not one single bit. but thankfully I don't have to make the most optimal decision. As to a more direct thought towards the thread, I think the point of medium armor was, whether right or wrong, was to give a middle ground of "coping" armor until something better could be grabbed, or the game designers thought that if the PC was never going to get higher dex then +3, the minus to speed would be an acceptable loss. The game has definitely evolved since its release, I just think the designers expected the game to be played one way but it was actually played another. **** happens, ya know?

[Zweisteine]

To avoid the pain of breaking up a quote, I reponded in bold green text inside them.


The argument that "real role players" wear medium armor because "role playing" is the stormwind fallacy.

Not really. That's more of the No True Scotsman Fallacy (https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/no-true-scotsman). It is, in fact, true that some players would wear medium armor for roleplaying reasons. The fact that roleplaying and optimizing are not mutually exclusive does not mean that they are mutually inclusive, The statement you claim to be false is false because it is all-inclusive, not because of the Stormwind Fallacy by any stretch.

To illustrate, let's say that WotC came out with errata that said that Breastplate sets your AC to 0 and makes you able to only move 5 ft. per round, but is fluffed to be more maneuverable than full plate (even though it isn't, mechanically). Would a "real role player" wear this Breastplate for the same reasons he does so now?

Nobody would wear that armor, because that would be silly.* Only a True Scotsman would still wear it. See point 1, after the quote.

Point 1: In the game, I can think of nothing that is functionally opposite to its fluff, because the game was designed to have fluff describing (nearly) everything. If this was the case, everyone would ignore the errata, because it doesn't make sense. If it had been in the original book, it would have been assumed to be a typo, or an editor's idea of a joke.

If we tone the example down, and say that the original printing had terrible stats for Hide armor (because hide armor is a better example of something you'd want to roleplay than breastplate, IMO). Depending on how bad it was, some people might still wear it. Optimizers (even roleplaying optimizers) would not use it, opting for leather armor, and stating that they throw animal furs over it.

*Yes, I know that statement probably contains a fallacy or a few. I mean that the specific example is silly, not the idea.




That point being: "role-play" to use something that is just plain worse than alternatives equally available to you is either the stormwind fallacy, or it's punishing players for having a particular concept.

That is not the Stormwind Fallacy at all. (and for the same reason as in the other quote.) The fallacy is that roleplaying and optimizing are mutually exclusive. It does not mean that you cannot choose to make optimization secondary to roleplaying. If you want to be a barbarian in hide armor, you can be, even if there are better options.

As for punishing the player, if one armor is realistically less useful than another, it isn't punishing the player for their concept, but rather forcing them to accept the limitations of their concept, or think their way out of it (and at the extreme end serves to prevent someone from playing a character in full plate that leaps around like an anime character).

Saying "I'm wearing breast plate, but using the mechanics for Chain Shirt" is not going to hurt your role-play a whit. That you'd want to do this for a variety of good reasons - starting with "breastplate probably wouldn't be used when everybody has access to better for the same price in this setting" - means the design of breastplate is flawed, mechanically.

See point 2, after the quote.

Point 2: While this isn't a bad idea, a lot of DMs won't let that fly, even if they are generally loose with the rules in favor of fun. I'm sure that my DM would never let me wear one type of armor and say it was another. There is a reason armor is statted how it is: the gear is built to be realistic (though limited by the designer's knowledge of realistic weapons, which wasn't always any good, like with the absurdly high weapon weights). In the D&D world, breastplate is less constraining than chainmail. A chain shirt is inherently different from breastplate. One is chain, one is plate; they are not the same at all.

Put simply, just because it isn't the best doesn't mean it is flawed. Breastplate exists, and is the best armor many low-level characters. It's a bit like the Pokemon TCG (or any children's game, or TV show, etc). Lots of kids play it, but most grow out of it as soon as they learn there's something better.

Just because D&D is the best RPG out there doesn't mean the others don't exist. FATAL exists, and it is an abomination against all D&D stands for, but it exists, and we can't do anything about it. Burn the books!


Also, consider that maybe it was meant to be a worse option. Low-level characters will use it, because they can't afford better. When they are rich with filthy lucre obtained from the corpses of brutally slaughtered, and possibly innocent, goblinoids, they will move on to better gear, and leave the breastplate for the common folk.

[kardar233]

I've used a breastplate for a Archivist//Sha'ir that went into Bone Knight as Bone Knight requires your armour to be at least medium weight and I found that with enough work (Githcraft, Feycraft, etc.) you can drop a breastplate's ASF to zero.

[Thurbane]

I'll hark back to my original complaint - the fact that chain shirt is +4 and you don't take a move penalty, and breastplate is +5 and you take a 1/3 move penalty (for 30 foot base move) makes most medium armor completely unappealing to me.

I would never, ever sacrifice 10 feet of movement for +1 AC. Particularly at low levels, I have found that that 10 feet of movement tends to make much more of a difference to living or dying in combat than 1 place of AC.

Throw in the fact you can sleep in light armor without requiring a feat nor special ability, and medium goes right out the window. I dunno about other groups, but our group tends to have a lot of wandering monster checks while we're camped outdoors. I love my chain shirt PJs. :smallbiggrin:

*Excluding mithril full plate and the like. +4 AC difference is usually enough to make medium worthwhile for me.

[Coidzor]

Again, the problem with Light Armor is that the penalties for medium armor are too stiff (Effectively as slow as a heavy armor user) and the Goddamn Chain Shirt exists, which offers Medium Armor protection without any of the drawbacks.

Yeah, I always wondered why Medium armor has the same penalties as Heavy.

[Seerow]

Yeah, I always wondered why Medium armor has the same penalties as Heavy.

But you can run at x4 instead of x3 in medium armor!


...yeah. When's the last time that came up?


If it had been reversed (can't run as fast in medium, but keep full move speed) Medium would be much more desirable overall. As it is, meh.

[animewatcha]

Chain Shirt with the two accessory items isn't bad, since you get an extra two whole armor slots for enchantments and the like.

Still reading the thread, but what extra two whole armor slots? accessory items?

[TuggyNE]

Still reading the thread, but what extra two whole armor slots? accessory items?

Dastana + chahar-aina; each is a separate piece of armor that adds to the total armor bonus. (What happens to their enhancement bonus is murky.)

[Mithril Leaf]

Dastana + chahar-aina; each is a separate piece of armor that adds to the total armor bonus. (What happens to their enhancement bonus is murky.)

Not that murky, you generally are assumed to only get the straight numbers from one, but all the special abilities from all of them.

[Coidzor]

Dastana + chahar-aina; each is a separate piece of armor that adds to the total armor bonus. (What happens to their enhancement bonus is murky.)

It basically all amounts to whether you think the enhancement bonus on a suit/piece of armor is a modifier of the wearer's AC (as in, enhancement bonus directly to the wearer's AC) or of the bonus of the AC that the armor gives its wearer(enhancement bonus adding to the armor bonus), right?

But they worded it one way in some places and another in others so it's somehow both and neither, IIRC. Granted, it's been ages since I've been over this so I may be misremembering the potential contention.

[lesser_minion]

OK, aside from the ever popular mithril full plate (when you can eventually afford it), what is the point of medium armor?

1st- and 2nd- level characters can't necessarily afford good armour.

Otherwise, I guess the stats are provided for completeness. Beyond the rule about rolling a natural 1 on a saving throw, the rules don't specifically model the in-universe practical concerns (such as maintenance) that might make cheaper armours a worthwhile choice, but that doesn't mean that such concerns aren't a part of the setting. It just means that WotC game designers are lazy.

[Coidzor]

Otherwise, I guess the stats are provided for completeness. Beyond the rule about rolling a natural 1 on a saving throw, the rules don't specifically model the in-universe practical concerns (such as maintenance) that might make cheaper armours a worthwhile choice, but that doesn't mean that such concerns aren't a part of the setting. It just means that WotC game designers are lazy.

Or the game is abstracted away from having such concerns come to the forefront and they left that to the myriad of other "gritty" d20 games. :smalltongue:

[TexAvery]

Tell that to a Roman legionnaire, Samurai, Viking, or Frank

Ok, this bothers me. A lot. Please tell me - exactly - why I should care what the Roman legions wore? They weren't existing with D&D 3.5 and dealing with its rules. Further, the rules of 3.5 do not, to say the least, do a perfect job of modeling historical armor. Given that, why should I try to make a character who looks like whose character sheet says the same type of armor used by some group in our world's history?

I guarantee, if the Roman legions would move 50% faster in slightly lighter armor, they wouldn't have worn breastplates.

[Zweisteine]

So why does the heavy mace exist? The same reasons as medium armor: they existed (and were relatively common) in reality, so the game has to model them, even if they are strictly worse than other options.

Mace, heavy | 12 gp | 1d8 | ×2 | 8 lb. | Bludgeoning
Morningstar | 8 gp | 1d8 | ×2 | 6 lb. | Bludgeoning and piercing

(And if you replace the spikes on a Morningstar with metal studs, it might be the same thing, but without piercing damage!)

[Coidzor]

So why does the heavy mace exist? The same reasons as medium armor: they existed (and were relatively common) in reality, so the game has to model them, even if they are strictly worse than other options.

Mace, heavy | 12 gp | 1d8 | ×2 | 8 lb. | Bludgeoning
Morningstar | 8 gp | 1d8 | ×2 | 6 lb. | Bludgeoning and piercing

(And if you replace the spikes on a Morningstar with metal studs, it might be the same thing, but without piercing damage!)

So historical heavy maces are strictly inferior to historical morningstars?

[eggynack]

I think the real question is why the option that's strictly worse in terms of both weight and damage type is also more expensive. That's kinda weird. My guess is that it would be because the weapon is heavier, which means that it requires more material to produce.

[Zweisteine]

Ok, this bothers me. A lot. Please tell me - exactly - why I should care what the Roman legions wore?
You don't need to care what Romans wore, unless you want to play one.

Further, the rules of 3.5 do not, to say the least, do a perfect job of modeling historical armor.
This is true, but it tries too, which is the point.

Given that, why should I try to make a character who looks like whose character sheet says the same type of armor used by some group in our world's history?
Maybe you want to warrior of a barbaric tribe, dressed in the hides of slain beasts. Maybe you want to play a knight, wearing a chain robe for protection. Maybe you want to play a samurai, dressed as a samurai would (I'm too lazy to look up what samurai armor was made of). That is why your character might wear a specific type of armor.


EDIT:

So historical heavy maces are strictly inferior to historical morningstars?

Not necessarily, but they are in D&D. My point is that some options are distinctly suboptimal, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't exist or need to change.


If you are offered a choice between a five-star restaurant and McDonald's, you choose the restaurant. You don't go on a quest to
Improve the quality of food at McDonald's; you let it remain as the obviously worse choice.

[lesser_minion]

Or the game is abstracted away from having such concerns come to the forefront and they left that to the myriad of other "gritty" d20 games. :smalltongue:

That's called 'laziness'.

[PersonMan]

Maybe you want to warrior of a barbaric tribe, dressed in the hides of slain beasts. Maybe you want to play a knight, wearing a chain robe for protection. Maybe you want to play a samurai, dressed as a samurai would (I'm too lazy to look up what samurai armor was made of). That is why your character might wear a specific type of armor.

Refluffing, though. It solves this issue perfectly.


If you are offered a choice between a five-star restaurant and McDonald's, you choose the restaurant. You don't go on a quest to
Improve the quality of food at McDonald's; you let it remain as the obviously worse choice.

The issue here is that McDonald's isn't obviously worse. If I'm on my way to school and woke up late, dropping my McD's allows me to actually have breakfast, whereas dropping by a 5-star restaurant will result in me being incredibly late. It's also cheaper to get two cheeseburgers and fries than whatever the 5-star place is serving.

[Malimar]

Probably because armor is kinda irrelevant in relation to roleplaying. Is there really some character concept that you have in which you couldn't find and replace "breastplate" for "chain shirt"? What, am I supposed to constantly be role playing the specific variety of armor my character has on? Armor doesn't even have the iconic value of something like a weapon, and even weapon types are pretty interchangeable.

Tell that to a Roman legionnaire, Samurai, Viking, or Frank

Ok, this bothers me. A lot. Please tell me - exactly - why I should care what the Roman legions wore? They weren't existing with D&D 3.5 and dealing with its rules. Further, the rules of 3.5 do not, to say the least, do a perfect job of modeling historical armor. Given that, why should I try to make a character who looks like whose character sheet says the same type of armor used by some group in our world's history?

You may have passed over the full context of the quote. One person says armor isn't personally iconic compared to weapons, another person mentions (as a counterexample to that proposition) armors that are generally considered culturally iconic. This side discussion isn't about modeling real-world anything, it's about iconic-ness and whether or not armor can possess it. Any other iconic armors would have done just as well as examples in the discussion. (The only iconic armors that come to my mind other than those mentioned are from sci-fi, not fantasy. I'm thinking Samus Aran, Boba and Jango Fett, Megaman, and maybe Robocop for personally iconic; stormtroopers and clone troopers for culturally iconic.)

(That said, just because you don't care about modelling real-world cultures doesn't mean nobody does. I, for one, would be pretty interested to know exactly which armor best represents various Roman loricae for my campaign setting's fantasy counterpart Romans. Same for samurai armor and my setting's fantasy counterpart feudal Japan.)

[Coidzor]

That's called 'laziness'.

Abstraction can be laziness or it can be any number of things, such as not wanting to spend half an hour doing something that isn't important to the game. Just because X *can* be Y, that doesn't mean it *is* Y. :smalltongue:


Not necessarily, but they are in D&D. My point is that some options are distinctly suboptimal, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't exist or need to change.

Then it's not really a very good explanation for why heavy maces are worse than morningstars. It's just an explanation for why they might have initially wanted to include both, not why they managed to fumble differentiating them.


If you are offered a choice between a five-star restaurant and McDonald's, you choose the restaurant. You don't go on a quest to
Improve the quality of food at McDonald's; you let it remain as the obviously worse choice.

That makes sense from the player perspective of choosing the superior option. It doesn't make sense from the designer perspective of making one option clearly superior to the other in every way and then putting them next to one another.

And the analogy seems flawed, since it's less about a consumer choosing between McDonald's and a five-star restaurant and more a business deciding to open two competiting fastfood restaurants in the same niche, serving the same area, setting them up so that they have the same operating costs and prices for their menu items, and then having one be strictly superior to the other in terms of what it offers.

[Chronos]

Heavy maces vs. morningstars are explained quite simply by a fundamental principle of game design. That principle can be summed up as "sometimes game designers screw up". Which can perhaps be forgiven, when dealing with a pair of very similar seldom-used weapons.

And what's the big deal about 20' movement instead of 30'? Several races are limited to that naturally, and it doesn't stop dwarves and halflings from being popular choices. In either case, you can still charge someone who's taken a single 30' move action away from you, and you can't charge someone who's taken a full-round run away from you. And party movement is going to be limited by the slowest character, who's probably going to be at 20' anyway. Sure, you probably wouldn't want to take medium armor on a small race for a 15' speed, but dwarves aren't affected by the speed reduction, and halflings and gnomes usually favor classes that are limited to light anyway, so it's seldom relevant.

So if you don't care about 20' vs. 30' movement, a breasplate instead of a chain shirt is effectively a free +1 to AC. OK, +1 isn't much, but it's cheap.

[eggynack]

So if you don't care about 20' vs. 30' movement, a breasplate instead of a chain shirt is effectively a free +1 to AC. OK, +1 isn't much, but it's cheap.
Folks don't care enough about that movement difference for it to be worth changing race, but a +1 to AC is worth significantly less than a +10 to movement speed. This +1 to AC is far from free on that basis.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Whether it's true or not, the idea of clergy attempting to wage war without drawing blood was modeled in the restrictions on the 1st ed Cleric's weapons which made "Clerics can use it" a desirable trait that was balanced around. So, 3rd ed's inferior Mace can be viewed as a holdover.

I agree aprevious poster, that it weighs more because a pure bludgeon needs more weight and a morning star often has a wooden shaft. They could be balanced by adding some realism/complexity to weapon rules by specifying that some weapons with two damage types let you choose the damage type while others always do a combination of both types, this would make mace superior against targets with DR/piercing.



Maybe you want to warrior of a barbaric tribe, dressed in the hides of slain beasts. Maybe you want to play a knight, wearing a chain robe for protection. Maybe you want to play a samurai, dressed as a samurai would (I'm too lazy to look up what samurai armor was made of). That is why your character might wear a specific type of armor.

Hides of Slain Beasts - Studded Leather with a rough and tumble look, with Hides (cold weather clothing) over it. This will let you role play things like taking off layers when it's too hot and using the hides for other purposes like bedding or draping them over a spiked or hot surface before before climbing on them or using them like oven mitts all without removing your armor.

Chain Robe - The defaut description and picture of Chainmail in the PHB doesn't look like the long sleeved shirt that hands low enough to form a skirt that you may be familiar with, so you're refluffing medium armor. Chain is a appropriate armoe to start a knight in, but you'll need a compelling reason to not upgrade to Plate which is generally considered to be the direct in world upgrade for a knight that doesn't start rich enough to afford Plate.

Samuri Armor - It's actually good. I'm not going to post it's stats, but it's Armor bonus and Max Dex mod add up to 9 and it has a low ACP for heavy armor.

[TexAvery]

Maybe you want to warrior of a barbaric tribe, dressed in the hides of slain beasts. Maybe you want to play a knight, wearing a chain robe for protection. Maybe you want to play a samurai, dressed as a samurai would (I'm too lazy to look up what samurai armor was made of). That is why your character might wear a specific type of armor.

If the rules model an armor that was used historically by a dominant military force to be sub-optimal I'm not going to be beholden to it. That's just... not appealing.

If a breastplate, for whatever reason, was AC +1, would you still think a legionnaire character should wear it despite being horribly sub-optimal?

[Rubik]

Giving mundane Light, Medium, and Heavy Fortification for the respective armor types would've made medium armor worth taking occasionally, even with the medium armors' otherwise inferior stats.

[eggynack]

Giving mundane Light, Medium, and Heavy Fortification for the respective armor types would've made medium armor worth taking occasionally, even with the medium armors' otherwise inferior stats.
That seems to be a bit of an arbitrary shafting for rogues. I mean, it feels like everything in the game is trying its best to turn off sneak attack as often as possible, but helping it along just seems vaguely mean. That rule would certainly help medium armor along though, so there is that.

[geekintheground]

Giving mundane Light, Medium, and Heavy Fortification for the respective armor types would've made medium armor worth taking occasionally, even with the medium armors' otherwise inferior stats.

wouldnt that make heavy armor still preferable?

[Rubik]

That seems to be a bit of an arbitrary shafting for rogues. I mean, it feels like everything in the game is trying its best to turn off sneak attack as often as possible, but helping it along just seems vaguely mean. That rule would certainly help medium armor along though, so there is that.Rogues get screwed anyway. Might as well either trade sneak attack for fighter feats, or take that feat that lets you trade 1d6 sneak attack for +2 to hit, and use Power Attack to convert that to damage.

[georgie_leech]

It wouldn't make as much difference if there were ways for Rogues to mitigate Fortification though. Something DDO did was have feats and abilities that let Rogues ignore a percentage of Fortification for the purposes of Sneak Attack (and treated creatures Immune to Sneak Attack as having 100% Fortification, as I recall, so they could SA Undead or Constructs a portion of the time), so having something like that could help differentiate the armours without totally screwing Rogues over.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

wouldnt that make heavy armor still preferable?

I think Rubik's intent was to make medium armor a viable option for people with the money/proficiency to wear medium but not heavy armor rather than make people consider dropping down from heavy to medium.

[Rubik]

I think Rubik's intent was to make medium armor a viable option for people with the money/proficiency to wear medium but not heavy armor rather than make people consider dropping down from heavy to medium.Right. This. Sorry, I missed geekintheground's post.

Yes, this does make heavy armor preferable, but not everyone is proficient in it, and this way at least makes medium armor better than light armor in some form, giving it a place in the game (as opposed to now, where it might as well not exist, other than as a classification for mithril plate).

[geekintheground]

I think Rubik's intent was to make medium armor a viable option for people with the money/proficiency to wear medium but not heavy armor rather than make people consider dropping down from heavy to medium.

:smallredface: oh yeah that makes sense

[TuggyNE]

You may have passed over the full context of the quote. One person says armor isn't personally iconic compared to weapons, another person mentions (as a counterexample to that proposition) armors that are generally considered culturally iconic.

However, those armors were iconic not in the face of superior options, but because (all things considered) they were essentially the best available, "mechanically". Form followed function, not the other way around; the Romans etc were not picking inferior armor just because it looked great.

[Coidzor]

However, those armors were iconic not in the face of superior options, but because (all things considered) they were essentially the best available, "mechanically". Form followed function, not the other way around; the Romans etc were not picking inferior armor just because it looked great.

Nor did it likely actually have the drawbacks the system ascribes to them.

[TuggyNE]

Nor did it likely actually have the drawbacks the system ascribes to them.

Oh, sure. I support changing armor stats to be more sensible, that's definitely a good idea (as long as it's researched more or less properly). But in the absence of houserules to that effect, sensible warriors will choose what works per the rules of the world.

[Zweisteine]

Hides of Slain Beasts - Studded Leather with a rough and tumble look, with Hides (cold weather clothing) over it. This will let you role play things like taking off layers when it's too hot and using the hides for other purposes like bedding or draping them over a spiked or hot surface before before climbing on them or using them like oven mitts all without removing your armor.
Didn't I specifically give the same example of wearing other armor with furs stapled to it?
I was just giving examples.


Refluffing, though. It solves this issue perfectly.
Many DMs don't allow refluffing. Even if they did, some people wouldn't want to. I would never want to wear armor specifically listed as metal and say it was hide, because the two are different, and I wouldn't like using one as the other.

The issue here is that McDonald's isn't obviously worse. If I'm on my way to school and woke up late, dropping my McD's allows me to actually have breakfast, whereas dropping by a 5-star restaurant will result in me being incredibly late. It's also cheaper to get two cheeseburgers and fries than whatever the 5-star place is serving.
1. And when you are a low-level (i.e. not rich) character with moderate dexterity, medium armor can be very useful. Everything has its uses (except FATAL), and would be used then. But if you had a choice or where to be taken out to dinner, you wouldn't choose McDonald's, because it is obviously the lesser option. Just as if you can choose hide armor or a chain shirt, you choose the second, because it is clearly better.
2. And scale mail costs half as much as chainmail, which has the same armor rating. Breastplate's total armor bonus (i.e. including maximized dex) is better than any heavy armor except the prohibitiely expensive (to anyone who isn't as rich as a mid-level adventurer), or light armor (but getting those high max DEX bonuses means spending a whole lot more making dexterity high).

I think it comes down to a few things:
1. They needed more armors. Realistic armor was not varied in the same way as D&D armor, and would have made for a less varied, and thus less fun, system.
2. The greatest point in favor of medium armor: most people are low-level, and a great many adventurers start that way as well. Maybe you'll outgrow something, but it is useful while it lasts. Something doesn't have to be optimal to exist, and without suboptimal choices, how would we see how optimal everything else is?
3. I forgot point three. Oops. I think it was a bad point, so it shouldn't matter anyway.

[lesser_minion]

Abstraction can be laziness or it can be any number of things, such as not wanting to spend half an hour doing something that isn't important to the game. Just because X *can* be Y, that doesn't mean it *is* Y. :smalltongue:

It is possible to incorporate this sort of thing into a game without it proving to be an annoyance for players or turning the game into "one of those games". One way or another, it's a place where the designers could have put extra effort in to make the game better as a whole, and it's a place where they didn't.

[Zanos]

You may have passed over the full context of the quote. One person says armor isn't personally iconic compared to weapons, another person mentions (as a counterexample to that proposition) armors that are generally considered culturally iconic. This side discussion isn't about modeling real-world anything, it's about iconic-ness and whether or not armor can possess it. Any other iconic armors would have done just as well as examples in the discussion. (The only iconic armors that come to my mind other than those mentioned are from sci-fi, not fantasy. I'm thinking Samus Aran, Boba and Jango Fett, Megaman, and maybe Robocop for personally iconic; stormtroopers and clone troopers for culturally iconic.)
Throw Master Chief on that list, too.

To be fair, though, all of those characters don't really wear armor, they're encased in it. You see their visor or whatever 99.9% of the time, and pretty much never see their face. The armor is only iconic by virtue of there not being anything under it.

Although I do agree that armor can be iconic, it's certainly more difficult and more rare than an iconic weapon. I made a character that never removed his armor that covered his entire body, and people remembered him more for dual-wielding fullblades than that.

[Coidzor]

It is possible to incorporate this sort of thing into a game without it proving to be an annoyance for players or turning the game into "one of those games". One way or another, it's a place where the designers could have put extra effort in to make the game better as a whole, and it's a place where they didn't.

Adding rules for maintaining armor, in and of itself, is unlikely to have made the game better as a whole, unless your argument hinges on them not being able to mess up the spell system as much if they had less time to spend on it because they were coming up with armor maintenance rules.

Further, there are many more direct ways of attempting to address (or have done in the first place and precluded the mess alltogether) the discrepancy between medium and heavy armors.

We're not talking about magically replacing the devs involved, after all.


Oh, sure. I support changing armor stats to be more sensible, that's definitely a good idea (as long as it's researched more or less properly). But in the absence of houserules to that effect, sensible warriors will choose what works per the rules of the world.

Mostly I feel it bears repeating directly instead of just being implied, considering the people who seem to have forgotten that the Romans didn't have to deal with marching, walking, and charging 1/3 slower from putting on their armor.

[Fitz10019]

Suboptimal armors and weapons are for DMs to use with NPCs. You want the right AC to challenge your players -- not too high, not too low. You want plausible gear for the NPCs, stuff that the players will probably sell.

It's like all those prestige classes that are too narrowly focused to be useful as player characters. They're there for DMs.