Impacts of Warforged's Integrated Protection

[Greywander]

I'm a little unclear about a few things regarding this feature, as I feel like I've seen people saying certain other features don't work, or that it both does and doesn't count as armor.

As far as I can interpret it, the darkwood core doesn't count as wearing armor, and thus would work for things like Unarmored Movement (making warforged good low-WIS, high AC monks). Composite and heavy plating count as armor, and thus would count for the Defense fighting style, correct? (But the darkwood core would not?) But I've also heard people say they don't count as medium or heavy armor, which I assume means Medium/Heavy Armor Master don't do anything. I'm skeptical on this, as these both require that armor proficiency, so it seems implied that they are that type of armor.

I know each table is different, but I tend to err on the side of permissiveness. If it's unclear, I don't really see a reason not to allow composite/heavy plating to work with Medium/Heavy Armor Master. It's not going to break the game.

I'm curious to see what may change once warforged are "officially" released (my understanding is that WGtE is only semi-official, a step up from UA but a step down from physically published books). I'm pretty happy with them as they are. They're a strong option, to be sure, but not to the point where you'd never play anything else.

[Yunru]

I believe this feature scale a bit too well anyway. At any given level, the Warforged will have 1 or 2 point of AC more than any member of another race with the same build and level-appropriate magic armor. That is significant.
That would be fine if this was the only feature of the race, but it also get Warforged Resilience and subrace feature, some of them are really good.

Don't forget the setting it's released in. While it may have higher AC that unenchanted gear, the other party members will have +1/+2/+3 armour.

For a lower magic setting, like the default one, half the proficiency bonus, rounding down.

[JackPhoenix]

Don't forget the setting it's released in. While it may have higher AC that unenchanted gear, the other party members will have +1/+2/+3 armour.

For a lower magic setting, like the default one, half the proficiency bonus, rounding down.

See my sig. Eberron is *not* high magic setting. While weak, utility magic is omnipresent, legendary stuff is extremely rare. Other party members may be loaded with low level wands, scrolls and potions, and stuff like self-cleaning clothes, but it's very unlikely they ever see +3 armor.

[Rukelnikov]

See my sig. Eberron is *not* high magic setting. While weak, utility magic is omnipresent, legendary stuff is extremely rare. Other party members may be loaded with low level wands, scrolls and potions, and stuff like self-cleaning clothes, but it's very unlikely they ever see +3 armor.

So, in your opinion, what would be a high magic setting? FR?

[stoutstien]

That was the original version, from 2015, or whenever the first Eberron UA was released. Problem with that is that WF would have to wear normal armor like everyone else... that doesn't fit them at all... their plating is part of their body.

True but it wouldn't be hard to have a line of text that allow the WF to install a suit of armor vs don/doff.
Allows them to sleep in it and maybe negate the weight of it as well.

[JackPhoenix]

So, in your opinion, what would be a high magic setting? FR?

Planescape. Spelljammer, I guess? Don't know much about that one. Warcraft (which was actually D&D setting in 3e).

FR is a mess. There are places that certainly are high magic, but it varies wildly. However, both average and maximum power level of its inhabitants is much higher than in Eberron.

[Khrysaes]

I'm a little unclear about a few things regarding this feature, as I feel like I've seen people saying certain other features don't work, or that it both does and doesn't count as armor.

As far as I can interpret it, the darkwood core doesn't count as wearing armor, and thus would work for things like Unarmored Movement (making warforged good low-WIS, high AC monks). Composite and heavy plating count as armor, and thus would count for the Defense fighting style, correct? (But the darkwood core would not?) But I've also heard people say they don't count as medium or heavy armor, which I assume means Medium/Heavy Armor Master don't do anything. I'm skeptical on this, as these both require that armor proficiency, so it seems implied that they are that type of armor.

I know each table is different, but I tend to err on the side of permissiveness. If it's unclear, I don't really see a reason not to allow composite/heavy plating to work with Medium/Heavy Armor Master. It's not going to break the game.

I'm curious to see what may change once warforged are "officially" released (my understanding is that WGtE is only semi-official, a step up from UA but a step down from physically published books). I'm pretty happy with them as they are. They're a strong option, to be sure, but not to the point where you'd never play anything else.

I can not answer this with specific backing examples, but based on the way it is worded, and my own experience with DND Beyond(which is not necesarily a valid source) the integrated protection, regardless of plating, does not count as wearing armor. Which descriptively makes sense as it is integrated with their body. They aren't wearing armor, they are armor.

Therefore, integrated protection should work with a monk's and a barbarian's benefits that require no or limited armor. While the Unarmored defense would not work, it would be one or the other, but a monk is required to not be wearing armor in order to get the benefits of the Martial Arts feature. A Barbarian has to be in medium armor or less to rage.

Simultaneously, Integrated protection, at least on DND Beyond does not gain any benefit from features that require armor such as Defense fighting style, Forge cleric's +1 bonus to armor at level 1 and an additional +1 at level 6, the medium armor mastery and heavy armor mastery feats. This aspect supports the conjecture that Integrated Plating is not armor.

Therefore, a 1 fighter/x monk or x barbarian should be able to use heavy plating of integrated plating and still benefit from their class features, i.e. martial arts or rage, as to equip the heavy plating requires heavy armor proficiency.

However, and this is the part I am unsure of, I think there is a Jeremy Crawford tweet that says that while using composite plating or heavy plating the character would be inelligible to benefit from the Monk's martial arts feature. And this is supported by the requirement for proficiency in order to equip. This may apply to barbarian and other similar features as well.

So Integrated plating counts as both Armor for the purpose of not being able to be used by a monk and retain their benefits, and not armor for the purpose of features that require armor like the defensive fighting style.


Additionally, Wild Shape throws a wrench into this controversy by saying

"You retain the benefit of any features from your class, race, or other source and can use them if the new form is physically capable of doing so. However, you can’t use any of your special senses, such as darkvision, unless your new form also has that sense."

Normally, should the player be a non warforged, they would wear armor and the armor would be absorbed into the new form.

However, you retain the benefit of any feature from your race if th new form is physically capable of doing so so long as it is not a special sense, AND the Integrated plating is not a special sense AND it is described as "Your body has built-in defensive layers, which determine your armor class."

Therefore, because the new form is using "your body" AND the warforged are using a feature from their race that uses "your body" to determine armor class it is a feature that the new form is capable of using and thus should be retained in a wild shaped form. Also because it is "YOUR BODY" even if it is composed of metal, you are not wearing metal armor you do not violate the taboo for the druid class regardless of plating.

[Petrocorus]

Don't forget the setting it's released in. While it may have higher AC that unenchanted gear, the other party members will have +1/+2/+3 armour.

For a lower magic setting, like the default one, half the proficiency bonus, rounding down.

I did account for magic armour. I may be a little wrong about heavy plating, but not for darkwood core or composite plating. All other things being equals, a WF will have 1 or 2 point of AC more than someone with a level-appropriate magic armor of equivalent type.

For instance, at level 5:
-The rogue with +1 studded leather and 18 Dex -> AC 17
WF rogue with darkwood core and 18 Dex -> AC = 11+3 (prof) +4 (Dex) =18
-Medium armor Cleric with +1 breastplate and 14+ Dex -> AC 17 (not counting shield)
WF Cleric without heavy armour proficiency -> AC 13 +3 (prof) +2 (dex) = 18 (not counting shield)

And that's assuming you do get a +1 armor at level 5, which is not that sure if you follow the guideline of the DMG or look the official campaigns like LMoP or ToB.

And for the records, about whether or not this is considered as armor, i did say i "personally consider" as being armor, not that it was RAW, because it makes sense "to me". It was a subjective opinion.

I can not answer......... is supported by the requirement for proficiency in order to equip. This may apply to barbarian and other similar features as well.

So Integrated plating counts as both Armor for the purpose of not being able to be used by a monk and retain their benefits, and not armor for the purpose of features that require armor like the defensive fighting style.

This is why i believe this rules needs better writing. And why it makes sense to me to consider that as wearing armor.

A WF with heavy plating is not actually wearing an armor, but his "skin" is as resilient as an heavy armor and more or less as bulky if we look at the art of the 3.5 WF.
It is weird to me that said WF can be as swift and agile as an unarmored human guy, while at the same time, cannot use fighting technique or magical power that rely on having a resilient metallic armor.
It may be RAW, but it doesn't look logical to me.

And if we want to justify this by the fluff, why not. I could understand that WF plating is very different of an armor and more integrated to the body. OK. But how do you justify fluff-wise the fact that WF can change their plating every day? What size is a heavy plating? Because most of the art dates back from 3.5 were normal WF had a +2 bonus to AC IIRC.

[Khrysaes]

...

This is why i believe this rules needs better writing. And why it makes sense to me to consider that as wearing armor.

A WF with heavy plating is not actually wearing an armor, but his "skin" is as resilient as an heavy armor and more or less as bulky if we look at the art of the 3.5 WF.
It is weird to me that said WF can be as swift and agile as an unarmored human guy, while at the same time, cannot use fighting technique or magical power that rely on having a resilient metallic armor.
It may be RAW, but it doesn't look logical to me.

And if we want to justify this by the fluff, why not. I could understand that WF plating is very different of an armor and more integrated to the body. OK. But how do you justify fluff-wise the fact that WF can change their plating every day? What size is a heavy plating? Because most of the art dates back from 3.5 were normal WF had a +2 bonus to AC IIRC.

To be fair, it is just my understanding of what JC wrote. I havent seen what he wrote, and if that is what he wrote it doesnt really matter because he has contradicted himself several times on several subjects, and I usually just ignore him. By RAW it works with monk or barbarian and heavy plating. I personally dont think it should, they should be limited to darkwood for monk and composite for barb, and the magic and effects like defensive style should work.

The one exception is darkwood. Darkwood counts as unarmored, and you add your Prof bonus ONLY if you are proficient in light armor. So this itself needs a separate ruling, is a monk NOT allowed to add prof? If you do add prof does defensive work? These would need to be established.

In 3.5 the armor type you had was decided at first level and NEVER changed. The feat that changed the initial composite plating (light armor i believe) to adamantine, mythril, or unarmored were limited to first level characters. And this makes sense to me mechanically and contextually to me. Warforged are built. Their body is formed so they can perform a specific function better. So while as players we design our warforged their intended function should be kept in mind. Each feat gave them a different armor bonus. Unarmored feat would be able to wear armor like a human I think.

The publication of the Eberron material to print is next month I believe. So we will have to see what changes and how. I personally agree with you that it does not make sense to be able to change your character's armor each day. I also agree with you that heavy plating would be as hard to move in as plate mail. Why should they be able to move as gracefully as an unarmored human that trained for years to do that?

[Rukelnikov]

Planescape. Spelljammer, I guess? Don't know much about that one. Warcraft (which was actually D&D setting in 3e).

FR is a mess. There are places that certainly are high magic, but it varies wildly. However, both average and maximum power level of its inhabitants is much higher than in Eberron.

Ok, yeah i always had the same impression regarding FR magic compared to Eb. Spelljammer can't talk about, never even read a single manual. Planescape though... Its... strange, I mean, the "average" power, as you call it, is definitely higher, since "commoners" aren't really that common most of the time, but that is from a personal power point of view, I haven't read that much, but don't remember empires comparable magic-wise to Aryvaandar or Netheril.

Funny that you mention WC, I knew it had a 3e version just never considered it as a "dnd setting", but since we are there, I assume Diablo would also be a pretty high magic setting then.

Anyway, this is pretty much completely OT, thx for the answer!

[Petrocorus]

To be fair, it is just my understanding of what JC wrote. I havent seen what he wrote, and if that is what he wrote it doesnt really matter because he has contradicted himself several times on several subjects, and I usually just ignore him.

I was not referring to his quote, i haven't read it. I also tend to take Sage Advice with a big grain of salt.

By RAW it works with monk or barbarian and heavy plating. I personally dont think it should, they should be limited to darkwood for monk and composite for barb, and the magic and effects like defensive style should work.

Exactly what i mean.

The one exception is darkwood. Darkwood counts as unarmored, and you add your Prof bonus ONLY if you are proficient in light armor. So this itself needs a separate ruling, is a monk NOT allowed to add prof? If you do add prof does defensive work? These would need to be established.

True

In 3.5 the armor t.......feat would be able to wear armor like a human I think.

3.5 was much more consistent and made more sense on this things. They had the base armor bonus of +2, same as leather armor, could be enchanted like an armor and the plating explicitly occupied the same space as armor. Unarmored WF could wear armors.

Now, in 5E, a feat would be too high a cost, and you normally don't have a feat at first level. But it would make sense for the WF to chose his plating at creation and never change without a lot of work with a skilled craftman.

The publication of the Eberron material to print is next month I believe. So we will have to see what changes and how. I personally agree with you that it does not make sense to be able to change your character's armor each day.

Yeah, i don't think this daily change is a big issue balance-wise, but it just seems weird. This is true for the integrated tool too.
People have pointed out the WF feels like they are transformers now.

I also agree with you that heavy plating would be as hard to move in as plate mail. Why should they be able to move as gracefully as an unarmored human that trained for years to do that?

Indeed.

[CorporateSlave]

...just a thought as someone who has played in a couple of campaigns in home-brew worlds which include Warforged (and in which integrated protection is treated just as the level of armor it implies), I've noticed that the debates about balance and scaling in this thread (and frankly on this forum in general fairly often) tend to do a pretty decent job of making "apples to apples" comparisons when looking at balance (i.e. AC granted by integrated protection vs normal armor, advantages and disadvantages of one or the other, etc).

However.

"Apples to apples" isn't necessarily a complete comparison if you're dealing with a fruit salad. In an RPG, race isn't necessarily just a collection of abilities and + stats when it comes to game time! Maybe Warforged have some great advantages, their resilience and integrated protection, but what about potential in game disadvantages? Sure they don't need food or sleep, but what if they are viewed with such suspicion that no local innkeeper will allow them on the premises? The party then has to choose between sleeping in the streets, or separating from each other. Maybe a wizard group wants to steal and reverse-engineer the "construct." There could be costs to being a Warforged that can bring some element of balance to the race even if their abilities seem at first to be OP or unbalanced when viewed in a white room comparison situation.

Frankly, I've always felt many of the "rare" races tend to get away with this a lot in some campaigns when used to optimize abilities and/or damage - dragon born, tiefling, etc. They get all the pluses in all the right places, and rarely or never suffer any consequences to "in game racism" that their very race descriptions state are a big deal! Anyway, just a thought.

[Khrysaes]

...just a thought as someone who has played in a couple of campaigns in home-brew worlds which include Warforged (and in which integrated protection is treated just as the level of armor it implies), I've noticed that the debates about balance and scaling in this thread (and frankly on this forum in general fairly often) tend to do a pretty decent job of making "apples to apples" comparisons when looking at balance (i.e. AC granted by integrated protection vs normal armor, advantages and disadvantages of one or the other, etc).

However.

"Apples to apples" isn't necessarily a complete comparison if you're dealing with a fruit salad. In an RPG, race isn't necessarily just a collection of abilities and + stats when it comes to game time! Maybe Warforged have some great advantages, their resilience and integrated protection, but what about potential in game disadvantages? Sure they don't need food or sleep, but what if they are viewed with such suspicion that no local innkeeper will allow them on the premises? The party then has to choose between sleeping in the streets, or separating from each other. Maybe a wizard group wants to steal and reverse-engineer the "construct." There could be costs to being a Warforged that can bring some element of balance to the race even if their abilities seem at first to be OP or unbalanced when viewed in a white room comparison situation.

Frankly, I've always felt many of the "rare" races tend to get away with this a lot in some campaigns when used to optimize abilities and/or damage - dragon born, tiefling, etc. They get all the pluses in all the right places, and rarely or never suffer any consequences to "in game racism" that their very race descriptions state are a big deal! Anyway, just a thought.

Except, as mentioned earlier, this was a discussion on the mechanical aspects of the race, not the fluff, which is all of what you just stated.

Hey, perhaps in someone elses world, warforged are common place and humans are the rarity.

My point in this post is that yes, in some worlds some races will have social advantages or disadvantages, however the cultures of the worlds are MUCH more subjective and should not be factored into mechanical balance.

[CorporateSlave]

Except, as mentioned earlier, this was a discussion on the mechanical aspects of the race, not the fluff, which is all of what you just stated.

Hey, perhaps in someone elses world, warforged are common place and humans are the rarity.

My point in this post is that yes, in some worlds some races will have social advantages or disadvantages, however the cultures of the worlds are MUCH more subjective and should not be factored into mechanical balance.

Indeed, the very title of the thread starts with the word "Optimization," which is why I chose the words "just a thought" rather than "here's proof I'm right."

Although frankly as a DM, my players leave the game world fluff implications of their optimization choices out of their consideration at their own peril...or to put it another way, in my campaigns optimization isn't necessarily just mechanical. I get that the game designers probably shouldn't factor any fluff into mechanical balance, but in an individual campaign, as long as it is made amply clear to the players in a Session 0 I don't see the issue.

[Tetrasodium]

Don't forget the setting it's released in. While it may have higher AC that unenchanted gear, the other party members will have +1/+2/+3 armour.

For a lower magic setting, like the default one, half the proficiency bonus, rounding down.

While they could, eberron is wide magic rather than high magic. At my table masterwork armor (among many other things) is no attune nonmagical & allows +1/3 proficiency bonus to ac, players have potion flasks that give 2hd+2, must of the table has picked up catrips from items or their background, & there are tons of single use trinkets with spells bound to them like the one charge feather tokens sold in sharn. Instead of ball bearings, my players activate a grease trinket or something. Being only level 3 right now they don't have any, but in previous campaigns they regularly found or bought trinkets with first to third level spells bound to them. Despite all of that, I almost never give boring +N equipment.

[Greywander]

So Integrated plating counts as both Armor for the purpose of not being able to be used by a monk and retain their benefits, and not armor for the purpose of features that require armor like the defensive fighting style.

This makes no sense. The exact wording of the Defense fighting style is, "While you are wearing armor..." while the wording of Martial Arts is, "While you aren't wearing armor." It's literally "If X" and "If not X", so it makes no sense that Integrated Protection could somehow fail to qualify for either one. The simplest solution is that Integrated Protection either does, or does not, count as wearing armor. If it does not count as wearing armor, then I don't benefit from the Defense fighting style, but I can also use Martial Arts/Unarmored Movement with heavy plating. If it does count as wearing armor, then I do benefit from the Defense fighting style, but can't use it with Martial Arts.

Honestly, if we're going to start making up arbitrary rules over what does and doesn't work with Integrated Protection, it actually makes more sense to me for them to get all the benefits of wearing armor (it provides the same level of protection) but with none of the penalties (because it's part of their own body). Thus, you could have e.g. a warforged monk who counts as unarmored but can simultaneously benefit from Heavy Armor Master and Defense style with heavy plating. As written, however, no special exceptions currently exist, so it really should either count or not count as armor. Pick one and be consistent.

Additionally, Wild Shape throws a wrench into this controversy

Yeah, I really don't know what I'd do with Wild Shape. I'd probably rule that your new form is not "physically capable of" using Integrated Protection. I might allow the warforged druid to turn into a warforged animal (i.e. an animal of a similar constructed nature), allowing them to benefit from all the warforged traits at the cost of obviously not being a natural animal.

[JackPhoenix]

If it does count as wearing armor, then I do benefit from the Defense fighting style, but can't use it with Martial Arts.

Glad to see you've used that wording. Integrated Protection explicitly say "You gain no benefit from wearing armor", so it could count as worn armor for any penalties without giving you any... well, benefits.

[Khrysaes]

This makes no sense. The exact wording of the Defense fighting style is, "While you are wearing armor..." while the wording of Martial Arts is, "While you aren't wearing armor." It's literally "If X" and "If not X", so it makes no sense that Integrated Protection could somehow fail to qualify for either one. The simplest solution is that Integrated Protection either does, or does not, count as wearing armor. If it does not count as wearing armor, then I don't benefit from the Defense fighting style, but I can also use Martial Arts/Unarmored Movement with heavy plating. If it does count as wearing armor, then I do benefit from the Defense fighting style, but can't use it with Martial Arts.

I did say that this understanding was based on heresay of the Jeremy Crawford tweet. What he says is not the wording in the book.

The wording in the books supports what you said. Integrated plating is a part of the body. Defense fighting style requires wearing armor, and monk martial arts says to not wear armor. This was the majority of my post that you quoted, seemingly one specific part, out of context, for the purpose of arguing, dismissing that the rest of the post before that agrees with your argument.

That being said, I agree that the table should rule if it does or does not. Which I think I said in my following post. It shouldn't be a nebulous neither. I think I also mentioned that Darkwood core throws a bit of confusion into it as to get the proficiency to AC bonus requires Light Armor Proficiency. Therefore, is it unarmored if you get the proficiency bonus or only if it isn't applied? Notably, monks are not proficient in light armor, therefore I am inclined to say that if you add the proficiency bonus because you are, then it is not unarmored.

However, as stated by JackPhoenix, Integrated Plating does say you gain no benefit from wearing armor AND that integrated plating is "your body" and therefore should not benefit from defense fighting style or forge cleric by RAW. Further supporting our agreed upon reading of the rules.

Honestly, if we're going to start making up arbitrary rules over what does and doesn't work with Integrated Protection, it actually makes more sense to me for them to get all the benefits of wearing armor (it provides the same level of protection) but with none of the penalties (because it's part of their own body). Thus, you could have e.g. a warforged monk who counts as unarmored but can simultaneously benefit from Heavy Armor Master and Defense style with heavy plating. As written, however, no special exceptions currently exist, so it really should either count or not count as armor. Pick one and be consistent.

A monk with defense fighting style, forge cleric, and martial arts would be too much. It should be one or the other, not both or neither.

Yeah, I really don't know what I'd do with Wild Shape. I'd probably rule that your new form is not "physically capable of" using Integrated Protection. I might allow the warforged druid to turn into a warforged animal (i.e. an animal of a similar constructed nature), allowing them to benefit from all the warforged traits at the cost of obviously not being a natural animal.

Transformers Robots in disguise. Maximals and Predecons.

[Greywander]

Glad to see you've used that wording. Integrated Protection explicitly say "You gain no benefit from wearing armor", so it could count as worn armor for any penalties without giving you any... well, benefits.

Huh, that... actually makes sense, in a weird sort of way. I mean, I don't agree with that interpretation, but I could see using that phrasing as justification for that position. My own interpretation is that it means you just don't get any benefit from putting on a suit of armor; it has no bearing on how your plating interacts with things like the Defense fighting style. When using the plating, you're not actually wearing armor, but it seems at the very least implied that you count as if you were wearing armor, due to the darkwood core being specifically labeled as "unarmored", while the composite and heavy plating are labeled as "armor".

I guess I just don't see the reason to make it so complicated. The simplest way of handling this is to say that composite and heavy plating count as "wearing armor" for any feature that is affected by such, while the darkwood core does not. The "you don't benefit from wearing armor" clause only refers to suits of armor, not your plating. This seems to me the most straightforward way of handling it.

Jeremy Crawford

I don't want to pick on him too hard, but he's made rulings that contradict RAW, and in some cases has later backtracked after making a post, sometimes more than once (see Shield Master bonus action shove). Sage Advice should be treated as just that: advice. And it seems more often than not I'm not inclined to take it. I'm sure he's doing his best, and that it can't be too easy for him. He probably has enough people yelling at him about how he's wrong on this, that, or the other rule.

This was the majority of my post that you quoted, seemingly one specific part, out of context, for the purpose of arguing, dismissing that the rest of the post before that agrees with your argument.

Ah, sorry if it seemed I was being argumentative or dismissive of the rest of your post. I know I have a tendency toward being verbose, so I try to trim quotes down to the most relevant parts to what I'm replying to so as to not take up so much space with my reply. I know you were mostly agreeing with what I was saying, I was just frustrated by the apparent ambiguity of that specific interpretation. It sounds like you are, too. I didn't even realize there was any kind of controversy around this topic, I just assumed that using composite or heavy plating counted as armored, period. Seems it isn't quite as straightforward as I thought.

That being said, I agree that the table should rule if it does or does not. Which I think I said in my following post. It shouldn't be a nebulous neither. I think I also mentioned that Darkwood core throws a bit of confusion into it as to get the proficiency to AC bonus requires Light Armor Proficiency. Therefore, is it unarmored if you get the proficiency bonus or only if it isn't applied? Notably, monks are not proficient in light armor, therefore I am inclined to say that if you add the proficiency bonus because you are, then it is not unarmored.

Yeah, if someone is interested in playing a warforged, they should talk to their DM to find out how their DM is going to handle this question. This isn't the kind of thing you want to find out in the middle of a session.

As for the darkwood core, the simplest answer is that it always counts as unarmored, even if you have light armor proficiency (as it is labeled as "unarmored" on the table). This makes it an interesting option for a low-WIS monk, though you'll probably have to multiclass to get the light armor proficiency (though if you're doing a low-WIS monk, it might be because you were already doing a multiclass build). The darkwood core essentially acts as a form of Unarmored Defense, though an especially strong one. This does mean, however, that DEX builds on classes that get fighting styles won't be able to benefit from the Defense style, even if composite or heavy plating would.

However, as stated by JackPhoenix, Integrated Plating does say you gain no benefit from wearing armor AND that integrated plating is "your body" and therefore should not benefit from defense fighting style or forge cleric by RAW. Further supporting our agreed upon reading of the rules.

It's possible this was the intention, but I just don't like this inconsistency. My feeling is that it should either count as armor, in which case you would benefit from things like the Defense style and Forge cleric bonus, or it doesn't count as armor, letting you monk it up with heavy plating. What I don't like is that it counts as armor for some things, but not others, and in such a way that is entirely negative to the player. The only apparent redeeming quality is using heavy plating on a barbarian.

A monk with defense fighting style, forge cleric, and martial arts would be too much. It should be one or the other, not both or neither.

Sounds like we're in agreement here. I do think it should be one or the other. The point I was trying to make was that between both or neither, the "both" option makes more sense to me than the "neither" option. It just seems like there's almost a kneejerk reaction to take away player options whenever there's a balance concern. Nerfs are almost never fun for players, except in the most egregious cases where even the players can agree that a nerf is needed.

I think one good way of evaluating if something is over/underpowered is to look and see if people are always or never picking it. Even if it gets taken a lot, as long as people still pick other options sometimes, it's not too strong. Even if it doesn't get taken as often, as long as people still pick it sometimes, it's not too weak. This doesn't mean a small tweak might not be appreciated, just don't go overboard.

Transformers Robots in disguise. Maximals and Predecons.

I've mentioned this on the forum before, but the envoy can choose any tool for their integrated tool. Vehicles are listed under the tool proficiencies. Transform and roll out.

Not sure how I'd actually implement that, though. Maybe they would need to actually get a vehicle, and could then integrate that vehicle during a rest. This would let them upgrade to better vehicles as they become available (size, tho'... some of those boats are a lot bigger than you are). Alternatively, just let them transform into a motorcycle or motorboat, depending on which vehicle proficiency they got.

[Khrysaes]

I don't want to pick on him too hard, but he's made rulings that contradict RAW, and in some cases has later backtracked after making a post, sometimes more than once (see Shield Master bonus action shove). Sage Advice should be treated as just that: advice. And it seems more often than not I'm not inclined to take it. I'm sure he's doing his best, and that it can't be too easy for him. He probably has enough people yelling at him about how he's wrong on this, that, or the other rule.

If you feel I am picking on him, that wasn't my intention. I am just rather dismissive of things he says.

Ah, sorry if it seemed I was being argumentative or dismissive of the rest of your post. I know I have a tendency toward being verbose, so I try to trim quotes down to the most relevant parts to what I'm replying to so as to not take up so much space with my reply. I know you were mostly agreeing with what I was saying, I was just frustrated by the apparent ambiguity of that specific interpretation. It sounds like you are, too. I didn't even realize there was any kind of controversy around this topic, I just assumed that using composite or heavy plating counted as armored, period. Seems it isn't quite as straightforward as I thought.

Ahh, I understand. It did seem argumentative, and I am sorry if my own response seemed harsh. I do understand snipping things though. That said, I think the controversy only comes from Jeremy Crawford.

It's possible this was the intention, but I just don't like this inconsistency. My feeling is that it should either count as armor, in which case you would benefit from things like the Defense style and Forge cleric bonus, or it doesn't count as armor, letting you monk it up with heavy plating. What I don't like is that it counts as armor for some things, but not others, and in such a way that is entirely negative to the player. The only apparent redeeming quality is using heavy plating on a barbarian.

Well, without asking for the intention and being dismissive of Jeremy Crawford, what we have is RAW. RAW to me doesn't seem controversial, and at least as I have read it and we seem to agree, it doesn't count as armor.
Warforged: "Your body... determine your armor class" "You gain no benefit from wearing armor"
Monk: "while... you aren’t wearing armor"
Barbarian: "if you aren’t wearing heavy armor"

Please note that while Warforged says "You gain no benefit from wearing armor" it doesn't say you can't wear armor.
Defensive style/forge cleric just says "while wearing [heavy] armor, you gain a +1 bonus AC."
These just boost AC while wearing armor, while you may get no benefit from the armor the wording as it is would mean that since these are class features, not armor, you could benefit from them. Note this applies to forge cleric 6th, not 1st, as 1st specifies that the armor becomes a +1 magic item, which you gain no benefit from.

I've mentioned this on the forum before, but the envoy can choose any tool for their integrated tool. Vehicles are listed under the tool proficiencies. Transform and roll out.

Not sure how I'd actually implement that, though. Maybe they would need to actually get a vehicle, and could then integrate that vehicle during a rest. This would let them upgrade to better vehicles as they become available (size, tho'... some of those boats are a lot bigger than you are). Alternatively, just let them transform into a motorcycle or motorboat, depending on which vehicle proficiency they got.

I had never thought of this, and that is hilarious. I could see a Warforged paladin turning into a cart and having their steed pull them.

[Tetrasodium]

Glad to see you've used that wording. Integrated Protection explicitly say "You gain no benefit from wearing armor", so it could count as worn armor for any penalties without giving you any... well, benefits.

"wearing armor" is a condition like, "encumbered", "in cover", etc not a "benefit". It's one hell of a stretch to think that your body being made from something counts as wearing something & is not supported by RAW. Not wearing armor is the default unless you are wearing armor.
Back in 3.5 it even said you could not wear armor. Having a body that is armor is not the same as wearing it. Sorry to say but you are still wrong.

[MaxWilson]

I don't want to pick on him too hard, but he's made rulings that contradict RAW, and in some cases has later backtracked after making a post, sometimes more than once (see Shield Master bonus action shove). Sage Advice should be treated as just that: advice. And it seems more often than not I'm not inclined to take it. I'm sure he's doing his best, and that it can't be too easy for him. He probably has enough people yelling at him about how he's wrong on this, that, or the other rule.

Note that Sage Advice and Crawford Tweets are not the same thing, anyway. There's a reason WotC has deemphasized Jeremy's Twitter account, and now tells you to think of those tweets as a "preview" of what might someday appear in Sage Advice, after they've given some actual thought to it. Twitter is a horrible, horrible medium for rules discussions/clarifications.

And I agree with you that even Sage Advice is just that: advice. Especially when Sage Advice conflicts with the Rules As Written, you should feel 100% free to ignore it and do your own thing.

[JackPhoenix]

"wearing armor" is a condition like, "encumbered", "in cover", etc not a "benefit". It's one hell of a stretch to think that your body being made from something counts as wearing something & is not supported by RAW. Not wearing armor is the default unless you are wearing armor.
Back in 3.5 it even said you could not wear armor. Having a body that is armor is not the same as wearing it. Sorry to say but you are still wrong.

Nobody said wearing armor is a benefit in itself. It's a hindrance. Other things (like Defense FS, Forge domain and other) give you benefits for wearing armor.

Composite and heavy plating counting as worn armor is not RAW, but only because Integrated Protection is badly written and it doesn't explain what it means. It definitely counts as worn armor by RAI.

Keith Baker and Mike Mearls agree on that, and they both claim Defense FS should work with it.... however, by RAW, it does not.

[Tetrasodium]

Nobody said wearing armor is a benefit in itself. It's a hindrance. Other things (like Defense FS, Forge domain and other) give you benefits for wearing armor.

Composite and heavy plating counting as worn armor is not RAW, but only because Integrated Protection is badly written and it doesn't explain what it means. It definitely counts as worn armor by RAI.

[/quote]
Indeed, you further demonstrate why your interpretation is screwy & finally admit it outright. They could have written "you are not considered to be wearing armor" for reduced ambiguity, but they did not because it probably seemed obvious that your body being armor is not the same as wearing it. This whole ridiculous back & forth is the direct result of JC making a rules call without consulting (or just ignoring) the rules & what they actually say. Going from the grey box at the top left of page2 on the aberrant sorc UA they learned their lesson. Also I can't help but notice that you flatly abandoned your "mechanical balance" strawman when challenged for specifics

Keith Baker and Mike Mearls agree on that, and they both claim Defense FS should work with it.... however, by RAW, it does not.

lots a things should work but don't, for example the grappled condition(phb290) & mounted combat without mounted combatant feat or something by RAW don't really fit well in some ways. Alternately you could say that on top of the RAW conflict between composite/heavy plating & defensive style there is also the fact that because warforge have a body that is armor rather than wearing some crafted suit of armor that the techniques and training that goes with defensive style simply can not apply.

[JackPhoenix]

Indeed, you further demonstrate why your interpretation is screwy & finally admit it outright.

It's not "my interpretation". The rule is unclear what the (armor) after composite and heavy plating mean, but as both Keith and MM noted, the intention is that the WF should be considered wearing armor when using either option. At the same time, the actual rule says that you gain no benefits from wearing armor.

They could have written "you are not considered to be wearing armor" for reduced ambiguity, but they did not because it probably seemed obvious that your body being armor is not the same as wearing it.

They could have. They did not, because that would be against what they intended. They SHOULD have written "you are considered wearing armor", which is the intent, but the RAW does not make that clear. Not that it would have sufficed, because there's still the "you gain no benefit from wearing armor", which ALSO requires clarification to make the whole feature work as the creators intended.

This whole ridiculous back & forth is the direct result of JC making a rules call without consulting (or just ignoring) the rules & what they actually say.

No, it is the result of the rules being badly written. Consulting the rules wouldn't help when part of the rules is missing.

Also I can't help but notice that you flatly abandoned your "mechanical balance" strawman when challenged for specifics

You want specifics? To match the AC a warforged gets just for being warforged, other characters need specific legendary magic items *and* feat/fighting style/ASI investment. Why is that a problem from balance perspective should be obvious.

lots a things should work but don't, for example the grappled condition(phb290) & mounted combat without mounted combatant feat or something by RAW don't really fit well in some ways.

There's a difference between not liking rule, and the rule not working in the first place.

[Khrysaes]

It's not "my interpretation". The rule is unclear what the (armor) after composite and heavy plating mean, but as both Keith and MM noted, the intention is that the WF should be considered wearing armor when using either option. At the same time, the actual rule says that "you gain no benefits from wearing armor."

So while i agree that the (unarmored) and (armor) after the plating are unclear. The rest of the wording for the feature is quite clear.

"Your body has built-in defensive layers, which determine your armor class."
Okay, the defensive layers of integrated protection count as your body, therefore NOT armor.

"You gain no benefit from wearing armor,"
You do not gain a benefit from wearing armor. But this aspect doesn't prevent you from doing so.

[Tetrasodium]

It's not "my interpretation". {scrubbed}

You want specifics? To match the AC a warforged gets just for being warforged, other characters need specific legendary magic items *and* feat/fighting style/ASI investment. Why is that a problem from balance perspective should be obvious.

It's good that you finally admit a "mechanical balance concern". Someone posted a build earlier in the thread that breaks past forty AC without needing to be warforged The AC of a warforge is not a "balance" problem. Every tuesday I GM for a table wuth a warforge monk & warforge barbarian as part of the groupusing integrated plating & have since wgte without issue.

You seem to be of the belief that no race can be better in one area than another race. What " specific legendary magic items *and* feat/fighting style/ASI investment" does a warforge need to equal variant human's free feat a variant human will always be ahead of warforge in the feat acquisition department. What about a tiefling, they get a free resistance & a cantrip without needing to use an attunement slot or class feature, a tiefling will always be ahead of warforge even if the warforge somehow gains a resistance from somewhere because the tiefling didn't need a class feature/attuned item/etc. How about a halfling?... what " specific legendary magic items *and* feat/fighting style/ASI investment" does a warforge need to acquire in order to get those free rerolls? So on and so forth. warforge shine i the AC department and can do things that non-warforge can not such as rage/use monk stuff without needing to rely on UAD just like all of those other races have things they can do without needing to rely on other sources beyond their race.

There's a difference between not liking rule, and the rule not working in the first place.

Indeed! "There's a difference between not liking rule, and the rule not working in the first place".... it works fine, you don't like how it works and have chosen to pretend that your houserule is the rule while defending your houserule as the rule here on the internet as if it were more than just a houserule.

[Petrocorus]

You seem to be of the belief that no race can be better in one area than another race. What " specific legendary magic items *and* feat/fighting style/ASI investment" does a warforge need to equal variant human's free feat a variant human will always be ahead of warforge in the feat acquisition department.

In this particular case, you also are using a specific to prove a general.
Everybody knows Vuman and their bonus feat are too good. Vuman have only this and a bonus skill, and a +2 total ability bonus and yet they're one of the best or the best race for almost any build. Because of the bonus feat.
It is not a good comparison.

What about a tiefling, they get a free resistance & a
cantrip without needing to use an attunement slot or class feature, a tiefling will always be ahead of warforge even if the warforge somehow gains a resistance from somewhere because the tiefling didn't need a class feature/attuned item/etc. How about a halfling?... what " specific legendary magic items *and* feat/fighting style/ASI investment" does a warforge need to acquire in order to get those free rerolls? So on and so forth. warforge shine i the AC department and can do things that non-warforge can not such as rage/use monk stuff without needing to rely on UAD just like all of those other races have things they can do without needing to rely on other sources beyond their race.

You're comparing an AC bonus with a fire resistance or a free reroll?
The fire resistance comes up once in a while, and even when it comes up, it's not breaking anything. It's a ribbon in many campaigns.
And the free reroll comes up once in every 20 rolls.

The WF's AC bonus comes up in every single round of every single fight.
And WF have a lot of other features.

If we look at the Envoy WF (because it's the best subrace for most build), in total, they get:
- a better AC than other races, for free, without a Strength requirement (aka drwarven speed). No other race has such a bonus to AC.
For a composite plating, it's basically the equivalent of Medium Armor Master in term of AC, so half a feat.
- Dwarven resilience
- air genasi unlimited breath-holding (sorta)
- elf's immunity to sleep
No eat and drink, that's a ribbon in most cases, but combined with the immunity to sleep, that's a free warlock invocation.
- immunity to diseases. Without exception for magical ones.
- ability to hear and see while long-resting.
- Integrated tool + specialized design that combined are almost as good as a feat (prodigy).
- +3 total ability bonus that can fit almost any build.

They do get a lot in addition of their AC bonus.

And the specific build you posted is just that, specific. For most build, they will have a better AC than their counterpart of other races, even more so in low-magic campaign.

[Tetrasodium]

In this particular case, you also are using a specific to prove a general.
Everybody knows Vuman and their bonus feat are too good. Vuman have only this and a bonus skill, and a +2 total ability bonus and yet they're one of the best or the best race for almost any build. Because of the bonus feat.
It is not a good comparison.


You're comparing an AC bonus with a fire resistance or a free reroll?
The fire resistance comes up once in a while, and even when it comes up, it's not breaking anything. It's a ribbon in many campaigns.
And the free reroll comes up once in every 20 rolls.

The WF's AC bonus comes up in every single round of every single fight.
And WF have a lot of other features.

If we look at the Envoy WF (because it's the best subrace for most build), in total, they get:
- a better AC than other races, for free, without a Strength requirement (aka drwarven speed). No other race has such a bonus to AC.
For a composite plating, it's basically the equivalent of Medium Armor Master in term of AC, so half a feat.
- Dwarven resilience
- air genasi unlimited breath-holding (sorta)
- elf's immunity to sleep
No eat and drink, that's a ribbon in most cases, but combined with the immunity to sleep, that's a free warlock invocation.
- immunity to diseases. Without exception for magical ones.
- ability to hear and see while long-resting.
- Integrated tool + specialized design that combined are almost as good as a feat (prodigy).
- +3 total ability bonus that can fit almost any build.

They do get a lot in addition of their AC bonus.

And the specific build you posted is just that, specific. For most build, they will have a better AC than their counterpart of other races, even more so in low-magic campaign.

That specific build is relevant because it completely demolishes any hope of pretending that warforge AC is a balance issue. Also don't pretend that PC's getting hit by fire damage is some unusual edge case given the umber of fire damage spells in the game. A vadalis human can sub monstrosities for beasts in any spell that involves beasts along with a whole bunch of other things, a warforge can not & gets different things. On the "so half a feat", high elves get a cantrip, weapon proficiencies (good ones), & other stuff so also easily "half a feat". You can pick & choose races to compare that make for better or worse comparisons for one argument or another; but the unquestionable fact remains that different races excel in different areas that other races can not hope to math without "specific legendary magic items *and* feat/fighting style/ASI investment." as jackphoenix put it. The mere fact that race A is better than race B in a given area is by design rather than a mechanical balance problem. Ad he put it "There's a difference between not liking rule, and the rule not working in the first place." the rule works fine as is.

[JackPhoenix]

It's good that you finally admit a "mechanical balance concern".

In case you've missed it, this was pointed out (and not just by me) ever since the WF was released.

Someone posted a build earlier in the thread that breaks past forty AC without needing to be warforged The AC of a warforge is not a "balance" problem. Every tuesday I GM for a table wuth a warforge monk & warforge barbarian as part of the groupusing integrated plating & have since wgte without issue.

There's a difference between theoretical optimization to achieve certain goal (whether that's highest possible AC, movement speed, DPR or whatever) and what you may see at actual table.

In addition, with some slight changes (using different feat and different legendary item) to the presented build, Warforged can achieve AC 51. While still using less resources (one less rare item, lower ability score requirement, no need for defense FS) just for the AC, meaning WF could have better AC and better offense.

What " specific legendary magic items *and* feat/fighting style/ASI investment" does a warforge need to equal variant human's free feat a variant human will always be ahead of warforge in the feat acquisition department.

None. 1 feat is equal to one ASI. You can get one ASI equivalent with one of the stat tomes. Which are very rare, not legendary. And (for a warforged with theoretically unlimited lifespan) re-usable.

What about a tiefling, they get a free resistance & a cantrip without needing to use an attunement slot or class feature, a tiefling will always be ahead of warforge even if the warforge somehow gains a resistance from somewhere because the tiefling didn't need a class feature/attuned item/etc.

You do realize warforged also have "free resistance" as a racial trait, right?

How about a halfling?... what " specific legendary magic items *and* feat/fighting style/ASI investment" does a warforge need to acquire in order to get those free rerolls?

Well, you've finally found something WF can't do. Congratulations. Now compare halfling racial traits beyond Lucky, and warforged racial traits beyond Integrated Protection. It's easy to see who's got the better deal.

Indeed! "There's a difference between not liking rule, and the rule not working in the first place".... it works fine, you don't like how it works and have chosen to pretend that your houserule is the rule while defending your houserule as the rule here on the internet as if it were more than just a houserule.

I haven't mentioned any houserule anywhere. And no, Integrated Protection does *not* work as intended by its creators' admittance.