D&D 5E Changes with Equipment, Weapons, Armor.

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Cloth/Padded Armor
Leather Armor
Ring Mail

Hide Armor/Brigandine
Chain Shirt
Breastplate
Scale Mail

Chaimail
Half-Plate
Full Plate

As much as studded leather and splint mail have been D&D staples for quite a while, I actually quite like this grouping of armor types. The challenge is to come up with mechanics that work to make the tradeoffs between them interesting.

For example:

Type				Cost	AC	DEX	Move	Stealth		Climb/Swim
		
Cloth/Padded Armor		5	11	Max	
Leather Armor			15	12	Max
Ring Mail/Brigandine*	        25	13	+4

Hide Armor			20	14	+2
Chain Shirt			50	14	+3		Disadvantage
Breastplate			75	15	+2		Disadvantage
Scale Mail			100	16	+1	-5	Disadvantage 	 Disadvantage

Chainmail			200	16	+1		Disadvantage	
Half-Plate**			150	17	+0	-5	Disadvantage	Disadvantage
Full Plate			500	18	+0	-5	Disadvantage	Disadvantage

*Or Studded Leather
**Or Splint Mail

Of course now the more I look at it the more I want to just call Ring Mail/Brigandine "Studded Leather" and Half-Plate "Splint Mail" for D&D consistency. But I do feel that the above stat mix makes for interesting choices for players based on what armor proficiency their character has and what their Dex bonus is. There's a reason to take almost all of them.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I'd go with:

Cloth/Padded Armor
Leather Armor
Ring Mail

Hide Armor/Brigandine
Chain Shirt
Breastplate
Scale Mail

Chaimail
Half-Plate
Full Plate

My only issue with this order and which makes me feel a bit like we lose something... is losing chain mail as an armor to strive for. Having it be the bottom of the heavy armors means that people are going to try and get out of it as soon as possible... and it just feels weird to me to have chain be so inconsequential. By the same token, having Ring Mail be the ultimate light armor to strive for also sits weird for me. Personally... even if the "real" armors would be listed differently in terms of protection... I'd rather group all the leathers, all the mails, and all the plates together, with the most iconics being in places of import. So something more in this way:

Cloth/Padded Armor
Leather Armor
Hide Armor/Brigandine

Ring Mail
Scale Mail
Chain Mail

Breastplate
Half-Plate
Full Plate

 

[Klaus]

As much as studded leather and splint mail have been D&D staples for quite a while, I actually quite like this grouping of armor types. The challenge is to come up with mechanics that work to make them interesting.

I'll give it a shot. Off the top of my head:

Name/Metal?/AC/Stealth/Speed

Light Armor (Dex mod):
Cloth/Padded Armor N/12/A/-
Covers bulky clothing, such as an explorer's outfit, or padded jacks used by conscripted troops (often paired with buckler and dagger). Embroidered doublets worn by nobility often fall into this category.

Leather Armor N/13/-/-
Soft leather outfits and jacks, either with or without metal rivets.

Ring Mail Y/14/D/-
Leather jacks reinforced my metal rings and rivets sewn onto the torso, thigs and arms.

Medium (Dex mod up to +2):
Hide Armor/Brigandine Y or N/15/-/-5
Made of hard material, either boiled leather, thick animal hide or leather reinforced by interior metal plates.

Chain Shirt Y/15/-/-
Torso protection made of metal links, covers upper arms and upper thighs.

Breastplate Y/16/D/-
Metal breastplate complemented by sleeves and leggings of leather (possibly riveted).

Scale Mail Y or N/17/D/-5
Tunic made of sewn scales. Scales can be made of metal or boiled leather.

Heavy Armor (No Dex Mod):
Chaimail Y/18/D/-5
Long-sleeve shirt and leggings made of metal links worn over padded armor, often complemented with greaves.

Half-Plate Y/19/D/-10
Metal plates (whether solid or banded) protecting the torso, shins and shoulders, complemented by chainmail arms and legs, worn over padded armor.

Full Plate Y/20/D/-10
Interlocking metal plates fitted to cover the entire body, worn over padded armor.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

My only issue with this order and which makes me feel a bit like we lose something... is losing chain mail as an armor to strive for. Having it be the bottom of the heavy armors means that people are going to try and get out of it as soon as possible... and it just feels weird to me to have chain be so inconsequential. By the same token, having Ring Mail be the ultimate light armor to strive for also sits weird for me. Personally... even if the "real" armors would be listed differently in terms of protection... I'd rather group all the leathers, all the mails, and all the plates together, with the most iconics being in places of import. So something more in this way:

I think the answer to that is to make tradeoffs within an armor group viable. To do that, we can't use the model that "Light = All Dex, Medium = +2 Dex, Heavy = No Dex", because we've limited one of the options to make interesting trades on.

That's why in my model (above) I kept Chainmail in Heavy, but gave it +1 Dex (as well as no Disadvantage on Climb/Swim). That way a player designing a character with a Heavy Armor proficiency can go: "Hmm. I can take a +1 Dex bonus, and use chainmail, though I can't get as good as full plate, but I'll still be more mobile in other circumstances. Or I can take no Dex bonus, and go for Plate as soon as I can afford it. Or I take a higher Dex, but accept only using Medium Armor."

Meaningful trades is also why I added a "Disadvantage on Climb and Swim" checks to my armor table -- a way to balance armor weight and bulk as well as have something meaningful to make tradeoffs against. I acknowledge it may not achieve maximum "realism" as IIRC real plate armor is less bulky and allows more mobility than chainmail -- but if one wants chainmail and platemail to be meaningful game choices, they must be differentiated in meaningful ways.

 

[LesserCure]

Looks like they've seriously messed up ranged weapon balance. There is no reason to use the crossbows over instead of their normal bow counterparts. They do the same damage, but have the loading property, which is a disadvantage. It should be like this: (which it was in the last packet)

Light crossbow 1d8 damage instead of 1d6
Longbow 1d8 damage instead of 1d10
Hand crossbow 1d6 damage instead of 1d8

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Looks like they've seriously messed up ranged weapon balance. There is no reason to use the crossbows over instead of their normal bow counterparts. They do the same damage, but have the loading property, which is a disadvantage. It should be like this: (which it was in the last packet)

Light crossbow 1d8 damage instead of 1d6
Longbow 1d8 damage instead of 1d10
Hand crossbow 1d6 damage instead of 1d8

I'd personally go back closer to 3E crossbows:

All crossbows as simple weapons; hand 1d4, light 1d8, heavy 1d10; all with the loading property -- and potentially giving heavy crossbow a "double load" property to require a move action to reload.

All bows as martial weapons, with shortbows 1d6 and longbows 1d8.

That way there's a particularly meaningful trade between a shortbow & light crossbow, or longbow and heavy crossbow (assuming a character has proficiencies for both). The tradeoff for "loading" property should be more damage.

 

[Klaus]

I'd personally go back closer to 3E crossbows:

All crossbows as simple weapons; hand 1d4, light 1d8, heavy 1d10; all with the loading property -- and potentially giving heavy crossbow a "double load" property to require a move action to reload.

All bows as martial weapons, with shortbows 1d6 and longbows 1d8.

That way there's a particularly meaningful trade between a shortbow & light crossbow, or longbow and heavy crossbow (assuming a character has proficiencies for both). The tradeoff for "loading" property should be more damage.

My personal choice would be to give bows a restriction: can't be used in long range while indoors. And then give crossbows a longer short range. The big difference between bows and crossbows is that you arc one for a long shot, while the other one shoots mostly straight ahead.

 

[LesserCure]

I personally prefer the system we currently have in the playtest. Have you read the equipment document in the playtest packet? The loading property doesn't mean that you spend an action to reload it, it means that you can't attack with the weapon more once in a turn. In the 3e system, I don't see a reason to use a shortbow over longbow, or a light crossbow over a heavy one. The proficiency system makes sure that shortbow and light crossbow are still relevant for some people.

As for the shortbow/light crossbow or longbow/heavy crossbow distinction, it makes more sense to use a crossbow in earlier levels, because they do more damage and you can't multiattack anyway. In later levels, when you gain the Two Attacks class feature, it makes more sense to use a normal bow, because you can attack more than once in a single action. This may not be the most ideal solution, but it is at least realistic and reinforces the fact that bows require much more training than crossbows to use properly.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

.

As for the shortbow/light crossbow or longbow/heavy crossbow distinction, it makes more sense to use a crossbow in earlier levels, because they do more damage and you can't multiattack anyway. In later levels, when you gain the Two Attacks class feature, it makes more sense to use a normal bow, because you can attack more than once in a single action. This may not be the most ideal solution, but it is at least realistic and reinforces the fact that bows require much more training than crossbows to use properly.

The problem right now is there's no reason except for flavor to use a crossbow. With shortbow/light both simple weapons, and longbow/heavy both martial, equal damage, and crossbows limited to 1 shot per action, you'll always choose the bow. And if you choose for favor you're taken a disadvantage.

If crossbows are simple and bows martial, you'll see both in play based solely on proficiencies. If crossbows have slightly higher damage but are slower to employ, then the player can reasonably choose either weapon based on trading off one characteristic or the other.

I want to see 5E avoid the pitfalls of some prior iterations where once choice was always clearly superior, and everyone ended up in either leather or platemail, or using a longbow, because there was simply no mechanical reason to choose something else.

 

[LesserCure]

The problem right now is there's no reason except for flavor to use a crossbow. With shortbow/light both simple weapons, and longbow/heavy both martial, equal damage, and crossbows limited to 1 shot per action, you'll always choose the bow.

If crossbows are simple and bows martial, you'll see both in play based solely on proficiencies. If crossbows have slightly higher damage but are slower to employ, then the player can reasonably choose either weapon based on trading off one characteristic or the other.

I want to see 5E avoid the pitfalls of some prior iterations where once choice was always clearly superior, and everyone ended up in either leather or platemail, or using a longbow, because there was simply no mechanical reason to choose something else.

I completely agree. But isn't the bows being clearly superior thing fixed with the damage changes I proposed? I think it's better that way than 3e for the same reason you've explained in your post, because it makes all of them mechanically relevant at least for some characters.