| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Interesting... A thread without an OP. :P
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
As the title.
I'm really disappointed that Armor, as an item type, doesn't have any really cool or interesting options for customization or variation from one another, and that it ultimately boils down to 3 factors: What weight proficiency your class(es) provide(s), if any; what your Strength Bonus is, and what your Dexterity Bonus is. That's it. It otherwise doesn't particularly matter what Armor you wear. And I don't much like that compared to what we otherwise could have gotten, and what was apparent in PF1. Granted, PF1 had differing variations on what Armors were the best for those same reasons, and what materials were most practical, but the point is that PF1 did more to at least try to make Armor different from one another, and had fewer interactive tools to do so. PF2 has far more interactive tools by comparison, so why does it feel even more restrictive?
Look at what Heavy Armor could have been, for example: Half-Plate could have been neat with a Piecemeal trait that lets it benefit from two Special Materials at once, and/or letting it benefit from both Composite and Plate groups for the purposes of Armor Specialization, making it more competitive to Full Plate for those common wearers of heavier armor. Splint Mail could have also been cool with having only a -5 foot penalty speed to signify its added flexibility, or add a Fortified trait, increasing the amount of damage reduced from Specialization by a significant amount (maybe by half item-level rounded up, for example). But no, instead it boils down to "Just take Full Plate when you can, it's the only armor with a solid support trait compared to the other two." I'm sorry, but what kind of design philosophy was this? What was the goal to accomplish? Simplicity? Uniformity? Just getting a product out the door?
And the other weights aren't any better by comparison. For Light Armor, there is Comfort, and is handy on the Padded Armor, but it gives 1 less AC than most other armors of its weight to compensate, which is unfair to what other armors could have given in exchange if they were actually given something else to offer, and Padded Armor is really only relevant for, surprise surprise, Heavy Armor wearers who get ambushed at night while resting. And Explorer's Clothing, while listed under the Armor section, isn't actually Armor to begin with, yet is essentially better than Padded Armor with the right amount of Dexterity. Even if you need to wait until 10th level at the earliest (or don't have that choice if you aren't proficient with any armor), it's just not worth it, even if you are already proficient in Leather Armor, since you'd already be down the AC anyway. Worse yet, Light armor doesn't even benefit from any form of Armor Specializations by RAW, meaning the only reason they have groupings is for Special Material purposes (as few and far between as those are, given only one of them is actually a metal that can be made of a special material), and has little to no traits or neat attributes to warrant improved diversity, especially not compared to something like I proposed above. I can accept that Light Armor doesn't protect you as well as Heavy Armor can, and the AC bonuses support that, but I don't accept that it doesn't provide intricately useful benefits for you that Heavy Armor can't, either. Yes, 5 feet of movement is a useful benefit, but it's both universal and generic, and isn't bound to a specific armor of a given weight. It also doesn't justify armor within the same weights being equally universal and generic of themselves, which is what brings me to the other baffling tier of Armor.
Medium. Medium is the most boring armor category ever, worn by maybe what, Barbarian and Alchemist? Possibly Druid (for Hide Armor, anyway,) and Magus as well, but most of those classes are already inclined to increase Dexterity anyway because of Reflex Saves constantly escalating, and they get no help compared to Full Plate wearers in that respect from their armor. Either way, it's got the least amount of classes wearing it (especially later in the game, where non-Heavy Armor wearers have their Dexterity jacked up to be considering Light Armor instead), and it has the least amount of variation or interest behind it. It's either just a slight change in armor groups, adjusting a trait or two, and/or the cost is 2 or 4 gold different. That is super unoriginal and uninteresting compared to even the Simple weapon category, and that has weapons like Daggers and Longspears, which offer a lot more combat variety to the game than any given Medium Armor does. Don't get me wrong, Chain Mail might have been interesting if characters that benefit from Armor Specialization don't already have access to far better options, which is really the only neat place where it shines compared to any other Medium Armor; reducing damage from Criticals of any damage type is pretty helpful. But the scaling is pretty weak compared to even the basic Armor Specializations from Full Plate. And the worst part is, it actually doesn't see the light of day anyway, because nobody would actually want to do this compared to the other options.
What about some of the other neat armors that were introduced in Pathfinder 1, like Stoneplate or Bonemail, for example? Why haven't such items made an appearance and changed the dynamic of Armor for the better in a later book? A few ancestries list wearing equipment made of such things (Lizardfolk and Dwarves in particular, based on the example armor names I provided), but don't actually have items that replicate this very ideal, which hurts immersion immensely. Players may want to play a Lizardfolk with Bonemail, or a Dwarven Druid with Stoneplate, but as it stands, they simply can't. Also, where's the Lamellar Armor at? It sounds cool, and might have added another bit of diversity to the Armor game by having another group that may add a different benefit to the Specialization boons.
And boy, do we keep getting things like Class or Ancestry-based Armor that is just a rehash of the original Armors, just in slightly different packaging that doesn't involve gold(, at least not right away, thanks fundamental/property runes! ABP solves this a bit, but not for property runes). In my opinion, it's relatively annoying, given how common it's becoming; it seems like there are a bunch of Ancestries that have feat-specific Armors, and the Inventor with its Armor Innovation did not help matters any, either. There might be some slight benefits to such things, depending on which Class or Ancestry-based Armor you're benefitting from (such as being able to sleep in it despite not having the Comfort trait), but it's otherwise just as boring and uninteresting as the other basic Armors the game has to offer.
Is this really all that we should expect from Armor in this game? Do you think the game could be more than what it is if Armor was expanded on compared to what we have now? Are there any things you would like to see Armor do that it currently doesn't do well now?
|
One option is to reflavor armors. The basic armors are there just to give you a baseline. You could say that parade armor has the same stats as stuffed leather, but is made mostly out of metal. Splint mail could have the same stats as scale. O-Yori armor and full plate could have the same stats. The armors are there to cover the range of 0/max dex 5 to 4/max dex 1, and then the heavy armors. Their job is to set a baseline. If you want to make Japanese Ashigaru armor, just give it the same stats as a chain shirt.
Oh, and a TON of classes use medium armor
Melee rangers, melee in inventors, melee thaumaturges, brute rogues, any caster with the sentinel dedication. Heck my warrior muse Bard uses medium armor through sentinel dedication.
Also most magi get to twelve dex and stop (for the breastplate). They have other things to worry about like strength, con, and int. Only starlit span magi care about dex.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree. Armors could have been as diverse and interesting as weapons but they just aren't and shields, well it was obvious they got rushed when dents went out the window and nobody seems to want to fix that. The worst part is that making interesting armor is easy.
You start by setting the base armor for each category, that's the boring one that's good if you don't have a use for the special traits other armors at that tier get. Then you make two armors that give less AC but have some positive traits that could make up for it. Then you make armor with better AC that has drawbacks that some classes can overcome and others can't.
Test that. If it's balanced see if you can slip in another set of armor into each category or if your base armor has room to be made more interesting.
If you're willing to slaughter sacred cows you can make it so armor absorbs damage and shields and dexterity make you more difficult to hit. Then you have a lot more room for interesting trade-offs and can even design armor that has DR against some damage types and weaknesses to others so warriors have some ability to prepare defenses and pick weapons for use against known threats.
Making a game more interesting than the one Paizo gave us isn't difficult, they just got cold feet a few too many times and played a lot of things safer than they needed to.
I guess people love weapons far more. And it's nothing new : Mjolnir, Gungnir, Durandal, Excalibur are not the names of armors.
Aegis, Pridwen, and Svalinn are all famous shields and then the various armors tended to be named for those who wore them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You start by setting the base armor for each category, that's the boring one that's good if you don't have a use for the special traits other armors at that tier get. Then you make two armors that give less AC but have some positive traits that could make up for it. Then you make armor with better AC that has drawbacks that some classes can overcome and others can't.
This is... fundamentally not how armor class works in PF2. The drawbacks would have to be monumental to not just always take the armor type with the best AC rating.
You start by setting the base armor for each category, that's the boring one that's good if you don't have a use for the special traits other armors at that tier get. Then you make two armors that give less AC but have some positive traits that could make up for it. Then you make armor with better AC that has drawbacks that some classes can overcome and others can't.This is... fundamentally not how armor class works in PF2. The drawbacks would have to be monumental to not just always take the armor type with the best AC rating.
Why do we need to be tied to a system that leads to boring binary results?
You can make a more interesting system that isn't any harder to resolve than the current system that has more room for interesting mechanics. Like armor that provides a penalty to avoiding attacks but which absorbs more damage. Or armor that gives a limited ability to force an enemy to reroll their damage dice. Nothing that would be unbalanced but just enough difference that you can more easily play out certain archetypes.
|
You start by setting the base armor for each category, that's the boring one that's good if you don't have a use for the special traits other armors at that tier get. Then you make two armors that give less AC but have some positive traits that could make up for it. Then you make armor with better AC that has drawbacks that some classes can overcome and others can't.This is... fundamentally not how armor class works in PF2. The drawbacks would have to be monumental to not just always take the armor type with the best AC rating.Why do we need to be tied to a system that leads to boring binary results?
You can make a more interesting system that isn't any harder to resolve than the current system that has more room for interesting mechanics. Like armor that provides a penalty to avoiding attacks but which absorbs more damage. Or armor that gives a limited ability to force an enemy to reroll their damage dice. Nothing that would be unbalanced but just enough difference that you can more easily play out certain archetypes.
Balance is a thing.
And "a more interesting system" means we're not in PF2 anymore.
I believe there are some homebrew threads about armor.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Look at it from a different angle: what's stopping writers from adding new, interesting armors? It's pretty clear how the balance of existing armors is set up, so adding new ones that are in line with that should be straightforward.
You want to keep the AC value (Dex + Item) in line with the weight class, and the strength/speed in proportion too. But you can certainly come up with new good and bad traits, material options, and specializations.
I view the CRB armors as a basis to work from, not as a closed off set that can't be extended.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Look at it from a different angle: what's stopping writers from adding new, interesting armors? It's pretty clear how the balance of existing armors is set up, so adding new ones that are in line with that should be straightforward.
You want to keep the AC value (Dex + Item) in line with the weight class, and the strength/speed in proportion too. But you can certainly come up with new good and bad traits, material options, and specializations.
I view the CRB armors as a basis to work from, not as a closed off set that can't be extended.
I think the Armored Skirt was an interesting addition. You can basically create new styles of armor by combining it with the allowed armors. I wouldn't be averse to more options like that. Sets of greaves, for example.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My vision about currently armor situation comes from since original D&D where all is about AC. Games where you roll dices to set a character base stats and depending from what roll do you put in dex you choose the armor that best fits in you.
In PF1/3.5 (maybe even earlier) due many complains about how a bad dice luck can improve or penalty a character many tables switched to a points distribution system. And here is where the problem begins. With the full control over the char's dex the armors that stays in the middle started to become unwanted because almost all builds are min/maxed, if you wanted to do a high dex character like a rogue or an ranger you probably will max your dex and the armor penalty begins to become a problem restricting your choices to mostly lighter versions, and chars that usually don't plan to use dex to attack usually choses the full plate due it's higher AC. This where the medium armor begins to be put in sideways.
Also in 3.5/PF1 due mithral armors and Magic Vestment spells the thing comes even strange. Chars with medium armor limits like barbarian that already tends to buy heavy armor proficiency can use a mithral full plate as medium armor and light classes like rogues does the same with medium armors.
Basically the full focus was just in "how to take the best AC with minimum penalty" during in almost entire history of D20 systems.
And of corse this influenced the current PF2 armor situation. But IMO many things improved, maybe not like some people wanted but still improved. The focus in AC continues but we no more have the mithral super efficiency, the full plate still good but is no more soo good over lesser armors, armors now have some traits that gives little benefits and armor specialization the helps to distinguish some them. But off corse the things still far from perfect. We still have the hole where medium armors stays since 3.5 where they are too penalty for dex based chars at same time that their lower AC than heavy armors for no-dex based chars keeps they out of target. Also sentinel archetype didn't help one it allow a medium armored class change to heavy yet more expensive to use than older heavy armor proficiency but for many builds without heavy MC in mind is a great option specially when you are in a level that you don't like any of available feats (magus?).
I guess people love weapons far more. And it's nothing new : Mjolnir, Gungnir, Durandal, Excalibur are not the names of armors.
I agree. Culturally weapons have way more entasis in lores than armors and usually chars armors that gains some spotlight are the mostly heavier armors that make the char bigger and more imposing or the mostly skinner ones thats focus in char acrobatic and stealthy abilities what collaborate even more for light/heavy armor popularity.
Look at it from a different angle: what's stopping writers from adding new, interesting armors? It's pretty clear how the balance of existing armors is set up, so adding new ones that are in line with that should be straightforward.
You want to keep the AC value (Dex + Item) in line with the weight class, and the strength/speed in proportion too. But you can certainly come up with new good and bad traits, material options, and specializations.
I view the CRB armors as a basis to work from, not as a closed off set that can't be extended.
I agree. PF2 still in it's childhood we still have much time and space to more itens like different armors to be added.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not sure what the solution is, but right now it really does seem like the only decision is whether or not you're buying Sentinel.
Other than that armor could just not exist and everyone gets 5+proficiency to AC and you'd hardly notice a difference for anyone who isn't an unarmored caster.
Feel like the only time I actually think about my AC is when I'm statting up one of those, because they don't get armor proficiency but also don't go all in on Dex. That fits the squishy wizard tradition, but it also feels weird to me that I think more about my armor when playing a spellcaster than when I do when playing a heavily armored frontliner.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
...That fits the squishy wizard tradition, but it also feels weird to me that I think more about my armor when playing a spellcaster than when I do when playing a heavily armored frontliner.
This is a bad heritage from D&D. Due how AC is important for most part of the game and is almost exclusive calculated over dex turning the DEX a "must have" condition to almost all spellcasters.
IMO the PF2 lost the chance to avoid this when put only +1 in Mage Armor, the unarmored casters, specially Wizard and Sorcerer would have much more interesting builds if instead the Mage Armor starts with +5 but you couldn't add your DEX to AC instead. This would freed these caster to a wider variety of builds.
About medium armors. Here in my country there's a D20 system where they removed the medium armor definition. Instead half of medium armors goes up ou down to heavy and lighter definitions. And some classes simply are moved down or up their proficiency (Barbarians uses light armor proficiency, clerics heavy, fighters heavy, swashbucler light, ranger light, knights heavy, druid light no metal only, inventor light, rogue light, noble (it's kind of a marshal) light, paladin heavy) some times I think if would not better for PF2 if something like this was done.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Seems the more interesting aspects of armor are from the materials its made of then the actual armor itself. Skymetals and the Armaments of the Luminant Age 3pp for example
I think Medium keeps a niche as you level. Fighters and Champions that have some STR but are mainly DEX should be using Medium for Armour Specialization.
This usually don't happen. They tend to go to full plate due higher AC and receive a similar specialization.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think Medium keeps a niche as you level. Fighters and Champions that have some STR but are mainly DEX should be using Medium for Armour Specialization.
If Medium gave the same amount of armor as Heavy did, you'd be right.
As it stands, no sane person would make that switch.
Interesting... A thread without an OP. :P
I believe this is a glitch with previewing an opening post (which I did to make sure I did some HTML coding correctly). It's there, though.
Interesting... A thread without an OP. :PI believe this is a glitch with previewing an opening post (which I did to make sure I did some HTML coding correctly). It's there, though.
LOL I figured as much as weird stuff like new post markers and no posts, posting and not seeing your post, going to post and seeing new posts but you didn't have the new post marker ect. It's just the first time it's happen with the OP for me. ;)
One option is to reflavor armors. The basic armors are there just to give you a baseline. You could say that parade armor has the same stats as stuffed leather, but is made mostly out of metal. Splint mail could have the same stats as scale. O-Yori armor and full plate could have the same stats. The armors are there to cover the range of 0/max dex 5 to 4/max dex 1, and then the heavy armors. Their job is to set a baseline. If you want to make Japanese Ashigaru armor, just give it the same stats as a chain shirt.
Oh, and a TON of classes use medium armor
Melee rangers, melee in inventors, melee thaumaturges, brute rogues, any caster with the sentinel dedication. Heck my warrior muse Bard uses medium armor through sentinel dedication.Also most magi get to twelve dex and stop (for the breastplate). They have other things to worry about like strength, con, and int. Only starlit span magi care about dex.
They are, but even the basic armors aren't interesting or have good tradeoffs besides worrying about a Strength score, a Dexterity score, or if your class is proficient in that weight of armor. Where are my neat traits that can compare to Bulwark? Where is a better compromise for Padded Armor having less AC for a Comfort trait? Where are my Stoneplate and Bonemail armors at? Reflavoring doesn't do much to add variety to armors beyond what we already have, and that's evidenced in the Class/Ancestry-specific "armors."
Melee rangers might be inclined not to boost Dexterity, given they get Improved Evasion at a later point, but being in two groups that have melee rangers, neither of them dumped Dexterity. A Melee Inventor would do that if they invest in Full Plate, especially if they take the Armor Innovation to do so, otherwise I suspect not, since Reflex saves are deadly enough to kill parties now. Same can be said for Thaumaturge, Magus, basically any class that isn't specifically restricted to Medium (like Barbarian and Druid).
I think the Armored Skirt was an interesting addition. You can basically create new styles of armor by combining it with the allowed armors. I wouldn't be averse to more options like that. Sets of greaves, for example.Look at it from a different angle: what's stopping writers from adding new, interesting armors? It's pretty clear how the balance of existing armors is set up, so adding new ones that are in line with that should be straightforward.
You want to keep the AC value (Dex + Item) in line with the weight class, and the strength/speed in proportion too. But you can certainly come up with new good and bad traits, material options, and specializations.
I view the CRB armors as a basis to work from, not as a closed off set that can't be extended.
It doesn't really change anything fundamentally, though. If I am using this for one of my light or medium armors, I don't gain an effective AC unless my Dexterity is low enough, and it also requires more strength to ignore penalties, as well as increases them and adds a detrimental trait for it. If I use it for my Half/Full Plate, then I'm just adding the same detrimental trait for less strength requirements and relying more on Dexterity for my AC; which can certainly have a niche. But the biggest fundamental problem is proficiency adjustments that it poses, which might not be feasible. After all, a Barbarian, a class likely to dump Dexterity, will not be proficient in the final result, even if it's a net gain for them.
And really, the premise of my OP is that I am not a fan of the current fundamental operation that armor provides, and throws a couple bones to change that premise up in a good way that promotes diverse armor choices, instead of "Full Plate for Heavy, Leather/Explorer's Clothing for non-Heavy." The fact armor is essentially that binary is a pretty sad reflection of its design impact.
Here's a fundamental question that I rarely see asked, what does armor proficiency by armor type bring to the game? What harm is done by opening up armor availability?
A couple feats, including the sentinel archetype dedication in particular, would become redundant. That’s about it I think.
Here's a fundamental question that I rarely see asked, what does armor proficiency by armor type bring to the game? What harm is done by opening up armor availability?
The PF1 Druid worked this way, and I thought it was a neat workaround for using certain armor types.
The PF2 Druid takes the worst of both that world and this one, and it's even worse than the current armor paradigm is. And by RAW, Dwarven Druids can't wear a hypothetical Stoneplate without Sentinel.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I get the feeling that a lot of players would have more fun with PF2 if it wasn't so keen to silo everything and loosened up on niche protection. You can keep 90% of the balance and gain many times the number of viable builds by doing this.
LOL I figured as much as weird stuff like new post markers and no posts, posting and not seeing your post, going to post and seeing new posts but you didn't have the new post marker ect. It's just the first time it's happen with the OP for me. ;)Interesting... A thread without an OP. :PI believe this is a glitch with previewing an opening post (which I did to make sure I did some HTML coding correctly). It's there, though.
Do you still don't notice these are Schrödinger's post they exists and don't exist at same time until some one opens it and check. When you openend the forum decides that they don't exist. Some time after when other people entered the forum decide that they exist! 🤣
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do you still don't notice these are Schrödinger post they exists and don't exist at same time until some one opens it and check. When you openend the forum decides that they don't exist. Some time after when other people entered the forum decide that they exist!
That just happened with your post. I saw a new post, checked the thread, didn't see anything, and then I refreshed the page to see the new post that should have already been there. Magic.
|
Designer
|
| 25 people marked this as a favorite. |
Look at it from a different angle: what's stopping writers from adding new, interesting armors? It's pretty clear how the balance of existing armors is set up, so adding new ones that are in line with that should be straightforward.
You want to keep the AC value (Dex + Item) in line with the weight class, and the strength/speed in proportion too. But you can certainly come up with new good and bad traits, material options, and specializations.
I view the CRB armors as a basis to work from, not as a closed off set that can't be extended.
The answer to the initial question posed by the quoted post is "nothing but time and space". Like, the edition is only three years old and it's not like we've gotten zero new ways to customize armors or shields in that time. Grand Bazaar has a whole spread of armor and shield adjustments, as well as shields and armor made from new materials. Guns & Gears also has options for modifying or customizing shields and armors with various accessories.
It's wild to me how often people on these forums will be like "Obviously Paizo is never going to to do X", "Clearly the devs hate Y", or "Why haven't we gotten Z yet?"
Like, seriously now my guys, gals and nonbinary pals, we'll get there, this stuff just takes a minute and has to have the right home at the right time. I don't know that I've seen an edition of any TTRPG that accumulated this much content this quickly, and as I've said before, we're just getting started. The majority of the people who bought all of the release day books for PF2 at GenCon are still playing Age of Ashes, you know? The average rate at which an actual player gets hands-on experience with our material is one level of one class every 2-3 months, or every 1-3 months if they're playing in org play. If we put out material any faster there'd be a drop in quality and a drop in the game's accessibility for new players. With PF2 being the most successful thing we've ever created as a company, we're taking active efforts to keep things deliberate and carefully paced to keep the content consumers fed without shutting doors on the new players pouring into our communities every quarter.
New base armors? I'm confident we'll get there and I can think of half a dozen different traits we could use to make interesting and dynamic base armors without even trying very hard. More and more varied shields, magical or otherwise? I'm sure we'll get there too. We just need the right book at the right time with the right amount of design bandwidth available to get them done right and in a way that's healthy for the game's ecosystem.
Here's a fundamental question that I rarely see asked, what does armor proficiency by armor type bring to the game? What harm is done by opening up armor availability?
There's actually a bunch of answers to this question.
1) Basic Accessibility- The number of things you have to look at and pay attention to during character creation are one of the biggest barriers to entry for a TTRPG system; allowing people to focus on a specific subsection of gear makes the transition smoother.
2) Loot Distribution- It makes it easier to distribute loot in adventures where "magic marts" aren't going to come up often. Sure, you might still have a party of 4 leather armor wearers, but generally you'll see a more even dispersal of unarmored/light/medium/heavy characters and so a pre-published adventure writer can know that if they put about 25% of the defensive loot targeting each of those categories in an adventure, it'll work pretty smoothly for most groups without creating additional burdens for the GM.
3) Character Creation- Am I champion with heavy armor and is my god anyone other than Erastil? I probably don't need to put points into Dexterity and should just grab the heaviest armor I can find. Am I a rogue who just got Thievery for free and can only wear light armor? Then I get the best light armor for my build. Individually these elements aren't major cognitive loads, but collectively they can snowball along with other pieces of the game into a real barrier for new players.
4) Intentional Design- If you put e.g. Iomedae's Armor in a book as a cool champion item, you want it to have a strong theme and story but also to be useful to the majority of champions; part of that means you want the majority of champions to not just be able to wear heavy armor, but to have incentive to do so. Same things with class items for any other class. There's a huge appeal to focused, flavorful items with rich stories, but to make sure those items and stories reach the people who want them, you need a framework that ensures they're relevant to the majority of the target players.
5) Aesthetic and Internal Consistency- As Stephen Radney-McFarland once said (and I have no idea if he was quoting someone) fantasy is a language, and people may not always know when they're speaking it but they sure the hell know when someone's speaking it wrong. An extant example of this would be monks being able to use shields as competently as anyone else. This strikes a raw nerve with a fair number of folks despite being a pretty minor thing that won't even impact all games. The number of people who are going to be even more put off if the best bards are in full plate and the best champions are in leather constitutes a much larger percentage of the audience. As much as I loathe the word "verisimilitude" when it comes to TTRPG design (it should never trump "fun" and most people who bandy it about aren't even talking about historical accuracy, they're just talking about their personal fantasy preferences and favorite media), there is an extent to which the game world needs to make sense to the person interacting with it, and armor categories associating with character role and flavor has deep roots in the fantasy zeitgeist pretty much regardless of what your point of entry is.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's actually a bunch of answers to this question.
1) Basic Accessibility- The number of things you have to look at and pay attention to during character creation are one of the biggest barriers to entry for a TTRPG system; allowing people to focus on a specific subsection of gear makes the transition smoother.
2) Loot Distribution- It makes it easier to distribute loot in adventures where "magic marts" aren't going to come up often. Sure, you might still have a party of 4 leather armor wearers, but generally you'll see a more even dispersal of unarmored/light/medium/heavy characters and so a pre-published adventure writer can know that if they put about 25% of the defensive loot targeting each of those categories in an adventure, it'll work pretty smoothly for most groups without creating additional burdens for the GM.
3) Character Creation- Am I champion with heavy armor and is my god anyone other than Erastil? I probably don't need to put points into Dexterity and should just grab the heaviest armor I can find. Am I a rogue who just got Thievery for free and can only wear light armor? Then I get the best light armor for my build. Individually these elements aren't major cognitive loads, but collectively they can snowball along with other pieces of the game into a real barrier for new players.
4) Intentional Design- If you put e.g. Iomedae's Armor in a book as a cool champion item, you want it to have a strong theme and story but also to be useful to the majority of champions; part of that means you want the majority of champions to not just be able to wear heavy armor, but to have incentive to do so. Same things with class items for any other class. There's a huge appeal to focused, flavorful items with rich stories, but to make sure those items and stories reach the people who want them, you need a framework that ensures they're relevant to the majority of the target players.
5) Aesthetic and Internal Consistency- As Stephen Radney-McFarland once said (and I have no idea if he was quoting someone) fantasy is a language, and people may not always know when they're speaking it but they sure the hell know when someone's speaking it wrong. An extant example of this would be monks being able to use shields as competently as anyone else. This strikes a raw nerve with a fair number of folks despite being a pretty minor thing that won't even impact all games. The number of people who are going to be even more put off if the best bards are in full plate and the best champions are in leather constitutes a much larger percentage of the audience. As much as I loathe the word "verisimilitude" when it comes to TTRPG design (it should never trump "fun" and most people who bandy it about aren't even talking about historical accuracy, they're just talking about their personal fantasy preferences and favorite media), there is an extant to which the game world needs to make sense to the person interacting with it, and armor categories associating with character role and flavor has deep roots in the fantasy zeitgeist pretty much regardless of what your point of entry is.
Thanks for the answer.
This is pretty much what I expected to hear. The design of PF2 is very neatly stacked into things that your class can do natively, things they can do with a little investment, and off theme builds that take system mastery and creativity to make viable. This is very stable and predictable as well as being streamlined so most players can slide in and build something functional on their first or second try. If I was making a game for mass-market appeal I would likely make the same choices.
I just like messy and deep systems. I'm the player that sees a nice à la carte point-buy character system and skill-based combat and get excited. I'm one for open rules that swing for the fences, even the ones that miss often do something interesting that shines when patched into another system.
That's why to me the Unchained designs were one of the best parts of PF1. I know it's unlikely to come any time soon (and possibly not at all) but I'd be very excited to see what a PF2: Unchained supplement might bring to the table. Not just to see what a second pass at some classes could do but to see what years of system mastery can let you get away with in terms of pushing limits.
In any case, keep being awesome.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the Armored Skirt was an interesting addition. You can basically create new styles of armor by combining it with the allowed armors. I wouldn't be averse to more options like that. Sets of greaves, for example.Look at it from a different angle: what's stopping writers from adding new, interesting armors? It's pretty clear how the balance of existing armors is set up, so adding new ones that are in line with that should be straightforward.
You want to keep the AC value (Dex + Item) in line with the weight class, and the strength/speed in proportion too. But you can certainly come up with new good and bad traits, material options, and specializations.
I view the CRB armors as a basis to work from, not as a closed off set that can't be extended.
Just for fun, I made armor tables that include the armored skirt options.
|
|
Very interesting answer Michael, there was a lot there that I'd never really thought about.
I think what I'd like in future armors would be to make it more active. Right now armor mostly just sits there protecting you, you calculate in the modifiers to your stats, and don't really interact with it very much after that.
I don't know exactly what form it'd take, but maybe something like wrestling moves where you can use heavier armor to bump people around or something. Or maybe some reactions usable by anyone wearing it who's trained in that kind of armor, like trying to bounce off a projectile or such.
The answer to the initial question posed by the quoted post is "nothing but time and space". Like, the edition is only three years old and it's not like we've gotten zero new ways to customize armors or shields in that time. Grand Bazaar has a whole spread of armor and shield adjustments, as well as shields and armor made from new materials. Guns & Gears also has options for modifying or customizing shields and armors with various accessories.
It's wild to me how often people on these forums will be like "Obviously Paizo is never going to to do X", "Clearly the devs hate Y", or "Why haven't we gotten Z yet?"
Like, seriously now my guys, gals and nonbinary pals, we'll get there, this stuff just takes a minute and has to have the right home at the right time. I don't know that I've seen an edition of any TTRPG that accumulated this much content this quickly, and as I've said before, we're just getting started. The majority of the people who bought all of the release day books for PF2 at GenCon are still playing Age of Ashes, you know? The average rate at which an actual player gets hands-on experience with our material is one level of one class every 2-3 months, or every 1-3 months if they're playing in org play. If we put out material any faster there'd be a drop in quality and a drop in the game's accessibility for new players. With PF2 being the most successful thing we've ever created as a company, we're taking active efforts to keep things deliberate and carefully paced to keep the content consumers fed without shutting doors on the new players pouring into our communities every quarter.
New base armors? I'm confident we'll get there and I can think of half a dozen different traits we could use to make interesting and dynamic base armors without even trying very hard. More and more varied shields, magical or otherwise? I'm sure we'll get there too. We just need the right book at the right time with the right amount of design bandwidth available to get them done right and in a way that's healthy for the game's ecosystem.
First, thanks for taking the time to give a reply; it's nice to have developer insight on things, and I actually wasn't expecting a developer to come in and comment on something.
Second, I'm glad that there are potential plans to make new armors, as well as making armor as a basic item a more interesting and dynamic option for gameplay (though maybe not like shields, IMO, as that's stepping on their niche). Even with all of the adjustments and new materials, I still feel that there is more that can be done so that even base armor choices can be interesting and dynamic, and/or even change to suit certain needs at certain levels. I can understand that the opportunity to simply "errata" several of those options into a previous published book is problematic (meaning I suspect a lot of the existing armors won't really improve), though it does create a sense of "What sort of book would include these kinds of added options?" An equipment book, perhaps, but I suspect that won't be for quite some time yet. Otherwise, I'm at a loss, and we probably won't cross that bridge until we get to it, which can take years.
Third, a lot of the "Paizo won't do XYZ because [reasons]" posts (which I have indeed made some of) largely stem from a pre-conceived establishment of rules balancing brought on by currently published options, and the odds of Paizo as a company deciding to implement XYZ is being weighted based on said pre-conceptions. For example, all Heavy Armor is currently designed to incur a -10 feet penalty to Movement Speed, incurs the most check penalties of any other weight, has a 16 to 18 Strength requirement to ignore said check penalties and reduce movement speed penalties, and has an overall AC bonus 1 higher than other armor weights. No Heavy Armors behave any differently from this mold, with the exception of Full Plate, which has a very powerful defensive trait attached to it with the drawback being that it's a higher level item with the highest cost in the game. While this is all Core Rulebook only, there haven't been any actual new armors published since (whether intentional or not), and a lot of the adjustment items don't really change these pre-conceptions too much, if at all. The Armored Skirt, while cool thematically, is a great example of an item that does something that tries to make the mold more malleable, but doesn't actually break it, though I feel it's almost a bit too niche in my opinion. (It also only works with certain equipment, and isn't a general application to armor as a whole.)
Fourth, I did get a kick out of you saying people are still playing Age of Ashes, since I am actually in a group still playing through it (though we are on the final book now and getting towards the end). We started on it about two years ago, though our play schedule now has been pretty lax compared to what it was then (every 2 to 3 weeks compared to every week). But the previous comment, as I stated before, isn't necessarily about publishing content faster. I'm actually of the opposite mindset, where it seems like content is being published almost too fast, in my opinion. Though this doesn't factor in things like needing to hit deadlines to generate sales to pay bills and workers, which is completely understandable, it does create a neat thought hypothesis of "What could a rulebook look like if Paizo was able to take their time with it without fear of a deadline or dues?"
|
Honestly, I think there tends to be too much diversity in armor.
In PF1, there are no less than 6 Medium armor sets with a +6 armor bonus, but Agile Breastplate is simply the best option past character creation (its only drawback is the 400g base price, which is far too high for a brand new character but inconsequentially cheap after your first adventure or two):
- Breastplate is slightly heavier and harder to climb/jump in (this was the 'Gold Standard' before the Agile version was printed).
- Chainmail has a even worse weight, Dex Cap, ACP, and ASF than Breastplate and pretty much seems to be a 'legacy' sort of thing from before Breastplate was introduced (Why exactly do elves make mithril chainmail instead of the superior mithril breastplate?)
- Four-Mirror Armor is just like chainmail, but even heavier and cheaper.
- Lamellar (Steel) is Breastplate with worse ACP and Weight.
- Mountain Pattern is Breastplate but heavier and with a worse ASF.
While PF2 isn't as bad (yet), you already have the Chain Shirt being kinda pointless (except maybe for aspiring acrobats with less than a 12 Strength).
When the DnD Next playtest was running, I remember thinking (don't remember if this was an original thought or something mentioned by someone else) that it would probably be better to give one set of stats to an entire armor category* (light, medium, and heavy) and let the players describe their specific armor however they like (within reason for the category, of course). While this idea definitively wouldn't have worked in 5e (specific medium and heavy armors are priced to balance them against light armor + Dexterity boosts), I still think this is likely a better philosophy.
*Metallic / Non-Metallic would also have to be a 'new' characteristic, but Leather, Studded Leather, and Chain Shirts should all have the same stats otherwise.
|
|
Chain shirt is actually great for casters that get light armor proficiency from a feat or rogue dedication and won’t want to invest in any strength!
It seems pointless because the cheaper and generally quieter Studded Leather exists: The only advantage the Chain Shirt has is that it is slightly better for Acrobatics and Athletics checks if you don't have a 12+ Strength due to the Flexible trait.
So the 'niche' this armor fits is: Characters proficient in light armor with a Dexterity less than 18, a Strength less than 12, and who really want to avoid a -1 penalty to Athletics and Acrobatics checks while accepting it on all other checks. That's just way too narrow of a niche to justify an entire set of armor (in my opinion, at least)...
Still dont like the spot medium armor is in, because later in your career (and when you have finally figured out the meta) you either want heavy armor & bulwark or light/no armor & DEX.
However not unlike heavy armor and by its requirements alone medium armor sets you up for high strength and low dex without providing the mechanical benefits that the former type does. This means that medium armor might become a worse option for later levels, especially considering your reflex save.
And while I do not doubt the mechanical benefits of medium armor during the very early levels of your adventuring chareer later on it can easily become a "feels bad" armor, when you finally realize that you should have either upgraded to heavy armor or raised dex nonetheless.
Two examples just from my own gaming group would be our nature themed Barbarian that went for STR, CON, WIS (because of skills) and CHA or my own Warpriest that would rather reverse his STR and DEX stats and wear Studded Leather instead of his "doctrine" Breasplate in order to not getting their faces melted off from every single enemy area effect.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, I think there tends to be too much diversity in armor.
In PF1, there are no less than 6 Medium armor sets with a +6 armor bonus, but Agile Breastplate is simply the best option past character creation (its only drawback is the 400g base price, which is far too high for a brand new character but inconsequentially cheap after your first adventure or two):
You can argue that you don't care about a specific characteristic (maybe you only have a 14 Dex), but you can't argue that any of the other sets are actually better for you mechanically, and given that none of them are particularly affordable at creation (four-mirror is still kinda expensive at 125g) they really are little more than a waste of space.
- Breastplate is slightly heavier and harder to climb/jump in (this was the 'Gold Standard' before the Agile version was printed).
- Chainmail has a even worse weight, Dex Cap, ACP, and ASF than Breastplate and pretty much seems to be a 'legacy' sort of thing from before Breastplate was introduced (Why exactly do elves make mithril chainmail instead of the superior mithril breastplate?)
- Four-Mirror Armor is just like chainmail, but even heavier and cheaper.
- Lamellar (Steel) is Breastplate with worse ACP and Weight.
- Mountain Pattern is Breastplate but heavier and with a worse ASF.
While PF2 isn't as bad (yet), you already have the Chain Shirt being kinda pointless (except maybe for aspiring acrobats with less than a 12 Strength)....
I don't disagree with PF1 having plenty of "duplicate" armors, but this does reinforce the concept that Medium armor has been Paizo's weakspot when it came to armor design, since a lot of your examples all refer to everything be "Breastplate, but worse." Incidentally, there are multiple instances of this design concept implemented in PF2, where every Heavy Armor that isn't Full Plate is "Full Plate, but worse," and some instances of Medium and Light armor are just "[Best Armor here], but worse," so I'm not sure if that lesson was either ever really learned, or if it just didn't become apparent until now.
In addition, the idea of simplifying it down to just utilizing the categories would be a fair compromise I would like as well, since this doubles down on the simplicity factor, and plenty of armor within identical categories already have similar design structures, as I indicated before with my Heavy Armor examples, where every Heavy Armor has -10 movement speed with high Check Penalties and Strength requirements, with a +1 effective AC over other armors. And given how the current armors published functions similar to PF1, where there is simply one true "best armor" for a given category, it would make sense that armor gets simplified to represent that everyone is already using the "best armor," and isn't weaker due to a lack of system mastery or for using flavor choices.
That being said, that doesn't solve Medium armor becoming dead half-way through the adventuring career, unless you both never work towards Heavy Armor and never improve Dexterity for Reflex Saves and Dex-based Skills, but given how PF2's math works and the importance of boosting Saves whenever you can, it's not very acceptable to do neither.
I agree with Darksol. The current main "problem" of the armors is more about in the low utility provided by medium armors.
For medium-dex and no-str based chars unable to use heavy armors like druids their specialization abilities doesn't compensate their penalties. You will just use them at low level but rapidly abandon them in higher levels when you dex increases. Making them a disposable armor category.
For high-str and low-dex based chars like barbarian, melee magus/warpriests/inventor you will use them until your dex increases in higher levels where you will probably discard them to use a lighter armor with a lower bulk.
For high-str and no-dex based chars like fighters/champions or barbarian/magus with sentinel archetype you will probably goes with heavy armor as soon as possible due it's better AC.
For high-dex and no/low/medium-str unable to use heavy armor like ranged magus/warpriest/alchemists/barbarian/gunslinger they probably will prefer light armors due it's lower bulk specially if their builds are no-str due others penalties.
For high-dex and no/low/medium-str able to use heavy armor like ranged fighter/champion and magus/warpriest/alchemists/barbarian/gunslinger with sentinel archetype they will probably prefer the heavy armors due higher AC.
So in the end only a couple of specific medium armors may justify the use of medium armors in mostly levels. But it's not like we also don't have good specific light and heavy armors too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
my biggest issue is honestly why is padded armor just... objectively bad? Padded cloth armor was ubiquitous throughout history but in rpgs its always the worst option that no one ever uses, even in character creation
|
|
Also as for having multiple types of armor. It is an issue of versimilitude. PF1 is a simulationist game and gave plenty of armor from different regions for people to simulate what they wanted. PF2 is a gamist game so it has much less variety in favor of "you need this to have the most optimal armor". A lot of the PF2 philosophy is "this is the best and nothing can be better than it", case and point Sturdy Shields being literally the best shield, until you start looking at the rare/unique shields that are indestructible.
The problem with 'versimilitude' is when all of the added options suck: If they just said 'use breastplate stats' for the later additions, that would have been fine (other than making chainmail even more depressing) but they had to go out of their way to make them worse (and in the case of Four Mirror armor, even worse than Chainmail).
Contributor
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a wee bit late to the mention of it, but honestly, I'm just glad the armored skirt made it to print usefully. I wrote it with only the playtest rules to go on (these books have a pretty long lead time) and mostly aimed for "something that will let people have the pretty armored gown aesthetic while not being embarrassingly bad". I think it did well enough under the circumstances. ^_^
For those interested in the nitty-gritty of design choices, it also has a sort of special design intent. Let's say you get a really cool and unique armor you want to wear, like Mr. Sayre's Iomedae's Armor, but your stats don't quite match up; you don't have enough Dexterity for this chain shirt, or enough Strength for that platemail. The skirt, as a sort of proto-adjustment, lets you sort of massage those stats to fit your own.
(I also did the armor and shield adjustments for Grand Bazaar, and I think we're just scratching the surface of concepts there! Hopefully we get the chance to really dig into what those can offer.)
This reminded me of some work I did with masterwork armor back in the day in an attempt to offer some differentation between magical and non magical armor.