Feat: Armored mobility

[WaterRabbit]

Nit pick on Run in heavy armor

When wearing heavy armor (or heavily encumbered) you can still only run at x3 even if you have the Run feat.

 

[Marshall]

Armor isn't something you can become better at. You don't use it, it's just there. Combat boots don't change into Nike Running Shoes when you are a seasoned veteran either.

From someone who has to use several different types of protective clothing in his job, Thats just not true. 'Better' is probably not the right word, but you do grow accustomed to what the gear lets you do, what it doesnt let you do, and what you do different to accomplish what you could do without it.

And yes, a kid just out of basic is much more encumbered by his combat boots than the guy who has worn them nearly every day for 5,10 or 20 years. Those vets would think of them as 'Nike running shoes'

There is also the point that the difference between Light and Heavy Armor is 4 points. At best thats a 20% advantage that falls fairly quickly to irrelevant. The penalties to heavy armor quickly outweigh any benefit, from a measly +4 AC.

 

[Ravellion]

From someone who has to use several different types of protective clothing in his job, Thats just not true. 'Better' is probably not the right word, but you do grow accustomed to what the gear lets you do, what it doesnt let you do, and what you do different to accomplish what you could do without it.

Hmmm... Still, I would consider this

There is also the point that the difference between Light and Heavy Armor is 4 points. At best thats a 20% advantage that falls fairly quickly to irrelevant. The penalties to heavy armor quickly outweigh any benefit, from a measly +4 AC.

+4 irrelevant? Tell that to the raging barbarian in our group, who really hates the -2, and often gets hit just because of it. Some creatures take out a quarter of your hitpoints per hit, so +4 AC is quite a lot.

Anyway, one of the biggest problems with such a feat, is that it justs sways the balance instead of restoring it. "HEY! I'm wearing better armour than you, and all I have to take for it is -4 to skills I'm never going to use" (in case of the fighter)

Rav

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

There is also the point that the difference between Light and Heavy Armor is 4 points. At best thats a 20% advantage that falls fairly quickly to irrelevant. The penalties to heavy armor quickly outweigh any benefit, from a measly +4 AC.

This is actually quite innaccurate. +4 AC may seem like a very small advantage, but it is often very significant in regards to how often you're hit.

Consider the following characters:
Aggressor: Human Ftr 2: str 16, wp focus longsword, masterwork longsword. Total attack bonus=+7

Lightarmor: 14 dex, chain shirt, large shield, dodge feat. AC=19
Heavyarmor: 12 dex, fullplate, large shield, dodge feat AC=22
In order to hit lightarmor, aggressor needs to roll a 12.
In order to hit heavyarmor, aggressor needs to roll a 15.
Consequently, aggressor will hit lightarmor 45% of the time.
He will only hit heavyarmor 30% of the time.

So a +3 differnence in armor class translates into a 33% decrease in damage taken (all other things being equal) which is much better than a 20% difference.

This effect is much more noticable when armor class is better compared to the attack.

For instance, consider lightarmor and heavyarmor fighting goblin rogues (lvl 2, str 12, wp focus shortsword. Total attack bonus=+3)
The goblin needs to roll a 16 to hit lightarmor.
The goblin needs to roll a 19 to hit heavyarmor.
Consequently lightarmor will be damaged on 25% of the goblin's swings but heavy armor will only be damaged on 10% of the goblin's swings.

In this case, the 3 point difference in armor class translates into heavyarmor avoiding 60% of the damage lightarmor takes.

Now, it's certainly possible to max out armor class without wearing heavy armor. On the other hand, for characters without a super high dexterity, it's a lot cheaper to buy fullplate and boots of striding and springing than it is to buy a +4 chainshirt (or a +3 mithril breastplate).

The difference between a 31 AC (+5 fullplate, +5 shield, +1 dex) and a 28 AC (+5 chain shirt, +5 shield, +2 dex) is also very significant when facing creatures with +13 to their primary attacks (Annis Hags for instance). (It actually about a 50% difference in how often the characters will be hit).

 

[Marshall]

Well if you are going to negate(actually reduce) Heavy Armors disadvantages with a MI that nobody else has access to...

Your numbers are way off. Why? Because the guy in heavy armor will subject to Many more attacks. He wont be able to avoid full attacks much, he'll be sneaked by nearly every rogue in sight, and retreating is more or less a 'the DM let me go' proposition.

Oh, and hell have no defense against any type of touch attack. Which are way too common and way to easy allready.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I'm not quite sure what you mean by an MI, but I will defend my numbers.

The guy in heavy armor may be disproportionately targetted by NPCs with attacks. (Or maybe not, some foes would doubtless try to attack characters who looked easier to hit--I know my characters often do this when they plan on cleaving into another foe). However, that is a matter of enemy tactics which are up to the DM. In many campaigns, wearing no armor marks one as an arcane spellcaster and therefore makes you a priority one target. In other campaigns, heavy armor might mark a character as a skilled fighter likely to have a high strength and deal devastating full attack actions. Such a character might be avoided by sneaky bad guys who would choose to engage a less deadly foe.

The number of full attacks and sneak attacks that a heavily armored character absorbs, however, should be entirely dependant upon how the character is played. (Unless all lightly armored characters pick up ranks in tumble and use that to avoid AoOs for movement--even so, the heavily armored character an negate those with a tower shield). The Character in heavy armor has to move 10 feet to avoid a full attack action--just like a character in light armor. That's well within his movement capability. If heavy armored characters tend to stay put so they can get their own full attacks in, full attack vs. partial attack and move is a choice lightly armored characters have to make as well.

Similarly, lightly armored characters aren't immune to sneak attacks either. They get the same AoOs that heavily armored characters get when rogues try to flank them. (Although, at high levels, the rogues may tumble to deny them those bonusses). If they want to move to avoid the tumbling sneak attacking rogues, they can provoke AoOs and do so--exactly like lightly armored characters.

As to touch attacks, even lightly armored characters tend to be vulnerable to them (especially ranged touch spells--an extra +3 to your AC (from an 18 dex) doesn't help much when the wizard has a +10 to hit with his disintegrate). If the lightly armored characters tend to have more deflection bonusses, heavily armored fighters can make equally good use of rings of protection, etc. (One could argue that the +3 dex bonus is as useful in this case as the +4 armor bonus is vs. a normal attack, but that analysis ignores the fact that touch attacks tend to have much higher attack bonusses relative to the available armor class. If a 6 (+10 ranged touch vs. AC 16 (18 dex, chain shirt, protection from evil)) is needed to hit rather than a 3 (+10 ranged touch vs AC 13 (12 dex, protection from evil)) the lightly armored character only avoids 17% of the touch attacks that hit the heavily armored character. That's a much smaller difference than the 30% to 60% demonstrated in the normal attack calculations.

Retreating is certainly a problem in heavy armor but not too much more than it is in light armor. Assuming that your DM shares your opinion of heavy armor not being worth it and doesn't arm his bad guys with it (and if the DMs bad guys Do wear heavy armor and consistently make you run away, maybe that tells you something about heavy armor's usefulness), non-barbarians and non-monks in light armor can't outrun his bad guys anyway. (Barbarians and monks will still have trouble if they're up against cavalry or other barbarians). A heavily armored character can escape using the same rope trick/wall of fire/solid fog/obscuring mist/invisibility/teleport/dimension door/horse/expeditious retreat/boots of striding and springing that lightly armored characters use to retreat.

Well if you are going to negate(actually reduce) Heavy Armors disadvantages with a MI that nobody else has access to...

Your numbers are way off. Why? Because the guy in heavy armor will subject to Many more attacks. He wont be able to avoid full attacks much, he'll be sneaked by nearly every rogue in sight, and retreating is more or less a 'the DM let me go' proposition.

Oh, and hell have no defense against any type of touch attack. Which are way too common and way to easy allready.