Why do fighters and paladins in D&Dland generally prefer heavy armor instead of agility in light armor, in a world where the merest touch from the hand or spell-ray of a caster, demon, devil, or other magical creature is more devastating than any solid weapon? Let alone a dragon's breath.
Is it just the tired old "knight in shining armor" cliché?
>in a world where the merest touch from the hand or spell-ray of a caster, demon, devil, or other magical creature is more devastating than any solid weapon?
Those things are all considered "very rare" for frequency of appearance, while things like bandits, goblins, and ogres which require heavy armor to counter are considered "common" or "uncommon".
Because they're stats would never be high enough to dodge a wizards spell ray demons touch attacks regardless.
And armor doesn't affect reflex saves anyway. And either way they'd take half damage.
any serious armour should have resistance to magic, or provide defence against common elemental attacks. if you're living in a world full of magic it's common sense to design your armour to protect against that.
Dunno about DnD, but in Pathfinder it's because:
Increasing your defense by way of buying heavy armor only requires money. Increasing your defense by way of dodge bonuses requires points in Dexterity, which are VERY hard to come by.
Even if you start out with 20 dex (+5 dodge bonus), by the time you're level 20, you've only gotten enough stat boosts to get it to 22 (+6).
Considering the best armor that lets you have a dexterity bonus of 6 only gives 2 defence on it's own... yeah. You could invest tons of build points into maxing out dodge for an end armor class of 8... or you could buy full plate which gives you 9 armor and one dexterity armor for a maximum of 10, then put all those dexterity points into strength instead for massive damage.
>Players who have never used the surprise round Flat-footed rules and been up against intelligent enemies
>Players who assume full dex to AC before they've moved even if they're not surprised
Heavy Armor ensures safety if you fail a Perception test and are surprised. It ensures safety if you're *not surprised* and still roll low on initiative.
The Dex Fighter can be absolutely pummeled in the first round if they don't go first. That's why armor is considered good, especially early on.
>Why do fighters and paladins in D&Dland generally prefer heavy armor instead of agility in light armor
the same reason fighters in real life preferred wearing armor instead of cloth and leather
You get in a fight, you're going to take hits.
Because most DnD AC is illogical anyway, basically you get AC either by having heavy armor or through feats.
It should be done like in Iron Heroes where AC(Agility Class) is for dodging and armor gives you DR(Damage reduction) per hit based on it's heaviness. It's much more like a scale where as you approach one end you get farther from the other.
>>43444109 pretty much this. The only time you really wana be relying on dexterity as your main defense is when you need dexterity for something else, as many Rogue builds do, or you can't wear armor at all without huge penalties (casters).
That being said, the entire system is stupid. Armor should just give damage reduction instead of hit-chance defense. Anyone who doesn't correct this via homebrew is an idiot or a new GM who has yet to realize how dumb the system is.
Also armor class creates a fuckton of problems later on in high level play where it doesn't really scale well enough to function the way it's supposed to.
HEAVY armor is a terrible choice for adventurers in general. It takes forever to put on and take off, which is necessary because you're penalized for sleeping in it. It was designed for battlefields where swords and arrows and spearpoints are coming from all directions, and thus maximum protection is more important than any tradeoff in mobility or visibility.
Medium armor is the best for dungeoneering. A breastplate over chain at most.
Not all fighters/paladins use heavy armor. Just try to build a dex fighter/paladin
Deadly Agility gets you Dex to damage.
Now you can dump the fuck out of Strength, get 1k Muleback Cords for +8 Strength for carrying capacity, buy a Vest of Resistance from DSP's Steelforge for your resistance bonus, and bump up your Dexterity for attack/damage/AC/initiative/skills.
Well shit... after reading that, I have to agree with OP that there's pretty much zero reason not to just spam dexterity.
Except, you know, actually roleplaying. I mean, 7 strength on a big burly Orc fighter just doesn't make alot of sense when a 16 year old human boy is apparently a 10.
Because in Basic and AD&D Heavy Armor is the best for avoiding that shit since it still has to break through your armor which doesn't impede your dexterity.
Because in 4e, you'll get around the same or slightly more Defense by wearing heavy armor.
Because in 5e, if you're not gifted in stat boosting gear or are a specific min-maxed build, it's a great way to get a high AC, and those abilities have to break through your armor anyway.
There's really only one edition where heavy armor fucks with your ability to avoid magic, and it's considered one of the worst editions of the game.
That changes the mechanics then.
It allows for things with low damage to actually do full damage if an opening is found. Getting stabbed in vitals with a dagger is almost always fatal in pre-sanitation periods. It is also almost always incapacitating in a conflict if it is a penetrating blow to a major body part. Having armor class as miss chance makes the game more simulation like. Armor as DR ignores all of that without a lot of extra rules.
>Is it just the tired old "knight in shining armor" cliché?
Pretty much. D&D drops high magic into a "standard medieval setting" without updating anything else. Plus, the armor-HP system is irreparable.
It may be true that armor can only blunt the damage of certain types of hits (e.g. maces), but it is equally true that some types of wound are completely negated by proper armor (e.g. arrows [at least made nothing but a very insubstantial bruise, at worst]). The whole thing is rather complicated and it's difficult for pen&paper to emulate it with any real consistency without becoming too much of an investment in tables, percentages, ratios, etc.. There's going to be a lot of illogical simplification.
Because armor helps against everything else you absolute retard.
Being agile is great if you're dodging some guy who can kill you with a touch, but it's sure as hell not going to save you from that arrow that you didn't see coming, and what do you fight more often? Deathtouch wizards or people with weapons?
Besides, you're still plenty agile in armour, you just get tired faster, but D&D is a terrible game that doesn't bother with having any kind of armour mechanics that make sense.
Your average suit of "Heavy" armor only weighs like 30-35 pounds, or your average plate carrier and loaded vest, but because the weight is distributed across your body, its super easy to handle.
For this reason >>43444655
Honestly, tho, in our world dex is not a defensive stat as much as it is an offensive one. So people would wear armor if they could and needed it to survive.
In D&D land a guy with 20 dex will simply wear trousers and be as hard to hit as the guy who is wearing a chainmail and has 10 dex.
>in a world where the merest touch from the hand or spell-ray of a caster, demon, devil, or other magical creature is more devastating than any solid weapon?
Because one does not exclude the other. The existence of magic does not exclude the existence of arrows and crossbow bolts.
This is on par with asking why soldiers wear helmets when artillery can utterly crush them regardless of what they wear.
> It allows for things with low damage to actually do full damage if an opening is found.
Called shots targeting weak spots.
> Getting stabbed in vitals with a dagger is almost always fatal in pre-sanitation periods. It is also almost always incapacitating in a conflict if it is a penetrating blow to a major body part.
Yeah, on people with +0 Fort Saves and/or not a lot of hp. Could also qualify as a sneak attack.
> Having armor class as miss chance makes the game more simulation like.
No. Armor as DR with a way to bypass it by aiming less vital areas, a.k.a. Called Shot to armor weak spots is much more realistic. Armor absorbs part of a blow. Of course, it implies loss of HP is not only actual wounds but includes bruises and fatigue.
> Why do fighters and paladins in D&Dland generally prefer heavy armor instead of agility in light armor, in a world where the merest touch from the hand or spell-ray of a caster, demon, devil, or other magical creature is more devastating than any solid weapon?
They do as long as it works. When facing an opponent with no miss chance and if armor do not absorb damage, they will put it aside and keep their movement speed.
Characters that do not have rolled their stats usually tend to be more efficient when they get weaknesses and somehow patch them. That's the role of armor.
> Is it just the tired old "knight in shining armor" cliché?
Why do armies around the world use protective gear? The cliché is a cliché for a reason.
THAT SAID, the game they choose to play favors that kind of behavior. So it's back to "Have you tried not playing DnD?". This is a pretty shit reason to switch, but switching itself might not be a bad thing.
Actually a guy with 20 dex and nothing is easier to hit than a guy in Chainmail (15 and 16 AC respectively).
That's why a guy with 20 dex wil be wearing Studded Leather Armor to bring his AC up to 18.
Tl;dr, even peak humans in the DnD settings use armor, you know nothing and are spreading misinformation.
"Weak spots" aren't really some static thing that exists. Especially in low level games, the ability to predict an opponent's movement to the point where you know exactly where a chink in their armor would be (underarm, neck, etc) and set up an attack to penetrate that point without them protecting it denotes a MASSIVE difference in skill between the two combatants, and that's not something that's represented in DnD as something like a +5 difference in BAB... a huge difference in combat stats.
Check your references.
Starting at 20 DEX, you could get up to 25 by level 20 (1 Ability Point every four levels). That's a bonus of +7.
Add in a wondrous belt to boost your DEX by 6 for a bonus of +10. Expensive, but not too hard to do given that you're level 20 at this point.
Darkleaf Cloth increases the Max Dex of armor by 2, allowing for Darkleaf Padded Armor with an AC bonus of 1 and a max dex of 10. That, on its own, would be an AC of 21.
Now, I'm not saying your argument is wrong, just pointing out some inaccuracies in your math.
Because its stylish and offers good protection. It's also imposing.
Either one works like that because of how the other one works, since without DM fuckery (and we'll ignore that since a good DM could run any game, yes, even fatal and have fun), even in AD&D, since armor is all kinds of derp.
Kinda balanced, but caster needs DM help to level up (druid) plus party help or DM given leeway and help. Meleeguys are very good.
Caster is broken because martial is bad.
Martial is bad because caster is broken.
Most people just castrate one when it'd be easier to just go for AD&D then since 3.5 feels like a game where noncasters where kinda added with superglue at a last moment notice.
n-not muh d-d-a-an-daaaaa, balances on giving everyone piepowers so they can actually fight. Heavy fight oriented.
3.5 less retarded brother.
>Making sense without massive tailoring and additional rules
No, I was saying that a decent martial character is a multiclass of at least 3 classes. Sometimes 5 or 6 different classes. A big issue with them was that the features were often frontloaded, and then scaled rather uselessly without ever unlocking anything worth having as you went up. As such, a decent martial character just took level 1 to 5 levels of many different martial classes. It's still fucking ridiculous that you should need to construct such an amalgamation, mind.
If you don't have some sort of class bonus that works in light armor, you won't be able to approach a heavy armor wearer in AC. In Pathfinder, a Fighter 7 can wear mithral full plate for +9 armor, +5 Dexterity, and -1 ACP (-0 with the Armor Expert trait) and still move at full speed. Even a non-Fighter can get +9 armor and +3 Dexterity, and that's not even counting the bonus from magic armor and shields. Add in a +1 bonus to the armor and a +1 heavy shield, and that's another +4.
Please, feel free to show me a light-armor Dexterity build that can match 28 AC without off-the-wall min-maxing shenanigans.
(Note that I'm not including things like Rings of Protection or Amulets of Natural Armor, since that's something everybody can get.)
Oh, absolutely. Martials don't have a way to compare. It's just that, you can construct something halfway decent as an amalgamation of various martial classes, assuming the DM hand waves multiclass penalties and allows for Partial BAB calculation.
Like, even without the issue of casters being so much stronger, 3.5 martial classes were fucking boring unless you did some fairly clever shit to give them a range of capability beyond what was offered by any single martial class.
I have 19AC in my 5E game right now with the Chainmail I started with and NOTHING fucking hits me. The DM has started to throw some crazy fucking shit at us all because most enemies simply can't hit me at our level.
Daily reminder that casters being strong is not at all because of their offensive/defensive potential, and that in fact their oft-lauded combat tricks come down to literal 50-50 success rates, and failure leads to them being squashed.
You take a race with a racial SLA to qualify for Crafting feats and become Iron Man with high AC, magical defenses via armor enchants, damage on weapons of various sorts modded for different situations, and make sure to nab Extraordinary Artisan and the like to cut costs and time requirements.
You're no wizard but you've got a kit to be ready for anything past mid-levels and if you have enough brain cells to do this right you'll have nabbed anti-dispelling tricks to avoid a disjunction-junction-fucking-up-your-function.
It's not necessarily better when that failed 50% leads to you being shredded into bits. A caster within 30ft who just missed their save or die is often a dead caster without outside intervention.
I'm one of the writers for DSP's Path of War.
There are plenty of STR options we have as well. The Brutal Slayer Stalker gets to add STR to AC and Reflex Saves. The Zweihander Sentinel Warder gets to replace most uses of DEX with INT. And the feat Defensive Expertise adds your shield bonus to Touch AC and Reflex.
We try to make as many options viable as possible.
Damn. If only casters had the ability to turn their skin to stone, or turn invisible, or fly, or conjure magical shields, or turn into a bear, or summon an army of bears, or wear heavy armor if they're not arcane, or heal themselves, or summon fog, or teleport, or enhance their speed to run more quickly...
Don't really listen to this thread.
Your addition of Deadly Agility doesn't make Dex an end-all be-all even for those without the options you listed.
Strength builds with armor still gain a higher damage output than Deadly Agility users in exchange for their weakness to touch weapons.
Keep doing good work.
Except in 5e, there aren't touch spells that ignore armor. It all targets AC, which is a good thing, since a Shield protects you just as well from arrows as it does from firebolts.
>getting free Shields at-will as a level 18 Wizard
I know we do good work. I've had this conversation more than I can count, its not near as big a deal as most people believe.
I just wanted to illustrate some more stuff we bring to the table.
Nothing wrong with a little heavy metal, after all,
Very few escape my grasp.
Even in death, my powers continue.
Because game balance. Sometimes somebody just needs to take a hit, si they need that constitution, and gimping their strength for dexterity is just kind of fucking gay rogue shit. Not everyone rolls perfect stats and I'd rather invest in a higher wisdom to up my will save to avoid mind affecting shit than up my reflex so I can avoid danage I'm comfortable taking with my beefy hit points.
Any plans for support for throwing weapons in later DSP?
I've been wanting to play a Card Caster forever but there's just horrendous feat tax as is to make it as viable as even a featless archer.
Even an item that is better than returning (which requires you to stay still and catch the weapon) would be a great boon.
There's two whole dedicated ranged disciplines, and nearly half the other disciplines have ranged friendly maneuvers.
Throwing specific support might come, but there really isn't much that can be added that doesn't already exist in throwing feats and ranged maneuvers.
Plate armor does not significantly impair agility or range of motion, provided it's made well.
Because while agility and light armor allows you to avoid hit like Death rays, it doesn't protect you worth a damn when you're on your back or being surrounded. In a set of Full-Plate, you can wade into a crowd and just shrug off hits from all sides.
It's a no-brainer for fighters in their given role. Let the monk or cleric deal with the mage, that's what they're good at. It's your job to deal with hordes and powerful enemies.
Also factoring in fantasy materials like mithral and various magical enhancements wearing plate could feel like wearing nothing at all.
>n a world where the merest touch from the hand or spell-ray of a caster, demon, devil, or other magical creature is more devastating than any solid weapon? Let alone a dragon's breath.
This stuff being a common conception in the D&D worlds is a player concept. Not the original designers... except ebberon you know.
Also fighters HAVING to wear armor. Also a player conception, play what you want. That's what the designers tell you. It's the internet that shouts "B-but balance."
I don't know if this is what you meant, but I've shown this one pretty often. Does a great job of showing how over-exaggerated the overall penalties for armor are in many systems, for anything other than Stealth checks.
>except ebberon you know.
Except it's not common in Eberron either. In Eberron, low-level utility magic is everywhere, but high-level magic is still very rare, and even low-level combat magic isn't super common. Basically, Eberron recreates steampunk with magic replacing steam technology, and most of the "magic is everywhere" flavor comes from low-level magic items and the like.
Blinkback Belts unfortunately don't solve the card throwing problem (expensive ammo, destroyed on hit, doesn't RAW work with blinkback or returning... despite Card Caster getting that...). I guess I'm more wondering if there's going to be any Harrow support since the idea is great but executed terribly currently.
>Thinks I can't face tank a magic missile
Come at me peasant
Because the primary purpose of armor is still to fight other humanoids.
If you think about it, why would a suit of armor or a shield not offer protection against a fireball? Even full plate was usually worn with non-conductive padding, and while lightning bolts were not usually a common occurrence during battle the padding would provide better protection than being naked.
It would make more sense to me that armor would offer protection against everything at the drawbacks of being encumbered.
> Called Shot is a rule being used in our group right now. You would be adding one (1) area to be targeted. That is all.
Called Shot (Weak Spot)
A called shot to a weak spot attempts to aim at a chink in the armored defense of the opponent. It is special as it does not have a static penalty like other called shots. For each -1 penalty you take on the attack roll, your called shot ignores 1 point of damage reduction the creature has. You get an additional -2 penalty if your weapon is the same size category as the target. You get a +2 bonus if you're using a piercing weapon.
> DR, and ways to circumvent it, are already implemented in the system. You would only allow PCs to make use of it.
> The shot in the guts add literally nothing to the game. Most people die from a shot to the gut, well, lvl 2 heroes / major NPCs are not "most people".
I guess it forces you to CHANGE some rules, especially as Paizo's idea of armor as DR is completely retarded. Also makes the Improved Called Shot feat mandatory for every non-maxed character.
Is that true?
Heavy armor or a shield would probably protect you from a fireball or whatever magic blast shit they throw at you, but not in D&D because they're too busy jerking off on magic. Against dragon fire, you'd probably get roasted in your armor if you took it full on, but a tower shield could probably protect you if you turtled it.
If I shoot one of those firework fireballs at you, and you hold up a trash can lid on it, it's gonna block it.
Plus, you gotta remember that most of the time, you aren't trying to block dragon's fire. You're trying to block spears and shit. Armor and shields are useful for that.
Plus, magic armor.
Real question is: why aren't you wearing armor?
So if I do Called Shot (Weak Spot) with a dagger or a spear, I get a +1 bonus (or no bonus if they're the same size category as my weapon) to my attack roll *and* I get to automatically ignore 1 point of damage reduction?
Why would you not be doing this all the time? What's the drawback?
Well, the video doesn't really show that, which is why I didn't mention it.
I mean, you could put something in all the joints, but that would go right back around to making it hard to move in. Generally, though, you're not meant to be sneaking around in full plate, it's a battlefield armor, so making a lot of noise isn't an issue.
I kind of want to see what would happen if martials actually had the same scale of power that casters do in terms of out-of-combat utility.
Like, just straight-up breaking down an iron gate or something.
I want my Final Fantasy skills.
>Why do fighters and paladins in D&Dland generally prefer heavy armor
Because it is mechanically superior for their stats and classes.
>Disconnect between mechanics and fluff.
>Or rather between intended and actual effect of mechanics.
Actually this is the intended effect. There are a variety of rules in place especially designed to make sure that fighters and paladins wear heavy armor while casters wear dresses. Barbarians wear furs, and monks wear a gi. This is simply a case of overly restrictive rules made by spergs who wanted everyone to play their way.
>Heavy armor or a shield would probably protect you from a fireball or whatever magic blast shit they throw at you, but not in D&D because they're too busy jerking off on magic
Actually not true. Tower shield provides cover to the wielder which protects them against many types of magic.
>Is poisoning an evil foe okay as a Paladin?
Great you have now influenced me.
I don't know can't I just be from shady order that bares the necessary evils to keep the purity of the followers of the deity?
A guy wearing trousers would have other means to increase his AC.
On our team, the Barbarian is naked and has 19 AC (5 con + 4 dex).
A guy in trousers, level 4, is harder to hit than our two-handed warrior wearing full plate.
No. Peak humans in D&D don't need to use armor, they use armor if they don't have other ways to increase their AC.
Please, bite an empty water bottle. You need to milk some of that poison out of your mouth.