Movement for mithral medium armor?

[MarkB]

Mithral armor is only 'treated' as one category lighter for purposes of MOVEMENT and other LIMITATIONS.

You can wear armor if you are not proficient in it, so lacking proficiency is not a limitation.

Non-proficiency limits how well you can perform a number of tasks whilst wearing armour. If that's not a limitation, I don't know what is.

Note that Mithral Full Plate of Speed has nothing about "movement and other limitations", the description says simply that it is considered medium armour.

Also, the Eberron Campaign Setting and other sourcebooks feature tables including category-adjusted armour, and they are listed under the categories they are treated as, not the categories of the base armour type (i.e. Darkleaf breastplate is listed as a light armour, and Darkleaf banded mail is listed as medium).

 

[Moon-Lancer]

"This isn’t exactly what the DUNGEON MASTER’s Guide says"


This is because it doesn’t say one way or the other. That’s what he meant.
He also is saying, that he isn’t saying something contrary to what the dms guild says. He is he is inferring that the word “other limitations” includes not being proficient. Their is too much evidence that says mythril makes the armor one category lighter for proficiency as well. Their is no evidence to the contrary except for believing that what is said in the dm's guild does not include proficiency.

It all depends on what a limitation is.

I don’t think anyone is going to win a raw argument on this, but evidence to say mythril is lighter even for feats is abound and in many different books all over the place.

Basically you have two beliefs but one side has sources, the faq and evidence to say otherwise.

This is really about that rogue that wants that mythril breast plate without getting med armor proficiency, isent it? Admit it.

 

[frankthedm]

The faq concedes defeat, admiting that mithral in no way changes the proficency requirements and that they and many people have made that mistake. Rules defeat reason in this forum.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

You haven’t stated any rules yet, so I do not see how this is so. The faq speaks of relativity in interpretation, not black and white rules. The rule you argue has no clear answer, even more so because no rule has been provided.

The question remains is lacking in a proficiency a limitation? I would say so. Limitation has no d&d context so one must use reason to find truth.

….

Well I’m glad have your characters wear armor they are not proficient with because clearly it is not a limitation of any sort the way you play.

Sorry cheap joke hehehe

 

[GorTeX]

Non-proficiency limits how well you can perform a number of tasks whilst wearing armour. If that's not a limitation, I don't know what is.

Note that Mithral Full Plate of Speed has nothing about "movement and other limitations", the description says simply that it is considered medium armour.

Also, the Eberron Campaign Setting and other sourcebooks feature tables including category-adjusted armour, and they are listed under the categories they are treated as, not the categories of the base armour type (i.e. Darkleaf breastplate is listed as a light armour, and Darkleaf banded mail is listed as medium).

This is really about that rogue that wants that mythril breast plate without getting med armor proficiency, isent it? Admit it.

Mithral Full Plate of speed is a specific armor with it's own properties.

Text overrides tables (even in later published works) when there is a conflict

For me, it's more about Barbarians wearing Mithral Full plate without having profieciency in it

Also, it really screws over Heavy Armor Optimization (as well as GHAO) (btw, why isn't this just Armor optimization and applies to all armor??) as well as some class abilities (such as the battlesmith's scared armor bonus only applying to heavy armors).

I think it makes more sense to not grant a 'free' feat for mithral along with it's movement and 'other limitations' benifits and allow feats that people actually have be used.

The only reason the FAQ came out with that answer is that it was 'easier' for players to understand...WOTC (and most game companies) don't think that the players of their games can handle complex rules and/or ideas (such as Mithral full plate having properties of both medium and heavy armor).

 

[Moon-Lancer]

I still havent seen any place that says mythril brest plate is still med armor yet i have seen many other sorces that say its light, so im going to have to go with the sorces that actualy say something.

 

[werk]

I still havent seen any place that says mythril brest plate is still med armor yet i have seen many other sorces that say its light, so im going to have to go with the sorces that actualy say something.

I think it's in Table : Armor and Shields.

MEDIUM
--Breastplate


If you look at the donning armor table, times are set by armor, rather than type, demostrating that type is not the gold standard for everything armor related.


I think it's more of a stretch to think that mithril changes the armor type, lacking specific RAW support, than it is to go with a more verbatim interpretation...i.e. It only changes what is called for in the description which is movement and 'other limitations'. Proficiency isn't a limitation, it's a requirement.

 

[glass]

FAQ's: Hmmm errata and FAQ's tend to be iffy on some cases. I am hoping that someone like, oh, say Hypersmurf or I2K can pop in with their 2 cp's.

BTW, Thanks for pointing to the Errata.

What Errata?


glass.

 

[MarkB]

I think it's in Table : Armor and Shields.

MEDIUM
--Breastplate

Mithral breastplate is not the same as breastplate.

If you look at the donning armor table, times are set by armor, rather than type, demostrating that type is not the gold standard for everything armor related.

Which really has no bearing upon determining armour type.

I think it's more of a stretch to think that mithril changes the armor type, lacking specific RAW support, than it is to go with a more verbatim interpretation...i.e. It only changes what is called for in the description which is movement and 'other limitations'. Proficiency isn't a limitation, it's a requirement.

Proficiency is certainly not a requirement. A commoner can don mithral or non-mithral breastplate and gain its full benefit - he just takes penalties to a wider range of tasks than a proficient wearer.

If that expanded set of penalties can be given any one-word definition, it isn't "requirement" - but "limitation" might fit.

Since it clearly is open to interpretation, I don't see any good reason to complicate and clutter the game by not going with the FAQ interpretation of making mithral armour simply one category lighter in all respects. It may slightly devalue Heavy Armour Optimisation, but frankly that doesn't even come close to being a good reason.

 

[frankthedm]

Since it clearly is open to interpretation, I don't see any good reason to complicate and clutter the game by not going with the FAQ interpretation of making mithral armour simply one category lighter in all respects. It may slightly devalue Heavy Armour Optimisation, but frankly that doesn't even come close to being a good reason.

That is your opinion. Doing so devaluates heavy armor proficiency as well, harming Paladins, Fighters, Clerics and Warriors.

I personally think a happy medium would be to allow the chain / mail armors to have the reduced proficiency benefits from mithral. This way, the perceived 'best' armors, Breast Plate and Full Plate still require normal proficiency to learn how to move properly in due to how solid they still are and the often overlooked armors are made more attractive since one needs less training to learn how to account for the now much lighter plates and bands over the chain.