Modified Armor Table - Do you think this is right?

[Clistenes]

I don't like the stats of armor we are given in the Player Handbook, and I thought of replacing it with something more similar to historical armor.

What I have thought is this:



Armor (all include a helmet)
Cost
Armor Class
Strength
Stealth
Weight


Light Armor







Light Gambeson (usually worn under mail)
Linothorax
Leather Coleto (a buffalo leather cuirass used by Spanish arquabusiers)
Buff Coat (similar to those used by Cromwell’s New Model Army)

10 gp
11+Dex modifier


8 lb.




Padded Jack (layers of linen faced with heavy canvas of flexible leather)
Chinese Paper and Cloth Armor

15 gp
12+Dex modifier

Disadvantage (making it thick enough to resist axes blows and sword slashes also makes it harder to sneak around uninhindered).
10 lb.




Buffalo or Elkskin-faced Padded Jack with metal reinforcement in key areas (vambraces, greaves, gorget or aventail)
Boiled Leather Cuirass combined with Padding (CuChulainn’s armor)
Boiled Leather Lamellar combined with Padding (mongolian armor)

45 gp
12+Dex modifier


13 lb.




Medium Armor (all include padding)









Chain Shirt
Brigandine
50 gp
13+Dex modifier (max 2)


20 lb.




Scale Mail
50 gp
14+Dex modifier (max 2)

Disadvantage
45 lb.




Breastplate
Banded Plate (classic Roman Legionnaire armor)
100 gp
14+Dex modifier (max 2)


20 lb.




Half Plate
750 gp
15+Dex modifier (max 2)

Disadvantage
40 lb.




Heavy Armor (all include padding)









Chain Mail (Hauberk)
75 gp
15
Str 13
Disadvantage
55 lb.




Brigandine (with chainmail sleeves and leggins)
125 gp
16
Str 13
Disadvantage
55 lb.




Cataphract Armor
Brigandine (with plate or splint arms and legs protection)
Steel Lamellar (with plate or splint arms and legs protection)
400 gp
17
Str 15
Disadvantage
60 lb.




Plate
1500 gp
18
Str 15
Disadvantage
65 lb.




Shield









Shield
10 gp
+2


6 lb.



I know there are still flaws, specially when comparing the stats of Plate, the Hauberk and the other Heavy Armor, but still, do you think this is about right?

[gkathellar]

That seems fine. At the high end, the only big change you're making is allowing Dex-invested characters AC equal to plate-wearers, which ... I mean, if you've invested in 20 Dex, you should get something out of it, right? This will also slightly increase the AC of low-level characters, which is probably good, since at low levels you're fragile as anything.

[Man_Over_Game]

The 13 + Mod Light Armor is strictly better than the 13 + Mod Medium Armor in every feasible way, even cost. Additionally, Medium Armor Proficiency requires Light Armor proficiency. You might as well remove the 13 + Dex Medium Armor from the game.

My big concern is that there's not enough incentive to play Strength. Dexterity should be inherently worse, because:

It works with Finesse weapons, which are generally tied in damage against Strength (when not considering two-handed weapons).
It works with ranged weapons (Strength weapons are generally limited to about 30 feet of throwing distance, and can't use Ammunition, meaning that thrown weapons are inferior when considering Extra Attack).
It controls a more important Saving Throw (Dexterity > Strength).
It controls more skills (Stealth + Sleight of Hand + Acrobatics vs. Athletics).
It has cheaper armor.
It's relevant for more classes (3.5 classes (.5 from Cleric) use Strength over Dexterity, where the remaining 8.5 classes use Dexterity over Strength).


There needs to be more incentive to focusing on Strength, not less. Or even expanding on Medium armor (which helps Dex less than Light armor, and helps Barbarians) would be better than adding superior Light armor. Personally, though, I think the best solution would be to add a new heavy armor option, bumping Plate to 16 Strength requirement and adding +1 more AC than it did before. Strength always needs to be superior to Dexterity, because Dexterity will always be more versatile.

[Grod_The_Giant]

There's literally no reason to buy scale mail, since it's both more expensive and inferior in all ways to the breastplate. Ditto the Padded Jack-- why would you take 12+Dex with disadvantage when you can get 13+dex for a pittance more?

[ProsecutorGodot]

The 13 + Mod Light Armor is strictly better than the 13 + Mod Medium Armor in every feasible way, even cost. Additionally, Medium Armor Proficiency requires Light Armor proficiency. You might as well remove the 13 + Dex Medium Armor from the game.

Seconding this.

Having a higher AC is one of the few things a Strength based character can hold over a dex based one. This change takes that away from them. Always be careful about making changes that benefit only Dexterity because the game already has a skewed balance in favor of it.

A few minor complaints:
-Scalemail is worse than Breastplate in every way.
-Cost changes, while mostly minimal, can negatively impact players who choose to take starting wealth rather than equipment. This has once again more negatively impacted Strength based characters. Where previously they could have afforded a starting AC of 16 for just 75gp your new table gives them an AC of 15 for that cost, the jump from 15 to 16 costing them an additional 50gp. A dex based character with a starting dex of 16 (very easy to meet and almost always expected) will reach an AC of 16 with only a 45gp investment.

I'm not really a historical expert on armor but I'm certain that lightweight leather armor isn't supposed to afford equal or better protection than full plate. Just as an example from your own table, your Steel Lamellar will regularly be less useful in defending yourself than the boiled Leather variant.

[Trickery]

If you want to get technical, armor doesn't really make you harder to hit in the same way that being evasive does. Historical armor makes you more difficult to be pierced or cut and provides some padding against impacts. At the high end, plate armor resulted in a person who, flatly, could not be slashed or stabbed through their armor by anything short of a horse-backed lance. You had to bash them or go around the armor.

Most importantly, armor was always made to counter the weapons of the time and place. You can't properly update the armor table without changing the weapon table, too.

Historically accurate weapons would involve something like armor providing increasing amounts of damage reduction versus slashing and piercing, smaller reductions vs bludgeoning damage, but also impairing climbing and swimming by increasing amounts, and also causing exhaustion in hot climates.

Meanwhile, daggers and estocs and similar weapons would have some degree of armor "piercing" against prone, restrained, or unaware targets. Slashing weapons would do the most damage but would have severely reduced effectiveness versus armor, and piercing weapons would be similar (slightly less effective than slashing against an unarmored target, but slightly more effective against an armored one). The rapier would have longer reach than the arming sword, short sword, and especially the dagger. Whips wouldn't exist as a weapon to fight with. The longsword would be two-handed only and, on a battlefield, strictly inferior to the greatsword. Bludgeoning weapons would be swingy, tending to do less damage, and would have short reach, but would bypass most damage reduction from armor. Axes would do slashing damage but would change to a smaller amount of bludgeoning damage when striking armor. The halberd would be renamed to "polearm" and would be able to do slashing, bludgeoning, or piercing damage as needed. Weapons would affect initiative (they actually used to do so in D&D). And so on.

If you just want to add a little more historical accuracy to the armor table, rename studded leather to brigandine and just fit specific historical armors you're looking for into the appropriate categories. Better yet, add them as rare magical items in true D&D spirit. And if you're worried about heavy armor being too weak, you might roll the feat Heavy Armor Master into the armor table: DR 1 for light armor, 2 for medium, and 3 for heavy.

[GlenSmash!]

The 13 + Mod Light Armor is strictly better than the 13 + Mod Medium Armor in every feasible way, even cost. Additionally, Medium Armor Proficiency requires Light Armor proficiency. You might as well remove the 13 + Dex Medium Armor from the game.

My big concern is that there's not enough incentive to play Strength. Dexterity should be inherently worse, because:

It works with Finesse weapons, which are generally tied in damage against Strength (when not considering two-handed weapons).
It works with ranged weapons (Strength weapons are generally limited to about 30 feet of throwing distance, and can't use Ammunition, meaning that thrown weapons are inferior when considering Extra Attack).
It controls a more important Saving Throw (Dexterity > Strength).
It controls more skills (Stealth + Sleight of Hand + Acrobatics vs. Athletics).
It has cheaper armor.
It's relevant for more classes (3.5 classes (.5 from Cleric) use Strength over Dexterity, where the remaining 8.5 classes use Dexterity over Strength).


There needs to be more incentive to focusing on Strength, not less. Or even expanding on Medium armor (which helps Dex less than Light armor, and helps Barbarians) would be better than adding superior Light armor. Personally, though, I think the best solution would be to add a new heavy armor option, bumping Plate to 16 Strength requirement and adding +1 more AC than it did before. Strength always needs to be superior to Dexterity, because Dexterity will always be more versatile.


There's literally no reason to buy scale mail, since it's both more expensive and inferior in all ways to the breastplate. Ditto the Padded Jack-- why would you take 12+Dex with disadvantage when you can get 13+dex for a pittance more?

These are my concerns as well.

[GlenSmash!]

If you want to get technical, armor doesn't really make you harder to hit in the same way that being evasive does.

This gets into the "Are hitpoints meat?" discussion which is best left avoided.

[stoutstien]

Eh just give heavy armor DR to show absorbing blows vs avoiding them

[Trickery]

This gets into the "Are hitpoints meat?" discussion which is best left avoided.

Well he asked for something more similar to historical armor, and it's hard to talk about real armor without also talking about the difference between a block and a dodge. Regardless, I don't really see a problem with the whole hit points as meat thing. I just assume D&D humanoids have regeneration powers.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I worked on armor as DR (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?588922-5e-Variant-Armor-as-Temp-HP-(no-longer-flat-reduction)) for a long time recently. It's functional for players, at least; for monsters it probably needs a different set of formula. It's a pretty radical departure tho.

(In a nutshell, instead of boosting AC light/medium/heavy armor will absorb so much damage per round, based on your level. So the Monk 20 would still have AC 20 but take full damage if they still get hit; the Fighter 20 in +3 plate might still have an AC of 10 and get hit constantly but would flat ignore the first 55 points of damage they take each round)

[Clistenes]

There's literally no reason to buy scale mail, since it's both more expensive and inferior in all ways to the breastplate. Ditto the Padded Jack-- why would you take 12+Dex with disadvantage when you can get 13+dex for a pittance more?

True. I have realized the Elkskin-faced Padded Jack is too good. I will downgrade it to 12 + Dex...

I have changed the prices of Scale Mail and Breastplate. That was fumble while writing the table...


If you want to get technical, armor doesn't really make you harder to hit in the same way that being evasive does. Historical armor makes you more difficult to be pierced or cut and provides some padding against impacts. At the high end, plate armor resulted in a person who, flatly, could not be slashed or stabbed through their armor by anything short of a horse-backed lance. You had to bash them or go around the armor.

Most importantly, armor was always made to counter the weapons of the time and place. You can't properly update the armor table without changing the weapon table, too.

Historically accurate weapons would involve something like armor providing increasing amounts of damage reduction versus slashing and piercing, smaller reductions vs bludgeoning damage, but also impairing climbing and swimming by increasing amounts, and also causing exhaustion in hot climates.

Meanwhile, daggers and estocs and similar weapons would have some degree of armor "piercing" against prone, restrained, or unaware targets. Slashing weapons would do the most damage but would have severely reduced effectiveness versus armor, and piercing weapons would be similar (slightly less effective than slashing against an unarmored target, but slightly more effective against an armored one). The rapier would have longer reach than the arming sword, short sword, and especially the dagger. Whips wouldn't exist as a weapon to fight with. The longsword would be two-handed only and, on a battlefield, strictly inferior to the greatsword. Bludgeoning weapons would be swingy, tending to do less damage, and would have short reach, but would bypass most damage reduction from armor. Axes would do slashing damage but would change to a smaller amount of bludgeoning damage when striking armor. The halberd would be renamed to "polearm" and would be able to do slashing, bludgeoning, or piercing damage as needed. Weapons would affect initiative (they actually used to do so in D&D). And so on.

If you just want to add a little more historical accuracy to the armor table, rename studded leather to brigandine and just fit specific historical armors you're looking for into the appropriate categories. Better yet, add them as rare magical items in true D&D spirit. And if you're worried about heavy armor being too weak, you might roll the feat Heavy Armor Master into the armor table: DR 1 for light armor, 2 for medium, and 3 for heavy.

True, but that would go beyond changing a bit the stats of armor... I was trying to do only a minor change...

[Blood of Gaea]

As someone who is very into arms and armor, I think you're making a mistake by trying to add too much verisimilitude to a game system that works this way. Light/Medium/Heavy really doesn't function very well if you try to make it realistic.

Just take the normal table and reskin it as needed for flavor.

[GlenSmash!]

I was trying to do only a minor change...

It's wise to keep changes small. Even then sometimes it's hard to predict the ramifications of changes.


Just take the normal table and reskin it as needed for flavor.

This is definitely the easy route.

For example I really like this reskinning of the armor table for a Dark ages/Viking campaign

https://66.media.tumblr.com/fcdd051a1e4a8b3e05d704abcf4fd7e4/tumblr_o5hyadAqdR1uaxtbdo2_1280.jpg

The numbers stay exactly the same, just what they represent changes.

[Man_Over_Game]

I think your current version is pretty good.

[Bjarkmundur]

I always keep forgetting how important it is to respect the little strength Strength offers, and ERMAGERD that armor reflavor is tight :O

[PeteNutButter]

There are all sorts of problems we face when trying to make D&D armors more "realistic." Not least of which is the notion of picking your armor is largely fantasy. In general there would probably be no more than a few armors in use at any given time & location, each being the most effective you can manage within a price range. Once a society has the technology to make the best, they only continue to make the weaker stuff if its significantly cheaper/easier to make. That rules most mail out of the equation, since its very time consuming to make properly (riveted), and wears much heavier than proper plate, since it hangs. The same is true for pretty much all "medium" armor. As I understand it, most areas that had plate, had two types of armor: Plate and some form of Gambeson or Padded Jack.

Technology didn't change nearly as quickly as it does in the modern world, but once it changed, it could disrupt economies. There'd be no reason to maintain the production of armors that were obsolete. Historically, the entire production of army-wide armor was a complex process from material gathering, to processing, to fabrication that often involved complex trade networks. The most realistic way to do this in a fantasy world would be to have each area/city/nation only sell a few options, limited by what materials they can get. If the PCs want to buy armor x, they'd have to go to an entire different area.
Ignoring all that, because fantasy, consider separating plate into multiple categories. If late plate armor, often termed Gothic Plate, is a thing in the world, it is notably better than earlier armor (corrugated metal offers better absorption for less weight, more overlap, better maneuverability, etc.), which could potentially be a high price tag 19 AC armor.

Also, why not expand the shield section? There ought to be at least bucklers, and maybe a difference between strapped and center-gripped shields. Shields vary in strength and absorption capacity just as much as armor.

[Justin Sane]

I might be wrong, but isn't that just the normal armor table with some refluffing (and okay, maybe different weights/prices) by now?

[Trickery]

Historically, the entire production of army-wide armor was a complex process from material gathering, to processing, to fabrication that often involved complex trade networks. The most realistic way to do this in a fantasy world would be to have each area/city/nation only sell a few options, limited by what materials they can get. If the PCs want to buy armor x, they'd have to go to an entire different area.

Slightly off-topic, but that sounds like a great feature for a campaign. Have the weapon and armor tables, along with smithing tools available, change completely depending on which city or town the players are in. Maybe some places have really good deals on certain kinds of equipment or will pay extra for rare materials.

[PeteNutButter]

Slightly off-topic, but that sounds like a great feature for a campaign. Have the weapon and armor tables, along with smithing tools available, change completely depending on which city or town the players are in. Maybe some places have really good deals on certain kinds of equipment or will pay extra for rare materials.

I've seen DMs slightly understand this notion before. "No, this is a desert kingdom. You can't buy plate mail here.":smallmad:

[Grod_The_Giant]

Slightly off-topic, but that sounds like a great feature for a campaign. Have the weapon and armor tables, along with smithing tools available, change completely depending on which city or town the players are in. Maybe some places have really good deals on certain kinds of equipment or will pay extra for rare materials.
Arguably, but D&D is really the wrong game for that sort of thing. Mundane equipment is such a small part of a character, and the differences so negligible, that I can't imagine that being a motivating factor even in an extremely sandbox game. Magic items or new spells, perhaps, but not "breastplate vs scale mail."

[Trickery]

Arguably, but D&D is really the wrong game for that sort of thing. Mundane equipment is such a small part of a character, and the differences so negligible, that I can't imagine that being a motivating factor even in an extremely sandbox game. Magic items or new spells, perhaps, but not "breastplate vs scale mail."

True. It would only work with modified tables such that some of the stuff was actually good.

[Man_Over_Game]

One thing I'd be interested in seeing is an armor chart with alternate effects with each item that aren't ALWAYS relevant, but occasionally can be.

For example, having some armors be Disadvantaged in Hot/Cold Weather, Metal (Disadvantage to Save against spells that deal Lightning damage, can spend your Reaction to have resistance against a Weapon attack and cause the armor to become Damaged), Frail (Damaged after taking Fire damage), [Damaged armor provides -1 AC each time it's damaged]. Things like that.

[Bjarkmundur]

True. It would only work with modified tables such that some of the stuff was actually good.

Agreed. I remember Grod's alternate weapons. It was kinda cool to see different weapons that dealt the same amount of damage, but had different mechanics if was a sword or an axe. The armor table you're thinking of would be something similar, where the armor values are the same, but has a different mechanic if it is a Padded Light armor or Leather Light armor. Something Like

Padded: 11 + DEX AC and a unique benefit
Leather: 11 + DEX AC and a unique benefit
Studded Leather: 11 + DEX AC and a unique benefit

Just like weapons, here each armor grants the same AC value but has some additional bonus that might benefit some characters more than others. It would have the same range of options as fighting styles, but all defensive focused. It's definetly a concept worth exploring.

This would also be based on culture. Mercenaries in orc-infested lands have very different needs than Caravan Protectors in a mofuntain area. The first would have armor more resistant against slashing and bludgeoning attacks, while the latter would be more geared to resist the piercing attacks from a griffon's claws.

[Clistenes]

I might be wrong, but isn't that just the normal armor table with some refluffing (and okay, maybe different weights/prices) by now?

Pretty much. I reskinned some kinds of armor and did some minor changes to others... For example, I don't like Studded Leather, Hide Armor and Ring Mail, none of which ever existed, so I replaced Studded Leather with something else, removed Hide Armor and Ring Mail and added Brigandines...

Also, historical armor made only of leather (like a Coleto or a Buff Coat) was worse than multi-layered textile armor (like a Padded Jack), so I changed that too...

I don't aim to make big changes, only to remove the most blatantly nonsensical stuff...

[Bjarkmundur]

Pretty much. I reskinned some kinds of armor and did some minor changes to others... For example, I don't like Studded Leather, Hide Armor and Ring Mail, none of which ever existed, so I replaced Studded Leather with something else, removed Hide Armor and Ring Mail and added Brigandines...

Also, historical armor made only of leather (like a Coleto or a Buff Coat) was worse than multi-layered textile armor (like a Padded Jack), so I changed that too...

I don't aim to make big changes, only to remove the most blatantly nonsensical stuff...

I like the way your armor is layered. I feel this is the biggest crime of official armors. You'd always wear some sort of gambeson underneath whatever metal armor you own.

[JackPhoenix]

I like the way your armor is layered. I feel this is the biggest crime of official armors. You'd always wear some sort of gambeson underneath whatever metal armor you own.

Perhaps you should read the descriptions, unless you mean "the biggest crime of official armors" is that they actually do mention padding and different materials used.

Also, the notion that people always wore gambeson underneath metal armor is not true.

[Max_Killjoy]

Maybe some armor "should" be more expensive and less protecting... depends on what you're going for, a list of game-balanced mechanical effects or something that reflects a specific time or setting.

[Bjarkmundur]

Perhaps you should read the descriptions, unless you mean "the biggest crime of official armors" is that they actually do mention padding and different materials used.

Also, the notion that people always wore gambeson underneath metal armor is not true.

My bad! Sorry!

[Clistenes]

Also, the notion that people always wore gambeson underneath metal armor is not true.

Most of the listed armor would require at least some padding to avoid the armor hurting your skin. I mean, Scale Armor or Lamellar full of rivets against my skin? No, thank you.

Some kinds of armor could be worn without much padding besides a sturdy, thick jacket (a XIX century cuirassier's breastplate, for example), but since even that armor could be used in combination with a gambeson or other kind of padded armor if you chose to do so, I prefer to anticipate and say "yes, those stats include the padding..."


Maybe some armor "should" be more expensive and less protecting... depends on what you're going for, a list of game-balanced mechanical effects or something that reflects a specific time or setting.

I would like suggestion about the price. About the level of protection, I wouldn't want to stray too far from the official material.

[JackPhoenix]

Most of the listed armor would require at least some padding to avoid the armor hurting your skin. I mean, Scale Armor or Lamellar full of rivets against my skin? No, thank you.

Some kinds of armor could be worn without much padding besides a sturdy, thick jacket (a XIX century cuirassier's breastplate, for example), but since even that armor could be used in combination with a gambeson or other kind of padded armor if you chose to do so, I prefer to anticipate and say "yes, those stats include the padding..."

"Some padding" is not the same thing as gambeson. Apparently, vikings commonly wore mail over normal clothes. Besides, both scale and lamellar armor already includes certain amount of padding in its very construction.