Time to add new Armors to the table.

[mellored]

Like Wizard typically. These non-gish mage concepts rely more heavily on spellcasting and other magic to defend oneself, as well as relying on a Warrior ally to stay between oneself and the hostiles.

Maybe when the Shield of Faith spell targets Self, it requires no Concentration.

Plus both Cleric and Artificer can use shields, which exchanges a free offhand for an AC bonus.

So everyone gets scaling mage armor or bark skin?

I mean, that kind of works. But you'll still end up with every fighter maxing Str right away. And it will be even harder to have any monk with any points into Cha.

It's hard enough for anyone to take the skilled feat as is. And your making it even harder.

 

[Yaarel]

So everyone gets scaling mage armor or bark skin?

Fighters can benefit from spells like Mage Armor too. I feel strongly Mage Armor plus a Cantrip should be a Fighting Style. It is meant for Eldritch Knights to feel magical at level 1, but other Fighter character concepts might want to choose this Fighting Style too.

(Note, in the UA, Bark Skin grants temporary hit points instead of AC.)

Note, the spells Mage Armor and Shield are effectively force constructs, and Shield of Faith is more like an aspect of fate that is scrying across timelines to navigate "lucky" opportunities in the form of a bonus to AC.

Each of these distinctive magical concepts might come imply other magical effects.

There are other defensive concepts too. For example, in Norse sagas the "helmet of dread" is actually a nickname for a magical technique, where one makes oneself mentally fill a target with fear in a way that makes oneself more difficult to be hit: a kind of Frightened bonus to AC.

The Sanctuary spell is a similar kind of defensive mental Enchantment.

And so on.

I mean, that kind of works. But you'll still end up with every fighter maxing Str right away.

I have no problem with the Fighter class encouraging investment in the Strength ability!

At the same time, it is also viable for a Fighter to max Dexterity right away, rely on finesse and archery, and Stealth.

And it will be even harder to have any monk with any points into Cha.

The Monk effectively has:

AC = Wisdom + Dexterity

This wouldnt really change any when typically AC=Strength+Dexterity.

The Barbarian has AC=Constitution+Dexterity.

Since these characters would have to invest in three abilities (Strength, Dexterity, and Wisdom/Constitution), it seems feasible to allow them to wear armor if they want, effectively reaching upto AC 25 near epic levels. It needs more scrutiny, but in principle seems balanced.

It's hard enough for anyone to take the skilled feat as is. And your making it even harder.

The Skilled feat is a worthless feat.

Really, a half-feat (!) should grant four (!) Skill Proficiencies.

However, those feats that grant Skill Expertise are worth the feat (as long as it is for one of the more useful skills).

 

[mellored]

I have no problem with the Fighter class encouraging investment in the Strength ability!

It's a lot more than "encourage" when you get +1 to hit, damage, and AC.

It's basically mandatory at that point.

Barbarians actually have a nice choice at the moment since their abilities are Str based, and defense is Con/Dex. But your way means it's Str, with no tradeoffs. Just always Str.

 

[Yaarel]

It's a lot more than "encourage" when you get +1 to hit, damage, and AC.

It's basically mandatory at that point.

Barbarians actually have a nice choice at the moment since their abilities are Str based, and defense is Con/Dex. But your way means it's Str, with no tradeoffs. Just always Str.

Dexterity benefits from finesse that does respectable damage, superior ranged weapons, and the more useful Dexterity skills. Plus Initiative.

Indeed, if AC=Strength+Dexterity, it will be the first time Strength has ever become competitive with the uber-stat Dexterity!

Note, a high Strength character still needs to find a suitable armor that can benefit from Strength. But the Dexterity bonus is an innate ability to "dodge".

 

[Yaarel]

Some may recall, I prefer eight abilities rather than six.

• Strength and Constitution
• Dexterity and Athletics
• Intelligence and Perception
• Charisma and Wisdom

In this context, Strength is the go-to for heavy armor and heavy weaponry concepts. Strength (and maybe Constitution too) is a prereq for Size, meaning very high Strength can represent Large size with reach.

Athletics is the go-to for all swashbuckling mobility and athletic agility stunts, including the dodge bonus to AC.

Dexterity remains with finesse, ranged weapons, Stealth and Slight of Hand.

Perception includes the Initiative bonus.

 

[mellored]

Dexterity benefits from finesse that does respectable damage, superior ranged weapons, and the more useful Dexterity skills. Plus Initiative.

Indeed, if AC=Strength+Dexterity, it will be the first time Strength has ever become competitive with the uber-stat Dexterity!

Note, a high Strength character still needs to find a suitable armor that can benefit from Strength. But the Dexterity bonus is an innate ability to "dodge".

You're still making it so no one will take a feat and reducing the number of characters.
Not to mention inflating AC.

 

[Yaarel]

When

AC = Strength (armor) + Dexterity (dodge)

You're still making it so no one will take a feat and reducing the number of characters.

Only character concepts that specialize in being unhittable, will reach the highest ACs. Even then, they will be tolerably near the upper limits of bounded accuracy. Investing for Strength armor and Dexterity dodge, is a viable option, but there are other good options for character concepts to take.

Not to mention inflating AC.

Actually, AC deflates − until the very highest levels when these superhuman ability scores come online.

Most of the experience of D&D will be normal AC within normal bounds.

 

[Yaarel]

In my view for ability scores:

12 = average
14 = exceptional
16 = rare
18 = peak possibility of human
20 = superhuman

 

[Lojaan]

Personally, I think One D&D presents an opportunity to add more decision treasure in treasure accumulation and ways to spend gold.

Time to Add more armors to the top end of the table of the armor types?

Light Armor	Armor Class	Strength	Stealth
Padded	11 + Dex modifier	-	Disadvantage
Leather	11 + Dex modifier	-	-
Studded Leather	12 + Dex modifier	-	-
Piecemeal	13 + Dex modifier	STR 15	-
Gambeson	13 + Dex modifier	STR 13	Disadvantage

This gives light armor users 3 options to upgrade to and allows DMs more variety of armors to reward as treasure. Piecemeal armor would be plate armor covering the chest and shoulder only. Gambeson is thicker but less flexible cloth.

Medium Armor	AC	Strength	Stealth
Hide	12 + Dex modifier (max 2)
Chain Shirt	13 + Dex modifier (max 2)
Scale Mail	14 + Dex modifier (max 2)		Disadvantage
Breastplate	14 + Dex modifier (max 2)
Half Plate	15 + Dex modifier (max 2)		Disadvantage
Brigandine	15 + Dex modifier (max 2)	STR 15	-

Again 3 choices in top armor. Medium armor was already fine.

Heavy Armor	AC	Strength	Stealth
Ring mail	14	-	Disadvantage
Chain Mail	16	STR 13	Disadvantage
Heavy Hide	16	STR 13	-
Splint	17	STR 15	Disadvantage
Banded	17	STR 15
Plate	18	STR 15	Disadvantage

Good old stupid banded armor allows for another option for heavy armor users. Heavy plate allows the rich STR user to remain on top as the high AC. Heavy armor is the toughest as you want to keep Plate as top. Add in banded for heavy armor users who want to be stealthy

Highest AC in armor before feats	Light	Medium	Heavy
16	Leather, Padded	Breastplate	Chainmail, Heavy Hide
17	Studded Leather	Brigandine, Half Plate	Banded, Splint
18	Gambeson, Piecemeal		Plate

As for the second part. what if armor of resistance dragon scale mail were craftable and your could switch the damage type buy collecting dragon scales and having a master smith work on the armor. 5000gp for the scales and 2000gp for the smith's work.

Resistance is something that your can add to armor without breaking bounded accuracy much. Possibly adding additional resistances to armors would be okay as well. An adventure with dragons or demons could yield adding fire or cold resistance to all the armor users on the downtime and see gold well spent. All while not warping the main combat flow.

What do you think?

If what you want is armor as reward then best to ignore the types altogether and go for magical armor alternatives, like enchantments and special materials and the like. Basic equipment as reward is not very, well, rewarding.

For actual types you only need poor/ok/superior quality for each weight category, and a subcategory of 'superior' which is 'special'. You don't need a different "type" for each. Then go to town on the fluff/special materials/enchantments etc...

You want flameproof armor? Sure you can have gambeson armor (light) made from the wool of the flame sheep of Tarterous, scale mail (medium) carved from the legendary light-but-no-heaty stones from cool mountain, or plate (heavy) wrought in the iceforges of the shadowfell. Or you could skin a (sentient) red dragon and make light/medium or heavy armor out of it depending on your preference (you monster).

None of this requires seven types of heavy armor, and it avoids the pitfall of magical versions of crap armor (oooh +1 ringmail).

If you are going for a low magic world then this approach works even better. You make one type of armor for each weight level, fluff them however best suits your world, and then replace magical "+x armor" with superior mundane versions. For example, make normal chainmail the default for heavy armor, +1 heavy armor could be superior chain, splint or brigidine, and plate could be the equivalent of +2 or +3 heavy armor. You also make the price and availability of these superior armors the same as their magical versions - so in this example splint mail would be the equivalent (in terms of price and availability) of +1 plate.

Anyway that is how I would do it.

 

[mellored]

Only character concepts that specialize in being unhittable, will reach the highest ACs.

There is no "specialize" if Str adds to both damage and AC.

You don't get a choice between offense and defense. Your taking +2 and nothing else.

Actually, AC deflates

Yes, that is intended. It gets easier to come back from the dead and lots of other things at higher levels. So you get hit a bit more to compensate.

 

[Yaarel]

There is no "specialize" if Str adds to both damage and AC.

You don't get a choice between offense and defense. Your taking +2 and nothing else.

Compare the tropes of the 5-Guy Band

• Strong Guy (Strength-Constitution)
• Rebel Guy (Dexterity-Athletics)
• Smart Guy (Intelligence-Perception)
• Heart Guy (Charisma-Wisdom)
• Jock Guy (generalist)

Strength is intentionally the go-to ability to build the Strong Guy character type, that is the big one-person-army brute. It includes both heavy weapons and heavy armor.

D&D has never done swashbuckling athletic stunts well. For example, it is absurd to separate jumping from falling, climbing from balancing, and so on. Where Athletics is a separate ability to all these things, it is the go-to ability for the agile daredevil Rebel Guy character concept.

Dexterity is very much offense − including finesse and two-weapon damage, but most importantly sniping safely from a distance.

 

[Minigiant]

If what you want is armor as reward then best to ignore the types altogether and go for magical armor alternatives, like enchantments and special materials and the like. Basic equipment as reward is not very, well, rewarding.

For actual types you only need poor/ok/superior quality for each weight category, and a subcategory of 'superior' which is 'special'. You don't need a different "type" for each. Then go to town on the fluff/special materials/enchantments etc...

You want flameproof armor? Sure you can have gambeson armor (light) made from the wool of the flame sheep of Tarterous, scale mail (medium) carved from the legendary light-but-no-heaty stones from cool mountain, or plate (heavy) wrought in the iceforges of the shadowfell. Or you could skin a (sentient) red dragon and make light/medium or heavy armor out of it depending on your preference (you monster).

None of this requires seven types of heavy armor, and it avoids the pitfall of magical versions of crap armor (oooh +1 ringmail).

If you are going for a low magic world then this approach works even better. You make one type of armor for each weight level, fluff them however best suits your world, and then replace magical "+x armor" with superior mundane versions. For example, make normal chainmail the default for heavy armor, +1 heavy armor could be superior chain, splint or brigidine, and plate could be the equivalent of +2 or +3 heavy armor. You also make the price and availability of these superior armors the same as their magical versions - so in this example splint mail would be the equivalent (in terms of price and availability) of +1 plate.

Anyway that is how I would do it.

You are completely missing my point.

In traditional D&D a strength warrior goes:
Half plate to Plate to Plate +1 to Plate +2 to
Plate +3 to Plate +4 to Plate +5

5e does
Half plate Ringmail to Plate to Plate +1/Splint+2 to Plate +2/Splint+3 to
Plate +3 to Plate +4 to Plate +5

Because armor is worn for AC. Flavor magical bonus almost never trumped AC increases. Only major always on always useful magic bonuses like stealth and speeds might trump AC. 5e armors have these tied to armors directly.

So my idea was to have players choose between:

1. +1 AC & Stealth penalty
2. +1 AC & Speed penalty
3. No penalty

 

[Yaarel]

You don't get a choice between offense and defense.

An other approach might be, to key the armor training prereq off of Constitution rather than Strength.

It isnt so much that the armor is super-heavy, it isnt. It is that armor is uncomfortable and fatiguing to wear over time.

Then Strength gains the offensive attack and damage bonus, while Constitution gains the defensive armor bonus.

For example, Chain (training prereq +3 Constitution) grants +3 AC.

(Likewise Dexterity gains the offensive attack bonuses, while a separate Athletics gains the defensive dodge bonus.)

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I would like to see chain allow for more Dex than scale does.

As almost always, I want to less complexity in the rules, not more (aside from optional rules).

man these two ideas both appeal to me and I am SOOO conflicted.

I hate that we have good, better, best armor, and I really would prefer more choices that matter. But yeah it makes it hard to remember.

 

[Blue]

I'm the other way. The idea of giving out mundane mid-level armor of a type is pretty narrow of a time it's worthwhile, and magical armors that give +X that mechanically duplicate better mundane armor is really never a big deal. So having more levels of variation seems a complete waste.

So I'd rather not have inferior types of each armor that have a narrow band of play where they are useful and mechanical differentiation doesn't add a lot. I'd rather just have light, medium, and heavy armor, and the players can define details of what it looks like within the class to fit their character theme - for this character has layers of rough boiled hides covered by a lion skin, and this one has a chainmail shirt. And mechanically they are just "medium armor" with the medium armor AC.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

"Other Ways" i.e. Push PCs past bounded accuracy & deal with the resulting fallout one way or another when monsters can't keep up and your the GM you homebrew a solution other than giving out objectively better & better equipment like more resistances on the best AC armor the player already has. 6e needs to do a better job with fitting a core subsystem like armor within the player expectations & GM needs of a game called d&d.

What I'm saying is that the dials don't need to be on the armour.

 

[tetrasodium]

What I'm saying is that the dials don't need to be on the armour.

You don't seem to actually be saying anything other than improvements are needed because they could be done through "other" ways a RealGM would be able to solve. Moving them somewhere else isn't impossible but there where how & what impact the design considerations. Without the where how & what there's no way to discuss them.

 

[Charlaquin]

Up until 5e it was accepted and even spelled out explicitly in more than one edition that awarding players with treasure to make them more powerful was an important part of keeping players interested as a GM. 4e made the mistake of taking that role out of the GM's control & giving it to the players

No it didn’t. It made the perfectly reasonable suggestion that players be able to request that the DM include specific magic items they wanted in the adventure. Something players have always done, and DMs have always had the power to agree to or not, and still had that power in 4e.

 

[Yaarel]

When

AC = Constitution (Armor) + Dexterity (Dodge)

The Armor has effectively five gradations (rather than three), with prereqs ranging from +1 to +5.

(I remain undecided if the prereq should be Constitution or Strength. Normally, Strength relates to Encumbrance. However, there are reasons for Constitution. Even the heaviest armors are less than 70 pounds, and even a Strength 8 character can carry 120 pounds without Encumbrance. The difficulty comes from the Armor being fatiguing and constraining to wear. Hence, Constitution can make sense to overcome the difficulty of Armor, and Constitution is generally defensive making this Ability a convenient go-to for combat defense.)

There are "typical" examples of Armor for each gradation, but the player and DM can agree on an other appropriate flavor for the Armor of the character concept. If the armor is atypical, there needs to be a narrative explanation for how the character acquired it, whether gift, purchase, or find.

If one meets the prereq, one can additionally add the Dexterity Dodge bonus to the AC.



Prereq: +1 Constitution
• Helmet (metal)
• Padded (fabrics including leather)
• Leather (hard boiled leather)

Prereq: +2 Constitution
• Leather Suit
• Padded Suit ("hide")
• Padded and Helmet
• Leather and Helmet

Prereq: +3 Constitution
• Chain
• Leather Suit and Helmet
• Padded Suit and Helmet

Prereq: +4 Constitution
• Scale (brigandine, squamata, lamellar, segmentata, etcetera)
• Breastplate
• Chain Suit
• Chain and Helmet

Prereq: +5 Constitution
• Scale Suit
• Plate Suit ("half plate")
• Scale and Helmet
• Plate and Helmet
• Chain Suit and Helmet

Prereq: +6 Constitution
• Scale Suit and Helmet
• Plate Suit and Helmet

Prereq: +7 Constitution
• Renaissance Full Plate Suit

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

You don't seem to actually be saying anything other than improvements are needed because they could be done through "other" ways a RealGM would be able to solve. Moving them somewhere else isn't impossible but there where how & what impact the design considerations. Without the where how & what there's no way to discuss them.

I'm just saying these proposed armour modifications add more complexity than they do benefits. So I'm suggesting that, yes, there are other areas where this granularity could be added without forcing granularity onto armour which (IMO) takes away more than it adds.