D&D 5E Why AD&D Rocks and 3e - 5e Mocks all over AC...

Vaalingrade

Legend
A film of one guy, running alone, doesn't indicate much.
Take two people. Have them both run unarmored - show they are about the same speed.
Put one in armor. Have them race the other unarmored. See what happens, and you may have a point.
The point is that they're running at all. In D&D combat, you aren't flat out running at your based speed, so top speed isn't the question, but tactical speed. If the game said you can't run in armor, it'd still be wrong, but it would be closer to the proposed experiment.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
It's primarily a gamist concession to avoid turning Dexterity into even more of a "god" stat, without enforcing draconian (heh) requirements for high strength on heavier armor.

If the lack of realism bothers you, try to practice the MST3k mantra, and focus on your ability to overlook things like "a combat round is only 6 seconds" or "a good night's sleep heals the most grievous of injuries" (unless you houserule it, of course.)
I can't accept that the answer to having a problem with a game's verisimilitude is, "don't worry about it".
 

I would say that 1e and 2e were also "Needless Complexity Editions", so really, it's a tradition...
Sure, though I feel like both of them largely-accidentally managed to use exception-based design to minimize the total amount of rules you had to either know or look up to a far lower amount than 3.XE/PF1. 4E also used exception-based design better and more consciously than 3.XE. One major issue 3.XE had was the "a rule for everything" approach, which no previous or later edition has really had, and loads of Feats existed solely to mitigate penalties to doing some manuever or whatever which only had penalties on it to justify a Feat existing. That's some real hardcore needless complexity.
This is every non-Original books or Basic edition of the game prior to 5e, really.
No way does 5E escape. 5E has less needless complexity, but it still manages to get it in with stuff like Hit Dice and Short Rest/Long Rest and so on. 4E also had less needless complexity than 3.XE, though uh, it still had it, thanks to the appalling action economy.
Wasn't all exercise basically naked exercise back then?
Apparently not, though the Greeks sure loved to strip off and start running or wrasslin' or whatever.
A film of one guy, running alone, doesn't indicate much.
Take two people. Have them both run unarmored - show they are about the same speed.
Put one in armor. Have them race the other unarmored. See what happens, and you may have a point.
It's not "one guy", though, experimental re-enactors (many of whom are also historians or archaeologists) have been doing this for decades. Mike Loades, I think it was, though don't quote me on that, even rode 250 miles on horseback in full plate to see if that was doable, and it totally was (I mean, riding 250 miles is never fun-fun, but he was in no way injured or incapacitated or so debilitated he couldn't act normally or anything). But if you have questions, just check out YouTube - there's loads of people doing fancy stuff in plate.

Would someone not in armour at all run faster? Sure, probably. It's 50-70lbs of weight, however well-distributed.

Would someone in virtually any armour at all run faster though? Hmmmmm much more questionable.

Would someone in a chainmail hauberk etc? Almost certainly they would not run as fast as the guy in full plate. A guy in crusader-era chainmail pajamas would be even slower.

Would an adventurer with say, a 50lb backpack? He'd be probably be slower than the guy in 70lbs of plate (unless, perhaps, he lived for "leg day" and was running in a very straight line).
I can't accept that the answer to having a problem with a game's verisimilitude is, "don't worry about it".
I mean, this is definitely not the worst "realism" or "verisimilitude" break D&D has, not by a long shot (falling is far worse, for example, as is the total lack of rules for a lot of stuff), so you actually "not worrying about it" with a bunch of stuff if you're playing D&D and you have like, less than 20 pages of house rules. Sheesh, D&D's weapons alone are probably drastically worse for both realism and verisimilitude (what genre/sub-genre do you refer to re: verisimilitude btw?) than its armour. D&D's weapons are a giant disaster re: both.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
There are a lot of similar situations in the world, where people repeat "received wisdom" that they've never made any attempt to engage with critically, nor been intellectually curious enough to look into, and that's not a good thing. It is in fact, a bad thing.

I dunno if an appeal to critical thinking is going to gain you much ground if you're not going to be rigorous about it.

When I think gymnastics, it's either spandex or a requisite outfit of old timey trunks and a meticulously curled moustache.

Hey, we can get the same point made in suits and street clothes if, to show mobility, we do it with a dance off. Let's see someone in plate armor do a decent tango, or some nice b-boy moves? Wanna prove you are dexterous in armor, do a good windmill or coin drop!

The point is that they're running at all. In D&D combat, you aren't flat out running at your based speed, so top speed isn't the question, but tactical speed.

The experiment will work with a fast walk, too. If, to make a given distance in the same time, your armored guy has to break into a jog before the unarmored person does, the point is still made that one is slower in armor.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
Would someone not in armour at all run faster? Sure, probably. It's 50-70lbs of weight, however well-distributed.

Would someone in virtually any armour at all run faster though? Hmmmmm much more questionable.

Would someone in a chainmail hauberk etc? Almost certainly they would not run as fast as the guy in full plate. A guy in crusader-era chainmail pajamas would be even slower.

Would an adventurer with say, a 50lb backpack? He'd be probably be slower than the guy in 70lbs of plate (unless, perhaps, he lived for "leg day" and was running in a very straight line).

If you are deciding this because of what's in your head, rather than noting that you'd really want to see actual comparisons done by real people who don't have an emotional stake in the results, then maybe your appeal to critical thinking above was a bit premature.
 

The experiment will work with a fast walk, too. If, to make a given distance in the same time, your armored guy has to break into a jog before the unarmored person does, the point is still made that one is slower in armor.
There's no reason to believe that he would have to "break into a jog", that doesn't make sense. I'm confused as to why you'd suggest that. That's not how stuff works. If I'm hauling a heavy backpack and my friend is carrying nothing, I don't have to "break into a jog" to keep up, I just tire faster and I couldn't sprint was fast (well, or if I did, I'd go out of control because the extra weight wouldn't be something I could properly account for, esp. as a backpack). You don't have to "jog" to go the same speed in plate any more than you have to "jog" to go the same speed carrying shopping. Your stride length is roughly the same. You'll tire a lot sooner is the main difference. There will be some difference because you're having to push up harder during that part of your stride, but as long as you're reasonably fit that's mostly just going to result in you tiring more rapidly. And we know from archaeology that knight-types tended to be appallingly super-fit.
If you are deciding this because of what's in your head, rather than noting that you'd really want to see actual comparisons done by real people who don't have an emotional stake in the results, then maybe your appeal to critical thinking above was a bit premature.
LOL!

Jesus dude, maybe finish the post before jumping to conclusions.
It's not "one guy", though, experimental re-enactors (many of whom are also historians or archaeologists) have been doing this for decades. Mike Loades, I think it was, though don't quote me on that, even rode 250 miles on horseback in full plate to see if that was doable, and it totally was (I mean, riding 250 miles is never fun-fun, but he was in no way injured or incapacitated or so debilitated he couldn't act normally or anything). But if you have questions, just check out YouTube - there's loads of people doing fancy stuff in plate.
I get that this is apparently SHOCKING INFORMATION to you, and you're apparently in weird denial about it, but this is pretty basic stuff, and you don't seem to have a great grasp on biomechanics, based your proposed experiment up there, so I don't think you should maybe being as pushy about this as you are.

As I've said repeatedly, people have been studying this since at least the '80s, probably earlier. The '80s is when I'm first aware of it being a whole "thing" though. I don't believe it because I've magically decided it for no reason, I'm not sure why you seem to think that. I believe it because I've come across quite a bit on it.

PS people dancing in full plate was requested I believe:


He's got more - the dude isn't super-fit but you can see what works (mobility) and what doesn't (endurance and the inertia issues).

This includes climbing a rock wall, a somersault and an upside-down ladder:


That dude is a lot fitter than the dance guy I admit.

EDIT - There's also been a bunch of testing done with chain and whatever you wanna call lamellar/scale/brigandine (a lot of disagreement about names), but it's not as glam so it's not as easy to find.

Ohh this guy ran a 5K in chainmail and wow that doesn't seem fun:


Here's a nice one:

Obstacle course - firefighter gear vs full plate vs modern military

 
Last edited:


dave2008

Legend
I hate the myth of heavy armor somehow having to have flaws. Like putting on some metal armor makes you unable to dodge or do anything remotely agile.
I hate the myth the because you don't have a +2 in dex you can't do anything remotely agile.

I agree "heavy" armor is under valued, but the lack of dex bonus doesn't bother me much.
 
Last edited:

Btw, to be clear, I think it would be fine to have a DEX limit on armour, but my point, in case it's been lost is that plate should have one of the lower penalties (though I do think it would warrant a STR minimum, like 13 or 14 maybe), and the worst penalties would be armour which was heavy and where the weight wasn't distributed well, or where joints had worse movement than plate (which is quite a lot of armour). And all armour would have a DEX penalty if we were going "realism", including leather/studded leather. But D&D just has a thing where armour with naturally higher AC limits DEX more, which doesn't track.
 


Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top