D&D 5E Medium Armor Fix

[schnee]

This doesn't really explain why people think it is bad. Is it because someone in light armour can have the same AC? I've used medium armour on my dwarf ranger, seemed to work fine. I think people are making an issue out of pretty much nothing.

It means Medium Armor Proficiency - the feat and/or the class feature - is worth nothing without some meta-gaming with ability scores.

And, in a game-ist sense, it makes medium armor proficiency penalize you for having a high ability score in the most useful ability in the game, without any bonus whatsoever and higher weight of armor, when a higher feat on the 'feat tree' shouldn't do that.

IMO It should be better by some margin. That's what this is trying to fix.

 

[Kryx]

Generally Fighters are considered to be the best-trained in matters of weapons and armour, because that is pretty much their definition.

Google results of Fighters: 0/10 of the top results are wearing plate, 1-2/10 of the secondary results are wearing plate (the sure one being on a horse), 3/11 of the next results are wearing plate.
4-5/31 (13-15%) of the Fighters wearing plate. The number is 50% here, see below

Google results of Paladins: 8/8 of the top results are wearing plate, 9/9 of the secondary results are wearing plate, 8/8 of the next results are wearing plate.
25/25 (100%) of the Paladins wearing plate.

These trends continue as you go further down the results.
RAW would have the vast majority of Fighters wearing plate (assuming they have the money, which is how most depictions of these characters represent)

The rules I proposed earlier would much more accurately represent the results. If a fighter wants plate armor they can either take the knight archetype or a feat (I suggest you don't use full sized feats to allow this level of customization, but that's a different topic). Fighters have more feats after all and this representation shows that plate is quite rare on a fighter.

 

[Satyrn]

Stream of consciousness:

I've also considered another approach, inspired by 4e: armor types based on the material . . .

. . . most fighter images are in chain or scale so I think restricting plate is flavorful . . .

For me, when I picture full plate wearing characters, it looks very much like the movie Excalibur - and indeed the original source material for that movie, La Mort D'Arthur - which is full of fully metalled up adventurers that are definitely not paladins.

You would be changing the flavor rather significantly, I think, if you restricted plate to paladins, even though I'm sure you'd have a way for fighter's to gain plate.

But wait. Maybe give plate prof to champions as a little boon to them over battlemasters. Eldritch knights wouldn't truly need it.

 

[Kryx]

For me, when I picture full plate wearing characters, it looks very much like the movie Excalibur - and indeed the original source material for that movie, La Mort D'Arthur - which is full of fully metalled up adventurers that are definitely not paladins.

You would be changing the flavor rather significantly, I think, if you restricted plate to paladins, even though I'm sure you'd have a way for fighter's to gain plate.

See the post above - it contains the response to this post as well.

 

[Satyrn]

See the post above - it contains the response to this post as well.

Aye. I noticed it after. You have a different flavour in mind.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Google results of Fighters: 0/10 of the top results are wearing plate, 1-2/10 of the secondary results are wearing plate (the sure one being on a horse), 3/11 of the next results are wearing plate.
4-5/31 (13-15%) of the Fighters wearing plate.

That's a little odd. When I clicked that link, six out of the first ten images appeared to be wearing plate or half-plate. Three were wearing scale, but two of those were depictions of the same character, and one did not appear to be wearing armour, (although if you're feeling generous, you might say they had hide.)

The rules I proposed earlier would much more accurately represent the results. If a fighter wants plate armor they can either take the knight archetype or a feat (I suggest you don't use full sized feats to allow this level of customization, but that's a different topic). Fighters have more feats after all and this representation shows that plate is quite rare on a fighter.

Do any of the other Fighter subclasses grant proficiency with plate-type armour from that table? Samurai? Champion?

Is the issue with Medium Armour that the measures in this thread are designed to "fix" the fact that some google searches of the words used to denote D&D classes do not appear to match the heaviest possible armour that that class has access to?

 

[Kryx]

On a third look there is definitely more plate than my original overview. Some results seem to have changed as well, but lets take a look as it is:

There are 28 fighters there, 2 of which are duplicate (1 on each side), so 26.
13/26 are not plate
13/26 are plate

So 50% on both sides. Definitely different than my original analysis. I would say that is still consistent with my choice of the base class not having plate. Perhaps more archetypes should have it.

Do any of the other Fighter subclasses grant proficiency with plate-type armour from that table? Samurai? Champion?

Thinking this through I'm actually considering removing parts of my Fighter to an arcane half caster (Eldritch Knight and Arcane Archer).

• Arcane Archer should not have plate
• Banneret/Purple Dragon Knight I'd argue it should not have plate. In 4e the warlord only got chain, not even scale.
• Battle Master I encorporated into the core Fighter, but I'd argue it should not have plate. In 4e the warlord only got chain, not even scale.
• Cavalier should have plate
• Champion I don't use, but it should have plate
• Eldritch Knight should not have plate
• Knight should have plate
• Monster Hunter should not have plate
• Samurai should not have plate (the armor they use is much closer to splint than plate - definitely not head to toe or even half plate)
• Scout should not have plate
• Sharpshooter should not have plate

So that's 3 that should have plate and 8 that shouldn't imo. Though I'd argue that Knight Replaces Cavalier and many of the "shouldn't" also shouldn't be a fighter: Arcane Archer (possibly), Eldritch Knight (possibly), Scout (See Ranger or Rogue's Scout), Sharpshooter (See Ranger or Rogue).
That'd leave 2 with plate (Champion, Knight) and 4 without (Banneret/Purple Dragon Knight, Battle Master, Monster Hunter, Samurai).

 

[Kobold Stew]

My problem with heavy amor proficiency isn't fighters, but clerics.

War clerics, i get. Heavy amor proficiency is fine.
But Tempest? Okay, maybe.
Nature and Life? No; just no.

 

[Kryx]

War clerics, i get. Heavy amor proficiency is fine.
But Tempest? Okay, maybe.
Nature and Light? No; just no.

Nature, agreed. Light doesn't have it, do you mean Life? Life could go either way imo.

Part of the problem here is the lack of granularity in "Heavy armor". Imo the system I suggest above allows clerics to have better variance here.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Sorry -yes Life. (thinko).