+3 Plate armour is OP!

how so? compared to getting resistance or advantage to saving throws or immunity to damage types... this seems pretty tame...

Referring to magic item table I, how is "Armor +1 Plate" Roll 66-67  different from a Roll of 76 Magic Armor; "Armor, +3 Plate" Where the cost in a shared campaign (XGTE Appendix A) is 12 Treasure Checkpoints in Table I?

Will Duplicate in the Armor +1 Message board

TIA!

This should require attunement, right? All other legendary armor items do. 

Quote from stoveclock >>

This should require attunement, right? All other legendary armor items do. 

 

 

Beyond 20

 

 

 

 

 

 +3 weapons or shields do not require attunement. In fact, the Hammer of Thunderbolts (I think that's what it is) is just a +3 weapon if you don't  attune to it.

The short answer is this boost your AC and does not require attunement. You can still get those other bonuses on top of this.

thats the reason its legendary and not very rare... Legendary is one step maybe even a half step away from artifact... you will run into one or two legendary items in a campaign to level 20 unless you have a very generous DM.

21 AC on plate with no attunement opportunity cost. That is one point below a Lv 20 barbarian or Lv 20 Way of the Astral Self monk.

This is the highest base AC from an item in the heavy armor category in the very rare and legendary rank.

Don't know how you are playing but there are crafting rules for all items that are non artifacts.

ok so first off crafting rules are completely optional, secondly crafting a legendary item takes 50 work weeks, 100,000 gold pieces and should defeat a CR 19 creature to get the materials for said item as stated in Xanathar's. that is a years worth of time just to craft said item if you have all the materials and spend 100,000 gold on a special forge and fuel. then you also need the skill to craft such an item. also a barbarian  can wield a +3 shield with no cost also... so max AC of them is 27... if they aren't wearing that shield and maxed out con and dex their ac is 22. but if we are counting magical items we should count magic items for all a monk can do the same with bracers a cloak of protection and get the benefits of the saves too. monks and barbarians get special abilities from their class so they don't have to wear armor and I find it strange why you think unarmored classes should have the same ac as real armor... that you have to spend time and money on and risk your life for.

yes this is the highest AC you can get from a magic item... but it only offers AC but nothing else. no invariability, no invisibility, no resistance to magic or elemental damage. look at the other legendary items they are huge compared to this. it is amazing to get a +3 plate and if you can get a +3 shield it is very powerful but so is almost any combination of legendary and very rare items. the luck blade grants between 1 and 3 wishes! the belt of storm giants strength grants you 29 strength. the Manuals and tomes permanently up your stats (they are only very rare items) and so much more most legendary items give you spell like abilities with DC in the 15-17 range and give you resistance to elemental damage type or even immunity in the case of the dragon masks. sphere of annihilation destroys magic items. look at what you are comparing these things to before calling it OP legendary items in their very nature are OP.

I never said it was OP. It is Good because you can have this AND the other items as well.

I know crafting is optional, but so are feats, flanking, proficiency die, and a bunch of other rules. I just mentioned it was an option.

As for the crafting rules them self.

"The Magic Item Ingredients table suggests the challenge rating of a creature that the characters need to face to acquire the materials for an item. Note that facing a creature does not necessarily mean that the characters must collect items from its corpse. Rather, the creature might guard a location or a resource that the characters need access to." -Downtime Revisited, Xanathar's Guide to everything.

"To complete a magic item, a character also needs whatever tool proficiency is appropriate, as for crafting a nonmagical object, or proficiency in the Arcana skill." -Downtime Revisited, Xanathar's Guide to everything.

Yes, you need the skill Arcana or tool proficiency in you party. As for time. It can be as simple as the table agreeing that a year passed.

For the Ac race, Monk OAS Maxes out at about 28. Base 22 + Defender 3 + Bracers of Defense 2 + Ring of Protection 1.
Barbarian is about 32. Base 22 + Defender 3 + Cloak of Protection 1 + Ring of Protection 1 + +3Shield 5.
Fighter and Paladin is about 32. +3Plate 21+ Defense Style 1 + Defender 3 + Cloak of Protection 1 + Ring of Protection 1 + +3Shield 5.
That is each class using all their attunement for defense only ,and assuming that defensive ASI are maxed out for the monk and barbarian.
All the following calculations are made with stat array and +2/+1 to stats. No tomes or manuals.
The Monk OAS is doing fine being able to contribute as their damage abilities are Wis based.
The Barbarian had to sacrifice four ASI's to hit their max defense That leaves one ASI for Str and + 4 Str from Primal Champion for a total of 16 or +3 mod.
The Fighter and paladin only need a 15 In Str which they can get at start so this build cost no ASI's.
Additionally this build can be used on any build that has heavy armor proficiency, can get 15 Str, or ignore the Str requirement.
That is without factoring in lost attunements from focusing on defense.


TL;DR: High AC at no attunement is LEGENDARY for most builds.


If you really want to compare it to another legendary plate armor, look at the Powered Armor, Plate Armor of Etherealness, Obsidian Flint Dragon Plate, or Armor of Invulnerability.

huh neat

so would this work on adamantine full plate armor? like are they compatible?

Quote from BlueGlue_506 >>

so would this work on adamantine full plate armor? like are they compatible?

 Base rules, no. Home games, talk it out with your GM.

Personally, I would classify +3 armor as "very rare" as opposed to "legendary." Like, if there was an additional bonus besides increasing your AC by +3, I would consider it legendary (or even game breaking.) Like, yes, +3 plate armor is a lot but it isn't as though a 3rd level character is going to have access to it and you still have disadvantage on stealth rolls. I dunno, man. Seems more tame to me.

To think about it it feels weird to have a splint armour or hell even a Ring Mail to be legendary when the platemail is also legendary.
Like you get 17 AC from a legendary ring mail.
Meanwhile you get 17 AC from a normal nonmagical set of splint armour. Not having to have 15 strenght at past level 17 or so and the armour not being suspectible to rust monsters and black puddings isn't worth being a legendary over a regular set of splint.

I mean imagine how the table of players would react when you announce that there is a legendary item in the hoard and when they go to get it, it's just a set of legendary ring mail or even chain mail at that point.
You are getting literally one legendary for the campaign or maybe two and one of them is worse than a normal item you sold to a vendor 8 levels ago because you found a better one.

This is mostly because armour doesn't do anything aside from giving AC, requiring strenght and affecting stealth. Therefore there is no reason, aside from roleplay (which makes your character worse) to wear any lower tier armour. Maybe sometimes breastplate if you want to sneak in medium set. (but when it comes down to a legendary item, you might as well buy mithril then and be done with it)

Its legendary because its just +3 armor that doesn't require attunement. If it required attunement, it would probably only be very rare. Magic items not requiring attunement usually bump them up a rarity.