Why is armor less emphasized?

[I'm A Banana]

Hussar nailed it, I think. Armor is passive, weapons are active, and in a game focusing on the heroic, they're going to focus on action.

But it's not exclusive. Races of Stone is a good resource, and Hammer & Helm is even better. If you get something like Death Striders, you can see armor that mutates into siege engines, making them VERY active, indeed.

In fact, now that I think about it, adding the Death Striders to my campaign is what caused people to sit up and take notice of armor, again. A sheet of metal is one thing, but a sheet of metal powered by necromantic energy that shoots lasers and powers jumps and can fly around and that you can't really penetrate without destroying....that made the party go "Woah."

 

[Banshee16]

What armor does Luke Skywalker use? What armor does King Arthur use? What armor does James Bond use? What armor does Inuyasha use (and he actually has named armor)?

Basically, yeah. It's a conceptual hole. People who use armor are less cool than people who don't wear armor but kill them none-the-less.

Stormtroopers wear armor. Han Solo does not. Who's cool? Right.

Cheers, -- N

King Arthur generally wore full plate, didn't he?

Banshee

 

[Nifft]

King Arthur generally wore full plate, didn't he?

I dunno... did he? What was it named? (I can name his sword, but have no clue if he wore fullplate or halfplate or banded mail, and one of those didn't actually exist.)

-- N

 

[Nyeshet]

King Arthur's armor was nameless. His sword was named, but it was also a rather powerful magic item: it ignored hardness of an object and seemingly did more damage than most other blades of its type (so was likely enhanced, perhaps beyond +1).

Also, the scabbard was more powerful yet. While wearing it he would not bleed - and some stories suggest that no weapon could cause lasting injury to him while he was wearing it. No, he was not wearing it during his final battle - although he did briefly regain Excalaber (the blade, not its accompanying scabbard) for that battle or near its end. The scabbard likely meant that all non-magical damage was converted to non-lethal, and granted a bit of DR /-- besides.

Wearing a scabbard like that - did he even need the armor (except for appearances)? In a certain sense his scabbard *was* his armor.

 

[MINI]

Well you just wear armor and it simply works. The idea of a weapon is not that you can hold it and it will do the attacking for you. The only limits of armor is design once you have it on your back. Limits of weaponry are a lot if you cant hold it, use it or know how to attack with it.

I do think an armor based class sounds really cool, but weapons simply will always offer more options based on the kind of items they are vs armor. It would be cool to have an Armor PrC for fighters that allowed them the metamagic feat to craft weapons and armor-- some kind of crafting based PrC of course.

 

[Herobizkit]

Wearing a scabbard like that - did he even need the armor (except for appearances)? In a certain sense his scabbard *was* his armor.

That's a great idea for my armor-light players. YOINK.

 

[frankthedm]

I can answer that one: AD&D didn't slap any Dex bonus limitations on armor. In fact, armor in AD&D had only movement-based penalties. Thus, there was no game-mechanic reason why a fighter would wear anything but Full Plate if they had a choice.

1. Max dex bonus is a big one. Unless you have MAD, a +1 max dex is crappy.

2. Speed kills: 10’ speed loss is painful, then loosing x4 run means you will be last to any combat that starts with any ground between you and your foe. And if you did have the decent dex for missile fire to be worthwhile, half that benefit is lost due to max dex bonus.

3. Tanking up with a mount to relieve the speed hit? You’ll find your armored weight dropping your mount’s speed fast unless you find some non PHB mounts. A heavy war horse can only could carry 300 lb before it’s 50’ becomes 35’. 25lb+ for the saddle, 50lb for your armor, 8lb for saddlebags 120-220lb pounds of you plus whatever weapons you want and then the mounts feed clocking in at 10lb per day even before water gets considered.

4. Armor check crops up when you can afford it the least. Especially since those who want fullplate the most have the least skills.

5. Full plate costs 200-800 gp to re-fit.

Magic and money can alleviate some of these, but heavy armor has a lot of hassle

 

[Hussar]

1. Max dex bonus is a big one. Unless you have MAD, a +1 max dex is crappy.

This is going to depend on the stats of your PC's. In a 25 point buy game, where your highest stat is likely a 15 and your dex is likely 14 or 12, +1 max dex suddenly doesn't look so bad.

2. Speed kills: 10’ speed loss is painful, then loosing x4 run means you will be last to any combat that starts with any ground between you and your foe. And if you did have the decent dex for missile fire to be worthwhile, half that benefit is lost due to max dex bonus.

Again, this is campaign dependent. Most combats, IME, start at about 60 feet apart (max distance of darkvision. Sure, you lose that charge, but, in a tank party, you're better off letting the bad guys come to you. Lose the charge, gain the full attack. Fair trade. I've never really noticed that 10 foot speed loss make much difference. Besides, any party with small characters in it is already at that speed anyway.

3. Tanking up with a mount to relieve the speed hit? You’ll find your armored weight dropping your mount’s speed fast unless you find some non PHB mounts. A heavy war horse can only could carry 300 lb before it’s 50’ becomes 35’. 25lb+ for the saddle, 50lb for your armor, 8lb for saddlebags 120-220lb pounds of you plus whatever weapons you want and then the mounts feed clocking in at 10lb per day even before water gets considered.

Fair enough. Then again, how many groups have ever used mounted combat? Beyond about 5th level, your mount is so much kibble in most encounters anyway. Besides that, who actually takes a mount into a dungeon? A fair number of encounters in many campaigns are indoors, making a mount pretty redundant.

4. Armor check crops up when you can afford it the least. Especially since those who want fullplate the most have the least skills.

Now that I'll grant you entirely. Then again, negating those checks isn't that expensive. Armor with Swimming, that sort of thing. But, yeah, this is true.

5. Full plate costs 200-800 gp to re-fit.

Magic and money can alleviate some of these, but heavy armor has a lot of hassle

The refit though is only going to come in when you grab the armor off of someone else. Doesn't magic armor refit? I thought that it did, but I cannot find the bit in the DMG.

The main advantage of armor is that you are getting that +8 AC before you start in with magic enhancement. The disadvantage is that after about 10th level, your armor doesn't matter a whole lot as the baddies just whack you anyway.

 

[JRR_Talking]

My current charcater is a favoured soul with 10 Dex

she loves all types of armour and shields

...it is difficult to make armour exciting. All its bonuses are really static/passive so involve no dice roll. Which i like. I hate rpg's where both offence and defence require a dice roll. I see no need for it.

John

 

[Aaron L]

For me armor is all about appearance. I know when I want a character be an armored tank, it's because of how I want them to look, not because of the bonuses/penalties.

I then look for ways to use the rules to make the most out of my concept.