D&D (2024) Dropping armor proficiencies and using Strength as base for armor use.

[Horwath]

Should 1D&D just drop armor category proficiency and just use MIN STR stat for all armors?

It would give more importance to Str as an ability.
having effective Dex mod to a degree for even heaviest of armors also prevents "free" dumping of dex to 8. you would want now atleast a 12 for optimum AC.
Also Dex damage effects would now be impactful to heavy armor users.

Armor name	Min Strength	AC bonus	Max Dex
Leather	10	+1	+6
Hide	12	+2	+5
Chainmail	14	+4	+3
Half-plate	16	+6	+2
Fullplate	18	+8	+1
Buckler shield	12	+1	n/a
Shield	14	+2	n/a

penalty for not having required STR for specific armor would be:
speed halved,
Disadvantage on all attacks,
Disadvantage on all STR, DEX and CON saves and checks,
All targets of your DC based abilities and spells have advantage on their saves,

Why not simply say that you cannot cast spells?
For simple reason that a simple STR drain/damage should not be complete removal of caster from battle.
This way you can still heal, buff or chose to "misty step" yourself out of the armor. Trading protection for normal spell usage.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

These are my tables, inspired from Shadow of the Demon Lord. Shields are moved to weapons.

Cloth armors

Type	Armor Class	Property	Weight	Cost & Rarity
Traveler’s Cloak	10+Dex	-	1
Clothing, Cold Weather	10+Dex	Advantage against cold weather	1
Clothing, Warm Weather	10+Dex	Advantage against hot weather	1

Light armors (requires 11 Strength)

Type	Armor Class	Property	Weight	Cost & Rarity
Padded Coat	11+Dex	-	1
Hides	11+Dex	Advantage against cold weather	2
Leather Vest	12+Dex	-	1

Medium armors (requires 13 Strength)

Type	Armor Class	Property	Weight	Cost & Rarity
Reinforced Leather	13+Dex (max 2)	-	2
Brigandine	14+Dex (max 2)	-	2
Chain shirt	15+Dex (max 2)	Disadvantage to Hide Action	2
Helm	AC +1	Disadvantage to Search Action	1

Heavy armors (requires 15 Strength)

Type	Armor Class	Property	Weight	Cost & Rarity
Lamellar	16	Disadvantage to Hide Action	3
Cuirass	17	Disadvantage to Hide Action	3
Hauberk	18	Disadvantage to Hide Action	3

 

[Amrûnril]

I really like the general idea of relaxing armor proficiencies to make strength more competitive with dexterity. That said, I think that these requirements are quite steep from a flavor/worldbuilding perspective. With the setting assumptions I tend to make, this would result in a lot of soldiers unable to wear their armor effectively (and I think I'm actually more generous than a lot of posters here regarding the frequency of high ability scores among non-adventurers). The "free" armor proficiency also seems like a notable buff to spellcasters.

Perhaps an alternative would be having general armor proficiency and then having heavy armor proficiency as an alternative to the strength requirements. So a character could use full plate either with heavy armor proficiency or with basic armor proficiency plus 18 strength. I'd also probably keep shields as proficiency-based. Both flavor and balance-wise, I wouldn't want a wizard using a shield without a feat or similar investment, but for weapon-users, forgoing an off-hand or two-handed weapon is already a high enough cost.

 

[Horwath]

I really like the general idea of relaxing armor proficiencies to make strength more competitive with dexterity. That said, I think that these requirements are quite steep from a flavor/worldbuilding perspective. With the setting assumptions I tend to make, this would result in a lot of soldiers unable to wear their armor effectively (and I think I'm actually more generous than a lot of posters here regarding the frequency of high ability scores among non-adventurers). The "free" armor proficiency also seems like a notable buff to spellcasters.

Perhaps an alternative would be having general armor proficiency and then having heavy armor proficiency as an alternative to the strength requirements. So a character could use full plate either with heavy armor proficiency or with basic armor proficiency plus 18 strength. I'd also probably keep shields as proficiency-based. Both flavor and balance-wise, I wouldn't want a wizard using a shield without a feat or similar investment, but for weapon-users, forgoing an off-hand or two-handed weapon is already a high enough cost.

it seems like a buff to spellcasters, but really it is not.
how many wizards/sorceres are going around with 14 STR?

it's 8 or maybe 10 at best.

and if wizard did invest 14 STR, then why not and let him have chain+shield with 16+dex AC.

also, the classical "heavy" armor classes could get 1st level ability that is called armor training.
It counts your STR 2 points higher for using armor.
this could also be dwarven racial.
Also applied to some cleric domains and maybe hexblade warlock

so, dwarf fighter would count STR as 4 pts higher, and could wear plate armor with 14 STR.

or dwarf wizard with 12 STR could have above mentioned chain+shield combo.
non dwarf wizard with 12 STR would have 13+DEX AC. Hide+buckler.

 

[tetrasodium]

I really like the general idea of relaxing armor proficiencies to make strength more competitive with dexterity. That said, I think that these requirements are quite steep from a flavor/worldbuilding perspective. With the setting assumptions I tend to make, this would result in a lot of soldiers unable to wear their armor effectively (and I think I'm actually more generous than a lot of posters here regarding the frequency of high ability scores among non-adventurers). The "free" armor proficiency also seems like a notable buff to spellcasters.

Perhaps an alternative would be having general armor proficiency and then having heavy armor proficiency as an alternative to the strength requirements. So a character could use full plate either with heavy armor proficiency or with basic armor proficiency plus 18 strength. I'd also probably keep shields as proficiency-based. Both flavor and balance-wise, I wouldn't want a wizard using a shield without a feat or similar investment, but for weapon-users, forgoing an off-hand or two-handed weapon is already a high enough cost.

Relaxing them like the old acf/acp reductions you would sometimes see in a few 3.x cests/prcs rather than eliminating would be better. Dump stats are too easy to swallow & never again think of in 5e but the OP suggestion reverses that to a notable degree by making armored casters squishier or trading off somewhere else if they want higher ac just like strength & dex builds can't completely dump the other attrib if MAXac is their goal. By extension there is more room for magic items and a hyperfocused elite array distribution is no longer such a clearcut choice

 

[Amrûnril]

it seems like a buff to spellcasters, but really it is not.
how many wizards/sorceres are going around with 14 STR?

it's 8 or maybe 10 at best.

and if wizard did invest 14 STR, then why not and let him have chain+shield with 16+dex AC.

Currently, 14 DEX gets a wizard +2 AC. Getting +2 AC from 14 STR would be great, but +6 definitely seems like too much.

also, the classical "heavy" armor classes could get 1st level ability that is called armor training.
It counts your STR 2 points higher for using armor.

I like this idea.

 

[Jack Daniel]

Overall, this looks to me like a good idea and an elegant mechanic.

Do this, and also base initiative on Int instead of Dex, and suddenly the stats are looking quite a bit more balanced.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I like the idea. I would change a few numbers but the general Idea is sound.

 

[The Myopic Sniper]

I like this as a mechanic for D&D 2024 a lot . There might have to be a rethink on how standard starting equipment packages for classes work.
The strength requirement numbers would also probably be odd given how other similar things in the system work and to reward a simple +1 ASI on a stat.

More verisimilitude oriented types might object to such high numbers to get Full Plate proficiency, but at this point there isn't really any realism to the system as is.

 

[Horwath]

I like this as a mechanic for D&D 2024 a lot . There might have to be a rethink on how standard starting equipment packages for classes work.
The strength requirement numbers would also probably be odd given how other similar things in the system work and to reward a simple +1 ASI on a stat.

More verisimilitude oriented types might object to such high numbers to get Full Plate proficiency, but at this point there isn't really any realism to the system as is.

How bonuses work, I simply do not like odd stats.

requirement of 13+ is just saying that in 99% of cases it will be 14+ on that stat.
on default array/point buy, no one is having odd stat except the starting 17 and aiming at +1 ASI from half feat at 4th level to turn it into 18.

4th level seems just about right for heaviest mundane armor, so 18 fits nicely.
But yes, all STR requirements could be lowered by 1 point if everyone likes odd stats that much.