Skeletons can wear armor, right?

Vahktang

First Post
I mean they retain weapon proficiencies.
How about armor proficiencies?
The examples have them without armor but with weapons.
Choice or rule?

What say you all?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Actually, Rule.

I think wotc has published normal skeleton minis with armor, but the template does not give armor profs and strips away the feats that might have given it. Weapon profs are kept as specified under their attack heading. As it happens, Bugbear zombies seem to keep sheild prof.

I don't think it is unreasonable for a skeleton to keep it's armor profs, though they give such a good deal on CR as it is, I'd add a modest xp bump for thos full plate fire giant skeletons.

Proficient with whatever type of armor (light, medium, or heavy) it is described as wearing, as well as all lighter types. Undead not indicated as wearing armor are not proficient with armor. Undead are proficient with shields if they are proficient with any form of armor.

The skeleton and zombie templates originated here. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/mm/20010126a
 
Last edited:

It's not covered in the template, it goes back to the type description:

SRD; Monsters; Monster Types said:
Proficient with whatever type of armor (light, medium, or heavy) it is described as wearing, as well as all lighter types. Undead not indicated as wearing armor are not proficient with armor. Undead are proficient with shields if they are proficient with any form of armor.

If the skeleton is described as wearing armor, it's proficient.
 


Not to get too picayune, but what's the logic there? If I dig up a bunch of skeletons, animate them and they don't have armor on, I can't put it on them later because they won't be proficient. If I dig them up, dress them in armor and then animate them, they will be proficient. Or, if they aren't proficient in armor, I put them in armor, then they are described as being in armor, and therefore are proficient.

How 'bout this for a ruling: They're skeletons. They can wear armor.

--SJ beat me to it. Well played.
 

frankthedm said:
As it happens, Bugbear zombies seem to keep sheild prof.

And Human Warrior Skeletons?

Strictly, they don't, and so should take the shield's ACP on their attack rolls.

Are bugbear zombies and human warrior skeletons proficient in any form of armor? No; they are not described as wearing any.

Are they proficient with shields? No; despite shields appearing in their description, they are proficient with shields if they are proficient in any form of armor... which we've already established they are not.

-Hyp.
 

frankthedm said:
the template does not give armor profs and strips away the feats that might have given it.

It strips the feats, but if the base creature had the proficiency by other means such as a level of fighter or a racial proficiency, that would be retained.

It's a template so the example creatures do not count as 'description' in that sense.
 

phindar said:
Not to get too picayune, but what's the logic there? If I dig up a bunch of skeletons, animate them and they don't have armor on, I can't put it on them later because they won't be proficient. If I dig them up, dress them in armor and then animate them, they will be proficient. Or, if they aren't proficient in armor, I put them in armor, then they are described as being in armor, and therefore are proficient.
I imagine you'd use similar logic to how they retain weapon proficiencies:
"A skeleton retains all... weapon proficiencies of the base creature"
 

I actually like the idea that skeletons are proficient with whatever they are wearing when animated... it saves having to explain why they remember how to fight, but not how to ride a horse.
 

Actually, I never stripped my skeletons of their armor profs... might have been wrong, but skeletons with desecrate, armors, weapons, zombies and some wights and ghouls hidden in the throng make for very entertaining combats even against mid-level characters.
 

Remove ads

Top