D&D 5E Armor idea would like some feedback was inspired by Nerdarchy video on armor that was posted on YT recently. " D&D Equipment: Armor Sucks! Let's Fix I

Nightbeat84

Explorer
As the title suggested was thinking on the lines of armor damage absorption with armor having hp of some amount before the adventure needs to go get it repaired. This would apply only to medium and heavy armor to make armor wearing players get a benefit for doing so since thematically they aren't really dodging.
With any magic armor they would get a bonus to damage absorption which could be a 1d4 per attack or just a flat amount?? I haven't gotten too much further than that.

Comments and feedback welcome good or bad hit me with your thoughts.

This concept of course would not be for everyone and that is fine it was just an idea in my head.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I use a flat Damage reduction number based on the type of armour. Keeps rolling to a minimum. Has worked well. Even have consumable type armour that soaks up a single hit when the player chooses to use it. Shields can be used to negate a critical hit, but if they do, they are shattered. Also have helmets, gauntlets and greaves, each providing more DR.
 

overgeeked

B/X Known World
I like how Pirate Borg handles armor.

Armor reduces incoming damage by a variable amount based on tier. Heavy is -1d6, medium is -1d4, and light is -1d2. A crit reduces the protection, but not the penalties (slower move, check penalties, etc). Armor reduced to beyond light is destroyed. Armor can be repaired in town for a price.

I’m a big fan of splintered shields. Sacrifice your shield to negate a crit or hit depending on the version.
 
Last edited:

ECMO3

Hero
Not a fan for 5E. Get the Heavy Armor Master feat if you want damage reduction.

AC already gives damage reduction through avoiding hits I think this just makes for a lot of uneccessary math. Also if my plate is reducing damage, then logically a Dragon's scales should too, and then all of a sudden we are back to 3E where a lot of characters simply can't damage someone with attacks.

I think a better way to "fix" armor is just allow full dexterity bonus to AC regardless of armor type. It is kind of illogical to limit dexterity bonus with armor anyway.
 

Riley

Legend
I think a better way to "fix" armor is just allow full dexterity bonus to AC regardless of armor type. It is kind of illogical to limit dexterity bonus with armor anyway.
My 1e elf fighter with field plate armor, 18 dex, +1 shield, and +1 ring of protection (AC: -5 at 3rd level!) heartily endorses this reform.
 
Last edited:


Nightbeat84

Explorer
Not a fan for 5E. Get the Heavy Armor Master feat if you want damage reduction.

AC already gives damage reduction through avoiding hits I think this just makes for a lot of uneccessary math. Also if my plate is reducing damage, then logically a Dragon's scales should too, and then all of a sudden we are back to 3E where a lot of characters simply can't damage someone with attacks.

I think a better way to "fix" armor is just allow full dexterity bonus to AC regardless of armor type. It is kind of illogical to limit dexterity bonus with armor anyway.
Never played 3e but you do have a point of dragon scale and other enemy NPC's who are wearing armor but I would be more inclined to let the players have that benefit not so much myself but I suppose that would look funny.

As for you idea of a fix to allow full dexterity is flawed in that the idea that full plate is restrictive since it is heavy and that there are joints that restrict your movement. Having a character who can free move as if it wasn't even there is more illogical. Have you ever seen 2 armor knights based of actucal facts on heavy armor fight it is not graceful at all and when someone falls on the ground they do not get up.

That however is my opinion you can remove dex restriction if you like.
 



ECMO3

Hero
Never played 3e but you do have a point of dragon scale and other enemy NPC's who are wearing armor but I would be more inclined to let the players have that benefit not so much myself but I suppose that would look funny.

As for you idea of a fix to allow full dexterity is flawed in that the idea that full plate is restrictive since it is heavy and that there are joints that restrict your movement. Having a character who can free move as if it wasn't even there is more illogical. Have you ever seen 2 armor knights based of actucal facts on heavy armor fight it is not graceful at all and when someone falls on the ground they do not get up.

That however is my opinion you can remove dex restriction if you like.

You can find videos of guys doing cartwheels in plate armor.

I think holding a pike, longbow or a heavy crossbow is going to restrict your movement a lot more than wearing a suit of plate will. I think most shields will restrict your movement more as well (although not the really small ones). While I get the arguement for disallowing dexterity with a bulky suit of armor, it is not really logical if we are allowing full dex bonus while those large weapons or a shield.
 
Last edited:

Andvari

Adventurer
I describe the effects of armor narratively. Taking hit point damage while wearing armor is typically something along the lines of the blow striking your armor and you feeling the impact through it. Once HP goes to about one third, hits start finding weaknesses in the armor and drawing blood.

I agree Dex logically should benefit you while in armor. Even if you are heaver, dodging isn't the only way to use speed and skill to avoid attacks. You'd also be better at parrying, blocking or angling yourself. You also benefited from Dex in older systems while wearing armor. But changing it is a problem when the game is balanced around armor not benefiting from it.
 

Cruentus

Adventurer
Plate armor actually allows for quite a bit of movement and agility. Not anywhere near as much as no armor, though.

if I were to allow full Dex in 5e for armor, I’d then remove it from the Init calculation and remove Finesse for medium to heavy armors.

I don’t use DR, but allow shields to be sundered on any hit, and helmets to absorb criticals (nat 20) and be destroyed. Though I’m not playing 5e.

I tried to build a DR system for 5e, but found damage scales too easily and too quickly to make it worthwhile, on both sides.
 

Tales and Chronicles

Jewel of the North, formerly know as vincegetorix
I've had the idea of making all attacks against a Save:
Dex for weapons that ''pierce'' armors, so you need to dodge the blow (crossbows, warpick, daggers etc)
Str for weapons that wound through impact (axe, hammers, large weapons etc)

Some creatures and features could change that, of course.

Then you armor would give you Armor Reduction.

That does mean that most classes would need to invest a lot more in defense, so no more rushing to get that 20 in a stat while the rest is at 8, you'll need to have a better balance.
 

Cruentus

Adventurer
I've had the idea of making all attacks against a Save:
Dex for weapons that ''pierce'' armors, so you need to dodge the blow (crossbows, warpick, daggers etc)
Str for weapons that wound through impact (axe, hammers, large weapons etc)

Some creatures and features could change that, of course.

Then you armor would give you Armor Reduction.

That does mean that most classes would need to invest a lot more in defense, so no more rushing to get that 20 in a stat while the rest is at 8, you'll need to have a better balance.
One I saw, I think it was a 3e or d20 RPG of ASoIaF or GoT, and it had opposed d20 rolls as its combat mechanism. Attacker d20+combat bonuses; Defender d20 + defensive bonuses. Whoever had the higher total struck the opponent. Also included a DR mechanism rather than "AC", per se. I've found that interesting and am hoping to try out some fights to see how it feels. Making it so any encounter offers the chance to be hit introduces a lot of variables into whether or not to engage in combat. But thats also probably too gritty.

Unfortunately for 5e, when I've tried to replace mechanisms, like DR for AC, or others, it ends up breaking other stuff in unexpected places, so I was looking at a lot of rewriting and house ruling to fix downstream impacts. Some I could foresee, and some I couldn't. I don't find 5e to be very hackable, even though overall I find I like the design and it is 'simple' enough, though complex in execution.
 

Tales and Chronicles

Jewel of the North, formerly know as vincegetorix
One I saw, I think it was a 3e or d20 RPG of ASoIaF or GoT, and it had opposed d20 rolls as its combat mechanism. Attacker d20+combat bonuses; Defender d20 + defensive bonuses. Whoever had the higher total struck the opponent. Also included a DR mechanism rather than "AC", per se. I've found that interesting and am hoping to try out some fights to see how it feels. Making it so any encounter offers the chance to be hit introduces a lot of variables into whether or not to engage in combat. But thats also probably too gritty.

Unfortunately for 5e, when I've tried to replace mechanisms, like DR for AC, or others, it ends up breaking other stuff in unexpected places, so I was looking at a lot of rewriting and house ruling to fix downstream impacts. Some I could foresee, and some I couldn't. I don't find 5e to be very hackable, even though overall I find I like the design and it is 'simple' enough, though complex in execution.
Yeah, I know that feel.

For my next campaign I wish to go ''players always roll'' as it was presented in an old UA, but having to switch math on the fly for every creature is tedious, even if the math arent hard or anything.
 

CreamCloud0

One day, I hope to actually play DnD.
i kinda like the idea of medium and heavy armours being viewed more as separate proficiencies progression paths rather than medium directly upgrading into heavy, like have medium armour with higher AC values due to protection+dex bonus maneuverability meaning you dodge damage but heavy armour offering slightly lower ACs but damage reduction representing how it's more designed to absorb hits than evade them outright.

it's just offering choices, like how medium armour you have the choice of higher AC or no disadvantage on stealth checks
 

As the title suggested was thinking on the lines of armor damage absorption with armor having hp of some amount before the adventure needs to go get it repaired. This would apply only to medium and heavy armor to make armor wearing players get a benefit for doing so since thematically they aren't really dodging.
With any magic armor they would get a bonus to damage absorption which could be a 1d4 per attack or just a flat amount?? I haven't gotten too much further than that.

Comments and feedback welcome good or bad hit me with your thoughts.

This concept of course would not be for everyone and that is fine it was just an idea in my head.

Field plate in AD&D used to work this way. Basically provided DR that transferred over to the armor.
 

Quickleaf

Legend
As the title suggested was thinking on the lines of armor damage absorption with armor having hp of some amount before the adventure needs to go get it repaired. This would apply only to medium and heavy armor to make armor wearing players get a benefit for doing so since thematically they aren't really dodging.
With any magic armor they would get a bonus to damage absorption which could be a 1d4 per attack or just a flat amount?? I haven't gotten too much further than that.

Comments and feedback welcome good or bad hit me with your thoughts.

This concept of course would not be for everyone and that is fine it was just an idea in my head.
I usually see armor-as-soak systems in OSR type systems, and there's a reason for that. OSR systems tend to involve fewer attack exchanges each round of combat than 5e & fewer character abilities / conditions to track.

In 5e, this house rule would increase the time it takes to run combats because...

(a) the player or GM needs to perform another micro-maths calculation (in OSR that's not usually a big deal because you don't have character taking multiple attacks in a round typically, whereas in 5e that's par for the course, so you have MORE micro-maths)...

(b) the player now needs to track the armor's HP/state separately (it's another thing to track), and...

(c) magic armor involves rolling more dice and more micro-maths.

I don't know how much it would increase handling time (maybe for your rules-savvy group with only 1 medium/heavy armor wearing PC and monsters/npcs don't wear medium/heavy armor it's not much), but there would be some increase. So the question for you as the GM implementing the house rule (and your group) is whether the changes delivered by this house rule are worth that increased handling time for you?
 

Nightbeat84

Explorer
I usually see armor-as-soak systems in OSR type systems, and there's a reason for that. OSR systems tend to involve fewer attack exchanges each round of combat than 5e & fewer character abilities / conditions to track.

In 5e, this house rule would increase the time it takes to run combats because...

(a) the player or GM needs to perform another micro-maths calculation (in OSR that's not usually a big deal because you don't have character taking multiple attacks in a round typically, whereas in 5e that's par for the course, so you have MORE micro-maths)...

(b) the player now needs to track the armor's HP/state separately (it's another thing to track), and...

(c) magic armor involves rolling more dice and more micro-maths.

I don't know how much it would increase handling time (maybe for your rules-savvy group with only 1 medium/heavy armor wearing PC and monsters/npcs don't wear medium/heavy armor it's not much), but there would be some increase. So the question for you as the GM implementing the house rule (and your group) is whether the changes delivered by this house rule are worth that increased handling time for you?
As someone who is relativly new to D&D and TTRPG in general I did not know that about OSR games thank you for that information.
as for the micro math that is a concern and would in general slow the game down which combat is something that can take a good chunk of time as is.

I have though about HP or durability of armor and perhaps that is a bit much it was more of balance idea and something to sink gold into since in 5e gold is kinda useless but I have kinda fix that problem by giving out less and making mundane items more valuable and adding in additional options for mundane items.

As someone did point out there is a feat in 5e "Heavy armor master" that does a flat 3 damage reduction which I think is not worth a feat but I could slap it onto medium and heavy armor? It is a small amount but over time it does end up helping a lot also would be easy enough to calculate?

The idea of rolling a d4 is because players and myself just like to roll dice lol but perhaps a flat amount is faster ?
 

Nightbeat84

Explorer
i kinda like the idea of medium and heavy armours being viewed more as separate proficiencies progression paths rather than medium directly upgrading into heavy, like have medium armour with higher AC values due to protection+dex bonus maneuverability meaning you dodge damage but heavy armour offering slightly lower ACs but damage reduction representing how it's more designed to absorb hits than evade them outright.

it's just offering choices, like how medium armour you have the choice of higher AC or no disadvantage on stealth checks
That would be an interesting idea medium and heavy having different affects, armor and shields seem to me pretty dull but perhaps I am thinking to hard about the problem??
 

Epic Threats

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top