| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Title. Does Arnor Check Penalty need to exist as a game mechanic?
Apart from making heavy armor something you would only pick if you want to dump Dex, it creates another issue that is even worse IMO. People that should be good at certain things are equal or worse than those who shouldn't because they are wearing armor. This also creates another deeper issue. Pathfinder 2's proficiency system is built with the assumption of an universal math, but ACP kind of breaks it.
Every single skill check, attack, etc. can have the same DC to represent the same difficulty, but if you do this to Athletics checks, for instance, the success rate is going to be a lot lower for a lot of characters, because there is a -1 to -5 there that doesn't exist anywhere else in the system. So you either need to lower the DCs and use a different math just for those checks, and make them a walk in the park for those who don't have ACP, or you don't and now the Fighter with 18 Str has a 70% chance of failing at something he is supposed to be good at.
Now let's talk a little bit about the other side. What's the real benefit of this mechanic other than "it's legacy"? Realism? A lot of people have mentioned guys doing cartwheels in plate armor and the like, but even if it was that encumbering, is a guy climbing in armor immersion-breaking in the same world that guy can jump off a cliff in armor and not break his legs?
I have no problem with armor check penalty. You wear big bulky armor, you don't shimmy up the rope as well. This doesn't bug me.
The crux of this argument seems to be you don't like penalties. I don't see a super strong argument against them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not a big fan of ACP, and I don't see too many people sticking with heavy armor past their second stat bump because of the issues you mentioned. That said, character abilities are so close together as is,
and I'm not sure bringing them even closer is a good idea.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It made more sense when you were getting more out of it. "Heavy armor makes you slower and penalizes some actions but gives you more AC" makes sense as a tradeoff. Now it's more "heavy armor lets you invest less in DEX to get the same AC but also with substantial penalties"... which really isn't worth it.
It certainly seems reasonable that someone in full plate is going to have a tougher time doing gymnastics than someone not in full plate. On that end, I don't have a problem with the penalties existing. Removing them just seems like it would be another step towards sameness, where there's little mechanical difference between armor and it's all interchangeable.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree that armor shouldn't be all equal, I just think there are better ways to make them different than ACP. One a lot of people mentioned is having different positive traits, like weapons.
The thing is, with the math of PF2, a -4 or -5 in a skill is almost a "might as well never use it".
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree that armor shouldn't be all equal, I just think there are better ways to make them different than ACP. One a lot of people mentioned is having different positive traits, like weapons.
The thing is, with the math of PF2, a -4 or -5 in a skill is almost a "might as well never use it".
I think ACP is still useful for differentiation and makes sense in fiction but I agree that with the tight math the numbers need to shrink significantly compared to PF1.
IMO, ACP makes sense for stealth, but it would be better to have a more specific penalty or even an armor trait to represent that.
In all other cases, I don't see why you can carry X bulk in you backpack and not be hindered at all thanks to your Strength, but if you wear a medium armor (with a lower bulk value) you suddenly get slower, heavier and clumsier.
If you are overburdened, then yes, a penalty on some skills makes sense.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMO if heavy armor is the option you have for having low dex, it’d be fine. As it stands the truth is that heavy armor is your punishment for having a low dex which is a problem. The fact that only 2 classes have access to it without spending a feat makes it even sillier because who will take the feat to get it when it’s universally just worse than medium armor? It makes people feel the need to never dump dex, making every class more MAD than they already are. I mean I’m fine with the general move in the system towards MAD characters but after a certain point it just gets ugly. Then there’s the weirdness that at low levels heavy armor, it’s quality and it’s potency runes have a higher item level for no good reason. The 2 classes with innate access to heavy armor are incentivized to wear it but even then I feel it’s a hard sell and makes little sense especially for the fighter who can have dex as their core ability score.
Sorry for the slight derail. For possible solutions I could see dropping ACP a little across the board. Another option that I like the sound of is adding some positive armor qualities, weapons universally have positive qualities and armor universally has negative qualities, why not mix it up a bit? The 3rd option that does add a bit of math but that could really help some of the heavier armors is something I think I saw Deadman mention at one point, raise ACPs across the board a bit and then make ACP reduced by your strength mod.
It made more sense when you were getting more out of it. "Heavy armor makes you slower and penalizes some actions but gives you more AC" makes sense as a tradeoff. Now it's more "heavy armor lets you invest less in DEX to get the same AC but also with substantial penalties"... which really isn't worth it.
I feel like the main benefit of heavy armor was still letting you invest in Dex. In PF1 Dex + mundane armor topped at 8 for light, 9 for medium, and 10 for heavy. Which honestly isn't that big a deal. The main thing is that you didn't need to invest in dexterity to get a high AC, just accept being slower and having a high ACP. (Plus higher armor costs.)
Raising a secondary score was more expensive in PF1, but you also got inherently penalized more for having low Dex because initiative was tied to it and athletics wasn't a skill yet. The one thing that changed this equation was armor training on fighters, but that's basically just the proficiency bumps fighters and paladins currently have.
Which isn't to say Heavy Armor couldn't use some love, I am just saying I haven't really felt the changes as much as other people have. It feels like the same classes who wanted it before want it now for the same reasons, and it is now easier to use for all those casters than ever before.
My one pet peeve is I don't really get why heavy armor prevents raging, though as I've mentioned the barbarian seems pretty well off HP tanking right now.