Swimming

Post/Author/DateTimePost
#1

quindia

Jul 03, 2014 13:21:59

I am disappointed to see that armor disadvantage still only applies to stealth and not swimming. There are numerous historical accounts of Vikings dying in sea battles because they ended up in the water and were pulled down by the weight of their mail.

 

Oh, well... It's easy enough to houserule!

#2

jaelis

Jul 03, 2014 13:29:33

I'm with you.

#3

Rhenny

Jul 03, 2014 13:44:30

Yup...makes sense.   I'd definitely add it to my game.

#4

DemoMonkey

Jul 03, 2014 14:15:02

Where do you stop though? Shouldn't it also apply to climbing, jumping, etc? At which point the character who is supposed to be good at athletics, winds up being the worst at it.

 

Or it gives them one more reason to build a Dex fighter instead of a Str fighter.

(Reply to #4)

Nimloh

DemoMonkey wrote:
#6

souldoubt

Jul 03, 2014 14:47:34

DemoMonkey wrote:
#7

jaelis

Jul 03, 2014 15:02:15

DemoMonkey wrote:
#8

quindia

Jul 03, 2014 15:07:17

DemoMonkey wrote:
#9

Rhenny

Jul 03, 2014 15:37:51

I could rationalize that proficiency in armor grants you the ability to climb and jump without disadvantage, but swimming seems harder to rationalize.   Rocks sink.

#10

pukunui

Jul 03, 2014 15:54:07

Personally I think it should come in under the encumbrance rules. There was a case here in NZ recently where a young soldier drowned during an exercise on a lake. His life vest was faulty and didn't inflate. He wasn't wearing full plate, but he did have a lot of gear on, and it dragged him under before he could be rescued.

#11

iserith

Jul 03, 2014 15:59:42

I'd be fine getting rid of disadvantage for Stealth rather than add more cases of disadvantage for other activities. Provided that doesn't make certain armors way more attractive than others.

#12

sleypy

Jul 03, 2014 18:44:27

souldoubt wrote: