# Class And Equipment



## delericho (Jun 13, 2013)

I'm in favour of a looser coupling between class and equipment, but I certainly wouldn't go so far as to break the link entirely. There's a reason the Fighter tends to use heavy armour and the heaviest weapons - they're the ones that give the best protection and do the most damage.

These days, I'm actually in favour of merging the Rogue with the Fighter. Let them do both things - but assign tough skill penalties while in armour so they can't do them both at once.

For the more 'limited' classes, I felt that 3e got it mostly right - give out some appropriate baseline proficiencies, but allow those players who want to break the mould to spend feats on the better proficiencies. Unfortunately, it failed on two counts: firstly, % Spell Fail shouldn't have existed - just assume casters can cast in armour if they're proficient/ban them if they aren't; and secondly, multiclass characters automatically gained all the proficiencies of the new class (which made the %SF necessary). But the core idea was reasonably sound.


----------



## ExploderWizard (Jun 13, 2013)

I think that in a class based system, basic offensive and defensive capabilities should depend more heavily on the chosen class rather than equipment. Fighters should be the hardest to hit and deal the most damage with all weapons. The weapon used should perhaps modify the damage much like strength instead of being the primary determining factor. 

This allows for a greater variety of equipment use across the classes without all the balance issues that usually come from a wizard that uses a greatsword. 

As far as proficiencies go I'm still a fan of the B/X fighter who has basic proficiency in all weapons and armor and can use whatever is most suitable for the combat situation at hand. Other classes should have more a limited selection of the number of weapon types they are trained in. It always bothered me that the AD&D fighter was only proficient with a few more weapons than other classes. 

I can envision a fighter preparing for a field battle wearing plate and riding a warhorse. I can see that same fighter wearing leather armor and wielding a light blade during a ship battle. At another time perhaps this fighter might be in chainmail and engaging foes in a running skirmish using a bow in rough terrain. The power of the fighter in combat of all kinds comes from this versatility. Locking a character into an equipment set via options is kind of limiting that versatility. 

If the abilities of the fighter ( or any class) become TOO focused then we run into the kinds of problems like not being able to engage flying creatures because of the overwhelming focus on melee abilities. 

I like the idea of different equipment outfits having an effect on offensive power, defense, and mobility. There are situations where being the strongest in any one of these areas would be beneficial. That part that is less attractive is forcing a character to choose one or making the use of any of them limited by option slots.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 14, 2013)

The only class I ever mucked around with weapon proficiencies for was the Monk: I have a system by which a particular Monk's weapon list is chosen by the player at the time of PC creation, allowing the player to more closely mimic the weapons favored by particular real-world martial-arts systems.

As for the rest of it, I've gotten to the place where I can decouple equipment from class pretty easily.  I pick the class that most accurately models the character concept in my head, then equip accordingly...always within the rules, of course.

So, a couple years ago when I played a PHB Sorcerer who wore scale-mail armor and a Maul, I dutifully used all the penalties that entailed by RAW.


----------



## Jhaelen (Jun 14, 2013)

I think this is an area where skill-based systems have an edge over D&D's class-based approach. If you're investing a lot of points in armor and weapon skills there's simpy not many points left to spend on spellcasting or thievery or vice versa. You don't have to introduce artificial limitations, the system takes care of proper balancing by itself: If you want to create a 'knight' you automatically won't be able to cast spells, except maybe late in your adventuring career and at the cost of not being the best you can be in your main field of expertise.

Having said that, D&D 4e is remarkably free from class-based limitations. Anyone can wear and wield any kind of armor and weapons. It just takes the expenditure of a couple of feats. And it's even worthwhile to a certain degree: E.g. upgrading your spellcaster's cloth armor to leather armor is usually a very good deal.


----------

