Heavy Armor Master: +1 Str or +1 Con

[Arkhios]

Just wondering, would it fundamentally break anything to allow the player choose between the two stats to improve with the feat?

Clearly the feat is related to taking damage, therefore related to the ability to withstand damage. Which is quite directly related to Constitution.
This got me thinking, would it really be bad if you could choose strength or constitution?

Any thoughts?

[StoicLeaf]

Just wondering, would it fundamentally break anything to allow the player choose between the two stats to improve with the feat?

Clearly the feat is related to taking damage, therefore related to the ability to withstand damage. Which is quite directly related to Constitution.
This got me thinking, would it really be bad if you could choose strength or constitution?

Any thoughts?

Eh, I don't think so.
You need strength to be able to carry and move around in heavy armour.
The whole point of learning to wear heavy armor is to take hits in certain ways to maximise the amount of force the plates are absorbing.
More strength = an easier time moving in the armor = better deflection.

Constitution or rather being able to take a beating is quite the opposite; You've taken a hit, perhaps in a really, really bad spot but can push through the pain and keep on trucking.

[Deleted]

Just wondering, would it fundamentally break anything to allow the player choose between the two stats to improve with the feat?

Clearly the feat is related to taking damage, therefore related to the ability to withstand damage. Which is quite directly related to Constitution.
This got me thinking, would it really be bad if you could choose strength or constitution?

Any thoughts?

Heavy Armor Mastery is a great feat for the first few levels, it gets bad around level 6 or whatever (I think) when enemies start being able to do more and more damage.

Honestly, I feel like the feat needs a better boost than just a +1 stat BUT the +1 stat to either would be nice start.

I don't know how well this would work in high levels but having the DR be "1 + Prof Bonus" goes a long way to keeping it relevant once you get mid levels (DR 5 is awesome).

[Arkhios]

Heavy Armor Mastery is a great feat for the first few levels, it gets bad around level 6 or whatever (I think) when enemies start being able to do more and more damage.

Honestly, I feel like the feat needs a better boost than just a +1 stat BUT the +1 stat to either would be nice start.

I don't know how well this would work in high levels but having the DR be "1 + Prof Bonus" goes a long way to keeping it relevant once you get mid levels (DR 5 is awesome).

While I get the sentiment, I would prefer not to change too much of the functionality. A friend of mine runs a TotD game for another group and I've heard that even at level 6 Heavy Armor Master has proven a life-saver for their War Cleric, so I'm not really worried about the feat's potential at higher levels. High CR monsters really don't get that much higher damage rolls than lower CR monsters. Rather, they get more attack rolls. Heavy Armor Master's damage reduction remains strong all the way, and is actually pretty decent for a spellcaster, due to how concentration checks work.

[Gignere]

Heavy Armor Mastery is a great feat for the first few levels, it gets bad around level 6 or whatever (I think) when enemies start being able to do more and more damage.

Honestly, I feel like the feat needs a better boost than just a +1 stat BUT the +1 stat to either would be nice start.

I don't know how well this would work in high levels but having the DR be "1 + Prof Bonus" goes a long way to keeping it relevant once you get mid levels (DR 5 is awesome).

It isn't awful even at high levels most enemies actually scales with more attack not just bigger and more damage dice. Even against a dragon turtle you are still knocking off somewhere between 10% - 18% of average damage per hit. Which is fantastic and that is a CR 17 critter. Looking at the dragons even CR 10 ones you are taking off 20+% of average damage off each hit.

[Ruslan]

+1 Str or +1 Con is not going to break anything. Go for it.

[Arkhios]

+1 Str or +1 Con is not going to break anything. Go for it.

I had a feeling it might be so. Just wanted to see if the community would agree with me.

[FinnS]

I would allow it, makes senses to me.
What doesn't make sense to me is that Medium Armor Master doesn't have any stat bumps to it.
Having either a +1 to STR or DEX would seem reasonable to me.

As far as Heavy Armor Master losing effectiveness at higher levels...I couldn't disagree more.
If anything it gets even better since getting damage resistance becomes more readily available.

[MeeposFire]

I would allow it, makes senses to me.
What doesn't make sense to me is that Medium Armor Master doesn't have any stat bumps to it.
Having either a +1 to STR or DEX would seem reasonable to me.

As far as Heavy Armor Master losing effectiveness at higher levels...I couldn't disagree more.
If anything it gets even better since getting damage resistance becomes more readily available.

Yea that is one of my two changes I make to medium armor master (stat bump and I change the max dex to AC increase by 1 with every increase in attribute bonus of +6 and over so that way if the character gets a 22 dex or over he is not actively penalized by taking medium armor master but gains no additional benefit normally). I find with the changes it is a decent feat. Still niche but it does feel like a good investment for the right character.

[Arkhios]

Yea that is one of my two changes I make to medium armor master (stat bump and I change the max dex to AC increase by 1 with every increase in attribute bonus of +6 and over so that way if the character gets a 22 dex or over he is not actively penalized by taking medium armor master but gains no additional benefit normally). I find with the changes it is a decent feat. Still niche but it does feel like a good investment for the right character.

Personally I wouldn't change the maximum Dex from Medium Armor Master, because as it is now, with half-plate, it potentially ends up with an AC equal to plate. If you increase it further, medium armor becomes much better than heavy armor, which is just wrong balance-wise.
But I agree it doesn't make sense to me either that MAM doesn't add +1 to str or dex.

[MeeposFire]

Personally I wouldn't change the maximum Dex from Medium Armor Master, because as it is now, with half-plate, it potentially ends up with an AC equal to plate. If you increase it further, medium armor becomes much better than heavy armor, which is just wrong balance-wise.
But I agree it doesn't make sense to me either that MAM doesn't add +1 to str or dex.

Well the situation that I am looking at here has that problem anyway just with light armor. If you somehow start getting dex scores that break the current max then light armor will have better than plate AC anyway. I was just trying to keep medium armor to be still ahead of light armor considering it requires for you to have spent extra resources that neither light or heavy armor require. A corner case of course so not common or for sure ever to come up (how often do you give out manuals of dexterity?) but if it did I would be upset that essentially my entire investment into medium armor is now useless while the other two armor types still get all of their normal advantages with no investment.

[djreynolds]

Just wondering, would it fundamentally break anything to allow the player choose between the two stats to improve with the feat?

Clearly the feat is related to taking damage, therefore related to the ability to withstand damage. Which is quite directly related to Constitution.
This got me thinking, would it really be bad if you could choose strength or constitution?

Any thoughts?

I would allow it for any stat increase, why not?

[Arkhios]

Well the situation that I am looking at here has that problem anyway just with light armor. If you somehow start getting dex scores that break the current max then light armor will have better than plate AC anyway. I was just trying to keep medium armor to be still ahead of light armor considering it requires for you to have spent extra resources that neither light or heavy armor require. A corner case of course so not common or for sure ever to come up (how often do you give out manuals of dexterity?) but if it did I would be upset that essentially my entire investment into medium armor is now useless while the other two armor types still get all of their normal advantages with no investment.

Light armor, by definition, isn't exactly the most protective layer. Dexterity helps much in the sense of dodging away, but you can dodge only so much. In my honest opinion, it makes a lot of sense that light armor can't reach same levels of protection as medium or heavy. By default, even best medium armor would lag just behind the best heavy armor. It's just logical. The heavier your armor is, the more damage it can prevent.

[djreynolds]

It would only break it, if another player wanted something else.

If a multiclass would rather have a different + for his build... would you allow this?

Hey, I have an uneven intelligence score, and I don't want linguist?

[Arkhios]

It would only break it, if another player wanted something else.

If a multiclass would rather have a different + for his build... would you allow this?

Hey, I have an uneven intelligence score, and I don't want linguist?

Observant is pretty good for everyone, and it gives you either +1 int or +1 wis. Just saying...

[djreynolds]

Observant is pretty good for everyone, and it gives you either +1 int or +1 wis. Just saying...

Right, and someone in need of a + in con... durable or tavern brawler.

I might be inclined to actually leave those +'s as a free for all.

It would be foolish not take wisdom/intelligence with observant but some would do it.

[Arkhios]

Right, and someone in need of a + in con... durable or tavern brawler.

I might be inclined to actually leave those +'s as a free for all.

It would be foolish not take wisdom/intelligence with observant but some would do it.

I'd still prefer the options to make sense for the feat in question, but you may do whatever you please. +1 Con makes sense with Heavy Armor Master. +1 Dex wouldn't, because in heavy armor, you don't apply dexterity to AC - at all. Neither would +1 to Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma make sense.

Observant, for example, refers to observation, which is related to either intelligence (investigation) or wisdom (perception). You can't observe anything with Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, or Charisma.

[MeeposFire]

Light armor, by definition, isn't exactly the most protective layer. Dexterity helps much in the sense of dodging away, but you can dodge only so much. In my honest opinion, it makes a lot of sense that light armor can't reach same levels of protection as medium or heavy. By default, even best medium armor would lag just behind the best heavy armor. It's just logical. The heavier your armor is, the more damage it can prevent.

That is the exact problem I am trying to avoid. Light armor can become better than heavy and medium armor once your dex is high enough. While there is no good way to deal with heavy armor I can make it so that medium armor with the feat is always better than light armor without one.

Right now with the admirably rare dex of 22 light armor equals heavy armor and medium armor with a feat. At the even more rare 24 medium armor is worse than light armor even with the feat which if that happens is kind of sad for somebody who happened to invest in medium armor before getting those dex boosting items. That is what I am trying to avoid. Extremely corner case since it is not happening often but if it ever did I like keeping medium armor being better when you use a feat than light armor.

[Arkhios]

That is the exact problem I am trying to avoid. Light armor can become better than heavy and medium armor once your dex is high enough. While there is no good way to deal with heavy armor I can make it so that medium armor with the feat is always better than light armor without one.

Right now with the admirably rare dex of 22 light armor equals heavy armor and medium armor with a feat. At the even more rare 24 medium armor is worse than light armor even with the feat which if that happens is kind of sad for somebody who happened to invest in medium armor before getting those dex boosting items. That is what I am trying to avoid. Extremely corner case since it is not happening often but if it ever did I like keeping medium armor being better when you use a feat than light armor.

To reach DEX 22+ you'd have to have either a very good luck or an incredibly lenient DM to throw around a manual of Dexterity (whatever it's called) casually. It's a very rare item, but there's probably only one of each in any given campaign. IF you manage to get your hands upon one, then you have pretty much earned the AC equal with Heavy Armors. Other than that, it's pointless to speculate whether or not you can get above 20 dexterity.

I'm trying to deal within non-magical framework here. Magic items do marvellous things, there's no doubt in that. However, good luck ever finding one if your DM doesn't like to drop them around every corner. And no DM is under any obligation to give you them.

[djreynolds]

But perhaps the increase in dexterity shows the nimbleness to avoid heavy blows... like uncanny dodge

That's why I'm saying any game lawyer is going to give a valid reason.

That's why I say... just open them all up.

[Arkhios]

"Game lawyers" can propose anything, but DM is the judge of those proposals. And I don't buy everything. You might, and such is your right.

[djreynolds]

I wouldn't allow it.

The guys who take HAM already know they want it. They have planned to take that 17 and make it an 18

Where as the cleric, say a dwarf, maybe doesn't need the strength, but he took a 15 in con at creation and is now 17... so for him... I might say no

where as if he had a max strength of 20, yeah go ahead and place it in con

[Arkhios]

Many people plan ahead, that's true. But just as many don't. Those people generally stay away from forums like this, by the way, which might be a hint in itself.

Edit: I feel that my initial intent wasn't clear.
I'm pondering on this as DM - not as a player.

As a DM I promote homebrew and house rules quite leniently, but keep the right to veto everything. Also, as a DM I can rule anything the way I feel is right, but sometimes it's nice to see if anyone might agree with me.

As a player I always play by the book (or by the house rules/homebrew if and when they apply).

[djreynolds]

I know its for a player, I would allow it if the player already had a 20 in strength and couldn't benefit from it.

Or allow him to rearrange his stats, so he can benefit from the +1 in strength

Otherwise, go for it, its not broken by any means and certainly logical that you stamina allows you to benefit from heavy armor as others couldn't