Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 8144978" data-attributes="member: 7006">Let's also not forget that worrying about "realism" when we are all stuck with the tropes of D&D is also ridiculous.There is no "realism" in a group of five people walking around looking for treasure in random caves and then getting into hand-to-hand skirmishes every couple of hours with other bands of roving treasure hunters.  As a trope, it's the height of unrealistic.  Especially this same group of five people surviving each and every one of these... probably several hundred... hand-to-hand skirmishes they fight in your typical D&D campaign.  If we are talking realism... that's just stupid.So let's throw the "realism" bugaboo into the toilet.  Nothing about D&D is realistic-- even putting aside the fantasy aspects of the game.The reason why heavy armor wearers wear their heavy armor all the time is so that they can have their normal AC, especially when the DM throws meaningless random encounters at them to fight every hour on the hour  because that's what the tropes of D&D entail.  Cutting those characters off at the knees by forcing them not to wear their armor because it's "unrealistic" demands then that that DM start purging all the other crap that is "unrealistic".  Like for instance... taking Dexterity out of the Armor Class calculation.Armor Class should be about the class of your armor.  That's it!   How strong your armor is gives us the calculation on how hard it is to hurt you while wearing it.  Dexterity isn't armor-- dexterity is dodging away from attacks, which should be it's own separate calculation in D&D combat.  So if you want your heavy armor wearers to NOT wear their heavy armor except when they go into known full-on battles where they spend an hour beforehand getting themselves kitted up?  Well... take Dexterity out of the AC calculation. THEN those STR-based heavy armor wearers COULD go down to just wearing leather armor around during the day like everybody else in the party or the town and NOT be totally hosed compared to the PCs who prioritized DEX.  If EVERYONE had ACs of 11 or 12 for leather or studded leather armor as they walk around town... then the STR-based warrior types could remain slightly better in combat functionality against all the rogues and such because they'd have higher CONs and hit dice to survive longer.But if you are going to INSIST on DEX in your AC calculations AND INSIST that a STR-based fighter/paladin type not be allowed to wear their heavy armor all throughout the day (because "realism")... then AT LEAST those characters should get the same bonuses to their AC unarmored as barbarians and monks do.  I mean come on... the whole point of the Barbarians and Monks getting to add a second ability score to their AC calculations was so that those two character types could have their whole "unarmored warrior" trope while still remaining competitive against the heavy armored individuals! D&D wanted those tropes in the game, so they invented these bogus game mechanics of adding CON or WIS to calculate those character's ACs.  So if you are going to forcefully take the heavy armor away from the STR-based melee warriors that aren't Barbarians... then at the very least they should get to add their CON to their unarmored AC as well.  I mean fair is fair.</blockquote>

Verification