Mithral Armour

[SableWyvern]

Is mithral armour considered one step lighter for the purposes of the proficency required for its use.

Frex, would a mithral breastplate require the light or medium armour proficiency?

 

[Henrix]

No. The armour type does not change.

[Edit]
That is, a mithral breastplate is still medium armour.
[/Edit]

 

[Daeinar]

If I may quote from the SRD:

"Most mithral armors are one category lighter than normal for purposes of movement and other limitations. Heavy armors are treated as medium, and medium armors are treated as light, but light armors are still treated as light. "

 

[SableWyvern]

Daeinar: I don't think that quote is particularly clear on the matter. I'm not even entirely sure which side you're advocating.

IMC, I have ruled tentatively with Henrix, but I'm looking for additional feedback, and maybe a definitive answer somewhere in the rules.

 

[shilsen]

I would rule that the armor type does change. I can't find a completely unequivocal answer in the rules, but the quotation that Daeinar makes does seem to imply a change. Also, consider the description of Elven Chain (mithral chainmail) in the DMG (pg.182). It says that the Elven Chain "is considered light armor". Since it doesn't provide any restrictions to that statement, I'd see it as counting as light armor in all ways.

 

[SableWyvern]

Shilsen, I'm almost convinced. Unless someone comes up with a better reason why the proficiency required remains the same, I will eventually talk myself into agreeing completely.

 

[Henrix]

If we look again at what the rules say:

If I may quote from the SRD:

"Most mithral armors are one category lighter than normal for purposes of movement and other limitations. Heavy armors are treated as medium, and medium armors are treated as light, but light armors are still treated as light. "

we notice that it does not say that mithral armours are one category lighter, but that they are treated as if they were for some purposes.
If they were one category lighter it would have been easier to just say so, wouldn't it?

Besides, I don't want bards, rangers and abrabarians running around in mithral full plate!

If it were thus, heavy armour proficiency would be almost worthless in high-level campaigns!

 

[JacktheRabbit]

nm

 

[Savage Wombat]

I agree with the "treated as" interpretation. A mithril breastplate is medium armor, and requires medium armor proficiency to use. However, for determining movement, Dex mod, etc., it acts as if it were light armor.

I'm not sure whether I'd allow a ranger to wear a mithril breastplate and keep his two-weapon fighting ability. Should a monk be able to wear a mithril chain shirt and keep his monk abilities? Of course not.

 

[The Souljourner]

"for purposes of movement and other limitations"

This would imply that is does count for limitations such as "only in light armor", but proficiency is not a limitation.

I would let a ranger wear a mithral breastplate and retain his dual wield style, since it's a limitation.

However, just because the category has changed for some things doesn't negate the fact that it *is* armor, therefor a monk obviously can't wear mithral light armor and not get the standard penalties.

To go from an in-game perspective - a mithral breast plate is lighter, thus doesn't restrict movement as much, but if you're not used to wearing a big plate of metal on your chest, it's still going to mess with your skills.

The question is, is it unbalanced to allow this to barbarians and rangers and other classes that have abilities that only work in light armor? The answer? I don't know. It pretty much changes that retriction to meaning "only in mithral medium armor".

-The Souljourner