Just to bring up a point not covered already; heavy armor already has a whole lot going against it in 5e (cost, weight, high requirements, stealth penalty, discouraging primary save ability DEX, etc.) so really doesn't need home rules penalizing it further...
I mean RAW says that it takes 5 minutes (30 rounds) to take off heavy armor, so it is basically a death sentence in any "the ship is going down!" scenario to impose drowning checks. Personally I don't think escape options where the PC lives but with 10 AC and their 1,500 gp armor in pieces at the bottom of the ocean would be that warmly received, unless the DM is running a world where they could reasonably expect to just loot another set of platemail the same session (but even that rather makes a mockery of the saving/party fund pooling involved in obtaining it).
Obviously this thread was just started out of curiosity, but I don't think I have ever seen one heavy armor conversation that actually 'talks up' wearing 65 lbs of metal e.g. heavy armor wearers should be impervious to crude arrows, small/medium beast attacks, Spike Growth... - it does often seem to be viewed as vanilla AC in combat yet unyielding deadweight while adventuring. Heavy armor smiths need to hire a good publicist! ^_^
Well it does realistically take a long time to put on plate armor. So many ties and sections, knights had helpers aka squires whose main job was to put the armor on...that’s how hard it was. IMO you don’t get on a boat with your plate armor on and expect good things to happen. But as a DM you can guide the players against doing this.
When you drop to 0 hitpoints you sink and if one of your teammates wants to bring you up they have to be able to lift you in your armor and both of your gear combined.
There are no rules for this in the player's handbook. That said, here is my unofficial take on the subject:
Light Armor imposes no penalty.
Medium armor imposes disadvantage on Dexterity (Acrobatics), Attack Rolls, and Dexterity Saving Throws, and creatures must use half their movement to stay afloat, whether or not they take actions or use their other movement on their turn.
It is impossible to swim in heavy armor.
Elven Chain Mail counts as light armor. Magic Armor is lighter than its nonmagical counterpart. +1 Heavy Armor counts as Medium Armor. +1 Medium Armor or higher and +2 Heavy Armor or higher counts as Light Armor. Demon Armor counts as medium armor, and Mariner's Armor has no penalty on movement. Mithral armor counts as light armor.
There are no rules for this in the player's handbook. That said, here is my unofficial take on the subject:
Light Armor imposes no penalty.
Medium armor imposes disadvantage on Dexterity (Acrobatics), Attack Rolls, and Dexterity Saving Throws, and creatures must use half their movement to stay afloat, whether or not they take actions or use their other movement on their turn.
It is impossible to swim in heavy armor.
Elven Chain Mail counts as light armor. Magic Armor is lighter than its nonmagical counterpart. +1 Heavy Armor counts as Medium Armor. +1 Medium Armor or higher and +2 Heavy Armor or higher counts as Light Armor. Demon Armor counts as medium armor, and Mariner's Armor has no penalty on movement. Mithral armor counts as light armor.
What are your rules for equipment weight? If a character with 18 strength has 200lbs of gear (so, unencumbered) and swaps heavy armor for light armor they can swim fine? If I was a plate wearing high strength character playing with this many homebrew swimming rules I would just carry around a set of light "swimming armor" if I ever had to swim.
There are no rules for this in the player's handbook. That said, here is my unofficial take on the subject:
Light Armor imposes no penalty.
Medium armor imposes disadvantage on Dexterity (Acrobatics), Attack Rolls, and Dexterity Saving Throws, and creatures must use half their movement to stay afloat, whether or not they take actions or use their other movement on their turn.
It is impossible to swim in heavy armor.
Elven Chain Mail counts as light armor. Magic Armor is lighter than its nonmagical counterpart. +1 Heavy Armor counts as Medium Armor. +1 Medium Armor or higher and +2 Heavy Armor or higher counts as Light Armor. Demon Armor counts as medium armor, and Mariner's Armor has no penalty on movement. Mithral armor counts as light armor.
What are your rules for equipment weight? If a character with 18 strength has 200lbs of gear (so, unencumbered) and swaps heavy armor for light armor they can swim fine? If I was a plate wearing high strength character playing with this many homebrew swimming rules I would just carry around a set of light "swimming armor" if I ever had to swim.
so fall in the river/ocean/whatever, sink to the bottom, doff your heavy armor, don your light armor, swim. sweet.
Yeah, I'm all for people wearing heavy armor sinking like stones to the bottom of any water they try to cross, but this is a weight based penalty, not an armor based penalty. Any rule that says someone has a severe risk of drowning while wearing heavy armor but none while carrying heavy armor is a bad rule.
Really, I mean if you're talking about penalizing people for swimming, you had better be using variant encumbrance rules first; if you think people wearing heavy armor need penalized in water because realism, then being unencumbered while carrying gear weighing 10x your str should also be causing issues.
Now, a human fighter wearing plate with a sword, shield, and pack only has a movement speed of 10 under the best conditions. (30-10)/2=10, the -10 being because he's encumbered and the /2 being because in water every foot you move requires 2 feet of movement (4 in difficult terrain). This is probably penalty enough, and doesn't leave you with scenarios where your 18 str fighter carrying 130 pounds of gear/loot is screwed but your 10 str rogue carrying 100 pounds of gear/loot is just fine.
Yeah, I'm all for people wearing heavy armor sinking like stones to the bottom of any water they try to cross, but this is a weight based penalty, not an armor based penalty. Any rule that says someone has a severe risk of drowning while wearing heavy armor but none while carrying heavy armor is a bad rule.
i suspect you've never tried to cross a river in full combat gear vs. tugging all that crap along in bag. empty half a dozen water flasks, fill them with air, and put them in your backpack along with your suit of plate mail and i guarantee you'll have an exponentially easier time crossing the river than if you wore that armor.
Yeah, I'm all for people wearing heavy armor sinking like stones to the bottom of any water they try to cross, but this is a weight based penalty, not an armor based penalty. Any rule that says someone has a severe risk of drowning while wearing heavy armor but none while carrying heavy armor is a bad rule.
i suspect you've never tried to cross a river in full combat gear vs. tugging all that crap along in bag. empty half a dozen water flasks, fill them with air, and put them in your backpack along with your suit of plate mail and i guarantee you'll have an exponentially easier time crossing the river than if you wore that armor.
So what would be the rule addendum for that? 1 minute prep time, need to have 4 water skins available, dexterity check for the knots to ensure they don't come undone and all your PCs equipment sinks, etc.
The problem is that once you start arbitrarily changing the 5e D&D FANTASY game rules to incorporate real world mechanics, it gets ridiculous. The whole point of 5e was to simplify things across the board. If your table wants to start adding stuff, sure, go for it, but any "nerfs" put on heavy armor "bc science" needs to be applied across everything to balance it out.
What if you take the penalties for armor more widely and generally? Taking a cue from AngryGM, restrictive armors start to impose Disadvantage to Acrobatics checks; heavy-and-restrictive likewise impede Athletics (of which Swimming is a subset). Looks like his suggestions are based on the weight on the armor primarily, but also on framing style.
The point of the "heavy armor w/10lbs of gear sinks, but light armor with 100lbs is fine" is certainly "true" with these kinds of rules, but should be squashed by the GM. Most of the time, everyone is carrying the same amount of gear, and *then* has armor. So it's likely if the rogue has 100lbs of gear, so does the paladin. So the paladin is 55lbs heavier because of his armor, and restricted in his motions. STR does come into play... but the 18 STR is also reflected in the +4 Athletics bonus (and the rogue's 8 STR "cause I use DEX!" is -1).
EDIT 8/20: Or maybe, keeping with 5e's "keep it clean", but keeping penalties in mind, just add the penalties to the "STR Min" rules. So swimming in Full Plate is unimpacted (beyond raw weight) unless you don't have enough strength? So in addition to being 33% slower (-10' speed), you have disadvantage on Athletics (and Swimming) and Acrobatics.
ha.. well he is moving but that is definitely not swimming...and definitely not swimming and fighting.... you might realistically be able to "swim" for maybe 30-45seconds max, and definitely not be able to fight if we are being realistic....
IMO the way I'd do it....anyone without a swimming speed ...i would give the player 2-3 rounds then after that maybe STR check to not drown, and use the underwater combat rules. The player could alternatively cut off their armor or pieces of it to prevent further drowning if they fail a roll.
Do note however, that in D&D statistically that person is a commoner. He has 10 strength and even wearing the heavy armor is affecting his movement.
18 Str should have no issue beyond normal swim rules to move in their armor in water.
Yeah, I'm all for people wearing heavy armor sinking like stones to the bottom of any water they try to cross, but this is a weight based penalty, not an armor based penalty. Any rule that says someone has a severe risk of drowning while wearing heavy armor but none while carrying heavy armor is a bad rule.
i suspect you've never tried to cross a river in full combat gear vs. tugging all that crap along in bag. empty half a dozen water flasks, fill them with air, and put them in your backpack along with your suit of plate mail and i guarantee you'll have an exponentially easier time crossing the river than if you wore that armor.
So what would be the rule addendum for that? 1 minute prep time, need to have 4 water skins available, dexterity check for the knots to ensure they don't come undone and all your PCs equipment sinks, etc.
The problem is that once you start arbitrarily changing the 5e D&D FANTASY game rules to incorporate real world mechanics, it gets ridiculous. The whole point of 5e was to simplify things across the board. If your table wants to start adding stuff, sure, go for it, but any "nerfs" put on heavy armor "bc science" needs to be applied across everything to balance it out.
Right - Some systems I have seen that apply (restore) skill penalties to Heavy Armor *also* build in some innate DR (which Heavy Armor Master stacks on), or increases the AC bonus. For example, u/kivothe's Splintmail causes penalties to Athletics and Acrobatics, but also has DR 2/magic.
Since swimming in armor is actually a japanese folk sport with a 400 year old tradition and those samurai armors can weigh up to 50 pounds, I'd say it's quite possible to swim in heavy armor if you are trained and know what you do.
The movements are obviously completely different from other swimming styles, but it seems to work.
If you're interested you can just google for "samurai armor swim", there are some nice videos on YouTube. :-)
For everyone arguing for any semblance of realism while swimming: if you were my DM, I would ask the table to vote on whether or not we should ever be near water if overly punishing homebrew rules like this will be in effect. My vote would be hell no. I'm not taking off my armor to swim. I'm not taking a -33 to a check (absurd!). If water is to play a role in a campaign, make it so people can still play their characters. I 100% agree with RAW on this one. It's fine if it's not realistic.
With the exception of very few settings like Dark Sun and Curse of Strahd, playing any current version of D&D with a lean towards gritty and realistic makes zero sense to me and anyone at my table. There are other RPGs that better simulate what it's like in the real world. That talk at any 5E table has no value to me. It leads to a more realistic game which 99% of the time, leads to a less entertaining game.
To each their own but as you start to poke holes in the 5e rules and relate them to anything in the real world, you'll just break the entire system. Too many DMs don't consider the consequences of telling a player, "you can't do anything."
Telling a player that they cannot swim in heavy armor is hardly telling a player 'You can't do anything.' Minimum they can take off their armor. They can figure out some way off offsetting the weight (floats). They could build a boat. And even if none of those options are available for whatever reason, they could simply go somewhere else. If swimming is literally the only option, nowhere else to go and nothing else they can do, then *that* is the problem that the DM did not consider.
Oh and saying 'Yes' to literally everything is a far worse thing than saying 'No' to a few things.
Taking off heavy armor is not swimming in heavy armor. Building a boat is not swimming in heavy armor. Going somewhere else is not swimming in heavy armor. I thought we could move past those points and assume that in my post, the assumption is, a PC is overboard and in the water. They ask, "can I swim, though I'm wearing heavy armor?"
Swimming works itself around an athletics check, which is generally speaking in initiative/round based timing. Seconds sorts of stuff. Otherwise, if we're to talk about the vast amount of options a player has, then why not say, "you could use some sort of sending spell to reach out to that mage NPC you know, asking them to fly in and save you." Point is, when a player asks, "can I swim in my heavy armor", I'm going to say yes because the rules don't say you can't and because changing the rules to say you can't doesn't provide enough value to the game.
Where do you go with the heavy armor and swimming thing? Tell them to board a boat without their armor? Wear something else in case the boat sinks? So in a heavily inspired Ghost of Saltmarsh campaign, tell all PCs to shy away from any tanky martial classes? Same goes for sleeping in armor penalties sorts of stuff, regardless of how realistic it may or may not be. A PC making choices to get a 20 AC shouldn't just be thrown aside because you want to simulate, "the reals." That $hits stupid.
Telling a player that they cannot swim in heavy armor is hardly telling a player 'You can't do anything.' Minimum they can take off their armor. They can figure out some way off offsetting the weight (floats). They could build a boat. And even if none of those options are available for whatever reason, they could simply go somewhere else. If swimming is literally the only option, nowhere else to go and nothing else they can do, then *that* is the problem that the DM did not consider.
Oh and saying 'Yes' to literally everything is a far worse thing than saying 'No' to a few things.
Taking off heavy armor is not swimming in heavy armor. Building a boat is not swimming in heavy armor. Going somewhere else is not swimming in heavy armor. I thought we could move past those points and assume that in my post, the assumption is, a PC is overboard and in the water. They ask, "can I swim, though I'm wearing heavy armor?"
Swimming works itself around an athletics check, which is generally speaking in initiative/round based timing. Seconds sorts of stuff. Otherwise, if we're to talk about the vast amount of options a player has, then why not say, "you could use some sort of sending spell to reach out to that mage NPC you know, asking them to fly in and save you." Point is, when a player asks, "can I swim in my heavy armor", I'm going to say yes because the rules don't say you can't and because changing the rules to say you can't doesn't provide enough value to the game.
Where do you go with the heavy armor and swimming thing? Tell them to board a boat without their armor? Wear something else in case the boat sinks? So in a heavily inspired Ghost of Saltmarsh campaign, tell all PCs to shy away from any tanky martial classes? Same goes for sleeping in armor penalties sorts of stuff, regardless of how realistic it may or may not be. A PC making choices to get a 20 AC shouldn't just be thrown aside because you want to simulate, "the reals." That $hits stupid.
I can see how fantasy tropes would allow for swimming in armor (I want to say I've seen high fantasy films like Excalibur having someone like Lancelot doing just that in armor across a river or moat). That said, I'm more in the water as hazard or obstacle camp. I'm surprised Ghost of Saltmarsh did not have waterborne rules that would include rules for swimming and drowning. Avernus has rules for enhanced exhaustion vulnerability because the characters are in Hell a place where the soul is tormented. I get the sense that Rime of the Ancient Frostmaiden (they say Modern Horror, and invoke The Thing in the pressers, I think they mean survival horror where the elements are part of the issue) is going to have some mechanics for frostbite, avalanches and the like.
In 1e you had things like the Wilderness Survival Guide specifically addressing games where being out in the elements was a challenge if not "the" challenge to the PCs. Those rules were optional, and I like the give and take going on here (for quite some time) between those who dismiss it (and probably play fast and loose with encumbrance anyway) and those who want to take a more leaning toward realism take.
So yeah, in my game (which is informed a bit more by things like combat or environmental or combined combat and environmental stressors in traumatic situations) heavy armor unless magically assisted (i.e. Elvin chain) you're a rock in deep water. My current groups session zero actually involved a water borne rescue of refugees whose rafts had been capsized by pirate. I improvised a lot of the athletic and acrobatic checks, but I really wish I had seen the home-brew system earlier derived from rough water checks and am adding that to my notes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I can see how fantasy tropes would allow for swimming in armor (I want to say I've seen high fantasy films like Excalibur having someone like Lancelot doing just that in armor across a river or moat). That said, I'm more in the water as hazard or obstacle camp. I'm surprised Ghost of Saltmarsh did not have waterborne rules that would include rules for swimming and drowning. Avernus has rules for enhanced exhaustion vulnerability because the characters are in Hell a place where the soul is tormented. I get the sense that Rime of the Ancient Frostmaiden (they say Modern Horror, and invoke The Thing in the pressers, I think they mean survival horror where the elements are part of the issue) is going to have some mechanics for frostbite, avalanches and the like.
In 1e you had things like the Wilderness Survival Guide specifically addressing games where being out in the elements was a challenge if not "the" challenge to the PCs. Those rules were optional, and I like the give and take going on here (for quite some time) between those who dismiss it (and probably play fast and loose with encumbrance anyway) and those who want to take a more leaning toward realism take.
So yeah, in my game (which is informed a bit more by things like combat or environmental or combined combat and environmental stressors in traumatic situations) heavy armor unless magically assisted (i.e. Elvin chain) you're a rock in deep water. My current groups session zero actually involved a water borne rescue of refugees whose rafts had been capsized by pirate. I improvised a lot of the athletic and acrobatic checks, but I really wish I had seen the home-brew system earlier derived from rough water checks and am adding that to my notes.
Excalibur also has a sex scene in full armor, which is widely considered absolutely ridiculous. Did they think there is a zipper in full plate? So yeah, I agree. Unless the DM and players want a very silly campaign, at least a little realism is a good thing, not a bad one.
I never said it was a trope I embrace. That said, Lancelot's relentlessness re: Guinevere was renown throughout the realm.... But the D&D mechanics for that are in a book for different edition than the edition that put out the Wilderness Survival Guide. Speaking of wilderness though saw an article that Wizards is putting this out. A tailored GM screen probably isn't putting the crunchier possibilities for survival out there, but thought it was coincedence with this resurrected thread.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Well, if you want to go against RAW and make harsh rules for swimming in armor, I hope your players are on the same page. Everyone I know that plays would simply say "fine, we will never go near the water then." Would you say "make an athletics check for that long jump because it seems unrealistic" when the RAW clearly states the character can make it based on the rules of movement? Where does it end?
Let's see, "Sleeping in Armor" is totally a rule (albeit in XgtE): sleeping in heavy (and medium) armor penalizes you with reduced HD recovery and no exhaustion recovery. But, to forestall expected outbursts, the Chapter (#2) starts out with [these rules are optional].
"Extreme Heat", under Chapter 5 of DMG - Adventure Environments states that those in medium or heavy armor have disadvantage on saves to avoid exhaustion.
Otherwise, the [RAW] only speaks to - and in a Variant, I might add - reducing your movement speed by 10' at "STR*5" (or about 50 pounds for normal folk), and at STR*10 (100 pounds) reducing your speed by 20' and being at Disadvantage for all checks, attacks, and saves using STR, DEX, or CON. Let's see... 65 pounds of plate armor, standard 40 pounds pack of gear, lets say 15 pounds of various weapons, and a 5 pound shield... 125 pounds. Your average person in plate armor (which is too much for them, by the STR min, I know) is Heavily encumbered, swims at 5' (30-20, half for difficult terrain), and has Disadvantage on swim checks if they are required for any reason -- effectively failing on half of all rolls needing a 6 or better. At STR 15, the suggested minimum for plate armor, you're "ok"... swimming at 10' (30-10, halved), and 25 pounds of loot away from possibly drowning. Again, using the [Variant RAW] in the book, no house rules. STR 18 is pretty much fine, other than being a little slow; STR 20 is perfectly fine if he hands his pack to someone else. Go Conan!
I will say, to EldreddJonas's point, that I was unaware 5e changed the rules on Jumping. I thought it was "STR/Athletics check, divided by 2 = feet jumped". Look at me with edition-fatigue. So the [RAW] there is "STR feet"; Commoner running jumps 10', or 2 squares; Conan (STR 20) jumps 20'. Crazy. And, no mention of armor; it is a hidden impact, though, because again, you are spending MOVEMENT, so if the armor is slowing you down, then you may not be able to clear the "allowed" distance. If you're Speed 10' due to heavy encumberance, then you can only jump 10' with a running start. (which is still, damn, wow. I can't jump 10' with just clothes on.)
I decided to leave [RAW] alone and ignore the discrepancies. Instead, I'll take the option of forcing those in heavy armor to make swim checks (or jump checks) to succeed. I also added homebrew armors which are definitely steps up in effectiveness (and cost)... but they impose disadvantage on Athletics (and/or Acrobatics), which will impact swimming!
I think anyone who wants a game where they swim without hindrance in 65 pounds of metal is... a bit "touched." To each their own; you won't convince me, I won't convince you. The point about "5e isn't trying to be realistic; there are other games for that" is valid. As a GM, I will still curtail some "suspension-of-disbelief-breaking" actions. *Don't* wear your full plate on the ship, it's a bad plan; maybe downgrade to half-plate for the trip!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Well it does realistically take a long time to put on plate armor. So many ties and sections, knights had helpers aka squires whose main job was to put the armor on...that’s how hard it was. IMO you don’t get on a boat with your plate armor on and expect good things to happen. But as a DM you can guide the players against doing this.
When you drop to 0 hitpoints you sink and if one of your teammates wants to bring you up they have to be able to lift you in your armor and both of your gear combined.
There are spells and fantasy elements that can be at your disposal as well
There are no rules for this in the player's handbook. That said, here is my unofficial take on the subject:
Light Armor imposes no penalty.
Medium armor imposes disadvantage on Dexterity (Acrobatics), Attack Rolls, and Dexterity Saving Throws, and creatures must use half their movement to stay afloat, whether or not they take actions or use their other movement on their turn.
It is impossible to swim in heavy armor.
Elven Chain Mail counts as light armor. Magic Armor is lighter than its nonmagical counterpart. +1 Heavy Armor counts as Medium Armor. +1 Medium Armor or higher and +2 Heavy Armor or higher counts as Light Armor. Demon Armor counts as medium armor, and Mariner's Armor has no penalty on movement. Mithral armor counts as light armor.
What are your rules for equipment weight? If a character with 18 strength has 200lbs of gear (so, unencumbered) and swaps heavy armor for light armor they can swim fine? If I was a plate wearing high strength character playing with this many homebrew swimming rules I would just carry around a set of light "swimming armor" if I ever had to swim.
so fall in the river/ocean/whatever, sink to the bottom, doff your heavy armor, don your light armor, swim. sweet.
Guide to the Five Factions (PWYW)
Deck of Decks
Yeah, I'm all for people wearing heavy armor sinking like stones to the bottom of any water they try to cross, but this is a weight based penalty, not an armor based penalty. Any rule that says someone has a severe risk of drowning while wearing heavy armor but none while carrying heavy armor is a bad rule.
Really, I mean if you're talking about penalizing people for swimming, you had better be using variant encumbrance rules first; if you think people wearing heavy armor need penalized in water because realism, then being unencumbered while carrying gear weighing 10x your str should also be causing issues.
Now, a human fighter wearing plate with a sword, shield, and pack only has a movement speed of 10 under the best conditions. (30-10)/2=10, the -10 being because he's encumbered and the /2 being because in water every foot you move requires 2 feet of movement (4 in difficult terrain). This is probably penalty enough, and doesn't leave you with scenarios where your 18 str fighter carrying 130 pounds of gear/loot is screwed but your 10 str rogue carrying 100 pounds of gear/loot is just fine.
i suspect you've never tried to cross a river in full combat gear vs. tugging all that crap along in bag. empty half a dozen water flasks, fill them with air, and put them in your backpack along with your suit of plate mail and i guarantee you'll have an exponentially easier time crossing the river than if you wore that armor.
Guide to the Five Factions (PWYW)
Deck of Decks
So what would be the rule addendum for that? 1 minute prep time, need to have 4 water skins available, dexterity check for the knots to ensure they don't come undone and all your PCs equipment sinks, etc.
The problem is that once you start arbitrarily changing the 5e D&D FANTASY game rules to incorporate real world mechanics, it gets ridiculous. The whole point of 5e was to simplify things across the board. If your table wants to start adding stuff, sure, go for it, but any "nerfs" put on heavy armor "bc science" needs to be applied across everything to balance it out.
What if you take the penalties for armor more widely and generally? Taking a cue from AngryGM, restrictive armors start to impose Disadvantage to Acrobatics checks; heavy-and-restrictive likewise impede Athletics (of which Swimming is a subset). Looks like his suggestions are based on the weight on the armor primarily, but also on framing style.
The point of the "heavy armor w/10lbs of gear sinks, but light armor with 100lbs is fine" is certainly "true" with these kinds of rules, but should be squashed by the GM. Most of the time, everyone is carrying the same amount of gear, and *then* has armor. So it's likely if the rogue has 100lbs of gear, so does the paladin. So the paladin is 55lbs heavier because of his armor, and restricted in his motions. STR does come into play... but the 18 STR is also reflected in the +4 Athletics bonus (and the rogue's 8 STR "cause I use DEX!" is -1).
EDIT 8/20: Or maybe, keeping with 5e's "keep it clean", but keeping penalties in mind, just add the penalties to the "STR Min" rules. So swimming in Full Plate is unimpacted (beyond raw weight) unless you don't have enough strength? So in addition to being 33% slower (-10' speed), you have disadvantage on Athletics (and Swimming) and Acrobatics.
Do note however, that in D&D statistically that person is a commoner. He has 10 strength and even wearing the heavy armor is affecting his movement.
18 Str should have no issue beyond normal swim rules to move in their armor in water.
Right - Some systems I have seen that apply (restore) skill penalties to Heavy Armor *also* build in some innate DR (which Heavy Armor Master stacks on), or increases the AC bonus. For example, u/kivothe's Splintmail causes penalties to Athletics and Acrobatics, but also has DR 2/magic.
Since swimming in armor is actually a japanese folk sport with a 400 year old tradition and those samurai armors can weigh up to 50 pounds, I'd say it's quite possible to swim in heavy armor if you are trained and know what you do.
The movements are obviously completely different from other swimming styles, but it seems to work.
If you're interested you can just google for "samurai armor swim", there are some nice videos on YouTube. :-)
For everyone arguing for any semblance of realism while swimming: if you were my DM, I would ask the table to vote on whether or not we should ever be near water if overly punishing homebrew rules like this will be in effect. My vote would be hell no. I'm not taking off my armor to swim. I'm not taking a -33 to a check (absurd!). If water is to play a role in a campaign, make it so people can still play their characters. I 100% agree with RAW on this one. It's fine if it's not realistic.
With the exception of very few settings like Dark Sun and Curse of Strahd, playing any current version of D&D with a lean towards gritty and realistic makes zero sense to me and anyone at my table. There are other RPGs that better simulate what it's like in the real world. That talk at any 5E table has no value to me. It leads to a more realistic game which 99% of the time, leads to a less entertaining game.
To each their own but as you start to poke holes in the 5e rules and relate them to anything in the real world, you'll just break the entire system. Too many DMs don't consider the consequences of telling a player, "you can't do anything."
All things Lich - DM tips, tricks, and other creative shenanigans
Taking off heavy armor is not swimming in heavy armor. Building a boat is not swimming in heavy armor. Going somewhere else is not swimming in heavy armor. I thought we could move past those points and assume that in my post, the assumption is, a PC is overboard and in the water. They ask, "can I swim, though I'm wearing heavy armor?"
Swimming works itself around an athletics check, which is generally speaking in initiative/round based timing. Seconds sorts of stuff. Otherwise, if we're to talk about the vast amount of options a player has, then why not say, "you could use some sort of sending spell to reach out to that mage NPC you know, asking them to fly in and save you." Point is, when a player asks, "can I swim in my heavy armor", I'm going to say yes because the rules don't say you can't and because changing the rules to say you can't doesn't provide enough value to the game.
Where do you go with the heavy armor and swimming thing? Tell them to board a boat without their armor? Wear something else in case the boat sinks? So in a heavily inspired Ghost of Saltmarsh campaign, tell all PCs to shy away from any tanky martial classes? Same goes for sleeping in armor penalties sorts of stuff, regardless of how realistic it may or may not be. A PC making choices to get a 20 AC shouldn't just be thrown aside because you want to simulate, "the reals." That $hits stupid.
All things Lich - DM tips, tricks, and other creative shenanigans
I can see how fantasy tropes would allow for swimming in armor (I want to say I've seen high fantasy films like Excalibur having someone like Lancelot doing just that in armor across a river or moat). That said, I'm more in the water as hazard or obstacle camp. I'm surprised Ghost of Saltmarsh did not have waterborne rules that would include rules for swimming and drowning. Avernus has rules for enhanced exhaustion vulnerability because the characters are in Hell a place where the soul is tormented. I get the sense that Rime of the Ancient Frostmaiden (they say Modern Horror, and invoke The Thing in the pressers, I think they mean survival horror where the elements are part of the issue) is going to have some mechanics for frostbite, avalanches and the like.
In 1e you had things like the Wilderness Survival Guide specifically addressing games where being out in the elements was a challenge if not "the" challenge to the PCs. Those rules were optional, and I like the give and take going on here (for quite some time) between those who dismiss it (and probably play fast and loose with encumbrance anyway) and those who want to take a more leaning toward realism take.
So yeah, in my game (which is informed a bit more by things like combat or environmental or combined combat and environmental stressors in traumatic situations) heavy armor unless magically assisted (i.e. Elvin chain) you're a rock in deep water. My current groups session zero actually involved a water borne rescue of refugees whose rafts had been capsized by pirate. I improvised a lot of the athletic and acrobatic checks, but I really wish I had seen the home-brew system earlier derived from rough water checks and am adding that to my notes.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I never said it was a trope I embrace. That said, Lancelot's relentlessness re: Guinevere was renown throughout the realm.... But the D&D mechanics for that are in a book for different edition than the edition that put out the Wilderness Survival Guide. Speaking of wilderness though saw an article that Wizards is putting this out. A tailored GM screen probably isn't putting the crunchier possibilities for survival out there, but thought it was coincedence with this resurrected thread.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Well, if you want to go against RAW and make harsh rules for swimming in armor, I hope your players are on the same page. Everyone I know that plays would simply say "fine, we will never go near the water then." Would you say "make an athletics check for that long jump because it seems unrealistic" when the RAW clearly states the character can make it based on the rules of movement? Where does it end?
Let's see, "Sleeping in Armor" is totally a rule (albeit in XgtE): sleeping in heavy (and medium) armor penalizes you with reduced HD recovery and no exhaustion recovery. But, to forestall expected outbursts, the Chapter (#2) starts out with [these rules are optional].
"Extreme Heat", under Chapter 5 of DMG - Adventure Environments states that those in medium or heavy armor have disadvantage on saves to avoid exhaustion.
Otherwise, the [RAW] only speaks to - and in a Variant, I might add - reducing your movement speed by 10' at "STR*5" (or about 50 pounds for normal folk), and at STR*10 (100 pounds) reducing your speed by 20' and being at Disadvantage for all checks, attacks, and saves using STR, DEX, or CON. Let's see... 65 pounds of plate armor, standard 40 pounds pack of gear, lets say 15 pounds of various weapons, and a 5 pound shield... 125 pounds. Your average person in plate armor (which is too much for them, by the STR min, I know) is Heavily encumbered, swims at 5' (30-20, half for difficult terrain), and has Disadvantage on swim checks if they are required for any reason -- effectively failing on half of all rolls needing a 6 or better. At STR 15, the suggested minimum for plate armor, you're "ok"... swimming at 10' (30-10, halved), and 25 pounds of loot away from possibly drowning. Again, using the [Variant RAW] in the book, no house rules. STR 18 is pretty much fine, other than being a little slow; STR 20 is perfectly fine if he hands his pack to someone else. Go Conan!
I will say, to EldreddJonas's point, that I was unaware 5e changed the rules on Jumping. I thought it was "STR/Athletics check, divided by 2 = feet jumped". Look at me with edition-fatigue. So the [RAW] there is "STR feet"; Commoner running jumps 10', or 2 squares; Conan (STR 20) jumps 20'. Crazy. And, no mention of armor; it is a hidden impact, though, because again, you are spending MOVEMENT, so if the armor is slowing you down, then you may not be able to clear the "allowed" distance. If you're Speed 10' due to heavy encumberance, then you can only jump 10' with a running start. (which is still, damn, wow. I can't jump 10' with just clothes on.)
I decided to leave [RAW] alone and ignore the discrepancies. Instead, I'll take the option of forcing those in heavy armor to make swim checks (or jump checks) to succeed. I also added homebrew armors which are definitely steps up in effectiveness (and cost)... but they impose disadvantage on Athletics (and/or Acrobatics), which will impact swimming!
I think anyone who wants a game where they swim without hindrance in 65 pounds of metal is... a bit "touched." To each their own; you won't convince me, I won't convince you. The point about "5e isn't trying to be realistic; there are other games for that" is valid. As a GM, I will still curtail some "suspension-of-disbelief-breaking" actions. *Don't* wear your full plate on the ship, it's a bad plan; maybe downgrade to half-plate for the trip!