Wearing armor and resting

[Ryujin]

Standing up in armor while a guy tries to kill you is hard.

Standing up naked while a guy tries to kill you is hard.

It's not the armor that makes it hard. If you don't understand how that was dishonest, I can't help you.

What experience do you have to say that it wasn't?

Apparently I don't then. Let's try this angle; which of the two is HARDER, and by what order of magnitude?

You're the expert in period armor, you tell us. I only know what I've read and witnessed, I don't have an intimate understanding of early plate armors.

I'm hardly an expert. I've done my reading, seen the SCA folks whack each other about the head and shoulders, examined historic pieces in museums, etc.. My original comment of 70 lbs. weight should likely be more in the 70Kg range for an appropriate suit.

The suit in that video would appear to be modeled on 15th century plate and likely made from modern materials, rather than low carbon steel. That's mostly guesswork, as a grainy video provides little evidence. I'm pretty certain on the period though. If modeled on earlier armour then it wouldn't have had what appeared to be cloth in critical areas, but rather chainmail inserts to protect critical areas such as the groin and joints.

If you want something to use by way of comparison, then Hollywood has shown the approximate difference. Give "A Knight's Tale" a watch. The armour that the hero gets from the female smith is similar to 15th century type, while that used by the other jousters is more like what I'm talking about. The difference spans perhaps 150+ years in armour development. Obviously it isn't a historically accurate depiction (what in Hollywood is?) and the armour that he uses is actually more meant for combat afoot rather than mounted, but it demonstrates the differences fairly effectively.

 

[Nytmare]

Speaking from experience, as someone who jousted in armor on horseback for several years, and who has studied medieval armors (albiet only as a hobby) it is not a myth. You're looking at one type of armor and saying that it proves that another type of armor did not exist.

The books I've read could be wrong, the woodcuts I remember seeing might have been modern and or misdated, but I think that the more likely answer is that as the popularity of historical reenactment grew, people mistakenly assumed that the armors they were running around in, or that they saw other people running around in, were the only kinds of armor that existed.

That being said, I don't think that D&D is trying to be a historical authority. In my games, players who camp out on the bare ground in damp crypts without taking off their armor wake up dirty and sore and not well rested; but I don't impose any kind of in game penalty.

 

[Ryujin]

"Dirty, sore, and not well rested" is part of the adventuring experience

 

[Nytmare]

Oh man, I was terrified that you were going to take me up on the "your mom" joke I left myself open to.

 

[Piratecat]

One more claim of dishonesty, and someone's going to get booted from the thread. Come on, guys, people can disagree without necessitating personal insults.

D&D is far from a simulation. I don't mind letting PCs sleep in armor; my question with any house rule is usually "Is the game more fun for the players with this rule?" In this particular case, I'd argue it isn't.

 

[castro3nw]

If you want to encourage players to rest without their armor, instead of applying a penalty if they don't.. Why not give a small "well rested" bonus if they do take off the armor? ie. Instead of losing a healing surge if you sleep in armor, why not gain a healing surge if you don't sleep in armor?

It seems like more fun to have the chance at a bonus for the risk of being caught with your pants down than it would be to have a penalty for not taking off your pants so people can kick you.

 

[ArmoredSaint]

My suit of armour in the YouTube video I posted above is a reproduction of a 15th century Italian armour, and is made from mild steel--12ga, 14ga, 16ga, and 18ga, depending on the individual component, with attention given to fairly accurately recreating the weight and dimensions of the original piece, which now resides in the Diocesan Museum in Mantova, Italy. I own a catalogue of the armours from this museum, which gives piece-by-piece figures on weights and dimensions of each of the suits of armour housed therein.

I paid a lot for the suit, and even assisted in its construction myself. It is as accurate a replica of a late 15th century Italian field armour as we are able to reproduce today. It always bothers me when people who cling to preconceived Victorian holdover notions about armour being excessively heavy or cumbersome (or just have experience only with low-quality Renaissance Fair or SCA reproductions) see that video and conclude that it must not be a "real" suit of armour.

The figure of 71 pounds I give for its weight also takes into account the arming doublet, with its mail skirt, voyders, and standard, in addition to the clothing I wear under the harness.

I'm not sure where you come up with the 70kg figure from. Field armour didn't ever weigh that much. Even my suit is a little bit heavier than the originals.

As should be evident from the video, I have little trouble moving in my armour. Now, I'm only a weekend athlete at best; I imagine that a trained medieval warrior, who'd likely be in even better shape than I, would be even less hampered by his (presumably well-tailored) personal armour. I don't think a fantasy pseudo-medieval warrior in a Dungeons & Dragons setting should be penalized for wearing heavy armour.

 

[questing gm]

Since 4E doesn't explicitly mention that sleeping in armor does affect you, I think it's probably slightly unreasonable to say that PCs should remove them to have a proper extended rest.

However, we can encourage them to remove their armor by say, giving them an extra HS if they decided to sleep without armor after an extended rest?

 

[Kzach]

The guy in that armour in the video seems to be only wearing very light plates that wouldn't protect against much.

I was under the impression that the type of heavy plate-mail armours worn by knights of the type we model in D&D were of a much thicker metal. Not only that but a full suit included a chain hauberk over a padded armour vest as well as padded leggings and chain between the joints.

That type of armour would be a helluva lot stiffer, heavier and more uncomfortable to move in than what the guy in the video was wearing. If I was the DM and shown that video I'd put that armour down as ceremonial and the equivalent of hide, not even as good as chain since it covers none of the joints, has no padding to absorb blows, and looks about as sturdy as tinfoil.

 

[SableWyvern]

In my 4E game, there are no penalties for sleep in armour (except perhaps social ones) and I allow armour to be donned hurriedly, at a penalty to AC equal to the armour check penatly. I allow this any time that PCs have at least some time between the moment they learn they need to enter combat and the time when they actually roll for initiative.

Even in a more realistic game, I would not generally penalise someone for sleeping in armour -- soldiers learn to catch what rest they can, when they can, even in terrible conditions. I personally have managed to get a decent (if short) night's sleep curled in a large pot-hole, wedged between rocks and in a tiny sleeping bay dug into the side of a rifle pit. A seasoned adventurer will learn to cope with the same and worse.

Sure, they'll rejoice when they have the chance to doff their armour and make use of a feather bed, but when you're marching through the wilderness from dawn to dusk, with a bit of mortal combat thrown in over the course of the day, the only thing that might keep you awake is fear, nervousness, adrenaline or the pain from your punctured lung -- not the lack of silk sheets and some comfy bed socks.