And so does Ride.
Swim only has a normal armor check penalty as well.
So yes it looks like a global ACP on all Str and Dex skills.
Given there is an exception for Acrobatics (can't tumble past an opponent in armor that reduces your speed), surely there could have been exceptions for these other skills as well.
Disable Device: sure take my gauntlets off, but not my entire suit of armor.
Ride: sure an ACP for Quick Dismount etc, but not Fight with a Combat-Trained Mount.
Swim: swimming in full plate was never easier, 3.5's double the penalty was actually fairly lenient considering the reality of what happens if someone dives into a deep pool with 50 pounds of metal strapped to them.
My thoughts, what do you think?
I like the new tumble bit, you cannot do it if your speed is reduced by armour. Well hello The Terrific Tumbling Full Plate Dwarves!
I like the new tumble bit, you cannot do it if your speed is reduced by armour. Well hello The Terrific Tumbling Full Plate Dwarves!
I'd personally say while that is the RAW, it doesn't follow the spirit of the rule in question, even if you have said ability to ignore the movement restriction of armour, you could still say it "reduces" it, much the same way as you need heavy armour prof to wear mithril plate, despite it changing to medium.
Of course there could be other issues with ruling it that way I haven't thought of too.
I like the new tumble bit, you cannot do it if your speed is reduced by armour. Well hello The Terrific Tumbling Full Plate Dwarves!
This was actually new with 3.5, not Pathfinder (the rule has been there since 3.0, Dwarves got the "slow and steady" feature in 3.5). Fairly sure it stood up to Sage Advice check too. It kinda makes sense actually - armor's kinda like a second skin for Dwarves, rolling around in it - no problem. (except for the chafing). Armor check penalty still applies too.
I like the new tumble bit, you cannot do it if your speed is reduced by armour. Well hello The Terrific Tumbling Full Plate Dwarves!I'd personally say while that is the RAW, it doesn't follow the spirit of the rule in question, even if you have said ability to ignore the movement restriction of armour, you could still say it "reduces" it, much the same way as you need heavy armour prof to wear mithril plate, despite it changing to medium.
Of course there could be other issues with ruling it that way I haven't thought of too.
Well, the rule specifically says that if you have an ability that bypasses med/heavy the movement restrictions of armor or encumbrance you can use Acrobatics to tumble, so it seems fully intentional. Though I'm not sure it makes sense.
I think that its okay with exception of ride, any self-respected rogue doesn't have ACP anyway :p
|
And so does Ride.Makes perfect sense. Ride is not about sitting in the saddle, it's about getting your mount to perform tricks, about giving your mount subtle commands and about performing tricks/stunts yourself while riding. It's basically mounted Acrobatics, so I say the check is appropriate.
Except that the heaviest armors were historically made for cavalry warriors (only a heavy horse could lift the knight+armor anyway : they could not even walk normally in the damn things).
Obviously, they were made with a rider's priorities in mind, including guiding your mount appropriately.
If you picture a lightly armored mounted fighter against a heavily armored one, the main difference is not in their skill at riding, but in the horses they use : light and agile for the former, heavy and lumberous for the latter.
Well, I guess we can imagine that the penalty in fact stands for using the heavier, less agile mount.
|
|
Hmmm, that's odd. Could have sworn it said that when I looked last, but now it doesn't. Unusual.
I suppose I was just ahead of my time or something, or maybe I looked at the armor check penalty of Move Silently instead. >.>;;
For your ego's sake, I'd say you were just experiencing a moment of prescience. ;)
It could be an oversight to impose a penalty on disable device. All you need is to have your wrists and hands free to be able to disable a deviceYou also want to take off your helmet to be able to look at the devise to be disabled.
While I agree that if I was wearing a full helm with a small slit to see through, would make it trickier, mechanically it doesn't make sense. If I don't suffer a penalty for the Perception skill when wearing a helmet (and Perception checks are now used to find traps), why would I suffer a penalty for Disabling a trap?
|
I know there is a limit to real world comparisons, but if any of you have seen the movie Hurt Locker, I think you could appreciate not being in a suit of armor while dismantling a bomb.
Now, not all devices are bombs, but trying to do anything delicate and minute in something that is constricting on your movements is not easy/fun.
edit: Maybe imagine painting a miniature while wearing plate mail :)
Have to disagree with you here. The mechanisms of "devices" are not going to be right out in the open where they are easily accessible for anyone to manipulate (much less smash). Someone attempting to "disable" a device is going to have to squeeze their hands, arms and possibly torso and head into narrow spaces, feel behind walls, lay on the floor to reach at odd angles, and so forth.Imagine that you have to put your two un-gauntleted hands through a narrow opening so that both of them can manipulate the fine mechanisms of a trap at the same time. Try it yourself, reaching out but keeping your forearms together with your elbows and wrists in contact with one another. Feel the compression in your upper torso? Now imagine trying that move with a solid steel breastplate across your chest. What about with plate armor guards strapped on your biceps and shoulders? While you're doing it, be careful not to get any of your straps or buckles caught on anything that would activate said trap.
Did I mention that to reach the mechanism you have to hold your body elevated over the pressure plate that would otherwise trigger it, all while laying on your side. How heavy is that armor now? How flexible?
I have no problem with ACP being in Disable Device.
FWIW,
Rez
That is a very specific kind of device. Opening a padlock on a door now also gets the ACP. For your device, sure an armor check penalty seems reasonable but not every device is like that. My feeling is that most wouldn't (especially magic traps). I feel that a blanket ACP on EVERY Str and Dex skill in EVERY situation is unrealistic, and a step backwards from 3.5.
Ride:
Here are the things that the skill says you can do with Ride (and the DC):
Guide with knees 5
Stay in saddle 5
Fight with a combat-trained mount (have the mount attack as well as you) 10
Cover 15
Soft fall 15
Leap 15
Spur mount 15
Control mount (that isn't trained for fighting) in battle 20
Fast mount or dismount 20
[Just for reference, in 3.5 only fast mount/dismount has an ACP.]
My thoughts on the checks that need an ACP:
Guide with knees No
(the horse will still feel the rider guiding it through armor)
Stay in saddle No
(the weight of the armor could actually keep the rider in the saddle)
Fight with a combat-trained mount No
(this more about controlling the horse than what the rider is wearing)
Cover Yes
(it is acrobatic)
Soft fall Yes
(it is acrobatic)
Leap No
(if the horse isn't encumbered by the weight or fatigued, then it should be able to jump normally)
Spur mount No
(if the horse isn't encumbered by the weight or fatigued, then it should be able to run normally)
Control mount in battle No
(this more about controlling the horse than what the rider is wearing)
Fast mount or dismount Yes
(it is acrobatic)
Again, a blanket ACP or no ACP is unrealistic for different uses of this skill.
For me, it's just easier to remember if ALL Dex and Str skills have an armor check penalty. It has less to do with realistic or not, and more to do with ease and consistency.
To be honest, it would be just as easy to go by skill, because when you are playing, you look down your skill list, find the total bonus, roll a d20 and add the number.
There are plenty of parts of the PRPG rules that have systems that have a finer level of detail than this. In my opinion, skills are non magical (well except UMD) so they should be realistic (or close to). If I wanted a simple system that sacrificed realism for consistency, I'd be playing a different game.
|
|
Frankly I feel a table explaining instances where the ACP would apply and where it would be null and void would be an interesting thing to have but would add another layer of complexity that could really overwhelm someone new and could bog down simple tasks by having to look it up in the book. If I had a choice of looking for yet another large table I can never find (my fight with the character wealth by level table is eternal) or simply accepting the occasional unrealistic skill decision I can veto logic for the ease of use.
Also, the idea that a suit of plate armour is going to make an individual so incapable of movement that they'd be unable to right themselves or effectively fight on foot is a surprisingly common misconception.
A complete suit of plate armour can weigh somewhere from fifty to seventy pounds and is fairly evenly distributed across the body, it would certainly be tiring to wear for an entire day but you would still be capable of a wide range of motions and be easily able to fight on foot. A suit of tournament armour on the other hand could be clumsy, heavy, and exceptionally tiring but it was built to impress and protect (you didn't want your showpiece warriors dieing during the festivities).
@ One :
I think you never ride a horse !!
Leaping on a horse is acrobatic : you have to move your body weight to avoid being dismount.
Stay in saddle : you don't make this kind of checks when you are sit straight on your saddle, but when you are half dismounted and when the weight of your armor is pulling you to the ground.
Guide with knees : you don't just move your knees to guide a horse, you use your body weight to do this.
@ One :
I think you never ride a horse !!
Leaping on a horse is acrobatic : you have to move your body weight to avoid being dismount.
Stay in saddle : you don't make this kind of checks when you are sit straight on your saddle, but when you are half dismounted and when the weight of your armor is pulling you to the ground.
Guide with knees : you don't just move your knees to guide a horse, you use your body weight to do this.
You are correct I haven't ridden a horse since I was a kid, and I'm interested in the opinion of someone who rides, especially someone who has ridden in armor. Just to clarify, here are what each of those skill checks means, according to the PRD:
Stay in Saddle: You can react instantly to try to avoid falling when your mount rears or bolts unexpectedly or when you take damage. This usage does not take an action.
Leap: You can get your mount to leap obstacles as part of its movement. Use your Ride modifier or the mount's Jump modifier, whichever is lower, to see how far the creature can jump. If you fail your Ride check, you fall off the mount when it leaps and take the appropriate falling damage (at least 1d6 points). This usage does not take an action but is part of the mount's movement.
Guide with Knees: You can guide your mount with your knees so you can use both hands in combat. Make your Ride check at the start of your turn. If you fail, you can use only one hand this round because you need to use the other to control your mount. This does not take an action.
So Leaping is about the horse jumping, not the rider jumping onto a horse, which I agree deserves an ACP.
Do you think these deserve an ACP?
I think the best way to solve it is to change Mounted Combat so that it eliminates the armour penalty for riders.
|
|
Given there is an exception for Acrobatics (can't tumble past an opponent in armor that reduces your speed), surely there could have been exceptions for these other skills as well.
Just a question ... where is the exception for Acrobatics? I don't see it say anywhere that you don't apply the penalty. It just says that you can't even attempt it with certain armor and loads.
Also, being a life long horseback rider, Jumping and Staying in a saddle while moving quickly, cutting (think Barrel Riding, at State Fair) or distracted requires a lot of Dexterity. I have no problem with a penalty (after all they can still attempt it) but making a jump in Heavy Armor and not end up on the ground would be difficult I would think.
Edit: The problem with guide with knees is that you'd have a hard time feeling the horse under you, making it difficult for you to have any sense of responsiveness
|
And so does Ride.Makes perfect sense. Ride is not about sitting in the saddle, it's about getting your mount to perform tricks, about giving your mount subtle commands and about performing tricks/stunts yourself while riding. It's basically mounted Acrobatics, so I say the check is appropriate.
Swim only has a normal armor check penalty as well.I'd take this back to 2x in a heartbeat.
Disable Device: sure take my gauntlets off, but not my entire suit of armor.Have to disagree with you here. The mechanisms of "devices" are not going to be right out in the open where they are easily accessible for anyone to manipulate (much less smash). Someone attempting to "disable" a device is going to have to squeeze their hands, arms and possibly torso and head into narrow spaces, feel behind walls, lay on the floor to reach at odd angles, and so forth.
Imagine that you have to put your two un-gauntleted hands through a narrow opening so that both of them can manipulate the fine mechanisms of a trap at the same time. Try it yourself, reaching out but keeping your forearms together with your elbows and wrists in contact with one another. Feel the compression in your upper torso? Now imagine trying that move with a solid steel breastplate across your chest. What about with plate armor guards strapped on your biceps and shoulders? While you're doing it, be careful not to get any of your straps or buckles caught on anything that would activate said trap.
Did I mention that to reach the mechanism you have to hold your body elevated over the pressure plate that would otherwise trigger it, all while laying on your side. How heavy is that armor now? How flexible?
I have no problem with ACP being in Disable Device.
FWIW,
Rez
Agreed, go work on your care wearing leather armor...then go try to work on it in a suit of full plate...bracers of armor ftw!
And so does Ride.
Grrr. I didn't notice that. Very poor QA work on Paizo's part, there; it was pointed out that Ride had ACP in Alpha 2 or Alpha 3 and it was fixed in Beta -- now it's back again.