Pallys get Platemail Feat but Fighters do not?
CapnZapp
Legend
What I mean is you could go one step further than merely picking Shield Proficiency at first level. You could even reskin the Cleric into a class not getting any feat, but getting the shield prof.
In the same way, you could say the Fighter gets plate just like the Pally, but he does not get a feat.
You would do this only if you can't stand the thought of shieldless clerics or plateless fighters, of course.
DracoSuave
First Post
If a Pally cares -that- much about their AC, they're a shield-user, so Shield Spec is the feat of choice for them!
FreeTheSlaves
Adventurer
If a Pally cares -that- much about their AC, they're a shield-user, so Shield Spec is the feat of choice for them!
That's right, but then coming back to what previous posters have pointed out, a 15 dex is a big ask of the most MAD class in the PHB.
If the paladin didn't get plate for free, they basically wouldn't get it at all. Need Str, Wis, Cha and then Dex/Con? Ouch. Fighters otoh can manage to prioritise Con as a second or third important stat, which is one to two priorities better.
The 4E approach to armour/weapon proficiencies is to give the bare essentials and let characters spend feats thereafter. The fighter not getting plate is therefore comparable to the wizard not getting leather.
While the paladin doesn't get martial missile proficiency, I think the real balancing factor at play here is their MAD. The paladin's physical attributes, dex & con particularly, will usually be less than the fighter, and the extra point of AC (or extra feat) goes someway to making them comparable.
brendan candries
First Post
Considering marking is intended to make you a juicier target rather than your allies; improving your AC actually does the opposite. Now there's a thought.
On another note. Scale spec also ignores the speed penalty. A nice boon for non-dwarves.
It would make perfect sense for a Fighter to be proficient with Plate Armor, considering this has been stipulation with fighters and all warrior-knight types since the founding of D&D and other fantasy genre. But WotC's vision is greater than ours, don't forget. It's best for only a holy warrior to be proficient in Plate because if the Fighter is also proficient in it the classes won't be balanced. Look at what happened to the spellcasters when they were the greedy ones in the crappy previous editions of the game.
I'm sure WotC explained this in one of their preview books.
Hey, folks! Your friendly admin here, popping in to flag this as exactly the kind of post you don't want to make. Sarcasm + trolling does not, in fact, make posts like this worthwhile. That's probably worth remembering if you like posting here. ~ Piratecat
Last edited by a moderator:
WalterKovacs
First Post
There is a reason there are only 6 types of armors, they wanted each armor type to be used, thus, there are characters that have each armor type as a cap, and even someone with only light shield proficiency. They also made most of the armors give a "penalty" for going up the ladder, with the exception of scale. The cost of scale being that you need a certain number of feats to get into it which can be a hefty investment.
If no one uses armor type X, why have armor type X. Thus you have the leaders 'capped' at chain armor, having to increase certain scores to be able to "buy" scale. Plate becomes a special case because it has a high purchase cost feat/stat-wise, and penalizes the player with a high ACP. However, unlike the other heavy armors, you will automatically qualify for specialization unless you were a paladin, part of why it has no secondary benefit (while the other armor specs are counter intuitive, since heavy armor doesn't favor dex as much, and hide armor would want dex or int maximized, and wouldn't want to have to put too much into con, except perhaps an warlock).
Basically, it allowed the classes to be slightly different from each other, give them options, etc ... Most feats, except for going from cloth to leather, and perhaps leather/hide to chain are only going to give a +1 AC boost. That's a small enough bonus that it becomes a question for the player about whether or not it's worth the increase. In most cases (leather to hide, or scale to plate) there are also penalties fo the step up, with chain to scale being the only one with obvious benefits in addition ot the AC boost. Finding the right balance where the increased AC is an option, but not an obvious one is interesting. Instead of having a lot of armor that is "only if I get stuck with it because it's magic" or "I'm getting the cheaper alternative at the moment, because I can't afford the better one yet."
If no one uses armor type X, why have armor type X. Thus you have the leaders 'capped' at chain armor, having to increase certain scores to be able to "buy" scale. Plate becomes a special case because it has a high purchase cost feat/stat-wise, and penalizes the player with a high ACP. However, unlike the other heavy armors, you will automatically qualify for specialization unless you were a paladin, part of why it has no secondary benefit (while the other armor specs are counter intuitive, since heavy armor doesn't favor dex as much, and hide armor would want dex or int maximized, and wouldn't want to have to put too much into con, except perhaps an warlock).
Basically, it allowed the classes to be slightly different from each other, give them options, etc ... Most feats, except for going from cloth to leather, and perhaps leather/hide to chain are only going to give a +1 AC boost. That's a small enough bonus that it becomes a question for the player about whether or not it's worth the increase. In most cases (leather to hide, or scale to plate) there are also penalties fo the step up, with chain to scale being the only one with obvious benefits in addition ot the AC boost. Finding the right balance where the increased AC is an option, but not an obvious one is interesting. Instead of having a lot of armor that is "only if I get stuck with it because it's magic" or "I'm getting the cheaper alternative at the moment, because I can't afford the better one yet."
Charwoman Gene
Adventurer
I usually build my fighter more as a striker, so I usually lean towards using some chain to up my Dex.
Danceofmasks
First Post
If a Pally cares -that- much about their AC, they're a shield-user, so Shield Spec is the feat of choice for them!
I don't see many paladins having dex 15, either ...
Similar Threads
