Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Aaron L" data-source="post: 3247579" data-attributes="member: 926">Most of the Fighters I've ever seen wear full plate.&nbsp; Is full plate therefore cheese?&nbsp;&nbsp; Most Rogues I've seen wear chain shirts.&nbsp; Are chain shirts cheese, too?&nbsp; Every fighting character wants a magic weapon.&nbsp; How about those?&nbsp; Cheddar, too?&nbsp; Adamantine plate is a better option for someone without a high Dex, anyway.&nbsp; (DR 3/- is really nice.)&nbsp; Characters using the best equipment for the job isn't cheesy.&nbsp; Agile characters choosing to wear the lightest and most flexible armor available to them isn't cheesy in any way.&nbsp; On the contrary, it is simply logical.&nbsp; There's a reason that bronze armor isn't very common; steel is better.&nbsp; Is it cheesy to wear steel armor instead of bronze?&nbsp; I certainly don't think so.&nbsp; I would think that everyone who could get mithral armor should get it.&nbsp; If they are agile.&nbsp; If not then they should get adamantine.&nbsp; Just as steel overtook bronze, the better materials should be the first choice.&nbsp; The only problem is the rarity and cost of it, which is the only reason why mithral and adamantine armor isn't the standard the way steel is.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; It isn't like mithral is cheap, either.&nbsp; You pay a lot for your lighter armor.&nbsp; For the price of a suit of mithral full plate you could get a suit of +3 steel full plate instead!!&nbsp; How is that cheesy in any way at all?!&nbsp;&nbsp; Yes, but since mithral is stronger and lighter than steel, the plates can be made smaller and thinner; whereas a steel breastplate must be made of one or two big plates, a mithral version could be made of maybe five or six smaller interlocking plates with greater flexibility.&nbsp; The increased strength means the plates can be thinner, cutting down on the bulkiness.&nbsp; Not to mention the greater mobility granted from the sheer amount of reduced weight.&nbsp; Cutting the weight on a suit of armor in half should have a big advantage.&nbsp; I've always imagined mithral armor as not just being made of a different material, but being constructed differently to take advantage of the better material.&nbsp; Just as you wouldn't try to construct metal armor the same way you would leather armor, you wouldn't construct mithral armor the same way you would steel armor.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Aaron L, post: 3247579, member: 926"] Most of the Fighters I've ever seen wear full plate. Is full plate therefore cheese? Most Rogues I've seen wear chain shirts. Are chain shirts cheese, too? Every fighting character wants a magic weapon. How about those? Cheddar, too? Adamantine plate is a better option for someone without a high Dex, anyway. (DR 3/- is really nice.) Characters using the best equipment for the job isn't cheesy. Agile characters choosing to wear the lightest and most flexible armor available to them isn't cheesy in any way. On the contrary, it is simply logical. There's a reason that bronze armor isn't very common; steel is better. Is it cheesy to wear steel armor instead of bronze? I certainly don't think so. I would think that everyone who could get mithral armor [i]should[/i] get it. If they are agile. If not then they should get adamantine. Just as steel overtook bronze, the better materials should be the first choice. The only problem is the rarity and cost of it, which is the only reason why mithral and adamantine armor isn't the standard the way steel is. It isn't like mithral is cheap, either. You pay a lot for your lighter armor. For the price of a suit of mithral full plate you could get a suit of +3 steel full plate instead!! How is that cheesy in any way at all?! Yes, but since mithral is stronger and lighter than steel, the plates can be made smaller and thinner; whereas a steel breastplate must be made of one or two big plates, a mithral version could be made of maybe five or six smaller interlocking plates with greater flexibility. The increased strength means the plates can be thinner, cutting down on the bulkiness. Not to mention the greater mobility granted from the sheer amount of reduced weight. Cutting the weight on a suit of armor [i]in half[/i] should have a big advantage. I've always imagined mithral armor as not just being made of a different material, but being constructed differently to take advantage of the better material. Just as you wouldn't try to construct metal armor the same way you would leather armor, you wouldn't construct mithral armor the same way you would steel armor. [/QUOTE]

Verification