D&D General Do armor proficiencies make sense?

BookBarbarian

Expert Long Rester
Armor Proficiencies help players realize Fantasy Archetypes. The Knight in Shining Armor, the Barbarian in animal Hide, the robed Wizard.

Oh I would tweak a few things but on the whole it's pretty good.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Oofta

Legend
Whew. I fear to think what the game would look like if we applied that standard across the whole enchilada.

Certainly @lowkey13 would get some of his wishes.

Armor and weapons are supposedly based on simplified versions of real-world equivalents. While there may be a bit of discussion about what rapiers should be called (I view them as arming swords, not epees) one-handed light swords did exist.

Gnomes, paladins, dragons all get passes because they're fantasy creations. Studded leather? Just dumb. Almost as bad as hand crossbows that do more than a point of damage that should only be even potentially useful as a poison delivery device.

AKA, you have your pet peeves, I can have mine! :cautious:
 

Armor proficiency is quite realistic, but the way its handled is excessive. Wearing armor IS NOT like wearing clothes, but it's not something that takes ages of study, either. And using one kind of shield (say an Irish targe) can be completely unlike using another kind (say a Roman scutum). I believe that Warrior-types should get the armor proficiency for free, everyone else should have to by/earn it, and light armor can be used by anyone without proficiency, though this may influence certain abilities.
 

5ekyu

Hero
Its almost like saying you have to learn how to wear clothes.

Casting penalties do seem to serve certain flavors of fantasy magic (like fae related
magic not working well if you are carrying a significant amount of iron metal armor) but by far not all.

Stealth penalties are usually over blown

And plate armor is in reality less of a movement hindrance than some lighter
armor and easier to wear by someone with lower stamina your mount carries
the weight while traveling so its even better while exploring.

We might include other ways of serving the tropes A barbarians Woad might
provide extra protection and intimidation benefits. A Wizards robes might allow them
to use Intelligence instead of Dex for defense

In 4e even if a fighter could use scale armor there were class features that encouraged using chain armor
if you wanted to shift your character towards a more striker functionality.

ch
Yes they make sense within the mechanics of this game.

Do they make sense in reality? Once i have some data in reality on how the different armors work vs chromatic orb spells and fire bolts and chill touches in reality, i will do some analysis and get back to you.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Not having pants on means you can think your way around a sword to the guts? I am not sure you have the same idea of "making sense" as I do.
Quick thinking and pattern analysis for the win ... oh right only slow book learning intelligence need apply But come on I said mage you have constant catrips you can do at will (hint a wizard did it sublime extension of mage-hand and runes woven into your robes that you attune for free) . Although I actually think I want mage armor to be dynamically controlled instead of just being dex based.
 
Last edited:

Greenfield

Adventurer
Hi. I'm an armorer of sorts. That is, I teach classes in how to make chain armor, usually at Renaissance Faires.

Padded armor wasn't meant to be "armor" in any real sense. It represented the padding normally worn under the more substantial armors.

Chain's main purpose is to turn a cutting edge into a blunt collision. If the chain is all you're wearing then instead of being hit with a sword or axe it's more like getting hit with a crobar or sledgehammer. And nobody likes getting hit with a crowbar or sledgehammer.

So the padding is meant to soften the blow. Now considering that the heavier armors were more common in England (a cold country) and northern Europe, wearing an extra layer of sheepskin or a vest that looks like a double layer mover's pad wasn't going to give you problems from the heat.

Chain has the odd property: As it pulls dow longer, it draws out narrower. Over the course of a day you can feel it pressing in on your ribs, and it actually can impair your breathing. Sleeves don't fit your arms well. They can't taper towards the wrist because you hand has to be able to fit all the way down. Further, the other side of that "longer means narrower" thing is that, if you're holding your arm out at all then gravity will pull it wider, and thus shorter. I can easily see how baggy steel sleeves could be a problem when casting spells.

Scale and Banded armors are similar to chain in many ways, but the "longer=narrower" thing isn't there, and it's generally less flexible.

Now the only plate you'll ever want to wear is a set that's fitted to you, and fitted well. Properly done, the weight ends up resting on your hips more than anywhere else, so yes it's not bad to ride in. But keeping your balance when on foot, and someone's swinging at you? That takes skill and practice (i.e. armor proficiency.)

If you do fall down, do you know how to get up, quickly? It isn't easy, and yes there's a skill to it. Again, armor proficiency.

Now consider dancing in any of these. That's the best way to characterize fighting in the stuff, as you advance, dodge sideways or backwards, duck and recover. And on most battlefields that's on uneven ground. and the better the armor, the more top-heavy you are. If the armor includes leggings (the difference between "Chain Shirt" and "Chain Armor") then your legs are heavier and a bit harder to lift. Easier to trip or stumble when engaging in that dance.

I've seen the videos of people in chain, scale, plate etc doing shoulder rolls, running, mounting a horse and so on, and they make it look easy. I know from experience that it isn't. Those people had a lot of practice and more than a little training. Their armor had to be properly fitted, or even custom made, for them to do that. (With plate or breastplate the armor may have had two or three trips back to the smith for adjustment and refitting.)

If you've ever ridden a horse you'll recall how high your foot has to go to reach the stirrup. It's almost chest high on most people. Now think about doing that while wrapped in protective steel worn over a full snow suit. (the padding). Next, from that contorted position that has poor leverage, hoist your weight up with that one leg. And remember how much the armor weighs. You have to be strong to heft yourself and plate armor or even just breastplate up from that position.

D&D says that a person can put on "light armor" like a chain shirt in a minute. If all you're doing is pulling the shirt on, think more about six seconds. It's a straight pull over. But putting it on for battle means putting that padding on and cinching it to a good fit, then adding the armor, then adding a belt to take some of the weight off your shoulders, so it doesn't pull down/in and make it harder to breathe. Knowing how to arrange the whole rig is also part of "proficiency".

Finally, remember that the armor is presumed to include gloves or gauntlets of some sort. Leave those off before a battle and your friends end up calling you "stumpy". Now try to move your arms like a ballet dancer, to emulate the arm movements needed for the somatic part of spell casting. Hold and manipulate the material components just right, while wearing those gloves.

Alternatively, unstrap the gloves (they have straps and buckles that secure them to your wrists), while wearing gloves, before each spell, then secure them in place again. You'll get spells off every two, maybe three rounds, at best.

Now, on a separate topic, someone her discussed the idea of adding INT bonus to armor class.

As my Sensei once said to me, "If you have to think about it, you're too slow." I mean, if Int was applicable then the ners in sholl wouldn't have had anything to worry about when a football player was in a bad mood.

Anybody ever see that happen? I never did. Smart guys tended to lose those encounters, unless they were truly smart. As in, smart enough to run away before the "encounter" got started.

So, as someone who has some knowledge in the area, armor proficiency makes perfect sense. But it shouldn't be in light, medium or heavy armors. It should be by specific armor types. At least if you're chasing "realism".
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
So give me training and improved armor class based on my proficiency ;) with damage absorption for when that fails
 
Last edited:

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
I did a little bit of sword and board fighting in the SCA way back. If I said I wasn't very good, I've be overstating my abilities to the point of crass exaggeration. But it can at least give me some insight into armor and shield without proficiency. Moving in heavy armor is definitely a trick, and actively using it so that the armor took the shots and you didn't end up with, for example, solid wall of bruises on the back of your legs. No reason I picked that one, nope, not at all. More than once.

But really, using a shield while trying to attack, with a foe feigning high and them smacking me in the leg AGAIN. Definitely skill to use it. Just like driving a car is a skill but after a while you forget how hard it was at first and how much of your attention it consumed.

For light armors, doing things like taking blows intentionally on the bracers or other reinforced parts is kind of how I envision the proficiency - it's not just how to move like a gymnast in it, and how to do so while also maximizing it's protection.
 
Last edited:

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
You know, I could more support and understand a feature/feat that would allow you to use your INT instead of DEX for AC, the idea being you are calculating expected attacks and moving to avoid them instead of simply "reacting" via DEX.

A similar logic is present in the Unarmored Defense of Monks and Barbarians. WIS is used via "insight" into your opponent, CON is for your stamina and using your ability to absorb some blows (similar to how armor actually protects you). Both could be viable by you ability to go with the blow to avoid its impact.

Having studied martial arts, I can easily understand the logical arguments for any of them.

I can absolutely see using alternate (or multiple) ability scores for AC. I have problems that doning a piece of mundane equipment can make it happen. Steven Hawking with a robe draped over him does not go from AC 6 (from a -4 DEX penalty) to a AC 15 (from a +5 INT bonus).
 

Remove ads

Top