Armor check penalties are dumb

[Hackulator]

The proof is right here.

[flappeercraft]

Yes, armor is not as immobile as most people seem to think but it definitely has some impact. You will still do better with no armor than with armor, it's just that as mobile as medieval armor is, it still is not as mobile as no armor at all.

[Hackulator]

Yes, armor is not as immobile as most people seem to think but it definitely has some impact. You will still do better with no armor than with armor, it's just that as mobile as medieval armor is, it still is not as mobile as no armor at all.

Yeah but it shouldn't be worse than encumbrance. Wearing a backpack that weighs as much as your armor should be MUCH worse than wearing your armor.

[Tainted_Scholar]

This is probably just a case of science marching on.

[Hackulator]

This is probably just a case of science marching on.

How's that? This is a medieval scholar having someone wear armor designed to medieval specifications.

[Tainted_Scholar]

How's that? This is a medieval scholar having someone wear armor designed to medieval specifications.

I meant this probably wasn't semi-common knowledge back when 3.5 was written, which was almost 15 years ago by the way. Historical Knowledge marches on is probably more accurate.

[hamishspence]

Yeah but it shouldn't be worse than encumbrance. Wearing a backpack that weighs as much as your armor should be MUCH worse than wearing your armor.

I don't know - some armour is going to constrict the arms and legs when it comes to things like climbing and swimming - in a way that a well secured backpack, wouldn't.

[AnimeTheCat]

Full plate is not quiet. It will affect your ability to move silently and lift objects off of people. Full plate is typically metal, which can scratch, glint, shine, etc which would impact your ability to hide. While you can move fairly well, you can't move as if you weren't wearing it at all which can impact your ability to climb, tumble, and jump. It's also not exactly light which makes it harder to do all of the above.

I understand that the armor is designed to distribute the weight, but an extra 5-10 lbs of armor on your arms will make you tire quicker. the extra 30-40 lbs being carried by your legs and lifted by your legs when jumping will make you wear out a little quicker. Coming from someone who used to do live steel exhibitions, that stuff may carry well and not feel as heavy, but it's still heavy and it will wear you out faster than you think. A 10 minute exhibition feels like you just ran a 5K. It makes a difference.

[Goaty14]

Lets see the knight try to hide with his shining armor in broad daylight vs the soldier.

[Hackulator]

I meant this probably wasn't semi-common knowledge back when 3.5 was written, which was almost 15 years ago by the way. Historical Knowledge marches on is probably more accurate.

Ah ok yes, that makes sense, although even in more modern versions of the game, armor still has penalties it shouldn't really have. I think a lot of it has to do with the common issue that balance (or at least, attempts at balance) tend to trump realism.

[Nifft]

ACP isn't a prohibition, it's a penalty. You can still do all the things, you just do them worse than you would without armor.


Tumble: let's see a competition-winning gymnast perform gymnastics, and then a person in full armor perform the same gymnastics.

Swim: let's see a competition-winning swimmer do some timed laps, and then a person in full armor beat that time.

Climb, Jump, Move Silently... these can all be measured, the last one in dB. What ACP should mean is a statistically significant difference in measured performance.


These are things that can be tested.

They can be tested because people can do all the things in armor, so we can test how well they do all the things.

They will generally do all the things a bit worse. How much worse? The ACP value represents exactly that.

[Tainted_Scholar]

Ah ok yes, that makes sense, although even in more modern versions of the game, armor still has penalties it shouldn't really have. I think a lot of it has to do with the common issue that balance (or at least, attempts at balance) tend to trump realism.

Yes, but in 3.5 specifically you really can't fault them for getting it wrong.

[Fouredged Sword]

Yeah, if you wanted to go for accuracy Armor checks would be a maximum, not a penalty. An character who is good at escape artist can bend until they can wiggle through a space. The problem is armor cannot bend past a point. If your armor is not flexible enough to get through a space, not amount of skill will make a difference.

And gauntlets should impose a massive penalty to fine manipulation. You need free fingers to use lockpicks well.

But we cannot have a system that complicated. 3.5 is already complex. Do not make it worse.

[Hackulator]

Yeah, if you wanted to go for accuracy Armor checks would be a maximum, not a penalty. An character who is good at escape artist can bend until they can wiggle through a space. The problem is armor cannot bend past a point. If your armor is not flexible enough to get through a space, not amount of skill will make a difference.

And gauntlets should impose a massive penalty to fine manipulation. You need free fingers to use lockpicks well.

But we cannot have a system that complicated. 3.5 is already complex. Do not make it worse.

Agree on pretty much all points.

This was less a "the rules should be different" post and more just a "be aware this common belief about heavy armor is wrong" post.

[Bakkan]

ACP isn't a prohibition, it's a penalty. You can still do all the things, you just do them worse than you would without armor.


Tumble: let's see a competition-winning gymnast perform gymnastics, and then a person in full armor perform the same gymnastics.

Swim: let's see a competition-winning swimmer do some timed laps, and then a person in full armor beat that time.

Climb, Jump, Move Silently... these can all be measured, the last one in dB. What ACP should mean is a statistically significant difference in measured performance.


These are things that can be tested.

They can be tested because people can do all the things in armor, so we can test how well they do all the things.

They will generally do all the things a bit worse. How much worse? The ACP value represents exactly that.

Precisely this. An argument that ACP shouldn't be a thing from a realism perspective would require demonstrating that a person can complete an obstacle course just as easily while armored as when unarmored. All the video in the OP demonstrates is that full plate has a similar ACP to that of modern soldier kit and a higher one than firefighting gear (if we make the assumption that the knight and soldier were equally skilled). Indeed, that last point bears repeating: the knight lost to the firefighter. Unless you're going to argue that firefighting gear provides a bonus to obstacle course skills, this pretty clearly shows that wearing armor is worse than wearing nothing.

[Hackulator]

Precisely this. An argument that ACP shouldn't be a thing from a realism perspective would require demonstrating that a person can complete an obstacle course just as easily while armored as when unarmored. All the video in the OP demonstrates is that full plate has a similar ACP to that of modern soldier kit and a higher one than firefighting gear (if we make the assumption that the knight and soldier were equally skilled). Indeed, that last point bears repeating: the knight lost to the firefighter. Unless you're going to argue that firefighting gear provides a bonus to obstacle course skills, this pretty clearly shows that wearing armor is worse than wearing nothing.

Yeah, certainly having something heavy on you makes obstacles harder, but it shouldn't be a different system than encumbrance for things like climbing or jumping.

Also, remember that it was an ACTUAL firefighter against someone who has trained in heavy armor (some guy from a museum who does demonstrations I think). Getting through obstacles in heavy gear is one of a firefighters main jobs, so he can get to people in danger. A knight is trained for different things.

[Nifft]

Yeah, certainly having something heavy on you makes obstacles harder, but it shouldn't be a different system than encumbrance for things like climbing or jumping.

Also, remember that it was an ACTUAL firefighter against someone who has trained in heavy armor (some guy from a museum who does demonstrations I think). Getting through obstacles in heavy gear is one of a firefighters main jobs, so he can get to people in danger. A knight is trained for different things.

I think you're talking about the video of the full-plate guy running an obstacle course next to a modern soldier (in modern armor) and a modern firefighter (with full firefighter gear).

All 3 of those people are wearing heavy protective equipment. All 3 of those people are going to exhibit the effects of an armor check penalty.

The fact that modern heavy protective gear has an equivalent ACP is not proof that ACP is dumb.

It's just a demonstration that you can't kill the metal.

[Ellrin]

Armor, as a mechanical construct in-game, doesn't make physical sense, period. With the standard bonus to AC, it represents the ability of armor to help deflect blows, but doesn't represent damage you would take through the armor from the transference of kinetic energy. When representing armor as damage reduction, you have a representation of armor's ability to absorb some of that energy, but not of its decreasing ability to do so over time (due to damage).

The mere fact that you'll take damage in excess of what your armor does, even when faced with Str-based melee combatants, is just plain silly.

Armor is, as mentioned, nowhere near as hampering as most fantasy writers of the past 40 years seem to have believed.

The way ASF scales is physically utter nonsense. Somatic components are mostly performed with the hand, and the implication that progressively heavier types of armor must have progressively more restrictive gauntlets is ridiculous--especially since you can wear gauntlets as a weapon without incurring any ASF at all.

Then there's the absolutely arbitrary AC values that differing suits of armor have been assigned, and the fact that someone with 50 Str has the same max dex from a breastplate as someone with 5.

Like every other set of rules in the game, armor was written as an abstraction--one ultimately based on romanticized notions that were in vogue during the 70s and 80s. The reason those notions haven't really been updated to reflect current knowledge in the editions since then is because D&D has never really tried to reflect reality--it's much more interested in reflecting fantasy tropes.

[Nifft]

The way ASF scales is physically utter nonsense. Somatic components are mostly performed with the hand, and the implication that progressively heavier types of armor must have progressively more restrictive gauntlets is ridiculous--especially since you can wear gauntlets as a weapon without incurring any ASF at all.

Therefore, somatic components are actually break-dancing moves.

This is why Wizards should get the Tumble skill.

[Kurald Galain]

Yeah, certainly having something heavy on you makes obstacles harder, but it shouldn't be a different system than encumbrance for things like climbing or jumping.

Right, so your point is that the penalties for encumbrance are too mild and should be increased to match the (still pretty mild) penalties for wearing armor?

Bear in mind that for adventurers, being encumbered is extremely rare whereas wearing armor is very common.

[Dr_Dinosaur]

Folding ACP into Max Dex Bonus seems like the easiest solution here. Aftwr a certain amount of Dexterity only adding a +3 modifier to skills may as well be a penalty

[Knaight]

Yeah but it shouldn't be worse than encumbrance. Wearing a backpack that weighs as much as your armor should be MUCH worse than wearing your armor.

It depends. I'd take the heavy backpack over the armor when climbing or swimming, as gauntlets and armored boots will seriously hurt your grip with your hands and feet for climbing and the armor is almost certainly denser than a heavy backpack. Running is a case where it depends on the armor, where leg armor in particular is more of a problem than just weight, but torso armor is way easier to run in than a backpack of comparable weight. Then there's helmets, where something open faced and on your head is a minor heat concern at worse and generally just not a big deal, and anything close faced is a miserable heat trap (although a lot of the time you'd either flip a visor open or remove an overhelm or just take the helmet off when you're not fighting anyways). I've worn decent armor, I've done fighting in decent armor, and while it's not really a problem to fight in* it absolutely gets in the way elsewhere. The extent it gets in the way gets dramatically exaggerated into nonsense like being totally unable to get on a horse without a winch, or being unable to get up from falling, or being unable to move at more than a walking pace, or whatever else, but armor is absolutely a hindrance.

*If anything it's the maximum dex bonus I'd have an issue with, not ACPs.

[Hackulator]

Right, so your point is that the penalties for encumbrance are too mild and should be increased to match the (still pretty mild) penalties for wearing armor?

Bear in mind that for adventurers, being encumbered is extremely rare whereas wearing armor is very common.

I feel like if you think that then you've never actually dealt with encumbrance without magic to get around it. It's very easy to get over a light load on a character without much strength.

[Ellrin]

I feel like if you think that then you've never actually dealt with encumbrance without magic to get around it. It's very easy to get over a light load on a character without much strength.

Pack animals are extremely cheap even at level one.

[Mendicant]

Armor check penalties are not dumb. They reflect real life about as well as any of the other abstractions, and they're a very low-complexity way to model the tradeoffs between light and heavy armor. Since the penalties for heavy and medium encumbrance are almost exactly the same as what you get with the best heavy and medium armor, and since they don't stack, there's barely anything to talk about there anyway.

Now, the armor categories are a weird mishmash of nonsense and unnecessary detail, and I think arcane spell failure needs to be rethought or at least refluffed, but ACP is the second-least objectionable thing in the whole armor system.

With the standard bonus to AC, it represents the ability of armor to help deflect blows, but doesn't represent damage you would take through the armor from the transference of kinetic energy.

Eh. Considering how abstract HP is already this doesn't really bother me. If I want to describe you bruising inside your armor from a blow that would have pulped you without it, I'll just do that when your opponent rolls low damage. Besides, most armored combatants aren't wailing away at each other's armor anyway--it's something you generally get around, not through, so armor as miss chance makes more sense thematically than armor as DR.

[Hackulator]

Pack animals are extremely cheap even at level one.

That reminds me of this really funny time we took advantage of that fact in a party of all casters at level 1 and then the goblins just shot our donkeys to death and ran off to leave us to die in the wilderness cause we couldn't even carry enough food and water.

[Ellrin]

That reminds me of this really funny time we took advantage of that fact in a party of all casters at level 1 and then the goblins just shot our donkeys to death and ran off to leave us to die in the wilderness cause we couldn't even carry enough food and water.

I feel like it would probably be easier to kill an unprepared party of level 1 casters with a ranged wilderness ambush than it would be to kill their donkeys, to be honest. I don't think encumbrance had very much to do with that particular party death.

Eh. Considering how abstract HP is already this doesn't really bother me. If I want to describe you bruising inside your armor from a blow that would have pulped you without it, I'll just do that when your opponent rolls low damage. Besides, most armored combatants aren't wailing away at each other's armor anyway--it's something you generally get around, not through, so armor as miss chance makes more sense thematically than armor as DR.

I wasn't arguing for or against either version, it's just neither does a perfect job of representing physically what's going on when two real guys in real armor try to kill each other. My point was just that the armor rules in general are an abstraction of a romanticism, expecting them to make perfect real world physical sense is just killing catgirls or whatever.

[Zanos]

Armor, as a mechanical construct in-game, doesn't make physical sense, period. With the standard bonus to AC, it represents the ability of armor to help deflect blows, but doesn't represent damage you would take through the armor from the transference of kinetic energy. When representing armor as damage reduction, you have a representation of armor's ability to absorb some of that energy, but not of its decreasing ability to do so over time (due to damage).

The reason strength ads to to hit rolls is that it helps you punch through armor.

[Deadline]

Therefore, somatic components are actually break-dancing moves.

This is why Wizards should get the Tumble skill.

Exhibit A - A typical blaster wizard.

[Mendicant]

I wasn't arguing for or against either version, it's just neither does a perfect job of representing physically what's going on when two real guys in real armor try to kill each other. My point was just that the armor rules in general are an abstraction of a romanticism, expecting them to make perfect real world physical sense is just killing catgirls or whatever.

Fair enough.

The reason strength ads to to hit rolls is that it helps you punch through armor.

I think it'd have do with how fast you move and how difficult your blows are to parry more than anything else, though there are plenty of contexts where describing an attack as punching through armor would make sense too.