Ain't nuttin' wrong with that!
It could be a Feat, for instance...one that scales with level or one that has a tree of dependent feats that boost its benefits.
It could be an ability gained via a PrCL.
I hate armor
- Thread starter EroGaki
- Start date
Ain't nuttin' wrong with that!
It could be a Feat, for instance...one that scales with level or one that has a tree of dependent feats that boost its benefits.
It could be an ability gained via a PrCL.
RangerWickett
Legend
Why the feat tax for changing flavor? It reminds me of when a DM wanted me to spend a feat in order to have my cleric use a voodoo doll as a holy symbol. It doesn't change the balance of the game, so why not make it free?
Well, if done as I originally proposed- AC increases scaling with PC level- the Feat tax is needed because it does change balance.
That sketchily drafted Feat I suggested lets the PC's AC increase over time without an investing GP or "Blood, Sweat and Tear" equity in finding armor in a treasure trove. It can't be sundered. It can't be stolen. That AC boost will be with the PC no matter what happens to him.
...AND it does not prevent the PC from benefiting from wearing armor.
Now, a differently drafted wording of a HR to support unarmored warriors might not need a Feat tax, but that one does.
That sketchily drafted Feat I suggested lets the PC's AC increase over time without an investing GP or "Blood, Sweat and Tear" equity in finding armor in a treasure trove. It can't be sundered. It can't be stolen. That AC boost will be with the PC no matter what happens to him.
...AND it does not prevent the PC from benefiting from wearing armor.
Now, a differently drafted wording of a HR to support unarmored warriors might not need a Feat tax, but that one does.
As others have said, there's a variety of ways to get around this. But allow me to point something out ;p
That 60 pound plate mail isn't as cumbersome and horribly difficult to move in as you're assuming. We've all seen the youtube of the guy doing cartwheels in it, so I won't post it again, but seriously, plate mail wasn't just a big sheet of metal draped around their shoulders. It was also typically a lot lighter then 60 pounds, and, hell, was lighter then the combat gear most modern infantry units take into battle.
As for the weapons, in most villages and cities, everyone carried their dagger with them. Granted, that's a huge difference from everyone carrying their greatsword and ten foot pole, but hey, you're adventurers. They'd probably expect that from you. ;p
That 60 pound plate mail isn't as cumbersome and horribly difficult to move in as you're assuming. We've all seen the youtube of the guy doing cartwheels in it, so I won't post it again, but seriously, plate mail wasn't just a big sheet of metal draped around their shoulders. It was also typically a lot lighter then 60 pounds, and, hell, was lighter then the combat gear most modern infantry units take into battle.
As for the weapons, in most villages and cities, everyone carried their dagger with them. Granted, that's a huge difference from everyone carrying their greatsword and ten foot pole, but hey, you're adventurers. They'd probably expect that from you. ;p
The problem with that is that it is still reliant on armor. If I call it superior training, what happens when I'm ambushed at night or while in the bath? Where is my superior training? I see what you are saying, but describing it in a different way doesn't change the fact that it is still armor.
The encumbrance issue is really not the primary problem I have. I've seen the youtube with the guy cart-wheeling in the plate (that was a good video); my problem is the fact that a character can't really defend himself very well without armor.
There are a few options, such as the defense bonus presented in the SRD, but that rule depends on the DM allowing it, which mine doesn't.
coyote6
Adventurer
D&D fighters, at least in 3e & before, don't make good lightly/un-armored fighters. The Swashbuckler might work better, as would the Unfettered class from Arcana Evolved/Unearthed.
There was an unfettered/dervish in one of my campaigns, and he was pretty effective. His AC was, IIRC, fine; he had the highest AC in the group (OTOH, the group didn't have a full plate & heavy shield type; the dervish was the group's "tank"). When he pumped up the Combat Expertise, his AC got rather difficult to hit.
There was an unfettered/dervish in one of my campaigns, and he was pretty effective. His AC was, IIRC, fine; he had the highest AC in the group (OTOH, the group didn't have a full plate & heavy shield type; the dervish was the group's "tank"). When he pumped up the Combat Expertise, his AC got rather difficult to hit.
Only because the fluff text says it is. You can describe it how you like.
I guess there are different approaches to gaming. All are equally valid, as long as you enjoy it. For me, if one of my players asked "Hey, I bought chain mail, but I don't want to wear armour - can I just call it 'superior training' and imagine my character dodging stuff instead of armour deflecting it?" I'd think "(1) Will this increase the player's enjoyment of the game? - yes. (2) Does it *really* matter or will it break my game? -No." So I'd say "sure go ahead" and we'd all go on having a great time.
Ok, maybe once in a blue moon you'll come across a situation where your character is attacked in the bath. Maybe. The odds are it probably won't ever matter; but if it does, the DM can quite easily make a call on the spot and handle it. "Hey, your big toe got caught in the chain attached to the plug, and you don't get the benefit this round" or "It doesn't matter enough for me to worry about it." Whichever seems appropriate - or, more importantly, whichever will make the gaming experience more enjoyable for all involved (that being the sole reason we do it).
That's why we have DMs. If it was all set in stone, we could just play a CRPG. As human DMs we can accomodate an infinite variety of things which the rules don't.
I wasn't sure what edition you play as I just quickly skimmed through the thread, but in 4e there is "Summoned Armor" which has the following at will power:
Power (at will): Minor Action. You banish this armor to a secure extradimensional location. At any point in the future, unless you are wearing armor, you can use another minor action to recall the armor. The armor appears on you as though you had donned it normally.
This at least addresses the issue of 'walking around in armor at a party' that the OP mentioned in original post. In regard to the dependence on armor, I think Morrus' suggestion is valid, that or (if you're playing 4e) have a high DEX or INT and don't wear armor. I'm sure there will be more information coming out in the future about armor options as details of the Dark Sun campaign setting are brought to light. Wearing armor in that setting doesn't make sense.
Power (at will): Minor Action. You banish this armor to a secure extradimensional location. At any point in the future, unless you are wearing armor, you can use another minor action to recall the armor. The armor appears on you as though you had donned it normally.
This at least addresses the issue of 'walking around in armor at a party' that the OP mentioned in original post. In regard to the dependence on armor, I think Morrus' suggestion is valid, that or (if you're playing 4e) have a high DEX or INT and don't wear armor. I'm sure there will be more information coming out in the future about armor options as details of the Dark Sun campaign setting are brought to light. Wearing armor in that setting doesn't make sense.
Similar Threads
