D&D 5E helmets?

[Reynard]

In a manner similar to how a breastplate raises the AC of your entire body. As a DM, if there was a rational reason for me to say something only happened at head-level (say a swinging log trap?) I might take into account who was or was not wearing a helmet.

In real life helmets are important because head trauma is exceedingly dangerous, causing both short term and long term injury. I think it is reasonable to generally penalize a character for not wearing one rather than scramble for specific instances. I mean, if you care about that sort of thing at all. "Realism" does not show up on the list of things 5e cares about.

 

[Bacon Bits]

is there any point in having a helmet for non full plate characters. First time playing a warrior and just wondering if they have any purpose/benefit

Pretty much everything above light armor might include a helmet of some form, with all heavy armors guaranteed to include it. It's a part of the suit of armor, like the pauldrons, vambraces, breastplate/hauberk, or greaves. If you're wearing heavy armor or many forms of medium armor it's safe to assume you're wearing a helmet, even if it's just a kettle helm or nasal helm. RAW speaking, I don't see where you're allowed to wear less than a complete suit of armor and gain any benefit at all.

In other words, you wear a helmet because wearing a helmet is part of wearing armor.

 

[Reynard]

Why wouldn't you wear a helmet!

 

[abe ray]

Why wouldn't you wear a helmet!

Yes why wouldn't you?


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

 

[jaelis]

If you care about helmets for verisimilitude but don't necessarily want to deal with called shots, add a rule that a character not wearing a helmet at the time of being dropped to 0 HP has a penalty or disadvantage on death saving throws.

Kind of harsh for a wizard or a monk, no? Or do you assume they wear helmets even though they have no armor proficiency?

I think the easy ruling is to assume that an appropriate helmet is part of your armor, and included in the AC it provides. There's no obvious situation where you'd have armor but no helmet, so don't worry about it

 

[akr71]

Kind of harsh for a wizard or a monk, no? Or do you assume they wear helmets even though they have no armor proficiency?

I think the easy ruling is to assume that an appropriate helmet is part of your armor, and included in the AC it provides. There's no obvious situation where you'd have armor but no helmet, so don't worry about it

Armor proficiency to wear a helmet? That's like saying I need hat proficiency to wear a hat.

Well, maybe a more accurate analogy would be that I need to know the rules of baseball in order to wear a baseball cap to keep the sun out of my eyes.

 

[thenightgaunt]

I'd house rule it. If you're not wearing a helmet, you don't get the full effect of the armor. So if they aren't wearing a helmet, reduce the AC from that armor by 1.

 

[jaelis]

Armor proficiency to wear a helmet? That's like saying I need hat proficiency to wear a hat.

Not saying you need armor prof to wear a helmet (game has no rules about that either way), just wondering if you assume wizards and monks do...

 

[thenightgaunt]

Armor proficiency to wear a helmet? That's like saying I need hat proficiency to wear a hat.
Well, maybe a more accurate analogy would be that I need to know the rules of baseball in order to wear a baseball cap to keep the sun out of my eyes.

Keep in mind, most helms are probably less well fitting than a modern baseball helmet. You put a full helm on an elvish mage who's never been trained in how to move/fight in armor, he'd probably be kinda awkward. Maybe he wouldn't know that you wore a padded cap under it so it slides around? Or straps it too tight and it keeps cutting into his neck and screwing up his concentration. We're not talking about cloth hats here but heavy, metal helmets. The logic gets iffy around light armor though as a leather helm is probably not too distracting.

But the solution there is to give no benefit from just wearing a helmet alone. But don't significantly penalize the player for not wearing one. Simple rules are sometimes the best option. Otherwise you run into the "wizard w/out helmet" situation as folks have joked about on here.

I realize the poster here was making a joke, but my point's more along the line of arguing that you don't need to go into too much detail on how helmets work or why people should wear them according to the rules. Some common sense and DM fiat goes a long way here.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

The question you have to ask yourself is whether you prefer verisimilitude, or like the option for characters who should be wearing helmets to not wear them for aesthetics.

I personally prefer aesthetics. The players who want their characters in helmets have them wear them, and those who don't, don't.