Oh, I understand why they're overlooked in theorycrafting. It was more of a criticism of evaluating every available option solely through a long term theorycrafting lens.
D&D 5E Medium armor master: Too weak?
- Thread starter Horwath
- Start date
Oh, I understand why they're overlooked in theorycrafting. It was more of a criticism of evaluating every available option solely through a long term theorycrafting lens.
WarpedAcorn
First Post
My character is a Fighter 3/Cleric 1, and early on in the campaign we found Half-Plate +1 which I got (group is a Rogue, Warlock, Sorcerer, and Druid). We rolled for stats and although I rolled well, my stats allowed to have 16 Str, 15 Dex, and 15 Con. He's a Human Variant, so I took Shield Mastery since I was going to be the "Tank" of the group (and usually the healer too).
I really wanted to aim for a feat like Medium Armor Master because this will likely be the best Armor I can get since it maxes out my Dex bonus and the only thing that would beat it would be similarly enchanted Plate Armor. However, like the OP mentioned, the bonus is kind of weak. I feel the Dex bonus is not universally beneficial since most Fighters will want to min/max their Str and Dex based on whether they want to be Finesse Fighters or Brute Fighters.
Comparing this to the Heavy Armor Master, I don't feel that Medium Armor Master stacks up very well. Based on that, and the fact that there is no Light Armor Master, I feel the design intention is to say that Heavy Armor is supreme. I would rather each category of armor offer different options to provide incentive for diverse builds.
My quick and dirty opinion is just to add +1 Dex to the Feat's Benefits. The goal of the Feat is to make Medium Armor as comfortable and maneuverable as Light Armor (making Sneak viable and increasing AC due to Dex modifier), so I think adding in Dex makes the most sense.
I really wanted to aim for a feat like Medium Armor Master because this will likely be the best Armor I can get since it maxes out my Dex bonus and the only thing that would beat it would be similarly enchanted Plate Armor. However, like the OP mentioned, the bonus is kind of weak. I feel the Dex bonus is not universally beneficial since most Fighters will want to min/max their Str and Dex based on whether they want to be Finesse Fighters or Brute Fighters.
Comparing this to the Heavy Armor Master, I don't feel that Medium Armor Master stacks up very well. Based on that, and the fact that there is no Light Armor Master, I feel the design intention is to say that Heavy Armor is supreme. I would rather each category of armor offer different options to provide incentive for diverse builds.
My quick and dirty opinion is just to add +1 Dex to the Feat's Benefits. The goal of the Feat is to make Medium Armor as comfortable and maneuverable as Light Armor (making Sneak viable and increasing AC due to Dex modifier), so I think adding in Dex makes the most sense.
See, that's the kind of adjustment a DM should do. Maybe he gave you that armor because he wanted you in medium armor with the right AC. I agree getting Dex16 when taking MAM would be great and might help your DM too.
Xeviat
Dungeon Mistress, she/her
There are few builds where it can be useful, even Dex focused builds. A Ranger with a 20 Dex and no shield has a 17 AC in Studded Leather armor. If they wear Half Plate, they have a 17 AC and a stealth penalty, but if they take Medium Armor Master, they have an 18 AC. So it does only function as +1 AC for them, which they would have gained from Dual Wielder. Thus, it's not really worth it in this case, unless the player really, really, REALLY wants to stack AC.
Unless you're rolling for stats, I have a hard time imagining too many other characters who have medium armor pushing for a 16 Dex, where the choice is between 16 AC with studded (and +1 to hit and damage with dex attacks, and +1 Dex saves, and +1 dex checks), or 17 AC with half-plate and medium armor mastery.
It's worth half a feat at best. The "no stealth penalty" isn't a bonus when you are comparing the choice between studded leather and half-plate, or when comparing the choice between breastplate and half-plate. Going breastplate to half-plate, with a Dex of 16, the feat provides +2 AC. Having a Dex 16 is so marginal, though, that the feat needs a boost. +1 Dex would be fair, I think, without changing much. I'm not too worried about rogues pushing for AC with a shield and medium armor mastery as I think they give up way too much offense not going TWFing.
Unless you're rolling for stats, I have a hard time imagining too many other characters who have medium armor pushing for a 16 Dex, where the choice is between 16 AC with studded (and +1 to hit and damage with dex attacks, and +1 Dex saves, and +1 dex checks), or 17 AC with half-plate and medium armor mastery.
It's worth half a feat at best. The "no stealth penalty" isn't a bonus when you are comparing the choice between studded leather and half-plate, or when comparing the choice between breastplate and half-plate. Going breastplate to half-plate, with a Dex of 16, the feat provides +2 AC. Having a Dex 16 is so marginal, though, that the feat needs a boost. +1 Dex would be fair, I think, without changing much. I'm not too worried about rogues pushing for AC with a shield and medium armor mastery as I think they give up way too much offense not going TWFing.
