Is heavy armor really that great?

[OverLordOcelot]

I see people recommend things like dipping specific clerics, fighter, or paladin for heavy armor, and I don't get it, especially for anyone using point buy for stats. I think that for most characters medium armor is actually a better deal, that even if I like a dip that gets me heavy armor I would often choose to use medium. I'm certainly not saying that heavy armor is worthless or that no one should take it, but I think you're generally better off avoiding it on most characters.

What does heavy armor cost you? Some money, (Not really a big deal, as the high end medium armors cost roughly half as much). You get disadvantage on stealth while with medium armor you can give up 1 AC for stealth, and with light armor you always have stealth. A proficiency or multiclassing, and (for clerics) restriction to certain subclasses, which is often a big cost. And you need a 15 STR to be able to move unless you're a dwarf.

What does heavy armor gain you? No dex penalty to AC. +1 AC over the same level of medium armor if the medium armor wearer has a 14 dex. Generally a +1 over light armor if the light armor wearer is focusing on dex, higher if they have a low dex or don't increase it.

Who do I think heavy armor is great for? It's perfect for strength-based characters who aren't barbarians or monks, so mostly fighter and paladin centered builds, plus clerics who want to melee using strength. It's also good all around for dwarves, who don't need strength to wear it. It's also good if you're not using point buy or array and end up with a low DEX and high STR, or if you specifically want to dump dex for roleplay or other reasons.

Who do I think it's not that good for? Everyone who's not in the above categories. Generally if I'm playing a warlock, wizard, or the like who dips for more protection, I'll take medium armor and shield even if I get the heavy proficiency (except on a dwarf), because spending to get a 14 dex is usually cheaper and more beneficial than spending to get 15 STR, even with the single AC point I gain.

[Asmotherion]

The Heavy Armor Master feat is worth a mention; Next best protection in the game after Bear-Barian and Shield (the spell).

[strangebloke]

It lets you get 18 AC with no stat requirement if you're willing to eat 10 feet of movement lost.

that should tell you everything you need to know. Sorcerer with one level of war cleric? 20 AC. Bam. Note that dipping a single level of cleric or fighter also gets you shields, which is actually harder to get than heavy armor proficiency.

For contrast, a sorcerer has to expend a spell known to get mage armor, expend the spell slot each day, and then also then max dexterity which won't be happening until like level 17 or something.

For Clerics, the appeal of going for heavy armor is as simple as a free +1 to AC, and they might already want to be playing as a strength-based race like the firbolg. Moreover, while ranged combat is generally better than melee, it isn't as though clerics can really do ranged combat, so its pretty much a moot point. Might as well just go for strength, especially if no one else in the party has good strength.

[stoutstien]

Armor is not well represented in DND. Mechanically heavy armor can get a higher AC with less investment and access to some nice class features and feats. Downfall is don/doff time and disadvantage on some dexterity checks. Oh almost forgot the stupid high cost of heavy armor compared cross other options.

[Unoriginal]

AC 18 with little investment is better than any other way to get AC.

Its value depends on how much you value AC for your character, obviously.

[Man_Over_Game]

I see people recommend things like dipping specific clerics, fighter, or paladin for heavy armor, and I don't get it, especially for anyone using point buy for stats. I think that for most characters medium armor is actually a better deal, that even if I like a dip that gets me heavy armor I would often choose to use medium. I'm certainly not saying that heavy armor is worthless or that no one should take it, but I think you're generally better off avoiding it on most characters.

What does heavy armor cost you? Some money, (Not really a big deal, as the high end medium armors cost roughly half as much). You get disadvantage on stealth while with medium armor you can give up 1 AC for stealth, and with light armor you always have stealth. A proficiency or multiclassing, and (for clerics) restriction to certain subclasses, which is often a big cost. And you need a 15 STR to be able to move unless you're a dwarf.

What does heavy armor gain you? No dex penalty to AC. +1 AC over the same level of medium armor if the medium armor wearer has a 14 dex. Generally a +1 over light armor if the light armor wearer is focusing on dex, higher if they have a low dex or don't increase it.

Who do I think heavy armor is great for? It's perfect for strength-based characters who aren't barbarians or monks, so mostly fighter and paladin centered builds, plus clerics who want to melee using strength. It's also good all around for dwarves, who don't need strength to wear it. It's also good if you're not using point buy or array and end up with a low DEX and high STR, or if you specifically want to dump dex for roleplay or other reasons.

Who do I think it's not that good for? Everyone who's not in the above categories. Generally if I'm playing a warlock, wizard, or the like who dips for more protection, I'll take medium armor and shield even if I get the heavy proficiency (except on a dwarf), because spending to get a 14 dex is usually cheaper and more beneficial than spending to get 15 STR, even with the single AC point I gain.

It's a little bit more than that, though.

Heavy Armor is generally more efficient per stat than Dexterity. For example, having a modifier of 0 has the Strength version cost half as much as the Dexterity version of the same AC. Sure, Dexterity armors can come close to matching, but they're always much more expensive.

Strength also has the benefit of being useful for grapples and shoves.

Also, Strength weapons generally do more damage than Dexterity equivalents, which can be important since the primary difference between a high level and low level character is how much damage they can take or do.

Lastly (and this one is a bit more DM dependent), I've seen more magical Heavy Armor than I have Medium Armor.

[CheddarChampion]

I'd like to point out that heavy armor doesn't have a strength requirement to use but instead to have full mobility.
You can wear plate mail with 8 Str and be fine - you just move slower.
This can be circumvented with mounts.

Additionally, Mithral armor exists. Not that you should build around having it, of course.

Finally, in the games I've been in, magical heavy armor is much more common that magical medium or light armor.

On another note, where do you see dipping for heavy armor advised?
Is it for builds that have strength in mind already? Is is for builds that use melee weapons and would benefit from the larger damage dice? Is it for builds that want to maximize AC?
All of those are good reasons to get heavy armor, and dipping is an easy way to get them.

Edit: Ninja'd

[MaxWilson]

I'd like to point out that heavy armor doesn't have a strength requirement to use but instead to have full mobility.
You can wear plate mail with 8 Str and be fine - you just move slower.
This can be circumvented with mounts.

Yep. Also Longstrider or the Mobile feat.

[GlenSmash!]

I would rather enjoy if my Barbarian could Rage in Heavy armor, I could have dropped my Dex and further pumped Con.

[stoutstien]

I would rather enjoy if my Barbarian could Rage in Heavy armor, I could have dropped my Dex and further pumped Con.

Well if your DM is a raw warrior then heavy armor technically works with totem Barbarian quite well.

[GlenSmash!]

Well if your DM is a raw warrior then heavy armor technically works with totem Barbarian quite well.

It works with the Bear Totem benefits, not the standard Rage benefits. I'd still lose out on the bonus damage and Adv on Str checks and saves.

Anyway, not a Bear Totem Warrior.

[MaxWilson]

I would rather enjoy if my Barbarian could Rage in Heavy armor, I could have dropped my Dex and further pumped Con.

Yeah. If plate mail is good enough for Conan, it should be good enough for any barbarian!

Edit: I know, I know, Conan isn't a Barbarian in the first place. He's a Fighter.

[GlenSmash!]

Yeah. If plate mail is good enough for Conan, it should be good enough for any barbarian!

Edit: I know, I know, Conan isn't a Barbarian in the first place. He's a Fighter.

Conan disliked Plate armor.

From the Black Colossus

"Conan the Cimmerian, restless in his plate-armor"

"He had discarded the plate-armor for the more familiar chain-mail."

The Queen he is a mercenary for makes him put on her army's armor, but he gets out of it as soon as he can.

And represented in 5e I think he would totally have levels in Barbarian but probably Fighter also.

Edit: but I digress.

[ProsecutorGodot]

It lets you get 18 AC with no stat requirement if you're willing to eat 10 feet of movement lost.

that should tell you everything you need to know. Sorcerer with one level of war cleric? 20 AC. Bam. Note that dipping a single level of cleric or fighter also gets you shields, which is actually harder to get than heavy armor proficiency.

Multiclassing into fighter (or any class for that matter) doesn't give you heavy armor proficiency. The reason Cleric dip is often considered so powerful is because many of the popular dips happen to also give heavy armor proficiency as a subclass feature. I think that with that in mind Heavy Armor proficiency is harder to obtain that shield proficiency.

Every class that has Shield Proficiency can be multiclassed into to gain that proficiency iirc, only Cleric allows you to gain heavy armor proficiency on top of that and only in specific subclasses. Even taking the feat route towards either proficiency lends it to being easier for Shield proficiency, since Medium Armor proficiency is required to take the Heavily Armored feat. All classes that start with medium armor proficiency happen to start with shield proficiency. Even Hexblade, which gains medium armor through their hex warrior feature, also gains shield proficiency to match.

On topic, Medium Armor can be "as good" as Heavy Armor. The benefit of Heavy Armor is that you can choose to have dexterity as a dump stat (which sounds a bit crazy to those who would optimize, Dex is almost never a dump stat) without sacrificing AC compared to Light or Medium armor which asks that you have a 20 or 14(16 with feat) Dex respectively.

For those who roll stats, ending up with a negative to dex would be catastrophic without our trusty slow moving bulky tank option.

[LudicSavant]

No, heavy armor is not that great, and here's why

1) AC vs Cost In Practice
Let's say you're at level 1.

For 50 gp and 14 Dex, you can have a suit of Scale Mail with 16 AC and 30 foot movement.
For 75 gp and 13 Str (but let's face it, you need 15 to be future-proofed), you can have a suit of Chain Mail with 16 AC and 30 foot movement

Notice something? Your AC is the same but the guy with heavy armor actually had to pay more money and more stats for the same effect.

"But Ludic! That won't happen at all levels!" You're right, it won't. But it will happen at various ones. Strength guy will get to Splint before Dextery guy gets to Half Plate, and Dexterity Guy will get to Half Plate before Strength guy gets to Plate. It switches back and forth.

So let's talk about plate. Plate Armor costs 1,500 gold pieces and 15 Strength (or a 10 foot movement penalty). Half Plate costs 750 gold pieces and 14 Dexterity.

Here's the thing. A +1 Shield or a Cloak of Resistance is worth 500 gold pieces or less. Yeah yeah, you can't always get the magic items you want, etc etc, but this is just giving you a ballpark idea of how much that extra 750 gold pieces cost for the full plate is supposed to be worth. And for 1250 GP worth of gear, you could have had an 18 AC and +1 to all your saving throws and have invested in Dexterity instead of Strength.

Later on, Plate can get ahead again because of things like running out of attunement slots, or the rarity pattern, or some other such factor. Point is, at different levels one or the other will be ahead, and it keeps switching based on level, resources, nature of the campaign, etc.

If we're instead comparing to Light Armor and you have 20 Dex, you're trading at most 1 AC for 1500gp, full use of stealth, and investing in Dex rather than Str (see below for why that matters). That's a pretty good deal, especially at lower levels where that gold makes a real difference. And at higher levels where level 1 slots aren't a big deal, you can totally just have someone cast Mage Armor on you if magic armors aren't falling from the sky (in which case you're matching the AC of plate).

2) Dexterity vs Strength
Dexterity is a better stat than Strength, generally speaking. Initiative is incredibly important (and only becomes more important as the challenge and optimization level of the table rises), Dexterity saves are more important than Strength saves, and Dexterity has a lot more skills than Strength does (and arguably more important ones).

Even if you're at -1 to AC at some point in your progression (which you won't always be, see above), then you're still getting advantages in return. For example, a +3 extra to Dexterity saves might end up mitigating much of the extra damage damage you end up taking from a -1 to AC (you take more damage from attack rolls, but less from Fireballs and the like).

And of course there's the fact that you need less Dexterity than Strength, if neither of those are your main stat. Well, at least if you want to avoid the 10 foot movement speed penalty.

In conclusion:
At the end of the day, plate is largely a sidegrade. If you get proficiency in it, great, but you're not missing out on much if you don't.

[sithlordnergal]

Mostly due to the fact that you can easily get insanely high AC with little to no investment outside of gold costs. For example:

Any character who starts as a fighter can get a constant 21 AC through Plate Armor, a Shield, and the Defense Fighting style, no magic armor required.

Compare that to someone who uses Light or Medium armor. In order to get a 21 AC, a Rogue would need 20 Dex, +3 Studded Leather, and a Cloak or Ring of Protection to give them that +1 AC, or they would need the Dual Wielder feat and +3 Studded Leather.

Meanwhile, a Cleric has a slightly easier time. They just need Medium Armor Master, at least a 16 Dex, and either a +1 Shield or +1 Half Plate.

And there's the rub, you can only catch up to Heavy Armor users if you use Medium Armor, have Medium Armor Mastery, and magic armor.

And if you stick all that magical heavy armor on someone who can cast Shield? You're basically going to be unhittable. For example, lets snag a build that is doable in AL. We will have a Paladin/Sorcerer in +1 Fullplate and a +3 Shield.

You have a base 25 AC that can be boosted to 30 with Shield. If you find a Ring of Protection or Cloak of Protection, that puts you at 31. Cast Haste or Shield of Faith on yourself, and now its 33.

Hell, I have an AL Paladin/Sorcerer with a Staff of Power as their primary weapon. Their base AC is 28. I can boost that to 30 with Shield of Faith, have a friend cast Haste for 32 AC, and cast Shield for 37 AC. And to top it off, she wears a Cloak of Displacement to force disadvantage on attack rolls against her

[Unoriginal]

Conan disliked Plate armor.

From the Black Colossus

"Conan the Cimmerian, restless in his plate-armor"

"He had discarded the plate-armor for the more familiar chain-mail."

The Queen he is a mercenary for makes him put on her army's armor, but he gets out of it as soon as he can.

And represented in 5e I think he would totally have levels in Barbarian but probably Fighter also.

Edit: but I digress.

That's because he was not used to it at this point of his career.

In chronologically later stories, he wears plate as much as he can when facing a direct fight. Especially once he is king.

From "The Phoenix on the Sword":


Then as he stood, a stealthy sound in the corridor outside brought him to life, and without stopping to investigate, he began to don his armor; again he was the barbarian, suspicious and alert as a gray wolf at bay.

[...]


They stopped short. Conan faced them, not a naked man roused mazed and unarmed out of deep sleep to be butchered like a sheep, but a barbarian wide-awake and at bay, partly armored, and with his long sword in his hand.

For an instant the tableau held—the four rebel noblemen in the broken door, and the horde of wild hairy faces crowding behind them—all held momentarily frozen by the sight of the blazing-eyed giant standing sword in hand in the middle of the candle-lighted chamber. In that instant Ascalante beheld, on a small table near the royal couch, the silver scepter and the slender gold circlet which was the crown of Aquilonia, and the sight maddened him with desire.

"In, rogues!" yelled the outlaw. "He is one to twenty and he has no helmet!"

True; there had been lack of time to don the heavy plumed casque, or to lace in place the side-plates of the cuirass, nor was there now time to snatch the great shield from the wall. Still, Conan was better protected than any of his foes except Volmana and Gromel, who were in full armor.

Here he would have worn full plate had he had the time to put it.

In "Hour of the Dragon":


"The king is stricken by a strange malady," said Pallantides briefly. "A great honor is yours; you are to wear his armor and ride at the head of the host today. None must know that it is not the king who rides."

"It is an honor for which a man might gladly give up his life," stammered the captain, overcome by the suggestion. "Mitra grant that I do not fail of this mighty trust!"

And while the fallen king stared with burning eyes that reflected the bitter rage and humiliation that ate his heart, the squires stripped Valannus of mail shirt, burganet and leg-pieces, and clad him in Conan's armor of black plate-mail, with the vizored salade, and the dark plumes nodding over the wyvern crest.

Conan could easily be represented by a Fighter/Rogue multiclass. But people tend to forget his Rogue side.

[GlenSmash!]

That's because he was not used to it at this point of his career.

In chronologically later stories, he wears plate as much as he can when facing a direct fight. Especially once he is king.

From "The Phoenix on the Sword":

I'm not familiar with a suit of plate that would have side plates sown in like that but it seems equally applicable to half-plate and even a breastplate.


Here he would have worn full plate had he had the time to put it.

In "Hour of the Dragon":

Even assuming this also isn't half plate, how would you represent Conan before he becomes familiar with it?


Conan could easily be represented by a Fighter/Rogue multiclass. But people tend to forget his Rogue side.

Yup easily.

I don't quite like a Conan type character with Thieves Tools proficiency or Sneak Attack though. I've never read of him picking a lock, and when he gets the drop on someone he usually hits them with a broadsword sometimes an axe but never a rapier and only another type of finesse weapon if he didn't have something heavier at hand.

UA Scout fighter does great for a Conan type though. I would still give 2 levels of Barbarian as I think he does Recklessly Attack often, and can summon reserves of primal savagery a civilized person could not. Mariner fighting style for Climb and Swim speeds suits his athleticism. as does Prodigy for athletics expertise. I'd also grab Alert and Mobile since I wouldn't be going into Barb far enough for extra movement and Feral Instinct.

I would go into Barb further except no 5e subclass suits him at all. Tiger Totem works if you ignore the spells, but Tiger is pretty lackluster.

A level in Revised Ranger would certainly suit the character too.

Anyway, now I majorly digress.

Like I said, in regards to heavy armor if my Barb could he would.

[JackPhoenix]

Snip

That's because he's not D&D character. He doesn't have Sneak Attack, he doesn't need "finesse weapon" to stab someone (and it's been a while since I've read the stories, but I'm pretty sure Hyboria didn't have rapiers in the first place), he doesn't care about ability requirements or proficiencies.

You may use D&D mechanics to create character similar to Conan, but as is the case with every single non-D&D character, the representation wouldn't be 100% accurate, and the assumption that the character must've been limited by D&D mechanics in the first place is extremely faulty.

Oh, and by the way... (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_hf4eg6KfDoM/TAdr5E0swqI/AAAAAAAAAJ4/UTxvvQRAp9A/s1600/ConanStats.gif)

[Keravath]

Mostly due to the fact that you can easily get insanely high AC with little to no investment outside of gold costs. For example:

Any character who starts as a fighter can get a constant 21 AC through Plate Armor, a Shield, and the Defense Fighting style, no magic armor required.

Compare that to someone who uses Light or Medium armor. In order to get a 21 AC, a Rogue would need 20 Dex, +3 Studded Leather, and a Cloak or Ring of Protection to give them that +1 AC, or they would need the Dual Wielder feat and +3 Studded Leather.

Meanwhile, a Cleric has a slightly easier time. They just need Medium Armor Master, at least a 16 Dex, and either a +1 Shield or +1 Half Plate.

And there's the rub, you can only catch up to Heavy Armor users if you use Medium Armor, have Medium Armor Mastery, and magic armor.

And if you stick all that magical heavy armor on someone who can cast Shield? You're basically going to be unhittable. For example, lets snag a build that is doable in AL. We will have a Paladin/Sorcerer in +1 Fullplate and a +3 Shield.

You have a base 25 AC that can be boosted to 30 with Shield. If you find a Ring of Protection or Cloak of Protection, that puts you at 31. Cast Haste or Shield of Faith on yourself, and now its 33.

Hell, I have an AL Paladin/Sorcerer with a Staff of Power as their primary weapon. Their base AC is 28. I can boost that to 30 with Shield of Faith, have a friend cast Haste for 32 AC, and cast Shield for 37 AC. And to top it off, she wears a Cloak of Displacement to force disadvantage on attack rolls against her

All they need is the Lucky feat to counter those irritating crits :) (since 20 would always hit no matter what AC you have).

[Sigreid]

The most important factor is sometimes you just want to be heavy armor guy. I'll soon be playing a kobold paladin with rolled stats (and we agreed at our table to kill the strength penalty and the grovel ability) and I'm looking very forward to my kobold in his shiny plate armor.

[Yuroch Kern]

Then there is the idea that if the character prioritizes Strength, because Greatsword/Polearm, then Heavy armor. Dex being the better stat has it's own debate, but since gold matters little in most games, and magic is not guaranteed, simply buying a 20 AC is nothing to scoff at.

[Malifice]

spending to get a 14 dex is usually cheaper and more beneficial than spending to get 15 STR, even with the single AC point I gain.

You dont need a 15 strength to wear heavy armor.

You can dump Dex and Str to 8 and wear full plate. All it does is reduce your speed to 20'.

[Malifice]

Hell, I have an AL Paladin/Sorcerer with a Staff of Power as their primary weapon. Their base AC is 28. I can boost that to 30 with Shield of Faith, have a friend cast Haste for 32 AC, and cast Shield for 37 AC. And to top it off, she wears a Cloak of Displacement to force disadvantage on attack rolls against her

Base AC of 28? That's Defence style, full plate +3 and shield +3 and an extra +1 from your staff.

So a +3 shield, +3 Armor, Staff of Power and a Cloak of displacement? You're draped in legendary magical gear. More luck to you I guess. Beats me how you got that stuff in a AL game, and it's an outlier.

You do have the Warcaster Feat right? You can't cast shield with both hands full without it. Shield has S components only, so you cant cast it while holding your staff and shield even if they're foci for your spellcasting.

[Yuroch Kern]

It's also great against captured enemies that you think don't have proficiency. I watched a paladin stuff a wizard into some ringmail, tied his hands together, and didn't really worry too much about him all the way to jail.

[LudicSavant]

Any character who starts as a fighter can get a constant 21 AC through Plate Armor, a Shield, and the Defense Fighting style, no magic armor required.

Compare that to someone who uses Light or Medium armor. In order to get a 21 AC, a Rogue would need 20 Dex, +3 Studded Leather, and a Cloak or Ring of Protection to give them that +1 AC, or they would need the Dual Wielder feat and +3 Studded Leather.

This comparison isn't highlighting the difference between Light/Medium/Heavy armor so much as it's highlighting the difference between a shieldless Rogue that isn't built for AC and a sword'n'board Fighter that is.

If you were comparing Strength Fighter to Dexterity Fighter for example, getting 21 AC is as easy as Mage Armor, 20 Dex, Defense style, and a shield (as just one of several cost-effective ways to do it). And if you're assuming that magic items are at all obtainable by any of the various means of crafting or buying offered in the XGtE or DMG, 750 extra GP can get you the extra +1 AC for any Medium armor character to catch up to the advantage of Plate, and then some.

[Unoriginal]

The most important factor is sometimes you just want to be heavy armor guy. I'll soon be playing a kobold paladin with rolled stats (and we agreed at our table to kill the strength penalty and the grovel ability) and I'm looking very forward to my kobold in his shiny plate armor.

Using a lance is pretty good for small STR characters, and with Pack Tactic you could easily counter the disadvantage from close quarter.

[ChiefBigFeather]

I really dislike heavy armor. The cost and mobility are not a huge problem in my opinion, the disadvantage to stealth is. Being stealthy is a huge tactical advantage.
Lastly: Initiative is undervalued by a lot of people. Going first is often so important! Many combats last 3 rounds, going first means +1/3 or +1/4 damage and at least -1/3 or -1/4 damage taken. Contributing early and disabling or killing stuff fast ist the way to go in 5e.

[JackPhoenix]

I really dislike heavy armor. The cost and mobility are not a huge problem in my opinion, the disadvantage to stealth is. Being stealthy is a huge tactical advantage.

Unless the whole party is stealthy, one more heavy armored character won't change things.

Lastly: Initiative is undervalued by a lot of people. Going first is often so important! Many combats last 3 rounds, going first means +1/3 or +1/4 damage and at least -1/3 or -1/4 damage taken. Contributing early and disabling or killing stuff fast ist the way to go in 5e.[/QUOTE]

And it's overvalued by a lot of other people. Yes, acting before the enemies is good, but if you're going for heavy armor, you don't have character with Dex as primary ability anyway, and the random value from 1d20 vastly outshadows the +1 to +3 difference from Dex. And that's before going into situations where you don't want to go first, but rather after some other party member does his stuff.

[MrStabby]

Heavy armour is pretty good if you want it. As long as you have someone else to do the stealth and the whole party isn't looking to stealth then it isn't such an issue. Even if you did want to stealth if you have heavy armour you probably dumped dexterity.

I like cleric dips. I am one of the people for whom heavy armour is part of this. It isn't just about the heavy armour though: spell slots, spells known, domain spells, shields... the armour is just part of it.

It gets listed a lot as a good thing because it comes on a lot of lists, not because it is the best thing ever. It also depends on with which other option it is compared. For a strength based valor bard with medium armour already... ok. For a lore bard with light armour it represents a big boost to AC.

[Great Dragon]

When I'm DM-ing if the 3rd level PC has not earned enough gold to buy Plate (or the Player is making a new PC of at least 3rd level) they can trade/sell an Uncommon magic item to get it.

I have my own “Rarity allowed by Level” method.
****
I just made a Fighter 2/Evoker Wizard 3 PC.
Variant Human with Heavy Armor Mastery.

16 Str 14 Dex 16 Con 18 Int 16 Wis 14 Cha.

I'm sure people that know me are clued in as to where I'm heading with the PC. 👹

Defense Style + Plate + shield = AC 21 until 3rd level.

When he takes Wizard, he drops the non-magical shield for Shield. Wand focus.
19 AC just standing there. AC 24 if not surprised.

War Caster feat is not needed, since even a +3 shield only matches the Spell, and they don't stack.
Took: Resilient (Wis) Feat instead.

I did consider Mt Dwarf, but went Vuman for more punch with feat options. See “build” below for another clue.

Only by playing this PC will I see if Vuman with Plate was a “better” choice. I did note that my Idea made the Mt Dwarf's Armor Proficiency redundant.

The DM is running Homebrew. 2 Uncommon items.

Since this is a replacement for a Retired PC, and magic items are on the table:

I used an "Inherited" history to give him Plate.
I then used an Uncommon Item slot to get Adamantine. (Love that -3 damage against physical attacks from the feat plus NO Crits!!)

The second Uncommon Item slot was used
to get the 3.x Glamered Armor ability.

I'm planning on asking the DM to allow this to be a Legacy Item, where the PC can unlock more magical abilities as time goes by.
-----
And the PC straight up stole from a Noble to get a +1 Longsword and an item of Water Breathing.
Plot hook! And, yes - He has the Pirate background. I'm playing into that and his Flaw of “My pride my be my downfall”.

***
I am considering making another PC:
Mt Dwarf pure Sorcerer (Storm) just to see how it plays.

Str 16 Dex 14 Con 18 Int 16 Wis 16 Cha 17

Half Plate 15 + 2 Dex = 17.
Two-handing a Battleaxe when not casting a spell with Rod Focus.

War Caster feat at 4th makes AC 19.
Max AC 26
(+3 Half Plate, +3 Shield, +2 Dex, and Ring/Cloak of Protection.)

This way, he doesn't have to burn a Spell Known for Shield spell, and can trade for another spell when he has those items! Most likely at 18th level.

Background: Folk Hero.
(Edit)
Trait: "I am confident in my own abilities and do what I can to instill confidence in others."

Ideal: "There's no good in pretending to be something I'm not"

Bond: "I protect those that can't protect themselves."

Flaw: "I desire to be recognized, and will go out of my way to be noticed."

[stoutstien]

When I'm DM-ing if the 3rd level PC has not earned enough gold to buy Plate (or the Player is making a new PC of at least 3rd level) they can trade/sell an Uncommon magic item to get it.

I have my own “Rarity allowed by Level” method.
****
I just made a Fighter 2/Evoker Wizard 3 PC.
Variant Human with Heavy Armor Mastery.

16 Str 14 Dex 16 Con 18 Int 16 Wis 14 Cha.

I'm sure people that know me are clued in as to where I'm heading with the PC. 👹

Defense Style + Plate + shield = AC 21 until 3rd level.

When he takes Wizard, he drops the non-magical shield for Shield. Wand focus.
19 AC just standing there. AC 24 if not surprised.

War Caster feat is not needed, since even a +3 shield only matches the Spell, and they don't stack.

I did consider My Dwarf, but went Vuman for more punch with feat options. See “build” below for another clue.

Only by playing this PC will I see if Vuman with Plate was a “better” choice. I did note that my Idea made the Mt Dwarf's Armor Proficiency redundant.

The DM is running Homebrew.

Since this is a replacement for a Retired PC, and magic items are on the table:

I used an "Inherited" history to give him Plate.
I then used an Uncommon Item slot to get Adamantine. (Love that -3 damage against physical attacks from the feat plus NO Crits!!)

The second Uncommon Item slot was used
to get the 3.x Glamered Armor ability.

I'm planning on asking the DM to allow this to be a Legacy Item, where the PC can unlock more magical abilities as time goes by.
-----
And he straight up stole from a Noble to get a +1 Longsword and an item of Water Breathing.
Plot hook! And, yes - He has the Pirate background. I'm playing into that and his Flaw of “My pride my be my downfall”.

***
I am considering making another Mt Dwarf pure Sorcerer (Storm) just to see how it plays.

Str 16 Dex 14 Con 18 Int 16 Wis 16 Cha 17

Half Plate 15 + 2 Dex = 17.
Two-handing a Battleaxe when not casting a spell with Rod Focus.

War Caster feat at 4th makes AC 19.
Max AC 26
(+3 Half Plate, +3 Shield, +2 Dex, and Ring/Cloak of Protection.)

This way, he doesn't have to burn a Spell Known for Shield, and can trade for another spell when he has those items! Most likely at 18th level.

Background: Folk Hero.
(Will add Traits later)

Why don't you think they stack?

[Great Dragon]

Why don't you think they stack?
From my understanding, Armor bonuses do not stack. Like either Armor or Natural Armor being counted, and not stacking.

Am I still stuck in 3.x again?
Does 5e RAW/RAI allow the +3 shield to stack with a Shield spell?

If so, WOW! That is crazy O.P.!

[darknite]

If you're PC has no Dex and is going into the scrum often, then, yes, it's really that great.

[Frozenstep]

From my understanding, Armor bonuses do not stack. Like either Armor or Natural Armor being counted, and not stacking.

Am I still stuck in 3.x again?
Does 5e RAW/RAI allow the +3 shield to stack with a Shield spell?

If so, WOW! That is crazy O.P.!

If they didn't stack, shield of faith would be pretty bad. It's good stuff, but you are giving up a spell slot and it only protects you for a turn from attack rolls. Also, a +3 shield is pretty legendary.

[MoiMagnus]

Heavy armor isn't that great. It is good, but far from a no-brainer.

Unless you manage to break the bounded accuracy:
Heavy armor + shield + shield of faith = 22 AC
If you somehow managed to obtain a magical heavy armor early, you ends up with 23-24 AC, which allow you to be roughly immortal to regular enemies.
But even then, you're not THAT strong, as strong enemies still have a fair probability of hitting you, and most spells are against saves so will just ignore your armor (and moreover, shield of faith is a concentration spell)

(Note that if you were a Wizard or Sorcerer taking one level of Cleric, you also have the Shield spell which allow you to be even more stupid with your AC, allowing you to use plenty of spell slots to compensate for your ridiculously low number of HP)

[strangebloke]

From my understanding, Armor bonuses do not stack. Like either Armor or Natural Armor being counted, and not stacking.

Am I still stuck in 3.x again?
Does 5e RAW/RAI allow the +3 shield to stack with a Shield spell?

If so, WOW! That is crazy O.P.!

You're having trouble distinguishing between types of effects.

There are effects that set your AC to a value. Plate or natural armor or unarmored defense or the barkskin spell.

Then there are effects that add to your AC. Shields, the shield spell, enhancement bonuses to armor, the shield of faith spell... These all stack. The only rule here is that you can't have benefit from more than one of these bonuses at a time. So before you get any bright ideas, no duel-wielding shields.

[stoutstien]

From my understanding, Armor bonuses do not stack. Like either Armor or Natural Armor being counted, and not stacking.

Am I still stuck in 3.x again?
Does 5e RAW/RAI allow the +3 shield to stack with a Shield spell?

If so, WOW! That is crazy O.P.!

so different ways of calculating AC do not stack such as natural armor vs wearing armor. static boosts are quite rare in 5E but for the most part they all stack. so in theory you could have a shield, defense fighting style, shield of faith, and shield spell active at once. good rule of thumb tho is hunt down adamantine armor to prevent crits or you will still get hit ~10% of the time.

[Great Dragon]

@Frozenstep. Thanks!!


rule of thumb tho is hunt down adamantine armor to prevent crits or you will still get hit ~10% of the time.

You must have missed the Spoiler.
Adamantine Armor was in there.
***
This changes my Plan!

(Will edit after some research)

[Willie the Duck]

Who do I think heavy armor is great for? It's perfect for strength-based characters who aren't barbarians or monks, so mostly fighter and paladin centered builds, plus clerics who want to melee using strength. It's also good all around for dwarves, who don't need strength to wear it. It's also good if you're not using point buy or array and end up with a low DEX and high STR, or if you specifically want to dump dex for roleplay or other reasons.

Who do I think it's not that good for? Everyone who's not in the above categories. Generally if I'm playing a warlock, wizard, or the like who dips for more protection, I'll take medium armor and shield even if I get the heavy proficiency (except on a dwarf), because spending to get a 14 dex is usually cheaper and more beneficial than spending to get 15 STR, even with the single AC point I gain.

So, in other words, heavy armor is great for X% (some nontrivial number, given that fighters, paladins, and clerics are fairly popular classes) of all characters, the ones who might otherwise have a reason to want a reasonably high strength and/or be dwarves? Sounds about right. I don't see the problem.

This is personal opinion, but: if... in isolation from other factors... you could have your warlock or wizard dip for a level and pick up one of two categories of armor, and one gave you up to AC 17 but required you to point buy up to 14 in a stat you otherwise didn't use, and the other gave you up to AC 18 but required you to buy up to 15 in a stat (costing presumably 2 extra points of point buy, as choosing a +2-in-that-stat race would be entirely too convenient for the example)… I would call that absolutely straightforward fair and reasonable. 2 points of attribute purchasing for +1 AC? Complete reasonable decision point where you can fall on either side. It is only other factors like the price of plate and differential value most place on Dex over Str* that clearly favor medium armor.
*Mind you, if the DM uses the restrictive encumbrance rules, the calculations change very quickly

That said, thank god! Finally there are once again good reasons for there to be multiple good choices in armor, depending one what you are playing! Mind you, the AD&D way of 'which armor is best: as heavy as you can' model is fine (and realistic), but if we're not going to have that, having there be some reasonable decisions other than studded leather or plate is, IMO, a good thing.



From my understanding, Armor bonuses do not stack. Like either Armor or Natural Armor being counted, and not stacking.

Am I still stuck in 3.x again?
Does 5e RAW/RAI allow the +3 shield to stack with a Shield spell?

If so, WOW! That is crazy O.P.!

Not really, you rolled really well, dedicated your character concept and build expenditures to being the 'hard-to-hit wizard' character, and actually succeed at being so. Sitting to your left, the guy who rolled similarly good stats rolls has a pure-class fighter with two attacks and is awesome and to your right the one who rolled similarly well and made a pure wizard has 3rd level spells. You ought to be really good at this, considering what you've sacrificed for it.

[Cynthaer]

The most important factor is sometimes you just want to be heavy armor guy. I'll soon be playing a kobold paladin with rolled stats (and we agreed at our table to kill the strength penalty and the grovel ability) and I'm looking very forward to my kobold in his shiny plate armor.
I feel like this gets lost in a lot of the comparisons between Str and Dex builds.

For most players and characters, the question of whether a light armor Dex build is marginally more optimized than a heavy armor Str build is irrelevant, because the character they have in mind is already one archetype or the other.

If I'm building a big strong sword-and-board Half-Orc Devotion Paladin in gleaming armor, I'm already committed to a Strength build. It's part of the basic character concept. It doesn't matter if a hypothetical Halfling Dex build could get a similar AC but with more utility and a better Dex save. That's not this character.

So then the question simply becomes, are Strength builds and Dexterity builds balanced enough that you can happily use one or the other? And the answer to that seems to obviously be "yes", since they demonstrably both work just fine and neither one is strictly superior to the other.

[MaxWilson]

Heavy armour is pretty good if you want it. As long as you have someone else to do the stealth and the whole party isn't looking to stealth then it isn't such an issue. Even if you did want to stealth if you have heavy armour you probably dumped dexterity.

Dex 10 + heavy armor is still moderately stealthy as long as you took Stealth proficiency. You've got about a 50% chance of hiding from normal enemies. If in addition to that, any of your teammates have stealth boosters like Enhance Ability or Pass Without Trace, you can sneak past anything.

Don't let heavy armor stop you from learning Stealth.

[Malifice]

From my understanding, Armor bonuses do not stack. Like either Armor or Natural Armor being counted, and not stacking.

Am I still stuck in 3.x again?
Does 5e RAW/RAI allow the +3 shield to stack with a Shield spell?

If so, WOW! That is crazy O.P.!

Yes they stack. Make sure you have warcaster so you can cast Shield with your hands full (it only has S components, so its one of the few spells you cant get away with using a wand or staff as the focus).

Also, go War Mage instead of Evoker. They get a free +2 to AC whenever they want it (as a reaction), plus a further +2 to AC whenever concentrating on spells at 11th level.

The bonus to initiative is just gravy.

[Great Dragon]

Like so:
01 Heavy Armor Mastery Feat.
04 War Caster feat
08 Magic Initiate Feat: Sacred Flame,
Spare the Dying; Shield of Faith.
12 Spell Sniper Feat
16 +2 Con

Yes, I'm totally aware that getting both +3 Armor and +3 Shield will not really happen until 20th level, if at all!!

Don't really expect to achieve that level in this game, but it's fun to think about!!

Humm.
Maximum potential AC = 35 !!!
(+3 Plate, +3 shield, +1 Defense, +2 Faith, +5 Shield +1 Cloak/Ring Protection)
Assuming he gets a round to cast Faith before combat.

Did I miss anything?

[stoutstien]

Like so:
01 Heavy Armor Mastery Feat.
04 War Caster feat
08 Magic Initiate Feat: Sacred Flame,
Spare the Dying; Shield of Faith.
12 Spell Sniper Feat
16 +2 Con

Yes, I'm totally aware that getting both +3 Armor and +3 Shield will not really happen until 20th level, if at all!!

Don't really expect to achieve that level in this game, but it's fun to think about!!

Humm.
Maximum potential AC = 35 !!!
(+3 Plate, +3 shield, +1 Defense, +2 Faith, +5 Shield +1 Protection)
Assuming he gets a round to cast Faith before combat.

Don't forget the defender blade that can move bonus to attack to AC also.

Also you will probably have crappy Wis and Dex saves with this build so watch out for casters

[Great Dragon]

Don't forget the defender blade that can move bonus to attack to AC also.

Also you will probably have crappy Wis and Dex saves with this build so watch out for casters

I don't see Defender in the DMG.

And yes, before he gets Counterspell, he's very worried (paranoid) about other casters!!

[MaxWilson]

Like so:
01 Heavy Armor Mastery Feat.
04 War Caster feat
08 Magic Initiate Feat: Sacred Flame,
Spare the Dying; Shield of Faith.
12 Spell Sniper Feat
16 +2 Con

Yes, I'm totally aware that getting both +3 Armor and +3 Shield will not really happen until 20th level, if at all!!

Don't really expect to achieve that level in this game, but it's fun to think about!!

Humm.
Maximum potential AC = 35 !!!
(+3 Plate, +3 shield, +1 Defense, +2 Faith, +5 Shield +1 Cloak/Ring Protection)
Assuming he gets a round to cast Faith before combat.

Did I miss anything?

Theoretically you could stack Warding Bond and [le sigh] the marriage AC bonus from Ceremony. Ceremony is stupid but Warding Bond isn't bad and also helps saving throws a little. Also you could eventually Foresight yourself to impose disadvantage, which takes crits off the table and is better than more AC.

Note that Shield of Faith is a bonus action to cast so you don't necessarily have to spend a whole round casting it, you just can't cast it on the same round as a non-cantrip.

[OverLordOcelot]

I categorically reject the notion that dropping to a 15 or 20' movement speed is 'free', that's a huge disadvantage for any character. It greatly reduces your ability to move around on the battlefield without burning resources, and will result in you taking a lot more attacks than you would otherwise as you'll get caught more easily. Note that you cannot do something as basic as 'stand up from prone and move to the space behind an ally' or 'walk past two spaces of friendly creature (like a horse, wildshaped druid, or large summon' with a 15' or 20' move speed, and you're much easier to trap within effects like sickening radiance or spirit guardians. If you're always burning slots on misty step or longstrider, that's less spell slots and less spells that you can cast during combat.

So no, anyone arguing that you don't need the 15 strength for plate is making a bad argument in my book. Dropping speed so low is a huge cost if your DM is playing monsters remotely aggressively, and if they're not then there's no need to worry about what's better, just pick whatever style looks cooler to you.

To comment on a few specific examples:

For contrast, a sorcerer has to expend a spell known to get mage armor, expend the spell slot each day, and then also then max dexterity which won't be happening until like level 17 or something.

But he doesn't have to multiclass to get mage armor, which is a significant cost that you're now ignoring. If he multiclasses to get medium armor, he has more options open - he can take fighter not as 1st level class, can take any cleric circle, druid, barbarian, ranger, or hexblade as the class instead of just fighter or certain clerics.


This is personal opinion, but: if... in isolation from other factors... you could have your warlock or wizard dip for a level and pick up one of two categories of armor, and one gave you up to AC 17 but required you to point buy up to 14 in a stat you otherwise didn't use,

But we're talking about STR and DEX. Your warlock or wizard also uses dex for initiative and DEX saves, which are significantly more common than STR saves. There are also a lot of situations where they could have use for sleight of hand, thieves' tools, and stealth, all of which are boosted by DEX and not STR. Also if they want to be stealthy, in addition to +2 to stealth the medium armor chooser has the option of dropping 1 AC to not have disadvantage on stealth rolls (for example, invisibility and darkness effects both get more potent if enemies can't tell where you are). Ignoring the fact that DEX is a significantly better stat for most characters than STR is badly missing a major point in the comparison.


Mostly due to the fact that you can easily get insanely high AC with little to no investment outside of gold costs. For example:

Any character who starts as a fighter can get a constant 21 AC through Plate Armor, a Shield, and the Defense Fighting style, no magic armor required.

That has a significant investment outside of gold costs, you're burning your one fighting style on defense instead of something useful for offense. Anyone taking a level of fighter can get a constant 20 AC through half plate, a shield, the defense fighting style, and the 14 dex that costs less than the 15 str you need for the heavy armor version. Heavy armor gets 1 more AC, but 14 dex gets +2 on initiative, more common dex saves, and dex skills (+3 if the heavy armor user fully dumps dex) while being just as able to defend against grapples and shoves as they can use acrobatics instead of athletics.


And there's the rub, you can only catch up to Heavy Armor users if you use Medium Armor, have Medium Armor Mastery, and magic armor.

First of all, there's nothing that stops the use of defense fighting style with medium armor, so making a comparison where you give the heavy armor wearer that particular bonus but not the others is not really legitimate. Secondly, who cares about catching up? It's not like either character has to hit a specific number for AC. I'm expecting the heavy armor user to have 1 more AC and the medium armor user to have other benefits. Thirdly, why are you comparing completely different classes? As I said in the OP, I'm primarily talking about the comparison between two mages, clerics, warlocks, druids, or others who don't already use STR where the question is 'do I go for medium or heavy armor' and not 'what do I do to catch up to a specific AC-chasing fighter build with another build entirely'.

And really, why are you even talking about what's obviously a strength based build (fighter in heavy armor with defensive fighting style) to non-strength based builds? As I said in my initial post, I already think that heavy armor is great for strength based builds. It's the non-strength based builds where I don't think the single AC point is worth the cost.


And if you stick all that magical heavy armor on someone who can cast Shield? You're basically going to be unhittable. For example, lets snag a build that is doable in AL. We will have a Paladin/Sorcerer in +1 Fullplate and a +3 Shield.

You're going to be hard to hit by things that use attack rolls - which means enemies relying on attack rolls will mostly avoid you. You're still vulnerable to things that require saves. I have a AL druid who went through most of T3 with 14 dex wearing +2 stone half plate and +3 shield for a 24 AC that can be boosted to 29 with shield from a ring of spell storing. She gets banished, held, dominated, and otherwise incapacitated way more than she gets bashed down by regular attacks, even when she's wild shaping and her AC goes low. I could push her AC up higher, but I don't see the point (even ignoring the fact that in T4 she'll be wild shaped 90% of the time) - it's already high enough that things trying to hit normally will stop bothering to. I can think of a lot better things to do with concentration than boost an already high AC 2 points higher!

Also the cloak of displacement that everyone seems to love is not that great in practice in my experience, as it stops working if you take damage. Getting hit by a cantrip, AOE spell/ability, or the little '2d6/round background damage that's intended to heighten tension but not really be a threat' that adventures love to have removes it's benefit. I am not a fan for those on people who tend to be in front.

[MaxWilson]

I categorically reject the notion that dropping to a 15 or 20' movement speed is 'free', that's a huge disadvantage for any character. It greatly reduces your ability to move around on the battlefield without burning resources, and will result in you taking a lot more attacks than you would otherwise as you'll get caught more easily. Note that you cannot do something as basic as 'stand up from prone and move to the space behind an ally' or 'walk past two spaces of friendly creature (like a horse, wildshaped druid, or large summon' with a 15' or 20' move speed, and you're much easier to trap within effects like sickening radiance or spirit guardians. If you're always burning slots on misty step or longstrider, that's less spell slots and less spells that you can cast during combat.

Standing up from prone does not cost 15' of movement--it costs half your speed. If you're a Str 8 human in plate armor with 20' movement, you can stand up and walk 10'.

I'm generally in favor of high movement speed because I strongly believe in running away from anything you can't kill, but if you're playing at a table where the DM doesn't do uber-Deadly encounters and you're mainly a ranged spellcaster like a Forge Cleric 1/Enchanter X, you'd rarely miss the difference between 20' and 30' speed, and when you did miss it you could make up the difference using Longstrider or Phantom Steed (ritual!) if it were important to you.

10' speed loss isn't fun but it's not necessarily worth investing in Str 15 to counteract either. There are alternatives.

[OlegRU]

I'm wondering if other editions did Armor better - what does everyone think?

[MaxWilson]

I'm wondering if other editions did Armor better - what does everyone think?

Yes, 5E makes it too easy to get a good AC and still have full spellcasting, which makes spellcasters too strong with not enough downsides. AD&D has a better balance IMO. Sure, your Fighter/Mage/Cleric may know how to wear plate armor, but you can't cast wizard spells while wearing it, so the choice of whether or not to wear armor on a given adventure is a meaningful one.

[Sigreid]

Yes, 5E makes it too easy to get a good AC and still have full spellcasting, which makes spellcasters too strong with not enough downsides. AD&D has a better balance IMO. Sure, your Fighter/Mage/Cleric may know how to wear plate armor, but you can't cast wizard spells while wearing it, so the choice of whether or not to wear armor on a given adventure is a meaningful one.

An elven fighter/magicuser could specifically cast in armor in AD&D. Of course due to racial level limits they did not have the potential to be as good at fighter or magic user as a dedicated human could be.

Edit: They also had modifiers to hit based on what weapon was being used against what weapon type, so there was an incentive to carry a variety of weapons and use the right tool for the current job.

[sithlordnergal]

That has a significant investment outside of gold costs, you're burning your one fighting style on defense instead of something useful for offense. Anyone taking a level of fighter can get a constant 20 AC through half plate, a shield, the defense fighting style, and the 14 dex that costs less than the 15 str you need for the heavy armor version. Heavy armor gets 1 more AC, but 14 dex gets +2 on initiative, more common dex saves, and dex skills (+3 if the heavy armor user fully dumps dex) while being just as able to defend against grapples and shoves as they can use acrobatics instead of athletics..

However, the cost is far less then spending ASI's and Feats. To be honest, I don't take offensive Fighting Styles...whenever I play a martial character, I go the Sword and Board route, and have yet to use a Two-Handed weapon. I find the damage increase is not worth the AC decrease. I did take Dueling once, but later found I would have been better off with +1 to AC instead of +2 to damage since I was a Paladin/Sorcerer and my damage came from Smites. I will admit, that is personal preference.

And you're correct, I should have given the Medium armor the Defense Fighting Style. But as you mentioned, you can get 20 AC with a 14 Dex and the Defense Fighting Style, or you can get it with 16 Dex and Medium Armor Master. Where as Heavy Armor users get 20 with Full Plate and a Shield. You don't even need the required strength if you're willing to give up 10 feet of movement. No matter how you crunch the numbers, you get more AC for a smaller cost when you use Heavy Armor.



You're going to be hard to hit by things that use attack rolls - which means enemies relying on attack rolls will mostly avoid you. You're still vulnerable to things that require saves. I have a AL druid who went through most of T3 with 14 dex wearing +2 stone half plate and +3 shield for a 24 AC that can be boosted to 29 with shield from a ring of spell storing. She gets banished, held, dominated, and otherwise incapacitated way more than she gets bashed down by regular attacks, even when she's wild shaping and her AC goes low. I could push her AC up higher, but I don't see the point (even ignoring the fact that in T4 she'll be wild shaped 90% of the time) - it's already high enough that things trying to hit normally will stop bothering to. I can think of a lot better things to do with concentration than boost an already high AC 2 points higher!

Also the cloak of displacement that everyone seems to love is not that great in practice in my experience, as it stops working if you take damage. Getting hit by a cantrip, AOE spell/ability, or the little '2d6/round background damage that's intended to heighten tension but not really be a threat' that adventures love to have removes it's benefit. I am not a fan for those on people who tend to be in front

I mean, yeah you will get hit hard by spells...but that's kind of an issue for everyone. I consider it a moot point because if you want to talk about saving throws, the only ones who are completely safe from those are Paladin/Monks at level 20 with proficiency in every save and Charisma to every save. And AC use will differ from build to build. A Druid and Barbarian won't really care about AC because they tank things with HP. But a Fighter, Ranger, Cleric, and Paladin tank with their AC. It would be tantamount to suicide for a Paladin or Fighter to try and tank with low AC, they just don't have the HP to tank like a Barbarian or Druid does. As a result, high AC becomes very important to any class that wants to be a tank without the Druid or Barbarian's HP reserves.

And sure, the Cloak of Displacement can be disabled, but I've still found it to be more useful then Cloak of Protection. I will admit though, there are better defensive items, like the Cloak of Invisibility. I'd have it on my Paladin/Sorcerer now, but I decided to get the Staff of the Magi first.


EDIT


And really, why are you even talking about what's obviously a strength based build (fighter in heavy armor with defensive fighting style) to non-strength based builds? As I said in my initial post, I already think that heavy armor is great for strength based builds. It's the non-strength based builds where I don't think the single AC point is worth the cost.


Because in order to compare something you need something to compare it with? There's not much point in comparing the benefits of Heavy Armor to Heavy Armor. In order to compare something, you need to look at something else. And honestly, I've had plenty of non-strength based builds that use heavy armor. One of my early tankiest characters was a Fighter/Wizard with 8 strength walking around in full plate. Did aggressive things get close? Sure, but they never gave me issues since I generally incapacitated them. I've yet to really find a build that doesn't benefit from having as high of an AC as possible, and Heavy Armor can provide that sort of AC with the fewest investments.

[Pex]

It's not worth multiclassing just to get it. Each class has a way to get a decent AC, and decent is enough. You don't need to have the absolutely best possible AC you can ever get for all your characters forever. However, if other class abilities also make your character fun along with the heavy armor then enjoy the perk.

[JackPhoenix]

From my understanding, Armor bonuses do not stack. Like either Armor or Natural Armor being counted, and not stacking.

Am I still stuck in 3.x again?
Does 5e RAW/RAI allow the +3 shield to stack with a Shield spell?

If so, WOW! That is crazy O.P.!

You only use one base AC calculation (armor, unarmored defense, natural armor, Mage Armor, whatever), but any bonuses do stack, as long as they don't come from the same source (i.e. dual wielding shields won't help you, but shield, Shield of Faith and Shield are perfectly fine)


good rule of thumb tho is hunt down adamantine armor to prevent crits or you will still get hit ~10% of the time.

Adamantine armor will prevent extra damage and various effects tied to critical hits, but natural 20 is still a hit no matter your AC.

[Great Dragon]

Theoretically you could stack Warding Bond and [le sigh] the marriage AC bonus from Ceremony. Ceremony is stupid but Warding Bond isn't bad and also helps saving throws a little. Also you could eventually Foresight yourself to impose disadvantage, which takes crits off the table and is better than more AC.

Note that Shield of Faith is a bonus action to cast so you don't necessarily have to spend a whole round casting it, you just can't cast it on the same round as a non-cantrip.

Um. Right. Because Adventurers get married (to each other, so as to always be within 30 feet) at dawn when they know they are Adventuring!!! LoL!

I just can't help but picture all the messed up RP that would create!!! (What about the Divorce Ceremony?)
"You've been married how many times?"

Warding Bond? Most Clerics would rather not. Just saying.

I think this PC is totally fine with being only able to use a Cantrip the first round for high AC, wait for it..... THEN nuke!!

[stoutstien]

Um. Right. Because Adventurers get married at dawn when they know they are Adventuring!!! LoL!

Warding Bond? Most Clerics would rather not. Just saying.

I think this PC is totally fine with being only able to use a Cantrip the first round for high AC, wait for it..... THEN nuke!! I did dig out my DMG page 164(English) very bottom right of page has defender.

[MaxWilson]

Um. Right. Because Adventurers get married (to each other, so as to always be within 30 feet) at dawn when they know they are Adventuring!!! LoL!

I just can't help but picture all the messed up RP that would create!!! (What about the Divorce Ceremony?)
"You've been married how many times?"

If you're saying that Ceremony is messed up, I agree. Especially when you factor in all the dying needed to benefit repeatedly.


Warding Bond? Most Clerics would rather not. Just saying.

Hmm, I guess it depends who you play with. Note BTW that you can also cast it on yourself if you're a cleric.

[OverLordOcelot]

Standing up from prone does not cost 15' of movement--it costs half your speed. If you're a Str 8 human in plate armor with 20' movement, you can stand up and walk 10'.

None of my examples assumed that standing from prone cost 15' of movement. Very simple, you CANNOT stand up and walk 10' with a 20' move if there is difficult terrain in the way - for example, the friendly creature you're trying to step behind in my example. With 30' move, you spend 15' to stand, 10' to move onto your friend, and 5' to move to the next square. With 20', you can't do that. Getting stuck with just 2 squares of movement in difficult terrain is a serious mobility limit that comes up all the time in dungeon corridors when other PCs are in your way. Can you dash? Sure, but you're giving up your disengage, attack, or cast to do it.


I'm generally in favor of high movement speed because I strongly believe in running away from anything you can't kill, but if you're playing at a table where the DM doesn't do uber-Deadly encounters and you're mainly a ranged spellcaster like a Forge Cleric 1/Enchanter X, you'd rarely miss the difference between 20' and 30' speed, and when you did miss it you could make up the difference using Longstrider or Phantom Steed (ritual!) if it were important to you.

If the DM gives you open spaces and doens't have enemies attack you, sure. But in that case optimization is irrelevant as the game is so softball your decisions don't really matter. If you start ending up going into dungeon rooms around a corner with other PCs in the way, or having enemies who don't just politely attack the people in front without moving towards you, you'll miss the 10' move a lot. And using up your spell slots, time, and prepared/known spells to counter your disadvantage is a significant cost.

Also relying on a phantom steed for combat movement is a bit hilarious - it disappears if it takes ANY damage at all.


10' speed loss isn't fun but it's not necessarily worth investing in Str 15 to counteract either. There are alternatives.

10' speed loss is a huge disadvantage if optimization matters at all, and treating it as having no cost is absurd.

[OverLordOcelot]

However, the cost is far less then spending ASI's and Feats.

You said no cost, now you're agreeing that the no cost claim is incorrect. Thank you for conceding that.


No matter how you crunch the numbers, you get more AC for a smaller cost when you use Heavy Armor.

No one has actually shown that. Various people have claimed that the cost is smaller, but they do it using techniques like 'completely ignore significant costs such as fighting style or movement penalty', which doesn't make a good comparison.


I mean, yeah you will get hit hard by spells...but that's kind of an issue for everyone.

Again, if your AC is actually so high that enemies can't hit you, then they just stop using attack rolls against youand use spells or spell-like effects or grapples or other things that don't go against your AC. Stacking AC to stratospheric levels looks great in DPR spreadsheets, but doesn't actually do much good in the game.


I consider it a moot point because if you want to talk about saving throws, the only ones who are completely safe

I don't consider a major risk on the battlefield that you're spending vast resources to not defend against and that will be used against you if you stack AC to absurd heights. And no one is completely safe from spells, not even paladins and monks, they don't get enough stats to get 100% save chance.

[quote]Because in order to compare something you need something to compare it with? There's not much point in comparing the benefits of Heavy Armor to Heavy Armor.

Good thing I never advocated comparing heavy armor to heavy armor. I advocated comparing heavy armor to medium armor on the same character other than the armor specific points. Instead of comparing two radically different characters who aren't even the same class or remotely trying to do the same thing like you did.

[MaxWilson]

None of my examples assumed that standing from prone cost 15' of movement. Very simple, you CANNOT stand up and walk 10' with a 20' move if there is difficult terrain in the way - for example, the friendly creature you're trying to step behind in my example. With 30' move, you spend 15' to stand, 10' to move onto your friend, and 5' to move to the next square. With 20', you can't do that. Getting stuck with just 2 squares of movement in difficult terrain is a serious mobility limit that comes up all the time in dungeon corridors when other PCs are in your way. Can you dash? Sure, but you're giving up your disengage, attack, or cast to do it.

[scratches head] But that's not what you said originally. You said:


Note that you cannot do something as basic as 'stand up from prone and move to the space behind an ally'

and you can totally do that. 10' to stand up, 5' to 10' to move behind an ally. You didn't say anything about chokepoints that made you have to crawl over your ally to get behind them, and that wouldn't be a "basic" scenario anyway. It's something you do less than 5% of the time.


If the DM gives you open spaces and doens't have enemies attack you, sure.

You realize that chokepoints actually make the game easier, don't you?


10' speed loss is a huge disadvantage if optimization matters at all, and treating it as having no cost is absurd.

In other news, 2+2 < 5. So what? Everybody knows the cost isn't zero.

[Arkhios]

My dex 9 Paladin would like to point out, that, unlike medium armor, heavy armor doesn't give a damn about your negative modifiers when it comes to AC.


IF you are building cleric, druid*, sorcerer, sorcerer, warlock, or wizard, you could easily dump dex and invest at least 13 in str (preferably more, but not really necessary), and still reach the best possible AC without spells either with just one level multiclass or with feats (if you can afford them, of course).

*druid can wear heavy armor if it's not made of metal (entirely possible while not readily available) and if they have the proficiency.

[Great Dragon]

@stoutstien: OMG, thanks!
But - it's part of "Attack with weapon", not a Bonus Action - to get up to +3 AC.

So let me see, 18 +3 Plate Armor (21), 2 +3 shield (26), +1 Defense Style (27), +3 Defender (30), +1 Cloak/Ring of Protection (31), +2 BA SoF (33), +2 Haste (35), and +5 Reaction Shield (40) and +5 from 3/4 cover (45)
Though cover is conditional, and can be negated easily by a sniper feat.

Haste AC needs Action from Boots activated the round before, or from friendly caster before foe attacks you!

But, if you get everything the Monster/Foe needs to roll a 19 and have a +26 to hit!!!
Natural 20 automatically hits, but no critical.
Um... AFB....

[Arkhios]

Natural 20 automatically hits, but no critical.
Um... AFB....

Natural 20 is always a critical hit. Regardless of whether the attack roll would hit the AC value. This especially is why Champion Fighter is better than most people seem to think. Improved Critical makes a 19 and 20 (and later 18, 19, and 20) to be always critical hits as well.

[Great Dragon]

@Arkhios. The "No Critical" was because of wearing Adamantine Armor, which simply does not allow the doubling of Dice. The Character is still hit - and hurt - normally, though.

Add Invulnerability for resistance to non-magical physical damage. Using an Action for "Immune to non-magical physical damage" for 1 minute, once a day.

I really like the Champion's Critical effect happening with a 18-20 at high level.

[Arkhios]

@Arkhios. The "No Critical" was because of wearing Adamantine Armor, which simply does not allow the doubling of Dice. The Character is still hit - and hurt - normally, though.

Add Invulnerability for resistance to non-magical physical damage. Using an Action for "Immune to non-magical physical damage" for 1 minute, once a day.

I really like the Champion's Critical effect happening with a 18-20 at high level.

Just so you know, you made a double post (probably by accident, but thought I'd mention it; FYI you can delete your own posts by clicking to edit them)

More to the point, I didn't see you mentioning adamantine in your post, so a human error on my part. I guess I should've manually traced it back to stoutstien's post you were replying to.
Using the Quote button makes it much easier for, not just yourself, but for other readers as well, to keep track of what has been said before, and thus to avoid things like this.

[Great Dragon]

Just so you know, you made a double post (probably by accident, but thought I'd mention it; FYI you can delete your own posts by clicking to edit them)
Being on my phone (which is most of the time) sometimes causes that.
I remove them when I notice.
Thanks for letting me know.


More to the point, I didn't see you mentioning adamantine in your post, so a human error on my part. I guess I should've manually traced it back to stoutstien's post you were replying to.
It was in the "Build" Spoiler in my post a little ways back now.


Using the Quote button makes it much easier for, not just yourself, but for other readers as well, to keep track of what has been said before, and thus to avoid things like this.
Because I'm on my phone, editing is a pain - because I have to add things like "[B]" etc by typing them in for each item I want to affect.

Also, I don't like just repeating everything that was said. So, unless I'm directly responding to more than one thing in someone else's post, I tend to just put @"Poster's Name" and then fingertip punch-in my response.

But, if it becomes something that more Readers bring up, I'll switch to another Editing option, to include more Quoted texts.

Just drop me a post in that thread or PM me.

[Willie the Duck]

This is personal opinion, but: if... in isolation from other factors... you could have your warlock or wizard dip for a level and pick up one of two categories of armor, and one gave you up to AC 17 but required you to point buy up to 14 in a stat you otherwise didn't use, and the other gave you up to AC 18 but required you to buy up to 15 in a stat (costing presumably 2 extra points of point buy, as choosing a +2-in-that-stat race would be entirely too convenient for the example)… I would call that absolutely straightforward fair and reasonable. 2 points of attribute purchasing for +1 AC? Complete reasonable decision point where you can fall on either side. It is only other factors like the price of plate and differential value most place on Dex over Str* that clearly favor medium armor.
*Mind you, if the DM uses the restrictive encumbrance rules, the calculations change very quickly



But we're talking about STR and DEX. Your warlock or wizard also uses dex for initiative and DEX saves, which are significantly more common than STR saves. There are also a lot of situations where they could have use for sleight of hand, thieves' tools, and stealth, all of which are boosted by DEX and not STR. Also if they want to be stealthy, in addition to +2 to stealth the medium armor chooser has the option of dropping 1 AC to not have disadvantage on stealth rolls (for example, invisibility and darkness effects both get more potent if enemies can't tell where you are). Ignoring the fact that DEX is a significantly better stat for most characters than STR is badly missing a major point in the comparison.

OverLordOcelot, I very specifically pointed out that that part of the analysis was being separated from the other factors. Pretending I am missing a point, when instead I had very very pointedly made that point is to my mind not discussing in good faith. Now, I was rushed, and did not go into the other factors as much as I could have, and we could go into them now. Yes, there are other factors to consider than merely the attribute points spent, however, I stand by my assertion. In isolation, 2 points of attribute allotment for a point of AC is a reasonable balance point on costs. For someone who is not making weapon-use decisions based on physical stats, I would call things relatively neutral (as in either decision is reasonable) at that point. Saves, skills, and initiative do in fact contribute to the major factors in favor of Dex/medium armor as weighting factors on top of that. Thus, in many campaigns, you are quite right that medium armor moves ahead for spell-based characters (and hexblade weapon-based characters, I suppose). Things swing back to a more balanced (either is a right decision) point in a number of situations -- 1) the DM uses the more restrictive initiative rules (incentivizing not dumping Str, although this is countered by the greater armor weight), 2) DM imposes a lot of athletics checks, 3) situations where spellcaster needs to fight with melee weapons (maybe as part of a disguise/impersonation plot) and thus relative prevalence of finesse/non-finesse weapons comes into play. Some of these are more niche than others, and one generally knows how much your DM will be including any of them relatively quickly in ones time with them.


An elven fighter/magicuser could specifically cast in armor in AD&D. Of course due to racial level limits they did not have the potential to be as good at fighter or magic user as a dedicated human could be.

Edit: They also had modifiers to hit based on what weapon was being used against what weapon type, so there was an incentive to carry a variety of weapons and use the right tool for the current job.

Depends on if we are meaning AD&D as 1e exclusively or both 1e and 2e. In 2e, fighter/magic users (well, fighter/mages) needed to de-armor to cast.

I'm a fan of TSR-era A/D&D's 'how heavy of armor is the best choice?' 'as much as you can get away with/afford.'- model is pretty good. It is (mostly) realistic, gives fighter types a clear and consistent reason to be best in combat, and incentivizes planning. It does kind of incentivize carrying around various sets of armor for various situations* (much like the weapon-vs-armor tables incentivized a golf bag full of different weapons), which is both good and bad. The thing is, it is hard to analyze the good/bad of that rule without also analyzing things like how the opportunity-attack and zone-of-control rules made/did not make possible keeping the lightly-armored people away from the fighting. Various TSR editions were better or worse about that, and IIRC AD&D as-written (RAW) kind of didn't really work well if you took it outside the dungeon (and had enough fighters and henchmen to physically stuff the corridors to keep the bad guys from the back line, despite that style of play already showing signs of not being universal by the time of writing.
*particularly if you updated it with things like chain shirts of jack-of-plate, which could be readily removed if you fell into water