[Not 3.5, but I wish] No one should start with the Heavy Armor proficiency.
- Thread starter Simplicity
- Start date
David Argall
First Post
But, but
As we have been trying to say..
Heavy armor is a dubious choice as it is. You can manage +8 in light armor [if you have good dex] and a fantastic +9 in heavy [if you have 1500 gp, which is more than +1 magic armor. Then there is armor check penalties, slower speed... The stuff is not a prime goal for a rollplayer.
The heavily armored knight is a prime sterotype for the roleplayer, so he too wants the armor easily available, and he wants it to be worth getting.
Require use of a valuable feat? Not hardly, and not unless you make the armor bonus something worth having.
As we have been trying to say..
Heavy armor is a dubious choice as it is. You can manage +8 in light armor [if you have good dex] and a fantastic +9 in heavy [if you have 1500 gp, which is more than +1 magic armor. Then there is armor check penalties, slower speed... The stuff is not a prime goal for a rollplayer.
The heavily armored knight is a prime sterotype for the roleplayer, so he too wants the armor easily available, and he wants it to be worth getting.
Require use of a valuable feat? Not hardly, and not unless you make the armor bonus something worth having.
krunchyfrogg
Explorer
Interesting idea, but only the Cleric, Fighter, and Paladin start with it anyway. I can picture Clerics without the heavy armor, but I have a hard time picturing Fighters, and especially Paladins without it.
Vocenoctum
First Post
Re: But, but
That's where I'm at. For me it's more of part of the image I want for the PC. Granted with point buy I don't bother getting a high dex for a Heavy Armor fella.
On several occasions I've missed nearly the entire battle when it was far across a courtyard.
It is a little odd that my gnome barbarian cleric got th eheavy armor prof from his cleric side though
Main advantage for the heavy armor is that you have the same AC flatfooted or whenever else denied dexterity bonus.
You also can make faces under your helmet without people seeing.
Disadvantages are;
getting dressed (requires assistance, though that's almost always been overlooked in the games I've played in. Also can be gotten around with Ease special ability IIRC)
movement (won't affect dwarves, but then they're already reduced movement. Usually I ended up with mithril and boots of S&S)
David Argall said:
That's where I'm at. For me it's more of part of the image I want for the PC. Granted with point buy I don't bother getting a high dex for a Heavy Armor fella.
On several occasions I've missed nearly the entire battle when it was far across a courtyard.
It is a little odd that my gnome barbarian cleric got th eheavy armor prof from his cleric side though
Main advantage for the heavy armor is that you have the same AC flatfooted or whenever else denied dexterity bonus.
You also can make faces under your helmet without people seeing.
Disadvantages are;
getting dressed (requires assistance, though that's almost always been overlooked in the games I've played in. Also can be gotten around with Ease special ability IIRC)
movement (won't affect dwarves, but then they're already reduced movement. Usually I ended up with mithril and boots of S&S)
Painfully
First Post
Sounds like a good HOUSE RULE for your game.
Tweaking your game is fine, but when your party finds their first suit of magical plate mail and the fighter in the group says, "I cannot use that until I take the feat." It sort of feels silly to me.
Are you trying to show that fighters, clerics and paladins should have to begin by not being ideally equiped for their first adventure? A lack of funds should easily accomodate you in that regard.
Why put another hurdle in the way? Are you going to give them another feat slot to make up for it if they decide NOT to take heavy armor proficiency? I think it would just unbalance things a bit more.
If you want to do it for campaign flavor, that's all good, but otherwise it just feels like tweaking something that isn't really broken, or needs any fixing to begin with.
Tweaking your game is fine, but when your party finds their first suit of magical plate mail and the fighter in the group says, "I cannot use that until I take the feat." It sort of feels silly to me.
Are you trying to show that fighters, clerics and paladins should have to begin by not being ideally equiped for their first adventure? A lack of funds should easily accomodate you in that regard.
Why put another hurdle in the way? Are you going to give them another feat slot to make up for it if they decide NOT to take heavy armor proficiency? I think it would just unbalance things a bit more.
If you want to do it for campaign flavor, that's all good, but otherwise it just feels like tweaking something that isn't really broken, or needs any fixing to begin with.
Vocenoctum
First Post
Oh, that's one other thing about heavy armor.
According to the random tables, 40% of all magic armor is full plate.
While playing my heavy armored types however, since I'm the only one in the group that decks out in heavy, the DM hands out light armor like lollipops.
Out of about 30 suits fo magic armor, maybe 2 suits of magical heavy armor have popped up. I've ended up spending quite a bit of money or favors to get my heavy armor's.
According to the random tables, 40% of all magic armor is full plate.
While playing my heavy armored types however, since I'm the only one in the group that decks out in heavy, the DM hands out light armor like lollipops.
Out of about 30 suits fo magic armor, maybe 2 suits of magical heavy armor have popped up. I've ended up spending quite a bit of money or favors to get my heavy armor's.
ForceUser
Explorer
This is a silly idea. The way heavy armor is utilized currently is just fine. It's not like a lot of character actually use it. In the case of clerics, more often than not it's encumbrance issues that determines whether they wear it or not. You guys are too caught up in "realism" as pertains to D&D - whatever that means. Happens a lot around here.
RangerWickett
Legend
I use the following option in my home campaign, and I got the idea from the Soldier class in Star Wars, slightly modified.
No class starts with heavy armor proficiency. However, Fighters and Paladins receive it as a bonus feat at 3rd level. Clerics do not receive it at all. I find that this version prevents people from multiclassing just for armor feats. I also created the Armor Mastery feat.
Armor Mastery
Prerequisite: Heavy Armor Proficiency, base attack bonus 5+
Benefit: You gain DR 1/- while wearing heavy armor.
Then again, take anything I suggest with a grain of salt. I've house-ruled out magic plusses to armor, and made magical armor and things like rings of protection and amulets of natural armor very rare. To compensate, I give a level-based Defense Bonus of +1 AC for every 2 levels, which you lose if you're flat-footed.
No class starts with heavy armor proficiency. However, Fighters and Paladins receive it as a bonus feat at 3rd level. Clerics do not receive it at all. I find that this version prevents people from multiclassing just for armor feats. I also created the Armor Mastery feat.
Armor Mastery
Prerequisite: Heavy Armor Proficiency, base attack bonus 5+
Benefit: You gain DR 1/- while wearing heavy armor.
Then again, take anything I suggest with a grain of salt. I've house-ruled out magic plusses to armor, and made magical armor and things like rings of protection and amulets of natural armor very rare. To compensate, I give a level-based Defense Bonus of +1 AC for every 2 levels, which you lose if you're flat-footed.
Ranger REG
Explorer
I'd be the first to admit, I don't enforce the encumbrance rules as much I would want to. I don't do the math, I just look at the list of equipment the party have and then ask, "How are you going to carry them around in your travel?"ForceUser said:
But if a cleric suddenly finds a plate armor that he can wear (unless his religious oath forbids him), he will keep and wear it because he knows he has no penalty.
Personally, I'll grant anyone who select the War Domain a bonus proficiency in heavy armor as well as the proficiency in a martial weapon associated with his patron deity, assuming that I remove the heavy armor from the cleric's starting proficiency feats.
Viktyr Gehrig
First Post
I'd say that removing the Heavy Armor Proficiency from all classes is a good idea-- as long as the Fighter gets a bonus feat at 3rd level.
It makes sense that Heavy Armor would need more training than every Fighter is going to get, but that training should be relatively easy to acquire.
It makes sense that Heavy Armor would need more training than every Fighter is going to get, but that training should be relatively easy to acquire.
Similar Threads
