D&D 5E Armour check penalties

[Vicar In A Tutu]

Hey, just a quick question: Are there armour check penalties in 5E? Can a man in full plate swim just as easily as a man that's not wearing armour?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Hey, just a quick question: Are there armour check penalties in 5E? Can a man in full plate swim just as easily as a man that's not wearing armour?

If he's proficient in Heavy Armour, the only penalty from Plate is Disadvantage on Stealth checks, which, really, seems pretty reasonable to me, given 5E's general lack of detailed penalties for encumbrance and the like (a 30lb pack should be a bigger impediment to swimming than plate, which people historically swam in - albeit with minor floation aids). Could make a good optional module.

 

[Prism]

It seems that there is also a speed penalty if the PC's strength isn't high enough but no specific penalty to skills except stealth. I also think that total encumbrance would be a good thing to focus on rather than armour type

 

[Vicar In A Tutu]

It seems that there is also a speed penalty if the PC's strength isn't high enough but no specific penalty to skills except stealth. I also think that total encumbrance would be a good thing to focus on rather than armour type

Our group never bothers to check encumbrance, so we have always just used armour check penalty and handwaved most of the other stuff. It's extremely easy to house rule that heavy armour gives disadvantage on swimming checks, so I don't really have a problem with that.

 

[mach1.9pants]

I hand wave swim checks in plate armour too, you just drown

http://vimeo.com/13634653

 

[Ruzak]

Encumbrance doesn't really tell the whole story either. Thirty pounds of coins makes it tough to swim, but thirty pounds of wood makes it easier, at least to stay afloat.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Encumbrance doesn't really tell the whole story either. Thirty pounds of coins makes it tough to swim, but thirty pounds of wood makes it easier, at least to stay afloat.

Sure, but which of those is more likely to happen in D&D? Plus if that wood is in your backpack, unless you take it off and use it as a flotation aid (and assuming it doesn't get waterlogged), is going to help you to be face-down in the water, which isn't great.

 

[Ruzak]

Sure, but which of those is more likely to happen in D&D? Plus if that wood is in your backpack, unless you take it off and use it as a flotation aid (and assuming it doesn't get waterlogged), is going to help you to be face-down in the water, which isn't great.

My point is just that we have to approximate at some level. I agree encumbrance is a reasonable measure, but still not perfect.

 

[delericho]

Encumbrance doesn't really tell the whole story either. Thirty pounds of coins makes it tough to swim, but thirty pounds of wood makes it easier, at least to stay afloat.

True. Encumbrance really shouldn't be measured in pounds, not least because a lot of D&D weights bear almost no resemblance to real-world equivalents. In some ways, the old-school measurement in "coins" was a better one, at which point encumbrance is no longer "how much are you carrying", but rather "how much does what you're carrying encumber you?"

As for armour check penalties... while I appreciate them as a "nod to realism", they tend to be rather fiddly, and the rules were never all that consistent. So a more informal approach where the DM just applies disadvantage when he considers it appropriate is probably better anyway.

 

[Nebulous]

Realistically (which D&D is not) wearing any heavy armor and carrying pounds and pounds of metal would be a drowning death sentence. At the very least, countless adventurers would have stripped out of their gear and left it at the bottom of countless subterranean lakes