Actually Factually Simple Armor

[Amechra]

Yeah, OK, I did some faffing around with armor here, but that wasn't actually very simple. So, here are my current thoughts:

Cloth Armor
Cloth Armor gives you an AC to 11 + Dex (max +5) while you're wearing it. Unlike other forms of armor, it does not require armor proficiency to wear, and you may use features such as Unarmored Defense while wearing it.

Light Armor
Light Armor gives you an AC of 12 + Dex (max +5) while you're wearing it.

Medium Armor
The one form of Medium Armor is the shield. Using a shield uses up one of your hands, but doing so gives you +1 AC. In addition, if you are capable of adding your Dexterity bonus to your AC, using a shield grants you an additional +2 AC, which counts towards the maximum AC bonus from your Dexterity.

Heavy Armor
Heavy Armor gives you an AC of 17. You have disadvantage on Dexterity (Stealth) checks while wearing Heavy Armor.

Using Armor You Aren't Proficient In
You have disadvantage on Dexterity (Acrobatics) checks, Strength (Athletics) checks, and Concentration checks while wearing armor you aren't proficient in. In addition, reduce your speed by 10ft, and you can't use any fly or swim speed you might have.

Spellcasting In Armor
Casting spells that require a somatic component require you to either have both hands free or use a spell focus in one hand while the other hand is free. If you have the War Caster feat, reduce the number of free hands required by one (so you can get away with either having one free hand or a spell focus).

...

If you're wondering about why I added Cloth Armor, it's so that you can make magic armor for Monks without having it just be for Monks (since it'll work for anyone with some form of unarmored defense).

[PhoenixPhyre]

Note:

This reduces the maximum armor class available via heavy armor to 18 (17 + 1 for shield), but raises light armor to the same thing (12 + 5 + 1 for a shield or 12 + 2 DEX + 3 shield). Which makes light armor way better than heavy armor, because it depends on a stat that's generally better (DEX), but doesn't have any downsides, is way cheaper, and you can get away with a 14 DEX. So it's cheaper both in money, in features, AND in stat requirements. And doesn't have any penalties.

Personally, I think that heavy armor should always provide the most defenses, out of anything. No other method should allow you to come close. Yes, including magic. That gives it a niche and gives STR people some bennies.

[Amechra]

That's fair. I think I might change how much of the Shield bonus is "dex based" (from +1/+2 to +2/+1) and maybe give Heavy Armor another +1 to AC? I could also see offering Adamantine Heavy Armor as non-magical "plate" while using these rules, but I don't really see that as a hard-and-fast "thing".

So then'd you have:

> Light Armor users starting around 15 and capping out at 17... if they're dedicated to boosting their Dex and aren't, like, a Bard or something.
> Medium Armor users starting around 16-17 and capping out at 19... which would require 18 Dexterity and using up your off-hand.
> Heavy Armor users starting at 18, with the option to up that to 20 if you pair it with a shield.

That seems fair to me, especially since things like the Defense fighting style only work with Heavy Armor in this system (because you aren't wearing medium armor while using a shield, you see).

EDIT: Due to how AC in 5e gets better the more you have of it, keep in mind that handing a magic shield to the Heavy Armor guy (who has a higher AC at base) is going to give you more bang for your buck than giving it to Shirtless Dan.

[PhoenixPhyre]

If the base for Heavy Armor was 18, that would solve the one issue.

This is a compression of the AC ranges, though. Which may or may not matter.

Additionally, the issue of magic armor comes up. Currently, one of the big differences between types of armor is that "weaker" armor in each category shows up earlier and more frequently (as a matter of "probability to roll" on the magic item tables). For example, Plate +1 shows up at the same level and frequency as chain mail +3 (table I, 2% chance); studded armor +3 has the same table (and 1/6 the probability) as regular leather +3. Splint +1 shows up an entire table earlier. Plate +3 is a 1/12% probability (roll a 76, then roll a 12) on table I. Under this system, those tables would have to be completely re-written. Of course, if all items are hand-selected, this isn't an issue.

But it does raise a point about how all the optimizations assuming +3 shields and +3 plate everywhere are...overstating things. +3 shields are a 2% chance from table H; +3 plate is a 1/12% chance from table I, 1/12 the chance of getting a Sphere of Annihilation! and 1/24 the chance of a Robe of the Archmagi. It, along with +3 half plate, is the least probable outcome from that table (and from any of the tables other than getting an individual specific spell from a spell scroll).

[Breccia]

If you're wondering about why I added Cloth Armor, it's so that you can make magic armor for Monks without having it just be for Monks (since it'll work for anyone with some form of unarmored defense).

I was under the impression that Barbarians and Monks "bought" Unarmored Defense, adding a second stat to their AC, by "paying" for it by not having, amongst other things, magic armor. PhoenixPhyre (great handle btw) might have something to say about that. This feels like a substantial benefit to any Monks or Barbarians in the game.

[Catullus64]

I wonder if some compatibility problems might be solved by simply calling the lightest available option "clothing", and removing any textual reference to the word "armor" in connection with it. That way, any features that are intended to be incompatible with armor function just fine with clothing by default, without the wording of the armor rules needing to point to specific features.

+1 to raising the innate value of Heavy Armor by... well, +1, I suppose. Up to 18.

I would also just eliminate the term of Medium Armor altogether, and just stick with proficiency in Shields, even if Shields function as you describe it here. Reads much cleaner that way.

Are you imagining a specific kind of fantasy and aesthetics with this, or is it meant to be neutral to such considerations? For example, I could interpret this system as "Light Armor = Mail, Heavy Armor = Plate" or "Light Armor = reinforced textile, Heavy Armor = Mail." Interested in your thematic intentions.

[Yakk]

I was under the impression that Barbarians and Monks "bought" Unarmored Defense, adding a second stat to their AC, by "paying" for it by not having, amongst other things, magic armor. PhoenixPhyre (great handle btw) might have something to say about that. This feels like a substantial benefit to any Monks or Barbarians in the game.

Unarmored Defence isn't great AC. It is mostly, as far as I can tell, fluff or compensation for a restriction.

Studded armor +1 or Mage Armor is 13+dex already.

For them to have an AC advantage over a compariable PC who just wears light armor, they need 20 in one stat and 18 in the other. Or, they can use it to allow them to dump dex compared to a light armor wearer, and pump their secondary stat.

For the monk, this is just moderately hard; dex and wis are primary and secondary (depending on build) stats for them. Still, if you start at 16/16, you are 3 ASIs with no feats away; so level 12 before you beat mere +1 studded. In T3 it seems more reasonable to compete with +2 armor, so now we are talking level 16.

For the barbarian, unarmored defence is fluff. Dexterity is not a primary stat; leave it as 14. A +1 breastplate gets them 17 AC. The barbarian who starts out 16 str/con 14 dex will probably want 20 strength and GWM; so now they are level 16 before they pump con to 18 and 19 before they hit 20 con. They have the same AC naked as they would in +1 Breastplate, in T4.

Making a dex/con barbarian might be possible, but you lose so much: reckless attack and barbarian damage bonus. And then you end up with being no better than the Monk.

[JNAProductions]

What game are you playing where you can reliably get +1 Studded Leather by T2?

[Yakk]

What game are you playing where you can reliably get +1 Studded Leather by T2?

You first can gain more AC than +1 studded armor at level 12 as a no-feat monk. This is after the end of T2.

You first can gain more AC than mundane studded armor at level 8 as a no-feat monk. This is half way through T2.

My point is, "unarmored defence" is a reduction in the harm caused by requiring to be unarmored, not a large benefit. You don't typically outpace the rogue's AC. And when you do, it is by a point.

Reaching 20/20 Dex/Wis is end of T3/start of T4 territory (L 16+). At that point, you do have good AC compared to a Rogue.

[JNAProductions]

Why do you assume generous magic items, but not generous stat arrays?

Edit: you can start at 16 Dex and Wis as a Monk with Point Buy.

That’s better AC than a 16 Dex Studded Leather Rogue. And Rogues don’t get an extra ASI till 10, if I recall correctly, so when would you have worse AC even under Point Buy?

[Amechra]

I'll get back to this shortly with some more in-depth responses.

That said, my perspective on Unarmored Defense is that it's usually either necessary for the archetype (the Monk's version, which is based off of two ability scores that they want to keep high anyway) or a trap option (Barbarians are almost always going to be better off just wearing medium armor). I also do not share PhoenixPhyre's opinion that heavy armor should trump all other sources of AC forever — I actually feel like the ideal is that, absent optimization, PC AC should be pretty consistent/similar.

(As for Dexterity being better than Strength... I'd argue that AC is not the place to balance them out, since it's so vital for not dying.)

[PhoenixPhyre]

I also do not share PhoenixPhyre's opinion that heavy armor should trump all other sources of AC forever — I actually feel like the ideal is that, absent optimization, PC AC should be pretty consistent/similar.

(As for Dexterity being better than Strength... I'd argue that AC is not the place to balance them out, since it's so vital for not dying.)

The concept of "clothies are easy to hit, heavy armor folks aren't" has been around since the beginning. And is pretty darn central to the current design of AC. Absent optimization, getting a high-AC wizard means dedicating a spell slot and a capped score...just to hit the same static AC as a heavy armor + shield guy out of the gate or a heavy armor + 2H guy 5 or so levels in.

[Breccia]

Unarmored Defence isn't great AC.

Are you talking about current rules or these new ones? Because I was talking about these new rules, in which the restriction is nearly nonexistant.

[Amechra]

My current thoughts on where I'm going with this (which will hopefully answer some questions/concerns people have):

• On further thought, I'm going to drop "Cloth Armor" as an armor type.
• I'm happy with all of the rules in the OP that aren't armor types. I'll probably leave them as-is.
• I like where Light Armor is at. I am considering slapping "resistance to non-magical slashing damage" on there, though, as a nod to realism and a bonus for armor users. I'm approaching this from the direction that monsters aren't actually using the same rules for armor as PCs, so bear that in mind. For people who are curious, I'm envisioning this as representing something like a gambeson + helmet.
• I'm thinking that I'm going to keep shields the way I originally presented them (+1 AC, +2 dex-based AC). With that set-up, it's practically identical to Half-Plate w/ the Medium Armor Master feat, which I think is acceptable. Remember that this prevents you from using two-handed weapons, and that you need to take a feat to use spells with Somatic components while using a shield.
• Heavy Armor is going to be AC 18 at base, and will give resistance to non-magical slashing and piercing damage. For anyone who still thinks that Heavy Armor users aren't getting enough love... this is the starting armor for Fighters, Paladins, and some Clerics. I'm envisioning something like lamellar armor or almain rivet here.
• As for later armors (the equivalent of half-plate or plate armor, the stuff you save up for) — I'm thinking that the big thing that you're going to be saving up for is some kind of mail, which should come online in early Tier 2. Medium Armor gives you 13+Dex AC and non-magical slashing resistance (and requires medium armor proficiency), while Super-Heavy Armor gives you AC 19 and the appropriate resistances. A decent smith can take Medium Armor and Heavy Armor and give you Super-Heavy Armor, which brings us to...
• Magic armor is going to predominantly be Medium Armor or Super-Heavy Armor of either type (because that's the good stuff). As a side benefit, magic armor removes the "non-magical" restriction on your armor-based resistances — magic weapons no longer go through the stuff like butter.
• As for Plate Armor... my thoughts is that it's basically going to be non-magical +1 Adamantine Super-Heavy Armor, with the caveat that it doesn't stack with shields (because you're already fully protected). And it's usually going to be enchanted, since that stuff is expensive as sin and needs to be fitted to you anyway. You're looking at getting non-magical Plate in mid Tier 2, and magical Plate in Tier 3.
• If you're curious, the Defense fighting style requires that you're either wearing Medium, Heavy, or Super-Heavy Armor.

So, using the character types that I had in mind while designing this...

• Light Armor Layla starts off with AC 15, finishes out Tier 1 with AC 16, and bumps that up to AC 17 by mid Tier 2. She has a low chance of finding magical armor she can use, but can supplement her AC with stuff like Bracers of Defense.
• Medium Armor Matt starts off with AC 17, bumps that up to AC 18 at the start of Tier 2, and finishes up with AC 19 in early Tier 3. He has access to both magical shields and (some) magical armor, but is restricted in terms of what weapons he can use.
• Heavy Armor Harri starts off with AC 18 (19 w/ shield), bumps that up to AC 19 (20 w/ shield) at the start of Tier 2, and finishes up with AC 20 in mid Tier 2. They have access to all of the magical defensive options that Matt does, but have better base resistances, eventually upgrade to being immune to critical hits, and can use two-handed weapons with impunity.
• The "oops, I have 13+Dex AC types", you have two cases — spellcasters (who are generally going to have low-ish Dex during Tier 1/2) or "Layla spent her race on being a Lizard for +1 AC and lost Resistance to non-magical Slashing damage for her troubles". I'm fine with this.
• Unarmored Barbarians are essentially just Medium Armor Matt, but they trade buying upgrades to their armor and improving Dex for pumping Con instead. They lose out on the slashing resistance, but they have Rage for a reason.
• Monks are going to have slightly better AC than Layla, but that uses up all of their ASIs. That's just a Monk Thing, though, so fixing that would require fiddling with the Monk class.

...

Quick summary:

Light Armor: 12+Dex AC and non-magical Slashing resistance — requires light armor proficiency. [STARTING ARMOR]

Shields: +1 AC, +2 to Dex bonus for AC purposes (max +5) — requires medium armor proficiency, uses up a hand. [STARTING ARMOR]
Medium Armor: 13+Dex AC and non-magical Slashing resistance — requires medium armor proficiency.

Heavy Armor: 18 AC and non-magical Slashing/Piercing resistance — requires heavy armor proficiency. [STARTING ARMOR]
Super-Heavy Armor: 19 AC and non-magical Slashing/Piercing resistance — requires heavy armor proficiency.
Plate Armor: 20 AC, non-magical Slashing/Piercing resistance, and immunity to crits — requires heavy armor proficiency, does not stack with shield.

[Kane0]

I think that's taking a step away from the 'simple' part of the premise.

[Witty Username]

Why do you assume generous magic items, but not generous stat arrays?

Edit: you can start at 16 Dex and Wis as a Monk with Point Buy.

That’s better AC than a 16 Dex Studded Leather Rogue. And Rogues don’t get an extra ASI till 10, if I recall correctly, so when would you have worse AC even under Point Buy?

I am not sure I would call one uncommon magic item by T2 is generous. I think that is reasonable by the DMG recommendations with creating characters beyond first level. I would need to double check.

Generous stat arrays have less justification than generous magic items. Well, no so much if you use the Tasha's racial options. By point by 16 in two stats is possible but only with a compatible race (for monk this would be wood elf, half-elf or human by the phb races). I would argue if Tasha's isn't in play the balance point should be 15 as the assumed highest stat, unless you use only optimized races. Secondarily, stats grow at a very consistent rate, so magic armor is more likely to occur prior to the expected time (or be delayed, but we are discussing the break point, not the baseline functionality). Also, stats cap at 20/20 for AC 20, generally speaking +2 AC from any combination of sources matches and any more overtakes.

More to the direct point, allowing monk and barbarian benefit from magic defense increases doesn't actually cause a significant imbalance. Regardless of the original intentions.

But to the homebrew:
Would cloth armor allow the defensive fighting style, or would that require at least light armor?