D&D (2024) It goes to show you can't please everbody!

[MGibster]

In Cyberpunk 2020, published in 1991, there were a myriad of brand name firearms you could purchase. Your character might buy a cheap piece of junk pistol like the Dai Lung Cybermag 15 or spend a few more eddies for a Sternmeyer Type 35 which was more reliable. In Cyberpunk Red, you just pick the pistol type (medium, heavy, or very heavy) and decide whether it's poor, standard, or of excellent quality. The book gives you some brand names to associate with each quality level, but it's not the same. It's not as fun.

On the flip side, you tended to see PCs selecte the same weapons. They weren't getting a POS Dai Lung they were purchasing a reliable Sternmeyer instead. And D&D is kind of like that, there are all sorts of weapons and armor you don't see players picking all that often for a variety of reasons. They'll typically pick the ones that give them the most bang for the buck.

 

[Bill Zebub]

In Cyberpunk 2020, published in 1991, there were a myriad of brand name firearms you could purchase. Your character might buy a cheap piece of junk pistol like the Dai Lung Cybermag 15 or spend a few more eddies for a Sternmeyer Type 35 which was more reliable. In Cyberpunk Red, you just pick the pistol type (medium, heavy, or very heavy) and decide whether it's poor, standard, or of excellent quality. The book gives you some brand names to associate with each quality level, but it's not the same. It's not as fun.

On the flip side, you tended to see PCs selecte the same weapons. They weren't getting a POS Dai Lung they were purchasing a reliable Sternmeyer instead. And D&D is kind of like that, there are all sorts of weapons and armor you don't see players picking all that often for a variety of reasons. They'll typically pick the ones that give them the most bang for the buck.

The problem with D&D armor is that there’s no meaningful trade-offs (possible sorta exception is disadvantage on stealth). Better armor is better, and you wear the best armor that you both can afford and have proficiency in. There’s no real decision.

 

[MGibster]

The problem with D&D armor is that there’s no meaningful trade-offs (possible sorta exception is disadvantage on stealth). Better armor is better, and you wear the best armor that you both can afford and have proficiency in. There’s no real decision.

I was all set on agreeing this was a problem, but then I thought to myself, "Is it really?" If we're going to define best amor as that which provides the superior protection, you're right, there really isn't much of a reason for a character not to take what is objectively the best armor they can both afford and use. In some games, you can't just walk around in heavy armor for no good reason. Or at least it's not socially acceptable. In D&D, the default assumption is that the PCs are wearing their armor when traveling, going to the library, or cracking open a few cold ones at the pub. Honestly, this is just one of the many D&Disms I've come to accept over the years. And if it's not the case in your game, great, but it seems to me that this would tend to favor classes that don't rely on armor for protection.

Is it a problem? Eh, it certainly makes choosing armor unintersting. Getting to the point where I could afford plate armor was a pretty big deal for me in 1st and 2nd edition, but other than that, I don't know if I ever really cared that much about making interesting decisions about armor. But then maybe I'd be more interested if it mattered?

 

[Mistwell]

I still wish some armors gave resistance to piercing damage, others to acid damage, others to fire damage, others could be taken off or put on in two rounds, others gave advantage on intimidation checks, etc.. There's more adders that could be used for different armors.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I was all set on agreeing this was a problem, but then I thought to myself, "Is it really?" If we're going to define best amor as that which provides the superior protection, you're right, there really isn't much of a reason for a character not to take what is objectively the best armor they can both afford and use. In some games, you can't just walk around in heavy armor for no good reason. Or at least it's not socially acceptable. In D&D, the default assumption is that the PCs are wearing their armor when traveling, going to the library, or cracking open a few cold ones at the pub. Honestly, this is just one of the many D&Disms I've come to accept over the years. And if it's not the case in your game, great, but it seems to me that this would tend to favor classes that don't rely on armor for protection.

Is it a problem? Eh, it certainly makes choosing armor unintersting. Getting to the point where I could afford plate armor was a pretty big deal for me in 1st and 2nd edition, but other than that, I don't know if I ever really cared that much about making interesting decisions about armor. But then maybe I'd be more interested if it mattered?

Or just have a LOT more adversaries with Heat Metal.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I still wish some armors gave resistance to piercing damage, others to acid damage, others to fire damage, others could be taken off or put on in two rounds, others gave advantage on intimidation checks, etc.. There's more adders that could be used for different armors.

If resistance would be more granular, that'd be awesome. Or maybe go with Damage Reduction instead:

Hide Armor: Medium, AC 13+ Dex (max 2), DR: Cold 3, Acid 3. Disadvantage on Stealth.

Full plate: Heavy, AC 18, DR: 3 Slashing. Disadvantage on Stealth, Advantage on test against being forcibly moved.

 

[DEFCON 1]

What I am learning on this forum is that there is no point, however obvious, that folks won't debate.

Yes there is.

 

[mellored]

I think it could be interesting to have the heavier armors give special THP (called them armor points, to avoid be able to have both) at the start of battle, recovering at the end of the encounter if you have Mending or the relevant Tool proficiency. So its not an always on damage mitigation, but having a thick cumbersome plate on your back helps you stand against your foes a little longer than a lightly armored rogue of the same AC.

You could even base those number of Armor Points on proficiency bonus, something like 3 AP per prof. bonus for chainmail, for example.

Final Fantasy Tactics did this, but it increased max HP. Which would be easier to keep track of than armor points.

Padded: 11+Dex, increase your max HP by twice your level.

I could see it for monks and barbarians as well.
Unarmed defense: when not wearing armor, add your Wis/Con * level to your maximum hit points.

 

[Nefermandias]

This is a pretty offensive thing to say to all the 3PP designers on this forum and elsewhere. Sure, choose what you want to buy, but tearing down 3PPs isn't a good look.

His point is, we shouldn't have to rely on 3pp to have something that was advertised as part of the official books. In this case, true modularity and solid options to customize your gaming experience.

There's also the fact that some groups will never accept the inclusion of 3pp or homebrew in their campaigns and only sticks to official releases.

 

[Morrus]

His point is, we shouldn't have to rely on 3pp to have something that was advertised as part of the official books. In this case, true modularity and solid options to customize your gaming experience.

There's also the fact that some groups will never accept the inclusion of 3pp or homebrew in their campaigns and only sticks to official releases.

Yes, I understood him. But thanks.