D&D General The diminishing effectiveness of armour across the editions

[jgsugden]

These are not apples to apples comparisons There are a lot of other factors at play.

And as for the notion that a heavily armored PC in 5E is not ignoring 90% of the attacks most of the time - by 8th level I had a PC walking around with an AC of 19 (Plate (+1 from Forge Domain ability)) + 1 Warforged + 1 Fighting Style + 1 Forge Domain (other ability) + 3 (+1 shield) + 2 (Shield of Faith) + 1 Ring of Protection. AC 28. Outside of very strong monsters, he was ignoring most attacks.

Yes, I focused heavily on AC defense. However, that is the point. Every little bit of that made a difference, and that is what you want - to see every little bit of specialization meaningful.

 

[Oofta]

if you max any stat other than dex then heavy armor is useful

True, but let's say I have a sword-and-board type guy. If I max out strength I'm good at hitting things and if there's ever an athletics check I'm da' man. I don't remember the last time anyone cared much about encumbrance though and strength saves are about as common as hen's teeth.

Add in movement penalty unless you have 15 strength, stealth disadvantage, sleeping penalties from XGTE, swimming penalties for many DMs, lousy ranged weapon options.

All for +1 AC over studded leather with max dex. The high dex person will have advantage on initiative, Dex saves, Acrobatics and Stealth are more common than Athletics in most games, bows have far greater range and allow for multiple attacks per round.

From a pure numbers perspective I don't see a reason to ever focus on strength for a fighter or paladin unless you want to grapple. Not even sure I see it for any class other than maybe barbarian.

Even if you only have an above average dex, breastplate or half-plate is probably better in most cases than putting anything into strength.

 

[FrogReaver]

True, but let's say I have a sword-and-board type guy. If I max out strength I'm good at hitting things and if there's ever an athletics check I'm da' man. I don't remember the last time anyone cared much about encumbrance though and strength saves are about as common as hen's teeth.

Add in movement penalty unless you have 15 strength, stealth disadvantage, sleeping penalties from XGTE, swimming penalties for many DMs, lousy ranged weapon options.

All for +1 AC over studded leather with max dex. The high dex person will have advantage on initiative, Dex saves, Acrobatics and Stealth are more common than Athletics in most games, bows have far greater range and allow for multiple attacks per round.

From a pure numbers perspective I don't see a reason to ever focus on strength for a fighter or paladin unless you want to grapple. Not even sure I see it for any class other than maybe barbarian.

Even if you only have an above average dex, breastplate or half-plate is probably better in most cases than putting anything into strength.

that’s a different argument than the one you made in the paragraph I responded to.

 

[Oofta]

that’s a different argument than the one you made in the paragraph I responded to.

Better AC is just one aspect, you're right that I didn't go into all the details. It's just one of those things I wish 5E had done differently.

If the gap was more than 1 point of AC I'd have less of an issue with it is all. Someone in light armor should be easier to hit than someone in plate IMHO. Had there been a significant difference it would be a justification for people wearing heavy armor (and having a 15+ strength).

 

[DND_Reborn]

Better AC is just one aspect, you're right that I didn't go into all the details. It's just one of those things I wish 5E had done differently.

If the gap was more than 1 point of AC I'd have less of an issue with it is all. Someone in light armor should be easier to hit than someone in plate IMHO. Had there been a significant difference it would be a justification for people wearing heavy armor (and having a 15+ strength).

Armor should always have a trade-off in some fashion or another IMO.

Even if they changed critical hits so that if you wore armor, a 20 might be a critical hit, but maybe just threatened instead and you had to follow it up with another attack roll to confirm the critical hit. In no armor, a 20 is a critical hit, no confirmation roll needed. Then armor would offer you the potential to avoid more lethal injury. shrug

 

[Oofta]

Armor should always have a trade-off in some fashion or another IMO.

Even if they changed critical hits so that if you wore armor, a 20 might be a critical hit, but maybe just threatened instead and you had to follow it up with another attack roll to confirm the critical hit. In no armor, a 20 is a critical hit, no confirmation roll needed. Then armor would offer you the potential to avoid more lethal injury. shrug

I'd be tempted to add armor bonus to dexterity saves myself. Combined with the slightly better AC that would make it more worthwhile without getting complicated.

You can already negate crits with adamantine armor which can be applied to medium armor as well.

I have no problem with trade-offs, it's just that there doesn't seem to be much of an upside to a very iconic build.

 

[CapnZapp]

It's just struck me how much less effective armour and especially plate armour has got since WotC bought out TSR.

It's because of what characters people want to play.

Back in the 80s that was decently realistic burly men like Schwarzenegger.

Now it's basically anime heroes and lithe females.

The connection between strength and fighting prowess has been truly broken.

Just consider how the portrayal of Legolas and Gimli differs from book to film.

Once they were equals; Gimli's sheer brute force more than a match for Legolas speed and agility. Now Gimli is the joke while Legolas has become essentially a superhero, with his arrow-stabbing, shield-surfing, and mumakil-killing.

You look at 5E you'll see the exact same tendency.

A minmaxer would never build a strong slow character like Gimli today, when options for magical death rays and dexterity out the wazoo gives much better results for the same costs.

I bet that come 6th edition only hapless NPC guards (and a token PC build) wears heavy slow cumbersome armor. All the rest of the heroes don't let armor crimp their style.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I'd be tempted to add armor bonus to dexterity saves myself. Combined with the slightly better AC that would make it more worthwhile without getting complicated.

You can already negate crits with adamantine armor which can be applied to medium armor as well.

I have no problem with trade-offs, it's just that there doesn't seem to be much of an upside to a very iconic build.

Sure, a bonus like Shield Master applies to DEX?

Adamantine armor is great (our Barbarian LOVES his since crits when raging still do half damage instead of effectively normal damage). But my suggestion would make so all armor turns a critical hit into a critical "threat", which is really what armor is meant to do--turn lethal injuries into non-lethal ones.

 

[DND_Reborn]

It's because of what characters people want to play.

Yeah, that is the trend, for better or worse.

Back in the 80s that was decently realistic burly men like Schwarzenegger.

Go CONAN! (Who pretty much didn't really wear armor. LOL )

Now it's basically anime heroes and lithe females.

Hmm... no thank you. Others are welcome to them, though.

The connection between strength and fighting prowess has been truly broken.

Connect HP to STR and remove CON from the game... that would fix it.

 

[Oofta]

Sure, a bonus like Shield Master applies to DEX?

Adamantine armor is great (our Barbarian LOVES his since crits when raging still do half damage instead of effectively normal damage). But my suggestion would make so all armor turns a critical hit into a critical "threat", which is really what armor is meant to do--turn lethal injuries into non-lethal ones.

Shield master only applies if the PC is the only target. The only way that makes sense if it's a dex save for something that has only a single target, so it almost never happens.

At least that's how I interpret it because it doesn't make sense if you get a bonus if you happen to be the only target of a fireball but not if someone else happens to be standing 20 feet away and also in the fireball.

Oh well, hardly the only issue I have with that feat.