D&D General Huge Equipment Lists: Good, Bad, or Ugly?

[Oofta]

I'm not arguing that it is possible to sleep in armour in a crisis. Humans can do lots of things in a crisis. And getting bad sleep is better than getting no sleep. But you're the one making the extraordinary, counter-logical claim, so I challenge you to find me even one reputable source that documents people sleeping in armour as a matter of routine, which is what we are talking about here.

I mean, I played lacrosse. I have nodded off with my equipment on. But would I go to bed like that? Would I be able to get proper rest, night after night, if I was, say, tramping through the wild or a dungeon and surviving for days? This is a silly idea, and modern sports equipment is a lot lighter and more comfortable than medieval armours.

I provided quotes above. Feel free to find a reference that contradicts those quotes. I'll still ignore it in my games for balance reasons, but I've never found any first hand accounts saying that you can't.

If someone is in a place they expect to be safe, odds are they aren't going to wear their armor. But beds weren't commonly used until the 18th century so we shouldn't assume that our first world expectations of a comfy night's sleep are at all necessary.

 

[DrunkonDuty]

I'm in the "depends on the style of the game" group.

Genre has a lot to do with it. But it's not the only consideration.

Sometimes you want the gear porn. Other times, simple is best.

e.g.: players in my current star wars game spend a lot of time going through gear lists, making checks to modify the tech, etc. And I get it. What's the point of a hi-tech setting if you don't get to play with the hi-tech?

Me, I find all the time spent on this minutiae takes away from the fast paced action that I associate with Star Wars and would be happier without all the gear.

 

[James Gasik]

It sounds more like you've had crappy DMs, and their crappiness has led you to build up resentment against realists, when there's nothing realistic about the situations you're describing.

Just because a DM says they're being realistic, it could just mean they're a jerk. In fact, that's common, so I get it. But please cool off a bit. We're not the DM(s) you unfortunately had to deal with, so while you have my sympathies, that ends at using us as strawman proxies for this joker. It's disingenuous and closing your mind.

Normal sleep is weird now? This conversation is going places.

Like James and his DM, you sound more sour that martials are screwed over in D&D overall, and taking out your frustrations on realists. This is a strange hill to die on, because in normal situations (you're wide awake and armored) winning this quibble is worth nothing. It won't fix the fundamental problems with martials.

The other thing is that this complaint is oddly myopic, as if "realism" is only used for this one thing as a cudgel to "get martialy". We're talking about sleep, but what about cold weather? RAW, you could be soaked through in summer clothes in a hurricane-force blizzard but you're perfectly fine if it's one degree above 0 F (-17 C). That's. . . more than a little ridiculous. Well, if we were to "real it up", almost all armor has thick padding or is thick padding, so I'd give you cold weather resistance for free. Wizard robes, not so much. There isn't an anti-martial conspiracy here being run under a false flag of "realism".*

*We are at 150,000 members and growing. We are Legion. My faithful followers, we will soon be ready for Phase Theta: Armor Hit Locations!!

I think you're the one who should cool off a bit. But hey, if I'm going to be accused of being hyperbolic ranting, here's some hyperbolic ranting for you!

I don't have resentment against realists- I often make posts where I fairly point out that if it's fun for you and your group, play how you wish.

I'm not part of some secret cabal of gamists who want to take all realism out of the game, lol, but often, I see these arguments for realism that go out of their way to penalize players for no good reason other than "it makes sense".

Chalking it up to "a few bad DM's" seems more disingenuous to me. Often, I see people cry out "realism" while also decrying the idea of making the game "easier" for PC's at the same time. Case in point, this post from Micah Sweet, where they state that they'd much prefer to side with what makes logical sense to them, than something that would favor the PC's.

Realism is something that is used to justify a lot of rulings. Many perfectly cromulent game rules are discarded simply because the DM doesn't feel that they are believable. Which is fine, if we're talking about destroying the narrative. But you also see these statements from people who don't really know what they are talking about.

Like plate armor being slow and cumbersome, when you can find videos on youtube of people performing a great many physical feats wearing plate armor. So yeah, these things happen.

What bothers me, however, is that in this fantasy game, there are those individuals who demand strict realism in every facet of the game that doesn't jump up and scream "I'm magical!", no matter how much handwavium you point out the game and it's settings are made of.

Worse, is how curiously myopic some of these things are, where certain things have to be realistic, but other things they shrug off. But what really bothers me about all of this is that the characters who most suffer from this are the ones who aren't magical or supernatural.

The Fighter and the Rogue being classic examples. Other classes can perform amazing feats with no other explanation than "because magic", but a guy wearing a suit of plate armor should suffer incredible penalties because "that's realistic" whether it is or isn't.

And when you bring these points up, the usual response is "well, then, nerf magic", lol. We can accept that non-magical humans in the game can survive being bit by a dragon the size of a barn, cause meaningful damage to creatures many times larger and denser than we are, often with scales or natural armor as sturdy as steel, run a marathon when reduced to 1 hit point without penalty, will themselves to get better without spending even hit dice (Second Wind), bend time and space (Action Surge), will themselves to succeed when they should fail (Stroke of Luck), dodge explosions that can fill a room without any sort of cover (Evasion)- but jumping 20' into the air, being stabilized (not revived mind you, just stabilized) with a Medicine check, and daring to be ready for an attack even while sleeping- these things are beyond the pale unless you have the magic feather/coupon!

Hyperbole aside, obviously, I'm not saying to dispense with all reality like D&D is Toon, but so much of the game is based upon acknowledging that D&D isn't a simulation, and part of the game's central premise has people doing unbelievable things, that planting a flag on a hill and saying "this thing in particular cannot be allowed, while I accept all these other things" is more than a bit confusing.

And it's not like I don't get it, as I said, I've had moments where I cannot believe things are happening, but really, as long as it's not detrimental to the game being fun or not, why does it matter so much? Does strict adherence to the things we believe stretch the boundaries of logic make for a better experience when i'm fighting next to a guy who gets so mad that he takes half damage from being dunked in molten lava?

Or should we just rule that Bear Totem Rage has a huge list of things it doesn't provide resistance to, because it's not realistic or "nobody could survive that", regardless of what the rules say?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think you're the one who should cool off a bit. But hey, if I'm going to be accused of being hyperbolic ranting, here's some hyperbolic ranting for you!

I don't have resentment against realists- I often make posts where I fairly point out that if it's fun for you and your group, play how you wish.

I'm not part of some secret cabal of gamists who want to take all realism out of the game, lol, but often, I see these arguments for realism that go out of their way to penalize players for no good reason other than "it makes sense".

Chalking it up to "a few bad DM's" seems more disingenuous to me. Often, I see people cry out "realism" while also decrying the idea of making the game "easier" for PC's at the same time. Case in point, this post from Micah Sweet, where they state that they'd much prefer to side with what makes logical sense to them, than something that would favor the PC's.

Realism is something that is used to justify a lot of rulings. Many perfectly cromulent game rules are discarded simply because the DM doesn't feel that they are believable. Which is fine, if we're talking about destroying the narrative. But you also see these statements from people who don't really know what they are talking about.

Like plate armor being slow and cumbersome, when you can find videos on youtube of people performing a great many physical feats wearing plate armor. So yeah, these things happen.

What bothers me, however, is that in this fantasy game, there are those individuals who demand strict realism in every facet of the game that doesn't jump up and scream "I'm magical!", no matter how much handwavium you point out the game and it's settings are made of.

Worse, is how curiously myopic some of these things are, where certain things have to be realistic, but other things they shrug off. But what really bothers me about all of this is that the characters who most suffer from this are the ones who aren't magical or supernatural.

The Fighter and the Rogue being classic examples. Other classes can perform amazing feats with no other explanation than "because magic", but a guy wearing a suit of plate armor should suffer incredible penalties because "that's realistic" whether it is or isn't.

And when you bring these points up, the usual response is "well, then, nerf magic", lol. We can accept that non-magical humans in the game can survive being bit by a dragon the size of a barn, cause meaningful damage to creatures many times larger and denser than we are, often with scales or natural armor as sturdy as steel, run a marathon when reduced to 1 hit point without penalty, will themselves to get better without spending even hit dice (Second Wind), bend time and space (Action Surge), will themselves to succeed when they should fail (Stroke of Luck), dodge explosions that can fill a room without any sort of cover (Evasion)- but jumping 20' into the air, being stabilized (not revived mind you, just stabilized) with a Medicine check, and daring to be ready for an attack even while sleeping- these things are beyond the pale unless you have the magic feather/coupon!

Hyperbole aside, obviously, I'm not saying to dispense with all reality like D&D is Toon, but so much of the game is based upon acknowledging that D&D isn't a simulation, and part of the game's central premise has people doing unbelievable things, that planting a flag on a hill and saying "this thing in particular cannot be allowed, while I accept all these other things" is more than a bit confusing.

And it's not like I don't get it, as I said, I've had moments where I cannot believe things are happening, but really, as long as it's not detrimental to the game being fun or not, why does it matter so much? Does strict adherence to the things we believe stretch the boundaries of logic make for a better experience when i'm fighting next to a guy who gets so mad that he takes half damage from being dunked in molten lava?

Or should we just rule that Bear Totem Rage has a huge list of things it doesn't provide resistance to, because it's not realistic or "nobody could survive that", regardless of what the rules say?

For the record, show me something that both realistic and easier on the players and I'm all for it. Make magic harder (but not necessarily less powerful) and I'm all for it. Put me in as the player of a non-magical PC in a game following these preferences and I'm all for it; I'm no hypocrite.

Also, on record as not a fan of any of those class features you pointed out, like evasion, that "we can accept". Any acceptance of those things on my part is an uncomfortable compromise.

 

[Oofta]

Have you slept in custom made plate armor?

@Mannahnin it was a simple question. Have you slept in plate armor? Have you ever even worn plate armor that was well fitted to you? Because I don't necessarily trust anonymous postings on the web, but I have yet to find a single posting from someone that has actual experience with the armor saying they could not.

We have two groups. One saying it's not realistic, the other saying that it's not a nonissue. When the former have never worn the armor in question and the latter have, I believe the latter.

 

[Mannahnin]

@Mannahnin it was a simple question. Have you slept in plate armor? Have you ever even worn plate armor that was well fitted to you? Because I don't necessarily trust anonymous postings on the web, but I have yet to find a single posting from someone that has actual experience with the armor saying they could not.

We have two groups. One saying it's not realistic, the other saying that it's not a nonissue. When the former have never worn the armor in question and the latter have, I believe the latter.

You simply don't know what you're talking about. Custom-fitted plate armor is custom-fitted for optimal protection and mobility while STANDING. Stiff metal plates so designed DO NOT settle comfortably for a person to lie down in. With good padding underneath and well-crafted articulation they will certainly give you some padding if you're knocked down and allow you to lie prone without stiffness for short periods, but they are absolutely not designed for sleeping in.

The people you're quoting out of context, and misrepresenting the words of, almost certainly also don't have custom-fitted plate armor. They're wearing the same kind of stuff that I have worn, which I can assert with reasonable confidence because I'm quite familiar with the SCA, Armored Combat Leagues, LARP, and the steel fighting hobbyist practice which preceded the ACLs. The stuff people wear in real life is expensive enough without being tailor-made.

Right now you're engaging in a dialogue with a person who's worn and fought and slept in armor, and you're choosing to ignore what I tell you in favor of misinterpreted quotes from google.

Please feel free to have a dialogue with anyone else who's worn and fought and slept in armor and ask them the same sorts of questions. They'll tell you the same. That it's a thing you can do in a pinch if you're exhausted or drunk enough, but it's not good sleep and nothing anyone would willingly choose to do if they had an alternative.

 

[Oofta]

You simply don't know what you're talking about. Custom-fitted plate armor is custom-fitted for optimal protection and mobility while STANDING. Stiff metal plates so designed DO NOT settle comfortably for a person to lie down in. With good padding underneath and well-crafted articulation they will certainly give you some padding if you're knocked down and allow you to lie prone without stiffness for short periods, but they are absolutely not designed for sleeping in.

The people you're quoting out of context, and misrepresenting the words of, almost certainly also don't have custom-fitted plate armor. They're wearing the same kind of stuff that I have worn, which I can assert with reasonable confidence because I'm quite familiar with the SCA, Armored Combat Leagues, LARP, and the steel fighting hobbyist practice which preceded the ACLs. The stuff people wear in real life is expensive enough without being tailor-made.

Right now you're engaging in a dialogue with a person who's worn and fought and slept in armor, and you're choosing to ignore what I tell you in favor of misinterpreted quotes from google.

Please feel free to have a dialogue with anyone else who's worn and fought and slept in armor and ask them the same sorts of questions. They'll tell you the same. That it's a thing you can do in a pinch if you're exhausted or drunk enough, but it's not good sleep and nothing anyone would willingly choose to do if they had an alternative.

The posters I quoted were responding to this same issue and claimed to have done it. Yours is the only account that says it's not possible, which is different from not comfortable. Thing is I've slept plenty of times when I wasn't comfortable yet still got adequate sleep, you get used to it. Admittedly, it helped that I was younger. As always the first night back sleeping in a bed was wonderful, just like that first real meal when I got back. But I wasn't exhausted and I didn't starve.

In any case if the PCs are in a known dangerous area they can sleep in whatever armor, or not, they choose in my games. Because it's a game that is not overly concerned about reality and people that wear heavy armor are already penalized for a minor benefit.

If I ever play in a game where this is a restriction, I'd simply choose a build where it doesn't matter. It's just one more nail in the coffin for people that don't want a high dex character.

 

[Mannahnin]

The posters I quoted were responding to this same issue and claimed to have done it. Yours is the only account that says it's not possible, which is different from not comfortable.

If you're just going to continue to misrepresent the plain black and white words on the page, there's no point continuing this discussion about real world armor.

 

[Mannahnin]

In any case if the PCs are in a known dangerous area they can sleep in whatever armor, or not, they choose in my games. Because it's a game that is not overly concerned about reality and people that wear heavy armor are already penalized for a minor benefit.

If I ever play in a game where this is a restriction, I'd simply choose a build where it doesn't matter. It's just one more nail in the coffin for people that don't want a high dex character.

Totally understandable!

Obviously in any well-designed game incorporating a realistic penalty for sleeping in armor, you'd have to make the armor more relatively protective and valuable than D&D does, in trying to serve the unarmored swashbuckler fantasy. The game would need better tradeoffs and balance between those options. Or it just wouldn't support the unarmored swashbuckler fantasy the same way.

 

[Oofta]

If you're just going to continue to misrepresent the plain black and white words on the page, there's no point continuing this discussion about real world armor.

I'm just clarifying what I quoted and why. You are saying something different from other posts that I've found. I did not understand that you had actual experience. My bad.