...The major issue is that Paizo gave +1 AC to heavy ones.
Armors might have just been:
light: +1 AC +4 DEX or +2 AC +3 DEX ( STR 10 )
medium: +3 AC +2 DEX or +4 AC +1 DEX ( STR 14 )
heavy: +5 AC +0 DEX ( + bulwark - 5 speed) ( STR 18 )ending up without forcing players into +1 bonus, given how bonuses work here in 2 ( even a +1 is excellent ).
In addition to this, there're not enough armor type specific runes ( and good one ), making you wonder ( if I get armor X I can take rune y... but I will renounce to rune x which his strong... what to do... ).
Currently, if you can afford it, you go with heavy armors, which is bad in terms of both mechanics and flavor ( similar to a tax feat ).
I don't think that's the problem.
Paizo's designers actually broke armor down into 4 practical categories:
Characters with no armor proficiency (except the monk) receive only the dexterity bonus.
Characters with armor proficiency, whether light or medium, receive an item bonus and can top up the remainder with the dexterity cap, resulting in an average +1 AC when compared to characters without armor.
Characters with proficiency in heavy armor, who don't need dexterity and average +2 AC when compared to characters without armor. And here comes where I see the real problem with medium armor. Their problem is that for you to get +5 in full AC you need to make some investment in dexterity, this kind of "forces" players without access to heavier armor to have dexterity in their build and given the way the stats are distributed in PF2, for optimization reasons this ends up making the player continue investing in this attribute until the end, which over time ends up making the need for these armors unfeasible.
In a practical example to facilitate understanding:
Let's say you wanted to make a melee, charisma-invested Magus for whatever reason (whether multiclassing, or simply wanting to Demoralize), plus being an intelligence-based
I tried to use an example, but I think I ended up making things more confusing.
My point with Magus was just to get a character with a MAD to use as an example. But the point is not this. The thing I wanted to point out is that in terms of optimization, to have the highest AC possible in classes that don't have access to medium armor without being forced to use feats to get heavy armor, you need to invest at least 2 points in dexterity, but this point of dexterity is lacking in optimization if you don't continue to invest in dexterity, which causes many players to simply continue investing in dexterity and fatally end up abandoning medium armor for light.
And that's the whole point here, the way the medium armor was built + the way the system distributes the points ended up creating a situation where the medium armor ended up becoming a expendable equipment and the thing ends up operating in a strange way where , or you try to get a heavy armor right away and take advantage of it until the end of the game, or you make a character that makes a "strip tease" of armor as your dexterity progresses, or you put only the necessary dexterity to get your maximum Armor AC and then invest in another attribute that will end up being your worst invested attribute.
That's why I said that the simplest solution for this would be for Paizo to make medium armor with +5 item bonus and 0 dex cap, to allow characters who don't have heavy armor to be forced to invest in dexterity.
Medium armor is the best armor many characters that can't max DEX, or don't want to max DEX are going to be able to get without investing feat choices into. And even Sentinel never gives you master proficiency in heavy armor, so your AC ends up -1 compared to wearing medium armor if your class only gives you medium armor, right?
I didn't understand. Sentinel Dedication grants access to the same levels of proficiency that the character gains with medium to heavy armor. So if the character would become master of medium armor, if he takes the Sentinel dedication he becomes master to heavy armor too.
Not at all as for a single feat investment (well, maybe 2 if you want to get out of the archetype) you get +6 (+ Bullwark). So why stay at +5?
The issue of medium armor is that it asks for Strength, which is also the main prerequisite for heavy armor which is also far better. So why take a medium armor when you can (quite easily) take a heavy one?
True. But the point is that it won't always be interesting for your build to sacrifice a level 2 class feat in order to get heavy armor. Especially a dedication feat that will lock you out of other dedications.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just think you're overthinking it a bit YuriP.
I make a character with 12 or 14 Dex so I give them a breastplate or scale or whatever and... that's pretty much it.
I may or may not give them more Dex at some point which may or may not lead to me changing my armor, but it also doesn't really matter much because my AC and stats are the same either way.
As long as you avoid trap armors like the armored cloak or quilted for every day use it's kind of just whatever.
What if light armor had an effective +5 total to AC (including dex) medium had +6, and heavy +7 (plus bulwark)?
In addition to being a homebrew solution that would be limited to several tables. Personally, this is typical of the thing I don't really like about heavy armor, because it makes lighter armored characters automatically more fragile, since they are easier to hit and crit. It's something that thematically bothers me a lot in a fantasy RPGs, the fact that you can't compensate with your agility.
It's that thing, a character with Evasion is agile enough to avoid a fireball in AoE, but never agile enough to avoid a Strike better than a character with heavy armor.
So if we put the total bonus (armor item bonus + dex) of medium armor at +6 and we increased that of heavy armor to +7, this would be even more evident.
For me, the fact that heavy armor is no longer much better in AC than light armor in PF2 when compared to PF1 and D&D is already a positive thing in PF2, as it leaves light characters on a much more competitive level with armor characters
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And even Sentinel never gives you master proficiency in heavy armor, so your AC ends up -1 compared to wearing medium armor if your class only gives you medium armor, right?
Sentinel gives you scaling proficiency, you can go up to Legendary (if it existed).
I just think you're overthinking it a bit YuriP.
I make a character with 12 or 14 Dex so I give them a breastplate or scale or whatever and... that's pretty much it.
I may or may not give them more Dex at some point which may or may not lead to me changing my armor, but it also doesn't really matter much because my AC and stats are the same either way.
As long as you avoid trap armors like the armored cloak or quilted for every day use it's kind of just whatever.
You are not wrong. It is something that can be passed easily. But the issue for me is the incentive, which is kind of bad.
It's that thing you can even make a martial character that by default only has access to medium armor, but wants to invest in mental attributes for any reason, such as for example to demoralize and have a good perception, then you will monster the stats:
Option 1 - "strip tease" character, dex, no con:
LvL 1: Str 18, 14 dex, 14 wiz, 14 cha: 3 +2 dex medium armor
LvL 5: Str 19, 16 dex, 16 wiz, 16 cha: 2 +3 dex light armor
LvL 10: Str 20, 18 dex, 18 wiz, 18 cha: 1 +4 dex light armor
LvL 15: Str 21, 19 dex, 19 wiz, 19 cha: 1 +4 dex light armor
LvL 17: Str 23, 19 dex, 19 wiz, 19 cha: 1 +4 dex light armor
LvL 20: Str 24, 20 dex, 20 wiz, 20 cha: +5 dex no armor
Option 2 - character fixed dex, bad con progression (4 +1 dex medium armor):
LvL 1: Str 18, 12 dex, 12 con, 14 wiz, 14 cha
LvL 5: Str 19, 12 dex, 14 con, 16 wiz, 16 cha
LvL 10: Str 20, 12 dex, 16 con, 18 wiz, 18 cha
LvL 15: Str 21, 12 dex, 18 con, 19 wiz, 19 cha
LvL 17: Str 23, 12 dex, 18 con, 19 wiz, 19 cha
LvL 20: Str 24, 14 dex, 18 con, 20 wiz, 20 cha (I upgraded dex here because 19 in a stat is useless).
Option 3 - heavy armor character via Sentinel Dedication:
LvL 1: Str 18, 14 con, 14 wiz, 14 cha: 4 AC medium armor
LvL 2: Str 18, 14 con, 14 wiz, 14 cha: 6 AC full-plate
LvL 5: Str 19, 16 con, 16 wiz, 16 cha: 6 AC full-plate
LvL 10: Str 20, 18 con, 18 wiz, 18 cha: 6 AC full-plate
LvL 15: Str 21, 19 con, 19 wiz, 19 cha: 6 AC full-plate
LvL 17: Str 23, 19 con, 19 wiz, 19 cha: 6 AC full-plate
LvL 20: Str 24, 20 con, 20 wiz, 20 cha: 6 AC full-plate
If you pay attention, option 2 isn't horrible. But thinking from an optimizing player's point of view, it isn't optimized either, because after all since I have to spend on dexterity to be able to optimize my AC anyway. Why not keep going until it hits 20 and also optimize my reflexes and skills based on it?
It's at this point that I think there's been a slight design flaw here. Because by joining the attributes distribution system with medium armor's dexterity dependence, you end up forcing the player to have to decide between breaking his optimization a little, or moving towards the "strip tease" progression where as his dexterity As it goes up, it becomes unfeasible to keep your medium armor.
|
Medium armor is good for some characters at low levels.
Later they may increase Dex, and light armor could do the job too.
But this doesn't really make medium armor bad. The only reason I see to actually strip tease in your medium armor for light armor is bulk. The downside of trading in medium for light is the cost of moving your runes. It just doesn't really seem that you have to make that switch. You can, but it's not like you really lose a lot by not doing it.
And there may be minor perks like some runes requiring medium+ armor.
I think if I was going to change anything, it would be to open up armor specialization to more classes. That way it becomes more a chance between freeing up a bit of bulk, or getting a little bit of resistance to a damage type.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Medium Armor isn't the Armor where I question why it exists, since like "it's pretty clear when you're a weapon inventor with a non-finesse melee weapon".
The armor I'm confused about is the stuff that tops out at a +4 like padded armor or an armored cloak.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not at all as for a single feat investment (well, maybe 2 if you want to get out of the archetype) you get +6 (+ Bullwark).
Sentinel is good but you're significantly overstating HOW good it is.
1) You need to have medium armor proficiency to get heavy armor proficiency out of it. So not all characters easily qualify
2) It takes up your archetype feat. So, either it is your ONLY archetype or you're spending 3 feats (one of which admittedly can be a skill feat)
3) If you're playing only until L13 or so (depends on class) then you get as much out of a single general feat OR a Champion Dedication (latter if you have the charisma, of course).
And for that you probably get a +1 AC and some bonus to some reflex saves Which is good but hardly "Wow, this is darn near essential"
Mighty Bulwark is also very nice but there is a LOT of competition for Level 10+ feats.
If I'm a melee sort (especially one with medium armor proficiency) I'd strongly consider taking it. But if I was a dex build already I'd probably pass.
I got confused by the wording. I see that it scales if your class gives you training in any armor besides unarmored.
Even so, Sentinel is a heavy investment if you aren't doing free archetypes. At a minimum, it is a level 2 class feat, a useless level 4 skill feat, and mighty bulwark at 10. The mighty bulwark is worth it, but steel skin is useless for anyone that is not a champion, because you didn't take sentinel to use medium armor and you are not getting master until very late in the game. Armor specialist would be ok for a level 4 feat, but losing a level 6 class feat for it hurts. Armored Rebuff is not really worth it for a class feat, and so you either end up stuck in sentinel for your archetype with 2 feats, or you take a feat you will probably never use.
And as good as mighty bulwark is, level 10 is difficult level to pass on your class feats if you aren't doing free archetype and the "No other good feats" thing kills the the archetype in most Free archetype games I have seen. It is not that it is never worth it, but I have not yet seen a single character take the sentinel dedication in the games that I play in, but I have seen a lot of characters running around in medium armor, even still at levels 10+. Maybe the "heavy armored X" just isn't as much of a common player fantasy at the tables I play at as adding casting through archetypes, or even the rogue class archetype, which I see a lot in the free archetype games I play.
Fortification Rune
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The armor I'm confused about is the stuff that tops out at a +4 like padded armor or an armored cloak.
They seem to value comfort really highly.
And I guess having one or two armors like that would make sense, but the armored cloak in the newest book feels really bad since not only is it a trap armor for normal use but even in that niche it's just a downgrade from padded armor anyways.
Fortification Rune
Doesn't that work just fine on medium armor?
|
|
One thing I have not seen mentioned is the movement penalty. Of course +1 AC is worth -5 speed, but is it worth -5 speed and a feat? I don't always think so.
And for those of you who might say fleet feat, I'll point that reaching 30 feet is an extra action in hexploration games.
L2 longstrider absolutely rocks. Gets almost everybody to at least a 30 ft move speed.
Of course, ALL extra movement is good, the more the better. But 30' is faster than a whole bunch of opponents and is very often "Good enough"
My strength greatsword precision ranger stayed with his medium armor through to lvl 20.I've never said it doesn't exist. Also, I'm curious if you made this choice because you had no room for Sentinel or if it was just for RP reasons (which is perfectly valid, it just doesn't answer OP's question).
The plus 1 to ac didn't matter to me compared to animal companion feats and ranger feats. If I had room to spare I'd still use them for interesting things instead of a +1 to ac that locks me into a dedication. Maybe not optimal, different strokes and all that. I just consider getting locked into something not worth small gains
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But this doesn't really make medium armor bad. The only reason I see to actually strip tease in your medium armor for light armor is bulk. The downside of trading in medium for light is the cost of moving your runes. It just doesn't really seem that you have to make that switch. You can, but it's not like you really lose a lot by not doing it.
I agree but we also have this situation for medium armored casters with no str (warpriests, druids) where the strip tease is usually the best option.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, I see Gortle's point now, stripping down to light armor takes away your ability to have the fortification rune, which is a pretty good one.
So if at level 1 you have a character that starts with Medium armor and a 14 or 16 STR, even if you do later boost Dex (as is often a good idea for martials), you might very well keep your medium armor because there is no penalty for doing so, and a rune like fortification is pretty good. Medium armors are also often made out of metal so they might be a little more resilient to getting broken compared to light armor. None of this is a big deal, but none of it is suboptimal to switching to light. If you invest in STR at all, even just to be able to carry your tool kits around, by the time your STR is 14 Medium might be more useful to you than Light. It is only if you look at STR and DEX as necessarily oppositional stats that medium armor has no place
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Medium armor is the best armor many characters that can't max DEX, or don't want to max DEX are going to be able to get without investing feat choices into. And even Sentinel never gives you master proficiency in heavy armor, so your AC ends up -1 compared to wearing medium armor if your class only gives you medium armor, right?
Point or order, Sentinel does upgrade your proficiency in heavy armor to master if your base class already has proficiency in either light or medium armor and would advance to master.
Unless I misunderstand how the following reads:
You have trained carefully to maximize the protective qualities of your armor. You become trained in light armor and medium armor. If you already were trained in light armor and medium armor, you gain training in heavy armor as well. Whenever you gain a class feature that grants you expert or greater proficiency in any type of armor (but not unarmored defense), you also gain that proficiency in the armor types granted to you by this feat. If you are at least 13th level and you have a class feature that grants you expert proficiency in unarmored defense, you also become an expert in the armor types granted to you by this feat.
I think what you mean is that for classes that are only trained in unarmored defense, that they will not gain master proficiency in heavy armor, which is true because
If you are at least 13th level and you have a class feature that grants you expert proficiency in unarmored defense, you also become an expert in the armor types granted to you by this feat.
It only advances to expert by the above rule with unarmored proficiency. However, to the best of my knowledge classes with unarmored proficiency only never advance to master proficiency in defense anyways, so they aren't losing anything.
Please let me know if I've misunderstood something, but I think you are in error.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Medium armor is the best armor many characters that can't max DEX, or don't want to max DEX are going to be able to get without investing feat choices into. And even Sentinel never gives you master proficiency in heavy armor, so your AC ends up -1 compared to wearing medium armor if your class only gives you medium armor, right?Why does it matter if players over time gravitate towards other armors? Medium is very useful at level 1 and for many characters to level 10 at least. Why bother having striking runes if everyone eventually wants greater striking runes eventually anyway? these are things people pay much more money for.
Characters and their equipment change over time.
a medium armor shouldn't be "good for some character up to lvl 10".
It should be a solid choice that gives something that light and heavy can't have. But so should a light and heavy armor do.
The current situation sees heavy armor giving +1 AC ( and, eventually, bulwark ) in a system where even a +1 is godlike. It's no surprise that this would lead to heavy armors.
Changing/upgrading equipment it's intrinsic in an RPG, yes.
But "why" do you change it, as well as "what" you decide to get as a new piece of equipment, is what should be taken into consideration.
ps: over 2 years and still have to see a weapon without extra damage runes ( except maybe thrown that are forced to get a return rune ).
Yes, lvl 19 and lvl 20 a character wont be able to use heavy armor ( big deal).
Those who don't want to invest in dex go with str.
Going with str they'll be better with heavy ones for 90% of the game ( sentinel and, eventually, a general feat) .
It will be -1 AC for the last 2 levels, but with greater rune of fortifocation available... I mean, yes, the last 2 levels will be without heavy armor, but doesn't seem a big deal to me.
As someone who has built and played a lot of Strength Martials who don't have innate access to Heavy Armor, such as a Ranger, a Magus, a Warpriest Cleric, I've never thought about getting heavy armor. I set it to 12 or 14 dex, grabbed my armor and that was it. I have better things to do with feats.
I had misread the dedication. Superbidi pointed that out earlier. Like I said, I have never taken the dedication myself and none of the 20 or so players I have GMed have taken it either.
Either everyone is just misunderstanding how much more important getting a heavy armor proficiency on classes that don’t already have it, or the meta conversation around getting heavy armor is undervaluing the cost of the dedication in terms of lost opportunities to do more active and engaged things.
Just like I almost never see non casters picking up wands of longstrider. Maybe in later levels more characters will when a single trained skill and skill feat would be enough to use it reliably all the time, but by the time you are figuring out how to get a wand to work on yourself so your sentinel dedication doesn’t slow you down to much, this is looking more like a full character build than and easy way for everyone to run around in full armor.
Monks are the ones denied getting master or better with heavy armor by this dedication.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The bigger issue for me is that even fighters, who get heavy armor and good HP for free, need more than just heavy armor to be static tanks in PF2. Heavy armor doesn’t make standing still and attacking as much as possible a strong tactic. Even champions with their better proficiency scaling pretty much need a shield as well if the plan is to actually draw attacks, or else a lot of HP and party healing.
As a player, I feel much better in a party investing early resources in making sure every character can do some healing and has the ability to be effective without needing to charge into melee at the start of every encounter than in a party where every player individually seems focused on getting the highest AC as possible.
Just like I almost never see non casters picking up wands of longstrider. Maybe in later levels more characters will when a single trained skill and skill feat would be enough to use it reliably all the time, but by the time you are figuring out how to get a wand to work on yourself so your sentinel dedication doesn’t slow you down to much, this is looking more like a full character build than and easy way for everyone to run around in full armor.Hmm. Do your games always go without (arcane or primal) casters? Also only one of characters needs to have Trick Magic Item for this purpose. Wands are much easier than staves.
Longstrider is self targeting only. Everyone in the party needs to be able to cast it on themselves.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Being able to ignore dex while still getting an effective 16/18 for saves means better overall saves and the chance to invest in a skill stat.
Some classes/builds get more mileage out of this than others. Magi and inventors need it if they want to invest in int and str, thaumaturge for str and cha, barbarians and rangers that want to go anything that isn't str/dex/con/wis.
It's not absolutely necessary of course, but most classes have absolutely horrid feat lists to begin with and can pretty easily spare the space at 2 and 6 and/or 10 to ensure a good set of saves and max AC.
Just like I almost never see non casters picking up wands of longstrider. Maybe in later levels more characters will when a single trained skill and skill feat would be enough to use it reliably all the time, but by the time you are figuring out how to get a wand to work on yourself so your sentinel dedication doesn’t slow you down to much, this is looking more like a full character build than and easy way for everyone to run around in full armor.
You realize that a martial with trained arcane and TMI running str/con/wis/int is going to activate that wand eventually unless they roll a 1 right? At 5, it activates on a 9+, allows retry on 2-8 and only fails for the day on a 1. That's pretty reliable, and you absolutely have a trained skill to spare.
This discussion is making me think that fundamentally, it might be better if armor did something else other than what it does. IRL, armor typically provides resistance to various kinds of physical damage as it is primarily useful when you are hit and not at preventing you from being hit. Other TTRPGs typically simulate armor in this fashion. Maybe AC has outlived its usefulness for D&D derivatives.
Funny enough, armor does here too (in certain cases dependant on armor type) but only for fighter and champion last I checked.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem is that armor as damage resistance/reduction rules usually don't work out well. They typically lead to characters that are either widely more or less durable than the base rules.
And then you have to look at every creature in the bestiary and decide how much hit avoidance it should have and how much damage resistance it should have.
It's wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too late to implement something like that well in PF2 at this point.
Edit: It would also mean that AC drops by a substantial margin because presumably armor no longer provides a bonus to AC (avoidance) but to damage resistance. So now you also need to recalculate all the monsters to hit bonuses to.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The plus 1 to ac didn't matter to me compared to animal companion feats and ranger feats. If I had room to spare I'd still use them for interesting things instead of a +1 to ac that locks me into a dedication. Maybe not optimal, different strokes and all that. I just consider getting locked into something not worth small gainsMy strength greatsword precision ranger stayed with his medium armor through to lvl 20.I've never said it doesn't exist. Also, I'm curious if you made this choice because you had no room for Sentinel or if it was just for RP reasons (which is perfectly valid, it just doesn't answer OP's question).
Penny wise, pound foolish as they say. (Not you, the people micro-obsessing over a whole +1 AC without regard for the greater cost on the char overall)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Being able to ignore dex while still getting an effective 16/18 for saves means better overall saves and the chance to invest in a skill stat.
Some classes/builds get more mileage out of this than others. Magi and inventors need it if they want to invest in int and str, thaumaturge for str and cha, barbarians and rangers that want to go anything that isn't str/dex/con/wis.
It's not absolutely necessary of course, but most classes have absolutely horrid feat lists to begin with and can pretty easily spare the space at 2 and 6 and/or 10 to ensure a good set of saves and max AC.
Just like I almost never see non casters picking up wands of longstrider. Maybe in later levels more characters will when a single trained skill and skill feat would be enough to use it reliably all the time, but by the time you are figuring out how to get a wand to work on yourself so your sentinel dedication doesn’t slow you down to much, this is looking more like a full character build than and easy way for everyone to run around in full armor.You realize that a martial with trained arcane and TMI running str/con/wis/int is going to activate that wand eventually unless they roll a 1 right? At 5, it activates on a 9+, allows retry on 2-8 and only fails for the day on a 1. That's pretty reliable, and you absolutely have a trained skill to spare.
Gesalt, for this example of a martial, non-fighter/champion character that is using a longstrider wand every day to make up for the movement loss of taking the sentinel dedication to pick up heavy armor, we are now basically saying the character has to dedicate a skill boost, a skill feat, at least a class feat if not multiple, and their early dedication to have a +1 AC and a +5 speed.
I am sure it makes sense for some characters, but it is hardly such an optimal build that it makes medium armor completely irrelevant.
Also, Dex is a skill stat, and a pretty important one. Anyone in the party completely tanking Dex is making party stealth an almost impossible challenge. Even with following the expert and quiet Allie’s, one player with an 8 or 10 in Dex that never boosts is giving a pretty big penalty to the whole group over a player who puts 2 or 3 boosts into Dex over 10 or 15 levels. Acrobatics can often be covered by Athletics in skill-based encounters, but having a really terrible acrobatics score can make certain environmental challenges, encounters quite difficult. Even with a low stat, martials are pretty well advised to train acrobatics so they don’t end up forever helpless to spells like grease or equivalent environmental hazards, but again, that is another skill, that can feel pretty useless with no dex investment at all.
The only fighter I ever built ended up wearing heavy armor with an 18 Dex at level 10 because being mobile and not being shut down by battlefield control options seemed as important as anything else I could try to add to the character. And throwing stuff accurately is nice too.
The important thing about Dex being a skill stat is that Dex is keyed specifically to three of the skills most important for "avoiding danger". Acrobatics directly since "don't fall in the pit of danger" is important but Stealth and Thievery are important skills for "avoiding getting into fights."
Gesalt, for this example of a martial, non-fighter/champion character that is using a longstrider wand every day to make up for the movement loss of taking the sentinel dedication to pick up heavy armor, we are now basically saying the character has to dedicate a skill boost, a skill feat, at least a class feat if not multiple, and their early dedication to have a +1 AC and a +5 speed.
I am sure it makes sense for some characters, but it is hardly such an optimal build that it makes medium armor completely irrelevant.
You misunderstand something here. You don't do that to make up for heavy armor speed loss. You do it because there are fast enemies in this game and everyone that doesn't have a built in status bonus to speed like the monk should be running TMI and a wand of longstrider if they plan to do any kind of melee. Not to mention using a wand of see invis at level 11.
As for dedicating a skill boost, non-rogues get exactly 3 full boosted skills. Just about every class gets 4 base skills, meaning you have at least one useless skill that gets to stay at trained. You use this skill for TMI because there are only a handful of good skill feats to begin with and most are cha based or have an actual level or proficiency requirement like kip up.
And again, sentinel isn't a requirement. Melee magus in particular would much rather just take cleric instead for the focus spell for example(can't get psychic without int after all). The bonus AC and effective save bonus is more powerful than what most class feats or archetypes can give you though, so it's always worth considering. A str/dex/con/wis character won't match the saves of bulwark sentinel until level 10 and won't match mighty bulwark until level 15 while having worse AC, slightly better speed, no int or cha utility and whatever feat/archetype they took instead at level 2.
I don't have a single medium armor character out of 15 characters. My Mutagenist, Barbarian and Ranger all have either Sentinel or Champion Dedication.
I must admit one selling point of heavy armor is that increasing str/dex/con/wis leads to the less unique stat array: the whole party increases these stats. So you don't bring much to the party skill wise. My Paladin has this stat array (but with Dex as main attribute) and I struggle to roll any skill check as there's too much overlap in the party. I like skills so I don't wear medium armor. But it certainly taints my point of view regarding medium armor: I don't think I'll ever play a medium armor character past level 4.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Part of why I like the dandy dedication so much for an illusionist wizard is that it boosts useful skills to expert. There are a lot of fun ways to build characters if you don’t lock yourself into thinking that maximizing specific numbers is the most important thing for every character.
But this doesn't really make medium armor bad. The only reason I see to actually strip tease in your medium armor for light armor is bulk. The downside of trading in medium for light is the cost of moving your runes. It just doesn't really seem that you have to make that switch. You can, but it's not like you really lose a lot by not doing it.I agree but we also have this situation for medium armored casters with no str (warpriests, druids) where the strip tease is usually the best option.
As someone who often begins new campaigns at 5th level, having medium armor to go 14 STR/14 DEX is very relevant as it allows you to cap your AC without investing your ancestry or background boosts in it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The party I'm GMing in Outlaws of Alkenstar consists of one veteran player and 4 newbies (I adjust with elite profiles or extra mobs where needed). They're a champion, gunslinger (the one veteran who made an on theme character, lol), cloistered cleric, sorcerer, & barbarian. Only the champion has heavy armor & no one has taken sentinel nor any other "must haves" discussed in the thread. They're doing just fine despite my upwards tuning of the difficulty with nary a complaint (I don't shy away from rushing the backline as much as I do the frontline). I think sometimes people with experience can get blinders on and think the optimized way is the only way, and to do anything else is unthinkable and a dire threat to the health of the PC.
Sentinel is not a must have for optimizers in all situations. It's a must have if you want to dump dex. If you keep raising dex, you can go from medium to light armor to save bulk and to enable light armor runes.
If you stop raising dex and stay with medium armor you are dumping reflex saves. It is this situation that sentinel enables you to dump dex without dumping reflex saves.
Bulk is rarely a problem past mid levels as bags of holding are cheap. As such it really doesn't affect optimizers much at all.
Avoiding the armour check penalty to skills and movement rate is normally important. It is easier to do that in light armour of no armour than in medium armour. But if you can't often the AC benefit from the better armour is typically the correct choice.
So it is a trade off between investment in Strength and investment in Dexterity. After a few ability score increase most characters can have enough extra Dexterity to rebalance that choice.
What keeps you in medium armour in the long run?
Having enough Strength so that you can.
Medium armour has different options. The runes that are available to medium but not light are things lke the Fortification rune.
You don't get Armor Specialization for light armour but you do for medium.
There are plently of good reasons to stay in medium armor.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are plently of good reasons to stay in medium armor.
You only compare medium armor to light armor. All the reasons to go for medium armor over light are also given by heavy armor.
Also you can hardly get armor specialization without also having heavy armor proficiency.I think sometimes people with experience can get blinders on and think the optimized way is the only way, and to do anything else is unthinkable and a dire threat to the health of the PC.
Please, no badwrongfun argument. If you don't care about that level of optimization then just stay out of the discussion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You only compare medium armor to light armor.
Well yeah, because those two are more or less in the same 'tier' of armor. It only makes sense to compare them.
If you're not buying heavy armor, you're wearing medium or light, in which case it mostly just comes down to which property runes you're going to use.
If you are going for heavy, it trumps both light and medium in terms of AC. Everyone is tankier in plate.