On Armour

[Tetsubo]

The concept of physically wearing one suit of armour over another suit of armour is bizarre. Barring that the person wouldn't be able to walk or move, it completely defeats the design concept behind the different armour types. If a player ever made such a suggestion I would respond with a curt, "No".

[Prime32]

The concept of physically wearing one suit of armour over another suit of armour is bizarre. Barring that the person wouldn't be able to walk or move, it completely defeats the design concept behind the different armour types. If a player ever made such a suggestion I would respond with a curt, "No".

Umm... so that guy wearing plate armour is naked underneath?

[Agita]

The concept of physically wearing one suit of armour over another suit of armour is bizarre. Barring that the person wouldn't be able to walk or move, it completely defeats the design concept behind the different armour types. If a player ever made such a suggestion I would respond with a curt, "No".

I'm pretty sure medieval knights wore chain shirts below their armor.

[Ashtagon]

I'm pretty sure medieval knights wore chain shirts below their armor.

They did indeed. And that chain (and the cloth padding beneath that) were considered integral components of the outfit called "plate armour". Wearing multiple armours doesn't make sense for the simple reason that the heavier armours have the lighter armours (as padding and reinforcement and protection for areas that require flexibility) as integral components.

[veekie]

The concept of physically wearing one suit of armour over another suit of armour is bizarre. Barring that the person wouldn't be able to walk or move, it completely defeats the design concept behind the different armour types. If a player ever made such a suggestion I would respond with a curt, "No".

Reality Is Unrealistic

...Because of this weakness most warriors wore a mail shirt (haubergeon or hauberk) beneath their plate armour (or coat-of-plates)....
...blunt weapons such as maces could harm the wearer by their impact without penetrating the armour; usually a soft armour, such as gambeson, was worn under the hauberk....
...The gambeson was used both as a complete armour unto itself and underneath mail and plate in order to cushion the body and prevent chafing...

Seems to me that they're a bit more like optional stacking armors, that are often stacked anyway, because well, if you can afford plate, a little more protection never hurts, each sort being effective against a different sort of attack, and when combined, was effective at stopping pretty much every weapon in common use at the time.

Funny enough though, the padded armor is the only one with any mention of being encumbering. Heh.

[Tetsubo]

The concept of physically wearing one suit of armour over another suit of armour is bizarre. Barring that the person wouldn't be able to walk or move, it completely defeats the design concept behind the different armour types. If a player ever made such a suggestion I would respond with a curt, "No".

Umm... so that guy wearing plate armour is naked underneath?

They wore a quilted cotton tunic called a gambeson. Not a full suit of armour.

[veekie]

Your mileage may vary, but the gambeson is considered a form of armor, both in D&D(known as Padded Armor) and in Real Life(the sort they put under Plate normally sounds a bit like a thick shirt instead though, what with the amount of protection being much lesser compared to it's padding benefits.

Anyway, mechanics-wise, how about creating armors in layers that stack, so your Heavy armor can have the hefty Plate parts taken off, leaving the Medium mail(for regular travel I imagine), which in turn can be taken off for the Light gambeson below it(for sleep)?
How to handle enchantments on such a thing is a bit tricky though. Maybe enchant the whole thing as one, and divvy up the enhancement bonuses between the layers. Say...a roughly 3/2/1 ratio(so a +3 Plate has a full +3 in Plate form, +2 in Mail, +1 in leather/padded). Not sure how to stuff the enhancements that fall between the cracks though. Or how to handle people swapping pieces of underarmor.

[woodenbandman]

That's called Sectioned Armor and it exists. In the Planar Handbook.

[veekie]

Guess that was obscure enough, heh.

[Havok4]

One Idea I have heard for making armor more useful for players is to make a player's AC convert its value in damage from any attack that hits into nonlethal damage while retaining it's miss chance properties, which would make the player a lot less likely to die but fairly likely to be put out of the fight.

[veekie]

You'd have to make them care about taking damage first though. But yeah, that is pretty useful.

[SiggyDevil]

The concept of physically wearing one suit of armour over another suit of armour is bizarre. Barring that the person wouldn't be able to walk or move, it completely defeats the design concept behind the different armour types. If a player ever made such a suggestion I would respond with a curt, "No".

Nice going. Emotional appeal.
I'm sure the logical gamers you know, if any, will love that.

Anyway, I'd go for a concept of 'ranked armor' wherein one can put on as much plated metal, padding, furs, and chain as desired, but penalties to move speed, physical skills, Concentration penalty with disruption to spellcast (like Arcane Spell Failure but could be overridden), and attack rolls would increase by a proportionate amount. You can literally wear as much as you want (limited by size) but without enough training a PC would end up immobile and with horrible aim.
I tried to stat out a concept for this, complete with rule(s) for removing "destroyed ranks of armor", but the result was criticized as too complex.
For proficiencies, the characters could grab feats to reduce armor penalties that increase in effectiveness by BAB, repeating armor feats then stacking the amount of penalty reduced.
Strength was also vital in reducing penalty; more STR, more armor worn.

Alas, I favor a "BP style" modular armor concept I saw here, in BG, a while ago. I think Zerosum made it.
It used Light, Medium, and Heavy armor categories, which worked much simpler than armor ranks. Less math.

[Tetsubo]

The concept of physically wearing one suit of armour over another suit of armour is bizarre. Barring that the person wouldn't be able to walk or move, it completely defeats the design concept behind the different armour types. If a player ever made such a suggestion I would respond with a curt, "No".

Nice going. Emotional appeal.
I'm sure the logical gamers you know, if any, will love that.

Anyway, I'd go for a concept of 'ranked armor' wherein one can put on as much plated metal, padding, furs, and chain as desired, but penalties to move speed, physical skills, Concentration penalty with disruption to spellcast (like Arcane Spell Failure but could be overridden), and attack rolls would increase by a proportionate amount. You can literally wear as much as you want (limited by size) but without enough training a PC would end up immobile and with horrible aim.
I tried to stat out a concept for this, complete with rule(s) for removing "destroyed ranks of armor", but the result was criticized as too complex.
For proficiencies, the characters could grab feats to reduce armor penalties that increase in effectiveness by BAB, repeating armor feats then stacking the amount of penalty reduced.
Strength was also vital in reducing penalty; more STR, more armor worn.

Alas, I favor a "BP style" modular armor concept I saw here, in BG, a while ago. I think Zerosum made it.
It used Light, Medium, and Heavy armor categories, which worked much simpler than armor ranks. Less math.

No emotional appeal in the least.

I've worn armour. And the concept of putting a full suit of Medium armour under a full suite of Heavy armour is absurd. You don't layer armour onto a human being like you do a tank. I think a much better method is to break down armour into evasion types (defense rolls and such) and damage resistance types (the physical armour itself).

[Prime32]

I've worn armour. And the concept of putting a full suit of Medium armour under a full suite of Heavy armour is absurd. You don't layer armour onto a human being like you do a tank. I think a much better method is to break down armour into evasion types (defense rolls and such) and damage resistance types (the physical armour itself).

Chainmail is medium armour. Plate is heavy armour. Chainmail was often worn under plate (with some leather too).

Also, it's fantasy.

[veekie]

The leather(Light) goes under the chain. Or it will chafe much indeed.

[Kuroimaken]

The concept of physically wearing one suit of armour over another suit of armour is bizarre. Barring that the person wouldn't be able to walk or move, it completely defeats the design concept behind the different armour types. If a player ever made such a suggestion I would respond with a curt, "No".

Nice going. Emotional appeal.
I'm sure the logical gamers you know, if any, will love that.

Anyway, I'd go for a concept of 'ranked armor' wherein one can put on as much plated metal, padding, furs, and chain as desired, but penalties to move speed, physical skills, Concentration penalty with disruption to spellcast (like Arcane Spell Failure but could be overridden), and attack rolls would increase by a proportionate amount. You can literally wear as much as you want (limited by size) but without enough training a PC would end up immobile and with horrible aim.
I tried to stat out a concept for this, complete with rule(s) for removing "destroyed ranks of armor", but the result was criticized as too complex.
For proficiencies, the characters could grab feats to reduce armor penalties that increase in effectiveness by BAB, repeating armor feats then stacking the amount of penalty reduced.
Strength was also vital in reducing penalty; more STR, more armor worn.

Alas, I favor a "BP style" modular armor concept I saw here, in BG, a while ago. I think Zerosum made it.
It used Light, Medium, and Heavy armor categories, which worked much simpler than armor ranks. Less math.

No emotional appeal in the least.

I've worn armour. And the concept of putting a full suit of Medium armour under a full suite of Heavy armour is absurd. You don't layer armour onto a human being like you do a tank. I think a much better method is to break down armour into evasion types (defense rolls and such) and damage resistance types (the physical armour itself).

So have I, actually. And if you don't wear a layer of padding and at least a chainmail under that plate, you're freaking screwed.

[Tetsubo]

The concept of physically wearing one suit of armour over another suit of armour is bizarre. Barring that the person wouldn't be able to walk or move, it completely defeats the design concept behind the different armour types. If a player ever made such a suggestion I would respond with a curt, "No".

Nice going. Emotional appeal.
I'm sure the logical gamers you know, if any, will love that.

Anyway, I'd go for a concept of 'ranked armor' wherein one can put on as much plated metal, padding, furs, and chain as desired, but penalties to move speed, physical skills, Concentration penalty with disruption to spellcast (like Arcane Spell Failure but could be overridden), and attack rolls would increase by a proportionate amount. You can literally wear as much as you want (limited by size) but without enough training a PC would end up immobile and with horrible aim.
I tried to stat out a concept for this, complete with rule(s) for removing "destroyed ranks of armor", but the result was criticized as too complex.
For proficiencies, the characters could grab feats to reduce armor penalties that increase in effectiveness by BAB, repeating armor feats then stacking the amount of penalty reduced.
Strength was also vital in reducing penalty; more STR, more armor worn.

Alas, I favor a "BP style" modular armor concept I saw here, in BG, a while ago. I think Zerosum made it.
It used Light, Medium, and Heavy armor categories, which worked much simpler than armor ranks. Less math.

No emotional appeal in the least.

I've worn armour. And the concept of putting a full suit of Medium armour under a full suite of Heavy armour is absurd. You don't layer armour onto a human being like you do a tank. I think a much better method is to break down armour into evasion types (defense rolls and such) and damage resistance types (the physical armour itself).

So have I, actually. And if you don't wear a layer of padding and at least a chainmail under that plate, you're freaking screwed.

Padding I can buy here. But mail under full plate? Not any suit I've ever seen. Mail was often improved with addition plates. But full plate was just that, armour made of plates. With possible add-ons at the groin and armpits made from mail. Heck, they add flexible armoured bits to police body armour in the armpits now as well.

[veekie]

Ignoring the fairly irrelevant detail of if a REAL armor has that feature(wikipedia certainly claims it was done so historically at some point), but the key factor, do we want people to buy a second set of armor, often magical, just to sleep in, when given the nature of plate armor, removing the plate pieces usually left you with a chainmail equivalent, which in turn is worn over a lighter cloth or leather padding. Also, the subsequent exploration of enchantment effects on such an armor, and the possibility of swapping out an underarmor(say Chainmail of Cold Resistance under plate, then you swap out the chainmail for a different enchantment? The inner layers aren't generally tailored to be an exact fit to the outer, considering the variety of paddings that work for pretty much any armor) to vary armor enchantments.

It's not like we're doing historical reenactment or something.

[Kuroimaken]

It's not like we're doing historical reenactment or something.

Yeah, stop killing my catgirls. Do you realize how much they shed when they're scared?

[dman11235]

I was honestly under the impression that the armors in the PHB accounted for all the stuff normally worn under it.  Which is (to me) the absurdity of allowing multiple armors being worn (you already are wearing them, so why allow the use of them again?).

As I said before: before you can make AC a stat to truly care about, you must make the thing it protects to be of value (HP).  And as for the DR of armors: see my suggestion of a "gray area" that is based on either character level, armor type, or both (I think the armor type would be best, but they all have their benefits) that is formed by a straight increase in AC (the lower value being what it would be now) that halves damage.