I hate armor

[Brother MacLaren]

2) Exterminate all ninjas. Impossible for fighters due to poor spot skills.

Take a level of Dread Pirate. In the errata, the 1st-level ability is "pwnzor teh_ninjas at will".

 

[GMforPowergamers]

ok, so we will start with have a high dex...then have bracers of amor...(Or my personal fav a mythral chain shirt +1) then go for the duilist prestige class...

now you are a lightly armored tank.

Infact If you start with a Dex of 16, a +1 mythral chain shirt, and at some point grab a ring of protection...you can call an AC of 19...take dodge and expertise and you can get that up higher.

if you have a good int it goes through the roof with that Prestige class...


or grab a monks belt add wis +1 to AC and get an unarmed attack...


infact I have to say the highest AC Warriors I have ever seen had light or no armor...

infact in 3.5 my friend kurt made a habbit of playing 2/3/3 fighter/rogue/ranger with a monks belt and no armor....

 

[I'm A Banana]

I think it's kind of a system/legacy thing. The following elements lead to D&D having a powerful love of armor:

1. Dwarves and other "heavy tank" archetypes should probably have armor. They need to be balanced with creatures that have no armor.
2. D&D evolved out of a medieval minis game, where armor vs. weapon was a big strategy, as it was in the medieval battlefield itself. This was important for minis wargaming, but not so much for fantasy RP.
3. D&D hearts loot. Gear. Things. Stuff. Armor is more Stuff for you to take from monsters you beat up. "Agility" is not something you can take away in a cart. This fits some of the archetype D&D is going for: legendary epic characters often have entire books of their epic poetry dedicated to the stuff that tricks them out.
4. D&D has a two-stage attack mechanic: to-hit + damage. Armor and agility have both only ever affected the first of these rolls. A svelte elf who puts on full plate and a dwarf ninja thief all are equal.

It's OK to hate armor, I think, but it's also OK to love it and D&D should appeal to both sides. I think, perhaps, though, it is past time to use a different mechanic to represent the two. You wouldn't think they'd play the same as each other, but they really do to a large degree, since both are "tough to hit."

 

[jdrakeh]

What about knives?

The use of short, crude, iron knives or delicate, decorative, silver-forged utensils employed as cutlery and existing distinct and separately from things like dirks, swords, maces, bows, is not restricted.

Not every knife is a weapons and, as previously noted, the laws are not enacted with the goal to eliminate all weapons within a city (an unrealistic goal), but to restrict weapons within a city.

Try stuffing a morning star up your pants, Ed. I think that you'll agree that asking people to check certain weapons at a city gate will accomplish the aforementioned goal.

And, much more importantly, what about the mage who knows Fireball? Do they make him check his brain at the gates?

Why so angry with me, Ed? To your question, laws are in place that forbid the practice of combat magic in towns and cities, though there is little that can be done to prevent its use past a polite request. After its use, however, the full force of the law (including other spell casters) can be brought to bear upon an offender.

As for fighting off the whole town, if they're gonna string you up for defending yourself, destroying them is not an evil act. Did I mention Fireball?

My point was that, unless you're playing a highly mucnhkin-ized character, killing the entire populace of a small town isn't a task easily accomplished. Further, if the legal penalty for murder is hanging and you kill the townsfolk for attempting to carry out the letter of the law, I'd argue that it's not the townsfolk who are evil — you are.

Now, in modern law, one who commits murder may argue self defense before a jury. And if there were juries in my campaign settings, that might be a viable defense for breaking the law. At best you get to argue self defense before a council of town elders in my settings (usually, your fate is decided by a single man, such as a Sheriff ).

So, you may (or may not) get to argue self defense in one of my campaign settings, but it isn't a "Get Out of Jail Free" card and you can't automatically assume that the friends and neighbors of the guy you just gutted are going to go out of their way to help you — a total stranger — out.

I guess a lot of that just seems like common sense to me. That said, I have been accused of placing a premium on verisimilitude when I DM. When I DM, I also expect my players to think before they act. If you can't be bothered to do that, you'll burn through characters pretty quickly.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Now, in modern law, one who commits murder may argue self defense before a jury. And if there were juries in my campaign settings, that might be a viable defense for breaking the law. At best you get to argue self defense before a council of town elders in my settings (usually, your fate is decided by a single man, such as a Sheriff ).

And remember, its always LOT easier to argue self-defense if you use a handgun (Magic Missile) as opposed to a truckload of dynamite (Maximized Empowered Fireball with Admixed Acid).

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Actually, limiting spellcasters would be easy. How many take Eschew Materials? ;p Or hell, just take out Eschew Materials altogether.

But yeah, bypassing armor and still having good AC isn't impossible, but yeah, you're going up a hill. But honestly, in return, you have much better touch AC then a dwarf with 10 dex and super heavy armor. He can take an axe to the face, you can dodge a scorching ray.

 

[jdrakeh]

And remember, its always LOT easier to argue self-defense if you use a handgun (Magic Missile) as opposed to a truckload of dynamite (Maximized Empowered Fireball with Admixed Acid).

Yes, as a general rule, the force used to defend oneself should be somewhat near that of the implied threat.

 

[jdrakeh]

Actually, limiting spellcasters would be easy. How many take Eschew Materials? ;p Or hell, just take out Eschew Materials altogether.

These words pertain to an edition of D&D that I do not play. Also, I try to find in-game ways to deal with things before I start altering actual rules.

 

[Aus_Snow]

In such a city, casters without a Writ or badge would be forced to wear a special armband or tabard while in the city...

Or perhaps they make certain you take an alchemical substance that dulls your arcane potential.

Step 1: Take plate armour off Fighter.
Step 2: Put it on Wizard.

 

[Theroc]

Step 1: Take plate armour off Fighter.
Step 2: Put it on Wizard.

And what of the Cleric?