D&D 5E Basic 5E: Weapons and Armor as style choice...

[P1NBACK]

I take it you haven't read many of the stories then.

I was just reading some. And, Conan wore armor just as any warrior would. When he didn't, it was because it was his earlier stories when he was broke or in his later stories because he was taken captive.

Have you read the Scarlet Citadel? Conan is a king. He's taken captive and loses his armor. Sure enough, he shows up in armor later... Hmmm.
Amalrus cried out in unbelief.

"I see Trocero and his captain Prospero--but who rides between them?"

"Ishtar preserve us!" shrieked Strabonus, paling. "It is King Conan!"

"You are mad!" squalled Tsotha, starting convulsively. "Conan has been in Satha's belly for days!" He stopped short, glaring wildly at the host which was dropping down, file by file, into the plain. He could not mistake the giant figure in black, gilt-worked armor on the great black stallion, riding beneath the billowing silken folds of the great banner. A scream of feline fury burst from Tsotha's lips, flecking his beard with foam. For the first time in his life, Strabonus saw the wizard completely upset, and shrank from the sight.

"Here is sorcery!" screamed Tsotha, clawing madly at his beard. "How could he have escaped and reached his kingdom in time to return with an army so quickly? This is the work of Pelias, curse him! I feel his hand in this! May I be cursed for not killing him when I had the power!"

The kings gaped at the mention of a man they believed ten years dead, and panic, emanating from the leaders, shook the host. All recognized the rider on the black stallion. Tsotha felt the superstitious dread of his men, and fury made a hellish mask of his face.


A few chapters later, Howard writes about how heavier armor is superior...


They were far outnumbered, and the Shemitish bow had the longer range, but in accuracy the Bossonians were equal to their foes, and they balanced sheer skill in archery by superiority in morale, and in excellency of armor. Within good range they loosed, and the Shemites went down by whole ranks. The blue-bearded warriors in their light mail shirts could not endure punishment as could the heavier-armored Bossonians. They broke, throwing away their bows, and their flight disordered the ranks of the Kothian spearmen behind them.


So, we're talking about replicating "genre vs. physics" and you cite Conan as an example where armor is meaningless in terms of survival because of "genre", yet here in this Conan story, Howard gives specific examples of better armor indicating a fighting unit's value.



And, Conan, well, he doesn't show up to the battle naked. No. He's wearing armor. Why? Because he's a king and he can afford it. And, of course heavier armor is better protection in a battle. And, the only reason you'd go into one wearing only a loin cloth is because you had to.


Want to emulate genre? Take away the PCs' stuff (capture them, steal from them, have stuff break, etc). Let their 14th level Fighters get out of situations with naught but a loin cloth and a rusty nail. That's genre emulation (and something later editions of D&D screwed up by making armor a "must have" because of the scaling of the math...).



But, making armor meaningless is not emulating anything... Neither physics or genre. It just doesn't make sense. Period.

 

[Mattachine]

This example supports my position, too: heavy armor is for warfare and otherwise planned battles and exhibitions.

When Conan is on an adventure, he tends to wear something like leather, or no armor (only clothing), or furs (when in the Arctic).

 

[P1NBACK]

This example supports my position, too: heavy armor is for warfare and otherwise planned battles and exhibitions.

When Conan is on an adventure, he tends to wear something like leather, or no armor (only clothing), or furs (when in the Arctic).

I agree. It's the same reason U.S. Soldiers don't wear EOD suits out on patrol. The EOD suit has a higher armor class, but visibility, fatigue and your ability to move is hindered.

But, to try and make armor meaningless altogether by throwing away physics (or reality, or plausibility, or verisimilitude, or whatever...) is kind of ... not really how the genre's fiction works.

 

[Gryph]

I liked that as D&D morphed from 1E to 3E to 4E the difference in weapon choices became more meaningful and distinct while still remaining relatively balanced.

At the simplest version of the game, yes -- weapon and armor should just be a flavor and visual choice without mechanical advantage or disadvantage (e.g. all fighters do 1d10 damage, all rangers do 1d8, all rogues and clerics do 1d6, wizards do 1d4 etc. regardless of weapon). As you add complexity, then the weapons choices should become mechanically distinct.

See, this I just don't get. One of the most justified criticisms of 4e, IMO, was the level of diconnect from fiction in its mechanics.

Having base damage based on class irregardless of equipment choices (or defenses) strikes as me as more of the same overly abstracted game system that will turn players off of the system.

I absolutely do not want to explain to a new player or my younger children why a fighter with a knife does the same damage as a fighter with a greatsword. It will not make sense to them.

 

[Gryph]

I think additional factors to weapons (such as hammers and daggers being useful against full-plate, but most other stuff isn't as good) are a good idea. Weapon speed might also return in some form.

Regarding the above post: I like encumbrance being a factor, but I don't think massive armor penalties are good. That is, let the weight of the armor be important, not just the fact that you're wearing it.

A man in plate-armor can do cart-wheels (believe me, I've seen it) but can't climb or jump too high nor swim due to its weight.

I think the best way to model heavy armor effects is through a long term encumbrance rule. Maybe even something like the disease condition track from 4e where skill/attack penalties accumulate over time rather than being static.

But, honestly, that's more bookkeeping than I want to incorporate in most sessions unless travel was a focus of a session or maybe in an extended battlefield scenario.

 

[Ranganathan]

Nice quote. One story out of how many Conan tales? And that's one character in all of fantasy. I'm not saying everyone has to play it as a style choice, but you're saying I have to play it as a physics emulator. My impression of what 5e is going for is inclusion. As per my OP, I don't want to dictate how people play, but conversely I'd like the game to support other options than simply repeating what's gone before.

 

[howandwhy99]

Weapons & Armor as fluff, say everyone is a default AC by class, removes a large chunk of the game for fighters.

Every item of weapons and armor should uniquely beneficial. Swords may appear as superior in all cases, but spears work far better underwater. Using a net offhand instead of a shield has its own advantages and disadvantages. Axes can result in different distributions of damage and therefore likelihood of amounts of damage in relation to a sword. Missile weapons immediately display a big advantage versus melee only weapons. And armor really is impacted by the weapons employed against it and the environment it's worn in.

Make these choices mechanically and situationally meaningful. Otherwise there is no reason for diversity other than coolness.

 

[GM Dave]

It's not entirely suicidal to build a no-armor warrior in 3.5. In Pathfinder, at least, I have a pretty useful build using the Barbarian with a maxed out Constitution and an Archetype that grants half level as DR. It works rather well, without being too powerful. I do have to worry about getting too deep into things, but every warrior does, from time to time. And having 180+ HP at 11th level combined with DR 7/- is a great buffer when you don't have any armor... plus, unlike armor, my HP applies against energy damage as well.

That said, I agree with the overall idea, as Conan isn't the only character type that this could apply to. And some people would want dodgy-guy with low HP to be as viable a non-armored concept as guy-with-massive-HP-and-DR.

You might want to recheck your PF rules for Damage Reduction. Being a DM I had to do this to avoid player abuse of the rule (player has Eidolon with Synthesis option and DR as part of evolutions).

Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains. Nor does it affect poisons or diseases delivered by inhalation, ingestion, or contact.

...

Spells, spell-like abilities, and energy attacks (even nonmagical fire) ignore damage reduction.

Special Abilities - Pathfinder_OGC

If you're claiming energy protection with DR then you're getting more bang for the buck then the rules allow.

 

[GM Dave]

DnD is a fantasy game with 'fantasy logic'.

Why is leather for leather armour made from cow leather?

There are plenty of monsters with great hides to choose to make armour from that would be better like Ogre hide, Hill Giant hide, Dinosaur hide, or a dozen of other choices.

Steel?? Why would this be the standard metal for armour when a level 1 enchantment (3e) can produce magical material that is better for slicing then the best steel?

When I looked at PF rules and realized that the level 0 spell Create Water produced 2 gal of water every 6 s then I realized that you could fire projectiles like a gun with just this spell (no need for gun powder when you create this much water in a confined space).

If you want to play Dark Ages armour with a slight touch of fantasy then the lists of armour and weapons in prior DnD have some meaning.

If you play with the standard view that there is at least one mage of level 5 per village that can teach young heroes and a city with some college of mages (with similar level distribution for clerics and rogues) then the weapons people are likely using and the battles they are fighting is going to be extremely different.

A rogue with slight training should be using wands for doing assassinations in most cases not a blade. Let's face it a necklace of strangulation is far superior to a garrote for killing someone and likely equivalent in cost to a rare poison (and much easier to use by only needing to drop it around a neck).

Bags of holding are fairly cheap to acquire and once you drop it over a head that person is trapped in a space that you can either keep closed for a slow suffocation or wait till you have a good moment to dump out (like at the top of high cliff or over some lava). If you don't care on the contents and ruining the bag then toss in some caltrops (pierced bags loose the contents forever in PF).

This is why I like 4e Gamma World's loose categories for weapons. The weapons have some details of quality but the specific description of material and appearance are left to the player.

What of the fighter and their thousand feats of style usage?

Actually, this will be an aid as they won't need a golf bag of weapons to make use of those feats or worry that they pick up a weapon and their feats won't apply. The rules will just refer to the more generic category rather than a specific item.

A heavy club could be the bone from a Tarasque or a field post. It still hits the same unless the player further enchants it or uses abilities with it.

 

[P1NBACK]

Nice quote. One story out of how many Conan tales? And that's one character in all of fantasy. I'm not saying everyone has to play it as a style choice, but you're saying I have to play it as a physics emulator. My impression of what 5e is going for is inclusion. As per my OP, I don't want to dictate how people play, but conversely I'd like the game to support other options than simply repeating what's gone before.

Right on. I'm not saying that your idea isn't a good idea for a game.

I was just pointing out that using "genre emulation" isn't really a good argument, especially for Conan stories and mostly because D&D's fictional inspirations are so wide and varied, even in the original Appendix N.

So, what's left? Game mechanic purposes and emulating how people expect it to work (i.e. physics).

The benefit of emulating how people expect it to work is that it's easier for them to grok out of the gates.