Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 SillyMind Nov 22, 2014 22:02:31	I've been playing 5th edition since the Monster Manual came out (7 sessions thus far) and when I look at the armors table I don't know how I feel about them.   In my game I have 2 melee fighters and the first thing that they did is commission Plate Mails from the blacksmith (I ruled that Plate Mails weren't just laying around but had to be custom made=300 days of crafting) and they are giving him cash anytime they come to town. I feel like I putting obstacles ''just 'cuz'' they weren't intended to start with a full plate.   I don't feel there's a strong enough distinction between light, medium and heavy armor in this edition. For instance, in 3/3.5/Pathfinder, heavy armor came with a high penalty to strength/dexterity based skills and you had a penalty to your movement whatever your strenght. But in this edition you seam to only have 2 choices: disadvantage on stealth or no. Everyone that has access to heavy armors and doesn't care about stealth will convet a full plate, even dex based characters (like an archer that doesn't care about discretion).   What do you think and when do you think it's ok to give your players Half-plate or Plate mail?
#2 AaronOfBarbaria Nov 22, 2014 22:45:18	I think 5e has done the best job that D&D has ever done in making any category of armor a viable option - all 3 categories of armor have roughly the same AC potential, and the penalties which prior editions assigned (which are less realistic than most people realize because they are too punitive) are reduced to a simple pair: maybe your armor makes stealth tricky, and maybe you aren't strong enough to move at full speed in your armor.   I disagree that everyone with no concern for stealth will convert to full plate - the archer you suggest will likely have a high enough dexterity that full plate comes down to a choice between spending 1,500 gp for a +1 AC and a -10' movement rate since an archer probably didn't put a high priority on Strength so he doesn't have the 15+ needed to ignore that penalty, and using that 1,500 gp for other more beneficial projects (for example, if you are using rules that allow the characters to craft magical items as presented in the DMG and spoiled by a fellow that got one early over on ENWorld, 1,500 gp can get you 3 uncommon magic items like a longbow +1, a cloak of elvenkind, and a bag of holding).
#3 Coredump00 Nov 23, 2014 14:08:38	Well, based on the released modules (HotDQ), the problem is the cost.  My PC just turned 4th, and doesn't quite have *half* the money for full plate.  Its a pretty big investment.   Besides the Stealth and Str, you also need proficiency, which only comes with certain classes.  Sure if you want it you can get it, but a Dex build is just as well without it.
#4 Illithidbix Nov 23, 2014 18:34:05	I think it's pretty good actually. Makes both very high DEX, high-ish DEX and STR based clankies viable. With a very slight advantage to clankies.   Yes you could add some kind of penalties to athletics and acrobatics in heavy armour... but where is the fun in that?    Did not MIGHTY BEOWULF not swim for five days and five nights in FULL CHAINMAIL, losing the race only because he was delayed by NINE SEA MONSTERS that he slew!   As for Half-Plate and Full Plate, depends on the campaign, it's kinda a useful for being the only "combat power" really increased by gold. So is actually pretty useful as a way of making it relevent.
#5 MechaPilot Nov 23, 2014 20:09:54	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#6 dmgorgon Nov 23, 2014 20:42:36	I prefer more realism when it comes to armor.    That means armor should reflect the technology level of the campaign.     It really should not be part of a class feature or feat.
(Reply to #5) AaronOfBarbaria	MechaPilot wrote:
#8 MechaPilot Nov 23, 2014 21:09:59	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#9 CCS Nov 24, 2014 8:14:54	I still feel that they were done best back in 1e. Ever increasing AC, & their encumbrance affecting your movement rates. And some -modifiers for certain class abilities like a Thieves "climb walls" checks. Everything done since has just been adding rules for the sake of adding rules. And I don't worry about the GP cost/availability at all concerning the game as a whole, just per campaign.
#10 AndyDay Nov 25, 2014 8:58:52	I've been applying the Disadvantage to lots of skill checks other than Stealth. That's worked well.   That said, getting heavy armor proficiency is a cost, so it shouldn't be worse than light armor, which neigh everybody gets. Granted, it's a cost that is part of the starting build for fighters and paladins. But it's a cost nevertheless. I wouldn't penalize a Rogue by making Thieves Tools grossly difficult to get.
#11 Lashan Nov 25, 2014 9:25:38	SillyMind wrote:
#12 Timborama Nov 25, 2014 10:12:44	I find the "armors" just fine. Each one has tiers within tiers, balancing stats, cost, and drawbacks. Not every town guard has halfplate, and not every adventurer can afford full plate.   With Fullplate (or even things like Halfplate, Breastplates, and even Splintmail) being so expensive, a DM is in direct control over just how and when they get it. It can take 300 days if they're making it from scratch and it's just one dude, sure. Or it can take a week because he has apprentices, and it's already half-made (not EVERY piece of the plate armor has to be custom tailored to the inch in order to suit the PC!). Or they happen upon a Magic Fullplate of Fitting from a giant.   Plus it allows interesting decisions: Do I take half-plate for the +1 AC, or the Breastplate so I can sneak without disadvantage? Do I start my PC as a paladin so I can get Fullplate eventually, or do I start rogue so I can get extra skills? Do I buy splintmail now and be short 200g but with 17AC, or do I just wear this Chain Mail and be at 16AC until I can afford Fullplate?   Oh, and there's PLENTY of good reason to want/sneak around in Heavy armor. So it's not always the easiest decision in the world. Again, this goes back to what I was saying about trade-offs.