As someone who of course never wore IIIa with plate inserts and molle bedazzled rig of holsters and pouches to a formal event, but who has also had to work the floor or be in a "face" position in such environment, I have worn well "tailored" II and IIIa soft vests with well tailored suits and shirts (for me the shirts were always the key thing) at formal functions ... where even folks who knew me thought I'd probably stopped track work in favor of heavy lifting gains...
So the realism of "combat gear" being brought to pomp and circumstance is fairly valid.
Well, except for the fact that you have just disproven this in the previous paragraph. Yes, people can wear weapons and armour to an event but those who do are a) working some kind of security, b) noticed for their equipment and most importantly c), adapting their gear to the occasion. You don't go in full BDU and an assault rifle when you are supposed to at least somewhat blend in with the guests wearing black ties. Ceremonial armour and a dress sword? Absolutely. Carrying your greataxe because you are a barbarian and "this is the way of my people"? Sure, you might pull that of but considered being "quaint" but showing up in your dirty, bloody and dented adventuring gear? That could just as well be taken as an insult to the host who is expected to take care of security and the safety of their guests.
Other than your effort to logic pick at musings that surveyed a broad range of possibilities which in themselves aren't consistent with each other, you're not wrong, in your game world, or any game world where armor gets dinged, dented, tarnished etc. under some governance the DM and table call "realism". But other than pride silks, maybe, I imagine those games probably don't do a lot of resource tracking for the acquisition and upkeep of their "fancy clothes." So, as I'm not arguing anyone but rather pointing out there's a myriad way of addressing this, to roughly but not completely enumerate it on a spectrum.
1. Full on Masters of the Universe or many renderings of Camelot = Your full armor get up is in fact your best look, and you can probably dance in it. Perhaps leave the shield behind or otherwise risk looking a little insecure.
2.) Cap e pied would be tres gauche, but a ceremonial Elvin chain shirt, with the Lord High Guards' ornamental yet functional pauldrons, highly fashionable and tactical whateverium kneepads and reinforced boots is completely appropriate to escort the Lord's offspring into court one's arm, and fancy dance in. Or maybe just your best silks around a breast plate. (results in reduction of AC).
3.) Armor at the ball? Hell no! The only thing reinforced you could possibly bring to the fashion show would be a codpiece and/or corset, neither of which would affect your possibly naked and afraid AC.
These are all options that may gel with a given game's sense of verisimilitude. It's a matter of play style with nothing to insist on in the rules.
Again, this whole discussion is predicated upon a DM second guessing their contrivance. There's been a range of options presented, and the DM seems to have appreciated that variety. Hating on or taking fundamental or essentialist stances in the discussion just seem to be peeing on a fire that's already warmed the needy. No need to make it a conflagration, micturition doesn't accomplish that anyway. At most it just makes a stink.
As someone who of course never wore IIIa with plate inserts and molle bedazzled rig of holsters and pouches to a formal event, but who has also had to work the floor or be in a "face" position in such environment, I have worn well "tailored" II and IIIa soft vests with well tailored suits and shirts (for me the shirts were always the key thing) at formal functions ... where even folks who knew me thought I'd probably stopped track work in favor of heavy lifting gains...
So the realism of "combat gear" being brought to pomp and circumstance is fairly valid.
Well, except for the fact that you have just disproven this in the previous paragraph. Yes, people can wear weapons and armour to an event but those who do are a) working some kind of security, b) noticed for their equipment and most importantly c), adapting their gear to the occasion. You don't go in full BDU and an assault rifle when you are supposed to at least somewhat blend in with the guests wearing black ties. Ceremonial armour and a dress sword? Absolutely. Carrying your greataxe because you are a barbarian and "this is the way of my people"? Sure, you might pull that of but considered being "quaint" but showing up in your dirty, bloody and dented adventuring gear? That could just as well be taken as an insult to the host who is expected to take care of security and the safety of their guests.
Other than your effort to logic pick at musings that surveyed a broad range of possibilities which in themselves aren't consistent with each other,
I was replying to the specific scenario you presented, but sure, move the goalposts all you want. :)
you're not wrong, in your game world, or any game world where armor gets dinged, dented, tarnished etc. under some governance the DM and table call "realism". But other than pride silks, maybe, I imagine those games probably don't do a lot of resource tracking for the acquisition and upkeep of their "fancy clothes." So, as I'm not arguing anyone but rather pointing out there's a myriad way of addressing this, to roughly but not completely enumerate it on a spectrum.
1. Full on Masters of the Universe or many renderings of Camelot = Your full armor get up is in fact your best look, and you can probably dance in it. Perhaps leave the shield behind or otherwise risk looking a little insecure.
MotU is a cartoon which means that it is held to the same limitations of animation as every other cartoon. Your "many renderings of Camelot" often includes fancier armour when at court or at least that the dents and dirt is cleaned off. And as you yourself point out, you adapt your gear to the situation by leaving your shield.
2.) Cap e pied would be tres gauche, but a ceremonial Elvin chain shirt, with the Lord High Guards' ornamental yet functional pauldrons, highly fashionable and tactical whateverium kneepads and reinforced boots is completely appropriate to escort the Lord's offspring into court one's arm, and fancy dance in. Or maybe just your best silks around a breast plate. (results in reduction of AC).
You mean adapting your outfit to the occasion? Yup, totally already said that was an option. Not sure why you think surcoats would reduce the effectiveness of a breastplate though...
3.) Armor at the ball? Hell no! The only thing reinforced you could possibly bring to the fashion show would be a codpiece and/or corset, neither of which would affect your possibly naked and afraid AC.
These are all options that may gel with a given game's sense of verisimilitude. It's a matter of play style with nothing to insist on in the rules.
Glad you agree with the points I made. :)
Again, this whole discussion is predicated upon a DM second guessing their contrivance. There's been a range of options presented, and the DM seems to have appreciated that variety. Hating on or taking fundamental or essentialist stances in the discussion just seem to be peeing on a fire that's already warmed the needy. No need to make it a conflagration, micturition doesn't accomplish that anyway. At most it just makes a stink.
Are you objecting to someone replying to your post in a public internet forum? Sorry for doing what the forum is for?
I would be puzzled by my PCs wearing their armour to a party, and it would result in negative social interactions if they turned up covered in orc blood or toting weapons.
Given the limitless ways in which the DM can have a portal swallow them into the Shadowfell, it's not that difficult to just work out a way that it happened when they had their gear close to hand. It's also legit to have them lose gear from time to time, especially if we're only talking about some stuff that they had from character creation. If it meant losing some Adamtine Plate Armor or armor they'd saved up with for a while, that would be different.
It kind of depends on if there was any foreshadowing for this event occurring. If the DM has foreshadowed the opening of portals at any time, then the PCs probably wouldn't have left their gear behind - they're basically in a war zone. So assuming that this portal comes out of the blue, they need to either be able to get their gear or get something to replace it pretty fast.
A good option might be for creatures from the Shadowfell to emerge from a portal. Dealt with, the PCs go grab their gear, after which they are drawn into another portal.
First of all, there is no logical reason what so ever why a character with a charisma of 8 wouldn't enjoy going to a party. Quite the contrary, a character with low charisma might be delighted to finally be invited to a party. Also, unless you lack imagination entirely then you can have a perfectly wonderful time roleplaying a social event even with a low charisma character and without rolling a single die.
This only works if your players know the session is 100% roleplay with no challenges or consequences attached. As far as the fighter knows, they may be approached by the baroness and be prompted for a persuasion or deception roll depending on how he answers her questions.
Players tend to be failure avoidant. If there is a social situation and the character is objectively bad at social skills, the player often tries to avoid or sit out the situation because they could actively work against the whole party's progress. That's just how the game works when you have a team with a varied skillset. Not to mention there is absolutely a logical reason outside of game logic as well - performing poorly in social situations is deeply unpleasant. I don't know if you're just equating charisma to how attractive you are, but it's way more than that.
Also, if I was hosting a party and one of the invited guests was just standing around outside wearing full combat kit I'd probably call the cops...
This is awful restrictive for someone so passionate about roleplaying. What if the character is a protective type who wants to watch the party's back? That's roleplaying too and it actually makes sense as a fighter doing what a fighter is good at.
Anyway, my point is that ultimately the fighter comes out of the situation feeling punished. They went into a situation where they were not much help to the party and because of that situation they continued to not be helpful to the party because they were unequipped and 90% of the fighter class concept is tied to its equipment. An experience like this can very much encourage the player to metagame future similar situations to avoid such a streak of feeling ineffectual.
Replacing their armor with makeshift armor from the Shadowfell would make it for a much more memorable turn of events. They coud also switch later with better manufactured armor from foes, but always shadow-flavored!
First of all, there is no logical reason what so ever why a character with a charisma of 8 wouldn't enjoy going to a party. Quite the contrary, a character with low charisma might be delighted to finally be invited to a party. Also, unless you lack imagination entirely then you can have a perfectly wonderful time roleplaying a social event even with a low charisma character and without rolling a single die.
This only works if your players know the session is 100% roleplay with no challenges or consequences attached.
No it doesn't. Why would it?
As far as the fighter knows, they may be approached by the baroness and be prompted for a persuasion or deception roll depending on how he answers her questions.
The fighter is a character in the game and doesn't know what a "deception roll" is. And as anyone who has served in the military knows, if there is anyone who loves to party, it's fighters.
Players tend to be failure avoidant. If there is a social situation and the character is objectively bad at social skills, the player often tries to avoid or sit out the situation because they could actively work against the whole party's progress.
That's just an assumption that isn't really relevant in any way. Again, there is no reason what so ever why a character wouldn't want to go to a party just because they are good at ifghting. That's just an absurd claim.
That's just how the game works when you have a team with a varied skillset.
Where in the rules does it says that fighters or people with a low charisma stat can't be interested in social events?
Not to mention there is absolutely a logical reason outside of game logic as well - performing poorly in social situations is deeply unpleasant.
Which bring sus back to the point I made about low-charisma characters actually being excited to have been invited to a party.
I don't know if you're just equating charisma to how attractive you are, but it's way more than that.
Why do you make such a baseless assumption? Are you just confused or do you like making things up?
Also, if I was hosting a party and one of the invited guests was just standing around outside wearing full combat kit I'd probably call the cops...
This is awful restrictive for someone so passionate about roleplaying.
No it's not, why do you lie? If I, where I lived, had invited people to a big party and one of the invited guests, no matter how socially awkward they might be, instead of coming in and joining the rest of us was just standing outside wearing armour, gear and most likely illegal weapons I would most likely call the cops. Perhaps not at once but definitely after I tried talking to them and they didn't go home at once.
What if the character is a protective type who wants to watch the party's back? That's roleplaying too and it actually makes sense as a fighter doing what a fighter is good at.
How do you protect someone when you are not at the same place as that person? And now you're just moving the goalposts. The previous reason you gave that fighters don't want to party is because they suck at charisma checks. Which is just absurd. Sure, any character, including those with high charisma, might have their reasons why they don't want to go to a social event but saying that being a fighter or having a low charisma automatically wants to avoid social events is just illogical.
Anyway, my point is that ultimately the fighter comes out of the situation feeling punished. They went into a situation where they were not much help to the party and because of that situation they continued to not be helpful to the party because they were unequipped and 90% of the fighter class concept is tied to its equipment. An experience like this can very much encourage the player to metagame future similar situations to avoid such a streak of feeling ineffectual.
Don't be ridiculous. It's absurd to claim that "90% of the fighter class concept is tied to its equipment". Any fighter can use improvised weapons which means that a strong fighter can turn a chair into a lethal weapon, a battle master can use their maneuvers to keep their allies safe, a Psi warrior can still force push people and so on and so on. Sure, if you as a GM wants to purposefully sabotage the fighters options by refusing them to use their abilities you can do that but I think we can all agree that is poor GMing.
Replace the armor. If you ever want fancy parties where players don’t come armed to the teeth again, you need to preserve trust here.
Or don't replace the armor and the players will learn both to make contingency plans for next out-of-armor party and adapt and improvise for when they aren't fully geared. Kind of depend on both the style of players and the style of DM:ing.
What I would do as a player, learning from that situation (though I've never actually played a full campaign) would be to stash my weapons and armor nearby.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hi, I am not a chest. I deny with 100% certainty that I am a chest. I can neither confirm nor deny what I am beyond that.
I used to portray Krathian, Q'ilbrith, Jim, Tara, Turin, Nathan, Tench, Finn, Alvin, and other characters in various taverns.
This thread is a couple of weeks old so the DM may not be checking and this reply might not be relevant.
However, I suspect that the armor is the least of the party's problems. The group went to a party. Some of them are likely carrying weapons, possibly concealed but they mostly decided not to wear armor. The odds are good then that they didn't bring back packs full of gear either. No camping equipment, no rations, no water containers, no travel clothing, no warm clothes, no tools (or at least limited tools - who takes their smith's tools to a party? but a thief might have put their tools in a concealed pocket), basically their resources are very limited. If there is a wizard, would they have carried their spell book? If they have several thousand gold pieces would someone be carrying a large sack with their currency? The DM needs to have the party take an inventory of what they have and whether there is anything they critically need.
Armor is only one item that they might not have.
From a DM perspective, I would not retcon it. Let the characters have a few challenges but the DM should make some resources and some armor available relatively soon after the group enters the Shadowfell. They should also be able to retrieve anything of value if they later return to where they left.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Other than your effort to logic pick at musings that surveyed a broad range of possibilities which in themselves aren't consistent with each other, you're not wrong, in your game world, or any game world where armor gets dinged, dented, tarnished etc. under some governance the DM and table call "realism". But other than pride silks, maybe, I imagine those games probably don't do a lot of resource tracking for the acquisition and upkeep of their "fancy clothes." So, as I'm not arguing anyone but rather pointing out there's a myriad way of addressing this, to roughly but not completely enumerate it on a spectrum.
1. Full on Masters of the Universe or many renderings of Camelot = Your full armor get up is in fact your best look, and you can probably dance in it. Perhaps leave the shield behind or otherwise risk looking a little insecure.
2.) Cap e pied would be tres gauche, but a ceremonial Elvin chain shirt, with the Lord High Guards' ornamental yet functional pauldrons, highly fashionable and tactical whateverium kneepads and reinforced boots is completely appropriate to escort the Lord's offspring into court one's arm, and fancy dance in. Or maybe just your best silks around a breast plate. (results in reduction of AC).
3.) Armor at the ball? Hell no! The only thing reinforced you could possibly bring to the fashion show would be a codpiece and/or corset, neither of which would affect your possibly naked and afraid AC.
These are all options that may gel with a given game's sense of verisimilitude. It's a matter of play style with nothing to insist on in the rules.
Again, this whole discussion is predicated upon a DM second guessing their contrivance. There's been a range of options presented, and the DM seems to have appreciated that variety. Hating on or taking fundamental or essentialist stances in the discussion just seem to be peeing on a fire that's already warmed the needy. No need to make it a conflagration, micturition doesn't accomplish that anyway. At most it just makes a stink.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I was replying to the specific scenario you presented, but sure, move the goalposts all you want. :)
MotU is a cartoon which means that it is held to the same limitations of animation as every other cartoon. Your "many renderings of Camelot" often includes fancier armour when at court or at least that the dents and dirt is cleaned off. And as you yourself point out, you adapt your gear to the situation by leaving your shield.
You mean adapting your outfit to the occasion? Yup, totally already said that was an option. Not sure why you think surcoats would reduce the effectiveness of a breastplate though...
Glad you agree with the points I made. :)
Are you objecting to someone replying to your post in a public internet forum? Sorry for doing what the forum is for?
I would be puzzled by my PCs wearing their armour to a party, and it would result in negative social interactions if they turned up covered in orc blood or toting weapons.
Given the limitless ways in which the DM can have a portal swallow them into the Shadowfell, it's not that difficult to just work out a way that it happened when they had their gear close to hand. It's also legit to have them lose gear from time to time, especially if we're only talking about some stuff that they had from character creation. If it meant losing some Adamtine Plate Armor or armor they'd saved up with for a while, that would be different.
It kind of depends on if there was any foreshadowing for this event occurring. If the DM has foreshadowed the opening of portals at any time, then the PCs probably wouldn't have left their gear behind - they're basically in a war zone. So assuming that this portal comes out of the blue, they need to either be able to get their gear or get something to replace it pretty fast.
A good option might be for creatures from the Shadowfell to emerge from a portal. Dealt with, the PCs go grab their gear, after which they are drawn into another portal.
This only works if your players know the session is 100% roleplay with no challenges or consequences attached. As far as the fighter knows, they may be approached by the baroness and be prompted for a persuasion or deception roll depending on how he answers her questions.
Players tend to be failure avoidant. If there is a social situation and the character is objectively bad at social skills, the player often tries to avoid or sit out the situation because they could actively work against the whole party's progress. That's just how the game works when you have a team with a varied skillset. Not to mention there is absolutely a logical reason outside of game logic as well - performing poorly in social situations is deeply unpleasant. I don't know if you're just equating charisma to how attractive you are, but it's way more than that.
This is awful restrictive for someone so passionate about roleplaying. What if the character is a protective type who wants to watch the party's back? That's roleplaying too and it actually makes sense as a fighter doing what a fighter is good at.
Anyway, my point is that ultimately the fighter comes out of the situation feeling punished. They went into a situation where they were not much help to the party and because of that situation they continued to not be helpful to the party because they were unequipped and 90% of the fighter class concept is tied to its equipment. An experience like this can very much encourage the player to metagame future similar situations to avoid such a streak of feeling ineffectual.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Replacing their armor with makeshift armor from the Shadowfell would make it for a much more memorable turn of events. They coud also switch later with better manufactured armor from foes, but always shadow-flavored!
No it doesn't. Why would it?
The fighter is a character in the game and doesn't know what a "deception roll" is. And as anyone who has served in the military knows, if there is anyone who loves to party, it's fighters.
That's just an assumption that isn't really relevant in any way. Again, there is no reason what so ever why a character wouldn't want to go to a party just because they are good at ifghting. That's just an absurd claim.
Where in the rules does it says that fighters or people with a low charisma stat can't be interested in social events?
Which bring sus back to the point I made about low-charisma characters actually being excited to have been invited to a party.
Why do you make such a baseless assumption? Are you just confused or do you like making things up?
No it's not, why do you lie? If I, where I lived, had invited people to a big party and one of the invited guests, no matter how socially awkward they might be, instead of coming in and joining the rest of us was just standing outside wearing armour, gear and most likely illegal weapons I would most likely call the cops. Perhaps not at once but definitely after I tried talking to them and they didn't go home at once.
How do you protect someone when you are not at the same place as that person? And now you're just moving the goalposts. The previous reason you gave that fighters don't want to party is because they suck at charisma checks. Which is just absurd. Sure, any character, including those with high charisma, might have their reasons why they don't want to go to a social event but saying that being a fighter or having a low charisma automatically wants to avoid social events is just illogical.
Don't be ridiculous. It's absurd to claim that "90% of the fighter class concept is tied to its equipment". Any fighter can use improvised weapons which means that a strong fighter can turn a chair into a lethal weapon, a battle master can use their maneuvers to keep their allies safe, a Psi warrior can still force push people and so on and so on. Sure, if you as a GM wants to purposefully sabotage the fighters options by refusing them to use their abilities you can do that but I think we can all agree that is poor GMing.
What I would do as a player, learning from that situation (though I've never actually played a full campaign) would be to stash my weapons and armor nearby.
Hi, I am not a chest. I deny with 100% certainty that I am a chest. I can neither confirm nor deny what I am beyond that.
I used to portray Krathian, Q'ilbrith, Jim, Tara, Turin, Nathan, Tench, Finn, Alvin, and other characters in various taverns.
I also do homebrew, check out my Spells and Magic Items
"That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange eons, even death may die"
This thread is a couple of weeks old so the DM may not be checking and this reply might not be relevant.
However, I suspect that the armor is the least of the party's problems. The group went to a party. Some of them are likely carrying weapons, possibly concealed but they mostly decided not to wear armor. The odds are good then that they didn't bring back packs full of gear either. No camping equipment, no rations, no water containers, no travel clothing, no warm clothes, no tools (or at least limited tools - who takes their smith's tools to a party? but a thief might have put their tools in a concealed pocket), basically their resources are very limited. If there is a wizard, would they have carried their spell book? If they have several thousand gold pieces would someone be carrying a large sack with their currency? The DM needs to have the party take an inventory of what they have and whether there is anything they critically need.
Armor is only one item that they might not have.
From a DM perspective, I would not retcon it. Let the characters have a few challenges but the DM should make some resources and some armor available relatively soon after the group enters the Shadowfell. They should also be able to retrieve anything of value if they later return to where they left.