Armor & Coins - please, No.

[The Little Raven]

This is an... odd rule. I might even say bizarre.

No more bizarre than getting smarter, more perceptive, and more likable as you move into the age categories that, in real life, are usually defined by senility and reduction of cognitive functions.

Good thing D&D has never been about realism, eh?

 

[delericho]

No more bizarre than getting smarter, more perceptive, and more likable as you move into the age categories that, in real life, are usually defined by senility and reduction of cognitive functions.

True. In any 'ideal' version of the game, the system should probably not bother detailing aging effects (since it affects everyone at different rates, and could certainly affect different races at different rates, and since it's almost certainly unlikely to matter in 99.99% of campaigns), or should certainly not bother with 'balanced' aging effects.

However, I'm not convinced that one can effectively defend bad rule X by pointing out that rule Y is just as bad. To me, that suggests what one should really do is fix rule Y instead.

 

[Zaruthustran]

I like that there are only two armor categories in 4E. It's either heavy, or it isn't. Makes sense to me.

I never liked how 3E really only really had three armors, total: mithril chain shirt, mithril breastplate, and mithril full plate. Everyone pretty much just used the best armor for each category. Sure, Druids wore Hide, but that's the exception.

These new rules at least give some variety.

The armor-donning time is a bit of a surprise. I understand that the goal is to not allow swapping armor in the middle of combat. I guess it's true that D&D considers armor to be more than just a breastplate, jerkin, or hauberk: it also includes boots, greaves, cuisses, tassets, spaulders, helm, gloves, bracers, elbow and knee cops, and gorget.

Truth be told, it takes a lot of time to get into all that gear. I know; I've done it. *Can* you speed-don your armor? Sure, I guess it could be done. Do the Players Handbook rules need to address it, and bog down with rules for "hasty" armor, or half-armor, and so on? Nah.

I think the armor don rule, like the rule for cover and a few other rules, is best understood in the context of the complete ruleset. By which I mean the DMG, which we haven't seen. Mike Mearls has mentioned on a few occassions that the DMG is actually useful this time 'round, and gives specific guidance on adjudicating these edge cases, like if a player wants his character to take a couple rounds to throw on just his hauberk and helm and rush out to the fight without all his other protective gear.

In other words, I get the impression that the 4E PHB contains all the rules, but not all the exceptions. And that the 4E DMG empowers DMs more, and maybe advocates and more clearly communicates the utility of conditional modifiers.

 

[pukunui]

My turn:

1) Medium armor category. Meh. Don't really care that it's gone. It was a distinction that wasn't all that important to me. Besides, things like the breastplate and other "medium" armors will probably make an appearance in the Tome of Treasures, considering that it's meant to be more like the Arms and Equipment Guide, with lots of mundane stuff as well as new magic items, than the Magic Item Compendium.

2) Funny names for armors. Meh again. Yeah, some of them are stupid and repetitive but they're just names. Names can be changed. Besides, we know adamantine is still in the game because there's now an adamantine dragon. I wouldn't be surprised if mithril is still there as well.

3) Adding Int to AC. I'm fine with this. I think it has to do with being intelligent enough to anticipate an opponent's actions and thus be better able to avoid them. Don't forget the 3.5 swashbuckler got this.

4) Masterwork armor. This one kind of makes me go "huh?!" but I think I understand the concept so I can live with it.

5) Astral diamonds. Whatever. Probably won't come into play for some time. They're meant to be for the "high rollers" of the planes, which the PCs won't encounter until they're practically high rollers themselves. I can also see some potential in it ... let's say a diamond somehow found its way onto the material plane. Anyone who knows what it is would be very interested in it, so if the PCs got their hands on it, they'd end up having to fight to hang on to it (especially if they let it be known that they had it -- it would be like going around waving wads of $100 bills in the air or something). Better yet, the PCs don't know what it is, but other people do, and they really want it, so the PCs keep getting attacked but they don't know why ...

6) Armor donning time. As others have pointed out, it says "at least" 5 minutes. I have no issue with this. It's only ever come up in my 3.5 game once, when the party's fighter spent an entire combat putting on his armor (at one point he even used his magic boots to teleport onto the pointed roof of the farmhouse they were in but failed his balance check and fell off, all the while still trying to put his armor on). I don't think he had much fun that night; however, the other players take great pleasure in making sure he never forgets it ...

 

[Falling Icicle]

I like Astral Diamonds. It makes sense to me that extraplanar beings would use something other than coins for currency. It also makes high level wealth more portable, reducing the need to have bags of holding just to carry your 10 tons of coins around.

I like that they removed medium armor. It was always the bastard child category. The only time I ever saw medium armor in play was mithral, which was treated as light. Everyone either wore light/mithral armor, or dove in the deep end and went for full plate.

I don't really like the 3 "tiers" of armor. It feels very diablo2-ish to me. Now that I'm level 11, I need star something armor? Ridiculous. I suspect they did this because of the enormous advantage light armor has over heavy armor, being able to apply ability scores. Since ability scores scale at 1/2 levels, the AC of light armor will exceed heavy armor very quickly. I think a much easier solution would have been to apply +1/2 level to AC when wearing heavy armor as well.

 

[Wolfspider]

3) Adding Int to AC. I'm fine with this. I think it has to do with being intelligent enough to anticipate an opponent's actions and thus be better able to avoid them. Don't forget the 3.5 swashbuckler got this.

What's 3rd edition got to do with it?

The 3.5 swashbuckler didn't get an INT bonus to AC, by the way. It was an INT bonus to damage.

 

[pukunui]

What's 3rd edition got to do with it?

I had been attempting to point out that it was not a new thing, but as you say, it wasn't a bonus to AC but rather to damage. I'm sure there's something in 3.5 that grants an INT bonus to AC, but I will happily accept being proven wrong on this account.

I still say that an INT bonus to AC can work just fine on the basis that it's all about anticipating people's actions. I think the ability to anticipate something is more an intellectual thing than an instinctual one. Again, feel free to prove me wrong.

 

[Kordeth]

I had been attempting to point out that it was not a new thing, but as you say, it wasn't a bonus to AC but rather to damage. I'm sure there's something in 3.5 that grants an INT bonus to AC, but I will happily accept being proven wrong on this account.

I still say that an INT bonus to AC can work just fine on the basis that it's all about anticipating people's actions. I think the ability to anticipate something is more an intellectual thing than an instinctual one. Again, feel free to prove me wrong.

It was the pre-swashbuckler swashbuckler, the duelist PrC, who got his Int bonus added to AC.

 

[Wolfspider]

It was the pre-swashbuckler swashbuckler, the duelist PrC, who got his Int bonus added to AC.

Ahh, I knew that the mechanic sounded familiar, but when I double checked CW I didn't see any such listing under swashbuckler. The duelist! Now I know where it comes from.

In any case, I don't have any problems with INT adding to AC. I can see how a quick mind might help one anticipate blows and such.

 

[Zaruthustran]

I had been attempting to point out that it was not a new thing, but as you say, it wasn't a bonus to AC but rather to damage. I'm sure there's something in 3.5 that grants an INT bonus to AC, but I will happily accept being proven wrong on this account.

Bladesinger, Duelist, and a bunch of others. See this thread: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=320889

As for 4E and Int-to-AC: I can see Dex and Int, together, form "reflexes". You take the highest bonus from or the other score, and that's what your particular character relies on more. You're either quick-witted and sharp-minded, or you're agile and nimble. Either way, you've got good reflexes and you're hard to hit.

Works for me!