Super Simple Armor

[mrpopstar]

The more I thought about it, the more I could see that class proficiency and the role of Dexterity in your base armor class contributed to medium armor already favoring the strong over the dextrous. There wasn't a need to cap light and force Str onto medium.

Boiled straight down, it's pretty damn simple.

(I think I may have been won by the idea of Str 11 for medium. It makes sense.)

 

[Ganymede81]

I LOVE THIS

Although, the paradigm does exist in terms of class proficiencies already (in a way-ish).

EDIT: Does having only two armors differentiate things enough? What would that look like in terms of numbers?

Presumably, you'd still have light, medium, and heavy armor and they'd provide the benefits/restrictions you've already detailed in your original post.

Simple or martial proficiency would result in a difference in armor class. Consider your original proposal to be the benefits of martial armor proficiency, while simple proficiency would result in one fewer pip of armor class across the board. If you have no armor proficiency, armor could either provide no benefit at all (purely aesthetic) or would come with a steep penalty as it currently does.

You could do the same with weapons. A long sword in the hands of someone with simple weapon proficiency would do 1d6 damage, while it would do 1d8 damage in the hands of someone with martial weapon proficiency. That way, choice of weapon is a purely aesthetic choice because your proficiency, rather than your weapon, determines damage (differentiation would come from whether you chose weapons that required one hand or two hands).

 

[mrpopstar]

Presumably, you'd still have light, medium, and heavy armor and they'd provide the benefits/restrictions you've already detailed in your original post.

Simple or martial proficiency would result in a difference in armor class. Consider your original proposal to be the benefits of martial armor proficiency, while simple proficiency would result in one fewer pip of armor class across the board. If you have no armor proficiency, armor could either provide no benefit at all (purely aesthetic) or would come with a steep penalty as it currently does.

Interesting. Let me chew on that.

You could do the same with weapons. A long sword in the hands of someone with simple weapon proficiency would do 1d6 damage, while it would do 1d8 damage in the hands of someone with martial weapon proficiency. That way, choice of weapon is a purely aesthetic choice because your proficiency, rather than your weapon, determines damage (differentiation would come from whether you chose weapons that required one hand or two hands).

The super simple weapons proposal in my head includes this! #greatminds

 

[mrpopstar]

Edited opening post with my current thinking...

Light armor: shifted base number and lifted Dex modifier max.

Medium armor: lowered Str requirement to 11.

Design goal: updated to reflect focus on straight reduction of armor table.​

EDIT: Should I not update the opening post when my thinking shifts? What's the best way to do that as the conversation unfolds? Update there and post within the thread?

 

[mrpopstar]

It's interesting that AC 16 is represented across the board in the standard Armor table.

What if the super simple armor table offered everyone an opportunity to get AC 16 before donning a shield?

EDIT: Plate armor jumps out again as the thing that's lost in that scenario.

 

[jaelis]

Food for thought...

[table="width: 650"]
[tr]
[td]Armor[/td]
[td]Armor Class (AC)[/td]
[td]Strength[/td]
[td]Stealth[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Light Armor[/td]
[td]11 + Dex modifier[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Medium Armor[/td]
[td]15 + Dex modifier (max 2)[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Heavy Armor[/td]
[td]18[/td]
[td]Str 15[/td]
[td]Disadvantage[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Shield[/td]
[td]+2[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]​

The more I thought about it, the more I could see that class proficiency and the role of Dexterity in your base armor class contributed to medium armor already favoring the strong over the dextrous. There wasn't a need to cap light and force Str onto medium.

Boiled straight down, it's pretty damn simple.

(I think I may have been won by the idea of Str 11 for medium. It makes sense.)

I like 12+Dex (max 4) better for light armor. (a) it is more symmetric and (b), you've already lowered the max light armor AC by one, now you've lowered it by one regardless of dex. Unless you think light armored characters generally need lower AC for some balance reason.

 

[mrpopstar]

I don't hate something like...

[table="width: 650"]
[tr]
[td]Armor[/td]
[td]Armor Class (AC)[/td]
[td]Strength[/td]
[td]Stealth[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Light Armor[/td]
[td]11 + Dex modifier[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[td]Disadvantage[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Light Masterwork Armor[/td]
[td]12 + Dex modifier[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Medium Armor[/td]
[td]14 + Dex modifier (max 2)[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[td]Disadvantage[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Medium Masterwork Armor[/td]
[td]15 + Dex modifier (max 2)[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Heavy Armor[/td]
[td]16[/td]
[td]Str 13[/td]
[td]Disadvantage[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Heavy Masterwork Armor[/td]
[td]18[/td]
[td]Str 15[/td]
[td]Disadvantage[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Shield[/td]
[td]+2[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]​

 

[mrpopstar]

I like 12+Dex (max 4) better for light armor. (a) it is more symmetric and (b), you've already lowered the max light armor AC by one, now you've lowered it by one regardless of dex. Unless you think light armored characters generally need lower AC for some balance reason.

Adding Str 11 to medium armor regained that symmetry (why is it so pleasing to our human eyes!?). I shifted numbers to drop the (max 4) just because it's the same outcome while sticking to what's standard. And I didn't realize I harbored a disdain for high armor Dex-types, but my bias is definitely showing! LOL

 

[mrpopstar]

Building out so everyone was at 16 would look like...

[table="width: 650"]
[tr]
[td]Armor[/td]
[td]Armor Class (AC)[/td]
[td]Strength[/td]
[td]Stealth[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Light Armor[/td]
[td]11 + Dex modifier[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Medium Armor[/td]
[td]14 + Dex modifier (max 2)[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[td]?[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Heavy Armor[/td]
[td]16[/td]
[td]Str 13[/td]
[td]Disadvantage[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Shield[/td]
[td]+2[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]​

 

[mrpopstar]

[MENTION=60210]jaelis[/MENTION] this gives back to the rogue (because I don't truly harbor Dex any ill will), captures everything a boil down needs to capture for me, takes most everything offered for consideration in the thread into account, and gets buy-in from [MENTION=6775031]Saelorn[/MENTION], so, I'm feeling pretty good about it.



I'll update the first post to reflect my thinking.

Most burning question: Should things be listed as "light masterwork armor" or "masterwork light armor" ?

[table="width: 650"]
[tr]
[td]Armor[/td]
[td]Armor Class (AC)[/td]
[td]Strength[/td]
[td]Stealth[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Light Armor[/td]
[td]11 + Dex modifier[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[td]Disadvantage[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Light Masterwork Armor[/td]
[td]12 + Dex modifier[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Medium Armor[/td]
[td]14 + Dex modifier (max 2)[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[td]Disadvantage[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Medium Masterwork Armor[/td]
[td]15 + Dex modifier (max 2)[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Heavy Armor[/td]
[td]16[/td]
[td]Str 13[/td]
[td]Disadvantage[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Heavy Masterwork Armor[/td]
[td]18[/td]
[td]Str 15[/td]
[td]Disadvantage[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Shield[/td]
[td]+2[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[td]--[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]​