Level Up (A5E) Fast learner heritage feature and armor proficiency.

[Distracted DM]

I'm a little surprised to see folks (I guess I'm assuming you're GMs) so OK with handing out armor proficiencies for time and a little gold. Doesn't that sort of neuter the mechanical investment of requiring a feat or multiclass level etc. to get armor proficiency? Good armor + shield = high AC is one of the advantages that martial characters have over arcane casters.
Do you let fighters get spell slots for time and money as well? It's a further step than armor prof, but still

 

[Dragongrief]

The way I look at it (and yes, I'm a GM), it that the armor proficiency gives consistency rather than the highest AC for casters.

Let's take a wizard as an example. Given the cost, this is probable only realistic above 5th level.

Wizard 1
*Gains proficiency in Half-plate (the best medium, non-special armor). 250-300 gold, 5/6 months
*Purchases half-plate. 750 gold
AC 15+Dex Mod (max +2). Maximum AC 17
-10ft Speed if Strength isn't 13+

Wizard 2
*Casts Mage Armor (-1 spell slot)
AC 13+Dex Mod. Maximum AC 18 w/20 Dex (more likely AC 16 for most characters)
Can add 20 levels worth of spells for the cost of training/armor)
Also leaves certain items open for use (Bracers of Defense, +2 AC if not wearing armor)

So Wizard 1 has one more AC, but potentially one less than Wizard 2, before looking at potential magical items. Plus side, it's consistent.

For your other question, yes, given the right circumstances, I would allow training of base level feats, which could give spells to a fighter (Mystical Talent).

Obviously that doesn't fit all group preferences or play styles. If it's something that allows for versatility or flavor, I'm more likely to find a way to allow it than if it's purely for power (the old GWM, SS feats would require an actual feat slot)

 

[Selganor]

For most campaigns I wouldn't have an issue with them aquiring it.
Though it would be 200-300 gold (50/month), plus the cost of the specific armor learned, so it's unlikely to be a pre-playing thing unless the game starts at higher level.

Personal preference - I like the option of doing it that way rather than requiring multi-classing or a feat.

I figured in the "fast learner" feature as this mentioned learning armor proficiency (unlike the Training downtime activity).

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm a little surprised to see folks (I guess I'm assuming you're GMs) so OK with handing out armor proficiencies for time and a little gold. Doesn't that sort of neuter the mechanical investment of requiring a feat or multiclass level etc. to get armor proficiency? Good armor + shield = high AC is one of the advantages that martial characters have over arcane casters.
Do you let fighters get spell slots for time and money as well? It's a further step than armor prof, but still

Verisimilitude is more important to me than mechanical balance. If a person can learn a thing with time, effort, and resources, a PC should be able to in the setting.

 

[Distracted DM]

Verisimilitude is more important to me than mechanical balance. If a person can learn a thing with time, effort, and resources, a PC should be able to in the setting.

D&D has classes and levels as representations for player characters' skillsets. Those skillsets include their class features like armor proficiency, spellcasting, extra attack, etc.

Allowing PCs to spend time training to gain armor proficiencies in favor of verisimilitude isn't how I'd do it- I'd say that that time and experience explains multiclassing into fighter or taking the feat etc.
I still liked Arcane Casting failure from 3.Xe for helping to mitigate spellcasters in armor. It was possible, but you had to invest mechanically for it. 5e is already really forgiving to spellcasters in armor.

Allowing time to train armor proficiency is similar to allowing time to work out and increase your characters Strength score. I don't think D&D, as a system, is built for that.

BUT all of this is down to personal preference

 

[JerichoPenumbra]

Allowing time to train armor proficiency is similar to allowing time to work out and increase your characters Strength score. I don't think D&D, as a system, is built for that.

Depends on the splats you're using. The game I'm in has just that sort of option available.

I feel like half the fun that winds up happening in each group is finding what rules that they want to use or ignore to create the sort of game they want to personally play.

 

[Anonymous3]

Verisimilitude is more important to me than mechanical balance. If a person can learn a thing with time, effort, and resources, a PC should be able to in the setting.

It is for this same reason why I wouldn't allow a wizard to learn/gain armor proficiency in their downtime because it would mean that they aren't practicing to become a better wizard (a deliberate learned experience) and instead focusing on "mundane" aspects of the world.
Given this reasoning, I would ask the player to take a level in a martial class instead.

Each to their own though. Fun is fun in the end.

 

[Anonymous3]

I'm a little surprised to see folks (I guess I'm assuming you're GMs) so OK with handing out armor proficiencies for time and a little gold. Doesn't that sort of neuter the mechanical investment of requiring a feat or multiclass level etc. to get armor proficiency? Good armor + shield = high AC is one of the advantages that martial characters have over arcane casters.
Do you let fighters get spell slots for time and money as well? It's a further step than armor prof, but still

I agree with this. I am hesitant to give out features "for free" that are inherent in other classes.
Downtime + gold is "for free" in my books because there isn't a sacrifice being made by the player.

 

[lichmaster]

The way I look at it (and yes, I'm a GM), it that the armor proficiency gives consistency rather than the highest AC for casters.

Let's take a wizard as an example. Given the cost, this is probable only realistic above 5th level.

Wizard 1
*Gains proficiency in Half-plate (the best medium, non-special armor). 250-300 gold, 5/6 months
*Purchases half-plate. 750 gold
AC 15+Dex Mod (max +2). Maximum AC 17
-10ft Speed if Strength isn't 13+

Wizard 2
*Casts Mage Armor (-1 spell slot)
AC 13+Dex Mod. Maximum AC 18 w/20 Dex (more likely AC 16 for most characters)
Can add 20 levels worth of spells for the cost of training/armor)
Also leaves certain items open for use (Bracers of Defense, +2 AC if not wearing armor)

So Wizard 1 has one more AC, but potentially one less than Wizard 2, before looking at potential magical items. Plus side, it's consistent.

For your other question, yes, given the right circumstances, I would allow training of base level feats, which could give spells to a fighter (Mystical Talent).

Obviously that doesn't fit all group preferences or play styles. If it's something that allows for versatility or flavor, I'm more likely to find a way to allow it than if it's purely for power (the old GWM, SS feats would require an actual feat slot)

It's an interesting comparison. I'd add that if you can wear armor, you'll have to pay for its maintenance but you'll also be able to equip magic armors. Armor can also make you drown and/or encumbered and can be targeted by spells like heat metal or effects like the rust monster's, but still works in antimagic fields and can't be dispelled.

So there are different pros/cons in several different situations, paying with money and downtime time seems reasonable overall, especially since the character wouldn't be able to invest into spellcrafting research at the same time (which in A5E is an extremely valuable option IMO)

 

[Micah Sweet]

It is for this same reason why I wouldn't allow a wizard to learn/gain armor proficiency in their downtime because it would mean that they aren't practicing to become a better wizard (a deliberate learned experience) and instead focusing on "mundane" aspects of the world.
Given this reasoning, I would ask the player to take a level in a martial class instead.

Each to their own though. Fun is fun in the end.

By that argument, wizards should also not be able to learn weapons, tools, languages, or skills, since these are also "mundane aspects of the world".