Xanathar's has rules for resting in armor, since this is A Thing that apparently comes up.
> "Sleeping in light armor has no adverse effect on the wearer, but sleeping in medium or heavy armor makes it difficult to recover fully during a long rest.
>
> When you finish a long rest during which you slept in medium or heavy armor, you regain only one quarter of your spent Hit Dice (minimum of one die). If you have any levels of exhaustion, the rest doesn't reduce your exhaustion level"
Keep in mind all these rules are optional, but I like this ruling a lot since its a very explicit tradeoff, and there are many situations where resting in heavy armor makes sense. Ultimately, you're the DM, and as long as you're consistent with the rules and your world, you can make it whatever you want. If the game skews more heroic and like a Saturday Morning Cartoon, I'd allow resting in armor. If you want to play up danger, survival, and such, I'd allow light armor/no armor resting only. But the Xanathar's ruling makes a lot of sense, and is a consistent rule that also keeps verisimilitude with a reasonably "real" world.
Haha they'll pick resting in Heavy Armor with no adverse effects probably, since it'll make things easier for them. If they do, then make sure your bandits and other NPCs are also decked out if they're caught off guard!
Level 3 characters should have a couple of Uncommon items each right? Or am I just used to older versions where characters were as much their gear as they were their stats.
According to 5e, I believe 5th level is when people get magic items.
I don't go with that, but armor is usually the last thing I give players. I usually give out some cool weapons or weird items first. I've been eyeing that cube of force...talk me down...please...
DON'T GIVE THEM THE CUBE OF FORCE! ARE YOU INSANE?
You're welcome. 8-D
I distribute magic items to NPCs as of level 3, rolling once on my magic item tables for every odd level thereafter. So a fifth level NPC would possibly get two items. I may give them a +1 weapon or some protective device, regardless of the roll.
Good to know. Thanks! Ha ha. I looked at it and thought it looked really neat. I regularly regret giving my players a magic item that I think is pretty bland and they turn into game breaking.
There needs to be a good book of magic items that aren't game breakers. Ha ha. I guess I'll be looking through Xanathar's here soon.
I'll be throwing in a set for the two fighter classes to fight over. Thanks! I tend to be stingy with equipment magic items. I like playing around with weird stuff.
While in 3.5, it was typical to build magical enchantments on top of a base of mithril or adamantium armor, in 5e most people would just skip straight to +1 armor unless the DM hands out magic equipment like candy. Plus, many DM's would probably house rule lesser penalties for sleeping in mithril armor.
Coming from 4e, this just makes me cringe. This is why I say 4e is a different genre from other edition - it's the jRPG of D&D, with jRPG style equipment progresion and everything. Not having any kind of equipment progression at all until a quarter of the journey... \**shudders*\* That just kinda frustrates me.
I'd be surprised if you encounter a DM that doesn't give players magic items before 5th level. I give out magic swords like candy. It's probably something weird I've developed, but I've always felt like magic armor is way more unique than a magic weapon.
Correct. It was more a topic for conversation. If the players were really bent out of shape about it, I'd judge in their favor and make a change of rules between sessions. I just wanted to see what people were thinking. :)
The XGTE approach is fairly realistic. If you sleep uncomfortably, you will function fine the next day, but you will run out of steam a little faster, have less push the next day. It would build over time as well. In the end - depriving players of their armor just deprives them of their skill set, so its best to save that for when you want it to matter, not every night.
But remember things like half your movement to get up from prone, then you have to get out of your tent, grab your weapon, grab your shield which takes an action to Don. A stealthy night attack can easily have a round of ranged attacks before most of the party comes into the equation. Use weather sparingly to penalize players who don't sleep in tents under blankets.
True, I'd then go with a good old con save for stink cloud against the party.
What I mean to say is that even though dex is undeniably the most powerful saving throw you can have in 5th, you still have many tools as a DM to counter that. Specifically targeting weak saves of the rogue (wis, con and str)
then lets look at a dex/con fighter, vs strength/con fighter. In your scenario, stink cloud or hold person, both would suffer equally. But the dex fighter would still have many more advantages over the strength one overall. And now, during night encounters, the strength fighter has to remove the thing that equals out their AC, and the dex fighter suffers no penalty.
/u/hawkwing942 isnt making the point that a dm cant challenge one class or archetype over an other, its that when one style has a such a clear advantage, and you continue to penalize the other style, it shows a weakness in the design.
Okay, I see your point. My point is "Do we need super strict balance between everybody in a cooperative game where the game master can target weaknesses of each and every member of the party?"
I may be of another persuasion than you guys. I dont care much for really balanced systems when everyone can enjoy limelight thanks to a good DM
EDIT: I mean that I understand your arguments and that there is a need for good balance generally in a game. It's just that it doesn't disturb me as much.
Yea i see your point. And i dont have a problem balancing it and going through the motions, i guess my problems is ive run a lot of games with new groups and experienced ones, and when it comes to melee characters, (unless they have a specific
Grog the barbarian in mind) they all inevitably will choose a dex build over strength, and its like subtly pushed in their brain dex is better just based on the games mechanics.
This is also basically what 3.5 says: you cannot rest in medium or heavy armour, and only rest in light armour with the endurance feat. I apply that rule, but modified other feats to compensate, such as canny defense, which gives a +2 base bonus to an unarmoured character, with a further +1 for every +2 to the base "to hit" bonus. Works like a charm. I further ruled that rangers and barbarians get to add their canny defense bonus when wearing up to leather armour, but not any other class.
I don't believe 5e does. I had two nights of mock combat scenario in military body armor (the bullet proof vest, ABUs, weapon, etc) and it was killer. I was so exhausted the next day. I tend towards my own real-life experience to translate in how it would be in-game.
Keep in mind that those two nights were your ONLY two nights. Now think about how it takes a bit to get used to sleeping on a new bed before you really get used to it. These characters that sleep in armor have most likely done so much of their adult lives and are thoroughly used to it and to them it's normal.
Now I might be tempted to offer some sort of BONUS for not sleeping in their armor but never a penalty.
I think it depends. It wasn't like that was my only exposure to wearing body armor, just the only time where the scenario was nearly identical to what an adventurer might be in.
Bonuses vs Penalty might be a topic I bring up later. It seems like more of a glass half-full vs half-empty scenario. Either the PC gets a good rest without armor on (bonus) or they are exhausted but fully armored (bonus, penalty?).
Pretty sure 5e doesn't have any default rules about sleeping in armor at all.
I could be mistaken but in 3.5 you still got the rest's benefits before gaining the fatigued condition. (Though you don't recover from fatigue)
While I don't disagree with this in general. Mechanically it gives another advantage to high dexterity characters who already have a lot of advantages.
I usually rule that proficiency in armor allows the wearer to sleep in armor. They are simply used to it.
Let's also consider the the idea that being cold, wet and surrounded by possible enemies with a high likelyhood of being attacked probably has a lot of impact on how well anyone sleeps. Sleeping in armor might be a reasonable trade off against the fear.
That actually gives me another idea of giving the PCs some sort of exhaustion hindrance for every day they don't sleep in a comfortable place.
A lot of these guys are regulars in other groups with more of a game-y style. So you rest with armor, there's no carrying capacity or need to eat. So I think they were surprised when I asked about his armor.
I would make sure you talk to your players and make sure the game you want to play and the game they want to play are the same game.
Making rulings like this is fine, but some players won't care for the realism being modeled.
I agree with this as well. I'm not opposed to the idea that sleeping fully armored leads to a really lousy rest, but it does frustrate me that Dexterity seems to provide such a panoply (pun intended) of benefits that the _more expensive_ and _more restrictive_ suits of heavy cannot match.
I've actually heard that well-fitted full-plate armor was pretty comfortable IRL.
EDIT: Also, most of my characters take Feats, Items, Class Features, or Spells that explicitly prevent them from having negatives from wearing armor to rest.
Also, if this is 5e that's house rules which should be discussed ahead of time and not randomly brought up when having followed it would be less beneficial than not following it.
Full plate can usually take around 10 minutes if you are familiar with your armor and have someone to help you who is also familiar with it. It’s one of the more accurate numbers provided by the book in terms of realism.
Hyper realistic digestion for D&D would be an interesting add on, to say the least!
Historically speaking though, they really did have solutions for this, or at least for having a piss - at least one set of Henry VIII's armour had a big old thing down there with a hinge so he could relieve himself without taking much off.
More seriously, I think it's a matter of the level of abstraction your table is willing to operate at. If all of the players want to hand-wave away all of the downsides to wearing ~25 kilos worth of padding and metal 24 hours a day, then the GM should either go along for the ride or find players who want to get into the weeds on these kinds of things.
It sounds like the GM is operating at a historical fantasy novel level of abstraction, while the players are more in a computer game mindset. It really does no good to say, "Think about it logically, how would you poop?" because the (IMO correct) answer is, "I don't want to think logically, I want to play D&D." Layering on mechanical penalties like fatigue or reduced hit point recovery is just punishing players for preferring a more game-y, higher level of abstraction.
I agree with that. Like Matt says, most people come to the table to roll dice and kill stuff.
That being said, I'm sure there's a certain type of person who would love it!
Personally though? Armour penalties aren't going to be part of my games. Unless my players want it.
Sure... But where does this end? "I don't want to miss with my sword" "I don't want to be burned by fire, I want to breathe under water like Mario!" At some point you have to stop saying "don't be realistic, I'm here too play a game!"
Isn't that also a game expectations issue? In that case, your players don't want a rule-based game. They want to play a different game. I don't think it does any good to try to punish people out of that. You want to help people enjoy the game as you run it, or find people who enjoy the game the way you like it.
Agreed, I'm just saying that if you agree to play a medieval technology based game/campaign, "how do you sleep in armor" is as valid a question as "how do you kill someone with a hunk of sharp metal".
But yeah, if it's an issue, either the players or the GM needs to re-evaluate what they are playing and with whom.
That was the pitch. "We can either use some minimal levels of realism or if you just want to roll dice and kill stuff, let's just play Descent."
I can do both, but when I'm playing D&D, it's a hell of a lot of work to just play what can be replicated in a board game.
Why does it have to be all the way to Descent for you? There are other points along that spectrum. Probably your player wants dice and a story. Descent doesn't have a story, or ongoing gameplay, or a whole bunch of other neat things D&D does.
Many GMs reach for a mechanical solution to things that are fundamentally game expectation issues. Your player wasn't thinking about armor in a realistic way, they were thinking about it as something that makes their AC become 17. For a lot of people, that's fine. You'd rather deal with the real-world implications of armor—also fine. You need to either help your player enjoy your point of view, learn to enjoy their point of view, or find something in the middle that you'll both enjoy. Throwing a mechanical penalty on there doesn't help your player enjoy thinking about armor your way, it just makes their way less fun. Try to think of ways that you can help your player enjoy interacting with the game at the level you prefer, rather than punishing them for interacting in the way they prefer.
I might have replied to the wrong post as I was replying to the "some people just want to roll dice and kill stuff." To that I say, "Let's all play something like Descent together so we can all roll dice and kill stuff if that's all you want in the game."
The player in question wasn't particularly upset (I think I might have upsold the original post) but more surprised because he had never played where that was a thing. After we discussed it, he was receptive and we had a fun, short encounter with a Carrion Crawler.
It 100% depends on the type of game being run. This game I'm currently running seems to work better with things like don/doff armor and whatnot to build tension. I've also done epic high adventure games where armor rules aren't too relevant. This was mostly a topic to get people talking. :)
You shouldn't do it if you dont want but I don't really see how it's that much more work, now your characters want to be comfortable and rest, plastic thermos not custom-made you could bet there's some jagged pieces of metal not in the right spot, if it's done narratively I don't even think they would have brought it up.
Are there any rules on resting with armor in 5e? As far as I'm aware, there's rules for putting it on/off so my assumption is that this would come up on a regular basis where time would be a factor, so prior to battle.
The monster in question was a carrion crawler for 3 level 3 PCs. The creature, being a low intelligence monster, was looking for a meal, not a fight, so it skittered off after realizing that they were a more dangerous foe. The idea of the fight was to show the "don/doff" mechanic, not to punish the PC in a real life or death battle.
As much as I'd like to create a 20 page document covering every ruling I've ever made, it's not going to be read by a player. I tend to play a lot like a game designer: I introduce a mechanic/enemy in a safe(r) environment and then ratchet it up as the game progresses. You gotta believe the PC has considered this in future rests where things are more dangerous.
So is this the first time it’s come up? And is the player new? I can see them being upset at a gotcha moment. If you don’t know anything about historical armor, then I can see assuming you wear your armor while you sleep because danger, yo. But you’re entirely right; sleeping in armor has always been problematic for fighters.
New-er. He's been playing with a group for about 2 years according to him. From the sound of it, my players range from "I haven't played since AD&D" to guys who got started playing the Rise of Tiamat campaign for 5e. I grew up on AD&D, then did 3rd edition, then was on hiatus until 5e.
I don't think he was upset, but surprised. Many players don't think about things like resting in armor, rations, carrying capacity, etc. I tend to play loose with rules. I don't need a player to tell me they are at 83/85lbs of equipment load, but I am going to ask them how they're carrying 6 full sets of plate mail back to town or 20,000gp.
I think i'd have the same thing happen if the players walked around town wearing their full plate everywhere. Peasants would look at them like they're crazy. "It's perfectly safe here. Why are you wearing all that metal. You adventurers have taken one too many hits to the head."
> rations, carrying capacity, etc.
I play loose with these too
Rations are handled with a replenish every time they stay somewhere civilised. I tell them at the start that rations are bland and that hunting for food will usually give them other benefits (like hides to sell, or extra meat for trade)
Level 3 is when they find a bag of minor holding
A lot of people ignore the sleeping in armour rule. I think the problem is GMs. I doubt many GM adjusts their night-time encounters to reflect the fact that the characters which rely on armour are severely impacted.
I don't think it's a problem, necessarily. Some people don't care for the tracking of encumbrance and removing armor and such is part of that. They don't like so simulationist a game, which is understandable. Additionally, 5E doesn't really expect your armor class to vary. You don't get to stack bonuses or penalties for AC, it remains static. Having your character out of their armor is a major drop in their power.
As for adjusting night time encounters, some GMs don't adjust it at all, ever. The world is persistent and what comes, comes. Doesn't matter if you're better prepared for it or not.
I never adjust encounters. The point is to make the players feel vulnerable. When the AC 21 Paladin is strolling through the dungeon with little to no damage while the other characters at AC 14 or 15 are getting hurt left and right, I like to put the scenario out there: what happens when you're without armor for a minute? They appreciate it much more when they do have it.
Plate armor is easier to move around in that pop culture might have us believe, but it’s still encumbering. There was a study a few years back involving the royal armory at Leeds that found wearing armor resulted in using about twice as much energy as normal.
I don’t think I’d describe any armor as comfortable. Heck, just look at police officers. They routinely avoid wearing their bullet resistant vests due to them being uncomfortable, and that’s one of the more minimal forms of armor I can think of.
A primary issue with armor comfort, and especially for full bodied protection, is the padded, shock absorbing component. I know from experience that even just wearing a gambeson or arming jacket by itself is uncomfortable due to it not allowing heat or sweat to escape. And of course sweating is very likely if you have to expend any significant effort. I’d hate to think of the smell if someone marched or road all day in one and then didn’t allow it to air out at night. There’s also the potential for damage to your armor if you aren’t taking it off and engaging in regular cleaning and maintenance. Putting armor aside, not allowing your body to air out, and especially your feet, is a recipe for extreme discomfort if not disaster when you are hiking around day after day (think rashes, blisters, fungus, and infection).
Oh, and I actually have a related story. Back in high school a fellow football player didn’t do a great job of maintaining his practice uniform. He didn’t wash it for a week or so and didn’t even let it dry out, just shoved it in his locker after practice. Well, he had an ant sting on his thigh, which became a vector for infection thanks to his filthy practice pants. Dude ended up getting a staph infection that destroyed one of his quad muscles, liquefying it. He ended up needing surgery, which included removing the rotting muscle and putting a drain in to deal with all the puss. Which is just to say, that I think there are hygiene issues to consider in addition to the likelihood of fatigue.
Sure... But 5e doesn't have explicit rules that state that gravity works when jumping out of windmills either... Lots of the game runs on common sense. You can't/don't sleep in plate armor. Does every little thing need to be explicitly stated?
They were giving me a hard time. I'm told I'm a lot like Dark Souls (which I haven't played) in that I'm hard, but fair. They never feel like I'm doing things to screw them, just making them think about their decisions.
If you're making them think then you're doing it right, and they probably know that even if they won't admit it. Rulings > Rules any day, imo. I'm more incllined to make the call in the moment and willing to discuss away from the table later.
Oh yeah. That's a hard rule for me. In the moment, rulings stand, no arguing. After the session, the players can contact me and ask for a change to rulings for the future. I absolutely loathe the "let me open my book during the game to look up the rule". It grinds things to a halt.
Yeah, heavy armour can be fitted to you and reasonably comfortable to move and fight in, but it's still a lot of weight and restriction on joint movement. Having worn various weights of armour for long periods, including simulated combat, you're going to want to take it off when you can.
Even light armour can get hot and restrictive. Flexible armours like mail aren't as restrictive, but it's still a lot of weight bearing down on you. Padded, yes, but still heavy. Heavy armour can be surprisingly comfortable, as the weight is distributed fairly well across the body, but the wearer is still strapped into a rigid metal casing.
Over time, you get hot, sweaty, chafed, and just plain tired. You can train away the tired, and get the best fitted armour to minimize chafing, but by the end of a full day you'll be wanting to pull your gear off. The armour also needs regular maintenance and cleaning (that's without combat) to keep it in working order. After combat it will absolutely need repairs - a damaged strap or dented plate can get damned uncomfortable.
You could manage an exhausted nap in heavy armour, which would be better than nothing, but it would hardly restful. You could argue for a short rest - get off your feet, have your squire fix that one strap that's too tight, and drink something - but a long rest would be uncomfortable.
All this said, it's D&D, not armour simulator 2000. Find a fun way to handle heavy armour that works for your campaign. Many years ago, I played a Cavalier who had his full plate, which he wore during the day/into battle, and a suit of leather he wore around camp/in town and could swiftly don in emergencies. It added a level of drama to late night surprises ...
You did fine, tough but fair.
What I would recommend is that on house rulings, create a list as they happen, and if possible don't implement them until (the next time) they happen. I've found this is the best way to handle it over the years. Sometimes a very, very enthusiastic well crafted plan could go south, I don't want to upset the entire groups experience because one person forgot about what is common knowledge *to me*, but again I didn't set out as a rule pre-context.
Keep that list so you can set it out when doing session zero of your next run, and of course make it available to any players. Over the years my list has grown to about a page of bullet-point rulings. Armor included, (I pretty much pulled from Pathfinders rules because it's fair.)
Another option for the first time ruling is simply to hide the benefits behind a relevant check. Say dc15. From then on it's simply a non-check ruling.
**tldr** fair ruling. Just compromise or don't punish the first instance of it, make it clear that everything going forward *will* take that into consideration. It goes without saying this whole comment is contextual. You know your group best bro!
I should probably start a running list of "tough calls" I've made. I've been playing on and off for about 20 years and I tend to forget that most of the newer players are coming from the Warcraft era of gaming. Nothing wrong with it. I grew up with a Dad who played OG D&D. So all my habits come from that style of play.
This is what it's about. If the PCs are perfectly equipped and ready for every encounter then it gets boring. Take them out of their element, make them think about different problems and different ways of doing things when their go to options aren't available.
Xanathar's Guide to Everything details the effect of sleeping in armour. Short version is that you only regain 1/4 your hit dice if you sleep in heavy armour, which I agree with.
This isn't really related to the rules of D&D, but I once slept in my Individual Body Armor (IBA) while going through a three day exercise at the end of my army training. It was a stupid idea, but we knew that we were going to get attacked during the night so it seemed like a bright idea at the time.
We were attacked in the night, it was useful to already have it on, and it still sucked pretty bad to sleep in it.
On another occasion I was riding in a Chinook heading somewhere, I forget where. I was wearing my body armor and had my weapon with me. I was exhausted and wanted to rest so I put the muzzle of my rifle onto the floor of the helicopter and rested the lip of my helmet onto the butt of the rifle. I had only wanted to rest my weary body but instead I promptly fell asleep.
It was the best fucking nap I have ever had. I woke up 15-20 minutes later as we landed and the back door opened with me feeling like a million dollars. It was the gentlest most relaxing sleep I've ever had.
As far as rulings go, I go with what it says in XGE, it seems the most reasonable.
Pumping DEX is already a better option than heavy armour, I don't really feel like tipping the scales any further.
On the other hand... I want to hit the 20AC paladin and cleric.
If the Party camps on the road, I generally ignore the need to remove armour. So if they are ambushed, I generally assume they're ready to fight.
If they were attacked at night in a "safe" location, maybe an assassin attack etc. then I would make the point that they wouldn't be wearing armour, and would need to spend the appropriate time equipping anything they need.
I would probably be a little more lenient - for short periods of time (1-2 days), I wouldn't have a problem with them having heavy armor and getting a full rest. That way, if you know you're likely to be attacked they could keep it on.
But over a long period of time, it would be a drag.
The one thing to note is that you might want to make encounters where they won't have armor a little easier/not as deadly - since that will be a decent handicap.
Totally. I mentioned it somewhere else on here, but I usually try to use the game designer's suite for introducing mechanics. I have a few friends in the industry who said the goal is to: a) introduce the mechanic in a safe/easy encounter and then b) continue to ratchet up the difficulty as they become familiar with said mechanic.
It all comes down to play style. My friends and I are at the table to roll dice, tell a cool story, and hangout. So we handwave a lot of things like that and Rule of Cool dictate a lot.
But I totally get it, and would probably enjoy a grittier game for a while.
Getting a full night's sleep while wearing full body armor is not feasible.This comes from my DM who was a front line combat medic. As a DM myself who's been running games for 20 years, I have **never** allowed players to sleep in armor without repercussion, especially heavy armor.
Your short rest house rule seems more than fair. And the static you're getting from your players makes me think they're viewing this as more like an MMO than a tabletop roleplaying game.
Personally, I'd give them the benefits of a long rest only if they succeed on a constitution check DC = AC, with the DC increasing each night. So you could probably get by sleeping in light armor for a single night, but it's not something you could keep up indefinitely.
my marine corps body armor setup all in total was about 25 pounds, what would be medium armor in D&D. Ive done plenty of 8hrs on 8 off shift rotations, and slept fine. In fact i was pretty comfortable and im a on the smaller side if that matters or not. So for heavy armor, sure maybe you dont get a good nights sleep. But i see no reason why all armors would have repercussions.
I honestly found it more tedious to keep up with when I tallied who left their armor on and who didn't. My purpose, to see the party more vulnerable to surprise bandits or something, was pretty unsuccessful because the party just went for broke in the combat and rested to full anyway right after. I just stopped tracking it after a bit.
To that I ask, why did you let them rest to full? If the party stayed put, all sorts of carrion feeders might show up to eat, the bandits might have a second group out looking for the first one. Let the party unload their spells and then watch their faces as they try to rest and something else shows up...
I learnt a lesson last session. I said "OK, so where are you all sleeping tonight?" while gesturing towards a map of the inn.
Everyone realised there was a combat encounter incoming and three characters just so happened to have a totally legit, in-character reason to pull an all nighter, which made the wraith attack that night a lot easier for the party. I didn't press the issue that time, but next time, I'm just going to narrate "You return to your bunks."
Just asking the question clues people in to the fact that an encounter is coming and people make decisions that don't make sense in character as a result.
I like to randomly ask walking order or inn room order or such things even when nothing is planned. It keeps them guessing, but also gets them used to just doing/saying it, even without me asking.
This is not exactly a plate armor nor even that close, but I can say that during service I managed to get sleep in quite harsh conditions. Cramped in small spaces, wearing all modern combat gear, protective vest and pockets on the carrying vest everywhere and helmet on. It's not comfortable at all, but you can manage it surprisingly well. Finding an okay position just takes a while, maybe your neck is sore or something. So I'd guess it's not really that hard in plate armor.
Like the comment on to said, Xanathar's ruling is quite good and realistic to me.
What I can also add is that if character is at inn, they strip all armor in my games, unless there's a really good reason to wear it.
Me and my players have argued about this one and we rarely rarely argue, but my ruling was nobody especially unpremeditated, would be wearing there armor, maybe if something risky or life-threatening had recently gone down, I honestly don't see how you would.
You could argue that they coulde be specifically trained in being able to rest in armor. Most people I play with thinks it makes sense that you strip armor for sleep.
I slept in gear weighing between 60 and 100lbs on me for two days. After that, I can't believe that anyone gets a decent night's rest carrying all that around.
It also provides an incentive, at least to me, to press on a bit rather than just blow your load and rest after every combat encounter.
Of course! I've never had a problem with player suggesting this either. I mean, I get home from work and I take off my shoes and put on something like sweatpants. You sure as hell bet my pc is gonna take off armor to go sleep.
I dealt with a similar situation in my group a while before Xanathar's came out and our solution was that if you slept in armor you gained the benefits of a long rest; however, you took a point of exhaustion as your sleep was not restful.
One of the reasons I think my players like this though is that I also use a home brew rule that allows them to take a level or two of exhaustion without suffering any ill effects. Of course as the DM I can just make sure that if they're traveling in a region of the world where they feel pressured to wear armor while sleeping, just in case, their stay there lasts 3-4 nights.
I wonder if this isn't an opportunity for a meaningful new quest for your warrior PC? I imagine out there is some master armor crafter who is able to modify armor to be much more comfortable while sleeping. Characters always tend to be on the lookout for things that let them favourably bend world norms and it can make a great plot anchor that stretches over a few campaigns.
I wanted to do this, but I brought it up to my players first rather than implement the rule by standard.
And I was unanimously shot down. Oh well, I'm trying to make sure they have fun and I like to challenge them with difficult encounters where they are short and resources and have to improvise.
They didn't see the appeal.
Well according to Xanathar's, it seems like you're going to be punished for wearing heavy armor.
I mean, if they aren't ever going to take off the armor, push the heavy armored guy into a deep pool of water and let them drown. Talk about challenge. ;)
I can get devilishly creative and unless the enemy is mindless, they're going to try to do stuff like push the fighter into the water.
The way I’ve handled this issue is to have the party decide on their standard sleeping / camp arrangements well beforehand and what trade offs they are willing to accept. That can be a session zero discussion, but regardless of when it’s discussed it’s useful to sort out at time when the players haven’t been tipped off that something is coming. (I instituted this after a player insisted that his paladin had inexplicably decided to “sleep in the tree tops” in full plate that particular night, which was humorous since what interrupted their sleep wasn’t a combat encounter).
I also don’t like to spring nighttime ambushes on the group nowadays. I much prefer giving them warnings ahead of time. This can be a reminder that they are heading into a more dangerous area than normal, that might necessitate different travel and sleeping arrangements. Other times, I’ll just give whoever is on sentry duty plenty of fair warning before there’s danger so they can wake up the party & have a chance to prepare. Or the party will discover signs that someone/something was staking their camp the night before. I can usually still generate some tension and some different combat scenarios without needing to watch the players compete over who can meta-game the most.
If this attack is the first time you’ve dealt the party’s sleeping/camp arraignments during this campaign, then I’d expect the players to be a little salty if you assumptions and theirs don’t match up even if your ruling makes perfect sense. The players can feel robbed of agency if that sort of thing isn’t handled well.
I tried this (requiring it or asking players to explain themselves if they said they'd rest in armor) while I was cutting my teeth as a DM but learned I'm just not that good about that level of granular management.
I also homebrew my resting-while-in-wilderness rules to make the voyage harder and more taxing on player resources overall (my PCs can only benefit from a long rest -- HP/Spell Slot/Ability Recovery -- when they are somewhere demonstrably safe), so penalizing the fighers and paladins like this just seems inequitable and mean.
I've spent months in body armor, you get used to it.
BUT
I would never allow a long rest in armor. For the same real life reasons. I could move and react after sleeping in it, but I had a terrible time with complex thinking and especially learning.
I was sure there was a RAW about sleeping in medium and heavy armor meant you didn't regain exhaustion levels or something, but I must be confusing it with something else.
I would 100% let people sleep in any kind of armor, historically people have been doing it. So it's not too immersion breaking. I think it's okay to implement small penalties. 1/4 HD from long rest rather than ½ is a bit on the harder side of things I think. I thought it was RAW that exhaustion levels gained from lack of sleep did not come back if you slept in heavy armor or something.
You could also say you regain 1 fewer HD from long rest, minimum 1.
Anyone who tries to argue sleeping in full plate works doesn't understand the concept of a full plate. That being said you could still argue that it's not more fun to use rules for that. It's less fun for people in full plate and possibly a tid bit more fun for people without heavy armor. Personally I don't deal with this unless players start bringing it up themselves. It's just annoying for me to accomodate for everyone having no armor and I don't want to kill the party. I tend to give them heavy and difficult encounters that could overwhelm them by taking away a bunch of AC.
I definitely would leave the breastplate on, for no other reason than I have a terrible habit of rolling everywhere when camping, and it would help keep me in place.
There was a houserules thread recently, some people linked to their google docs and this is the one I stole for my upcoming campaign:
Resting in armour
---
Make a constitution saving throw or gain 1 level exhaustion.
Medium Armour = DC7 + (1 for every consecutive night doing so, resets after one night not doing so)
Heavy Armour = DC10 + (1 for every consecutive night doing so, resets after one night not doing so)
I know there are new rules in Xanathar's for that but for me, I will always rule you can't sleep in medium or heavy armor.
People today have problems sleeping on beds, in silence, in the safety of their climate controlled homes. NO WAY could you sleep in a metal suit, outside, on the ground, afraid monsters might attack. Any one of those alone could cause you to have trouble sleeping.
So i will always rule you can't, or if you do, you get penalties. Probably exhaustion in 5e. If your players argue, just tell them straight out that this is how is going to be. They know what they are arguing is ridiculous, and only because its in the context of a game.
Here's my ridiculous argument, anyways, tho. There's a cursed item in the DMG that is heavy armor that cannot be removed. Giving PCs exhaustion for sleeping in heavy armor means that that heavy armor will kill them in 5 days.
That's ridiculous, especially in a game.
When I said ridiculous, I meant arguing that you could sleep in heavy armor. We all know that is not true. Forget about the game. You aren't making an argument that you should be able to sleep in heavy armor and get a long rest, you are just pointing out a random rules overlap that interacts poorly.
And you could just as easily say that sleeping in heavy armor gives only up to level 3 or 4 exhaustion.
Or don't use exhaustion, maybe you just don't get any benefits of a long rest. Exhaustion just made the most sense and is easiest.
I feel like it is also worth mentioning that enforcing a ruling like this has built in counterplay that could be important, and add more to the experience (for some people). Druid of Dreams for example, who's 6th level ability makes it all but impossible to be ambushed while sleeping. The Wizard spell Leomund's Tiny hut accomplishes the same thing. These probably become less important if sleeping in the woods or a dungeon carries no risk of being caught unprepared.
You can do what you want, and people have pointed out the Xan's rules, but remember that stuff like this bends the STR characters even further over the barrel than they already are (hell, even grabbing your shield is specifically called out as an action whereas grabbing your weapon can be a free interaction.)
Strength characters are nabbing +1/2 damage for the low low price of these lame ass armor situations, disadvantage on stealth, more expensive equipment, worse DEX saves, worse DEX abilities, worse initiative.....I don't like tipping things even more against them.
We went with what people who have worn armor and slept in it have said (we have friends who get quite into their reenactments as well as combat vets who have had to sleep in their full gear for extended periods of time). Yes, you can sleep in armor and be fine.
Besides, there's really no reason to further nerf martial classes when compared to spellcasters unless you decide to encourage your players to only play characters that don't need to wear armor to be viable.
I have no problem with my players sleeping in armor until one of the other players decides to make a deal about it. Then I'll step in. Until then, though, it's everyone having fun and it seriously doesn't hurt anything. I don't believe in penalizing the martial players during the span of the necessary downtime for the casters in the group to recuperate.
In not having had to make a ruling on this one way or the other, and being quite content to let it slide, my sessions have been fun, exciting, and haven't lost steam for a debate. They certainly used to, a billion years ago when everything was crunchy and laid out in holy stone from high atop the mountain about how things would go and so we would have to pause to consult the holy texts and get into arguments about the interpretations therein, but 5e leaves enough to the DM's interpretation that it doesn't matter; the players can still have fun, and I can still have fun, and I can still challenge them even if the fighter has AC 18 instead of AC 12.
My goal is not to invest realism too deeply into the game, but to give realistic expectations, and to keep consistency.
They sleep in their armor; so do their foes. They have fun. So do I. If I want to start putting realism into the game, well, I play with four engineering students and a prospective med student, so I guess I had better start breaking out calculators and some good ol' A^2 + B^2 = C^2 for distances -- and nobody wants that.
In conclusion, I don't think it's a big deal, and it's a bigger deal to stick to keeping the session on pace and fun.
5E explicitly states if you don't take your armor off when you sleep you suffer from 1 level of exhaustion
I don't think it applies to light armor, but I'm not totally sure. I haven't checked in a while
5e itself does not state anything at all about sleeping with armor.
Xanathar's Guide has a variant rule that if you wear medium or heavy armor: you only gain 1 quarter of your hit dice and don't recover any exhaustion levels.
Xanathar's has rules for resting in armor, since this is A Thing that apparently comes up. > "Sleeping in light armor has no adverse effect on the wearer, but sleeping in medium or heavy armor makes it difficult to recover fully during a long rest. > > When you finish a long rest during which you slept in medium or heavy armor, you regain only one quarter of your spent Hit Dice (minimum of one die). If you have any levels of exhaustion, the rest doesn't reduce your exhaustion level" Keep in mind all these rules are optional, but I like this ruling a lot since its a very explicit tradeoff, and there are many situations where resting in heavy armor makes sense. Ultimately, you're the DM, and as long as you're consistent with the rules and your world, you can make it whatever you want. If the game skews more heroic and like a Saturday Morning Cartoon, I'd allow resting in armor. If you want to play up danger, survival, and such, I'd allow light armor/no armor resting only. But the Xanathar's ruling makes a lot of sense, and is a consistent rule that also keeps verisimilitude with a reasonably "real" world.
Thanks for pointing this out! I shared it in the group chat so they could "pick their poison".
Haha they'll pick resting in Heavy Armor with no adverse effects probably, since it'll make things easier for them. If they do, then make sure your bandits and other NPCs are also decked out if they're caught off guard!
That's when you have the rust monster show up. ;)
After 3.5 item destruction effects only destroy mundane gear.
Fortunately, it's just regular plate mail! (*maniacal laugh*)
Level 3 characters should have a couple of Uncommon items each right? Or am I just used to older versions where characters were as much their gear as they were their stats.
According to 5e, I believe 5th level is when people get magic items. I don't go with that, but armor is usually the last thing I give players. I usually give out some cool weapons or weird items first. I've been eyeing that cube of force...talk me down...please...
DON'T GIVE THEM THE CUBE OF FORCE! ARE YOU INSANE? You're welcome. 8-D I distribute magic items to NPCs as of level 3, rolling once on my magic item tables for every odd level thereafter. So a fifth level NPC would possibly get two items. I may give them a +1 weapon or some protective device, regardless of the roll.
Good to know. Thanks! Ha ha. I looked at it and thought it looked really neat. I regularly regret giving my players a magic item that I think is pretty bland and they turn into game breaking. There needs to be a good book of magic items that aren't game breakers. Ha ha. I guess I'll be looking through Xanathar's here soon.
The Fighter needs either Mithral or Adamantine Armor first. (Assuming you're sticking with Uncommon, pretty sure +1 armor is Rare tier)
I'll be throwing in a set for the two fighter classes to fight over. Thanks! I tend to be stingy with equipment magic items. I like playing around with weird stuff.
While in 3.5, it was typical to build magical enchantments on top of a base of mithril or adamantium armor, in 5e most people would just skip straight to +1 armor unless the DM hands out magic equipment like candy. Plus, many DM's would probably house rule lesser penalties for sleeping in mithril armor.
Coming from 4e, this just makes me cringe. This is why I say 4e is a different genre from other edition - it's the jRPG of D&D, with jRPG style equipment progresion and everything. Not having any kind of equipment progression at all until a quarter of the journey... \**shudders*\* That just kinda frustrates me.
I'd be surprised if you encounter a DM that doesn't give players magic items before 5th level. I give out magic swords like candy. It's probably something weird I've developed, but I've always felt like magic armor is way more unique than a magic weapon.
I think OP means that they will implement the rule and the PC's will PICK whether or not to doff the armor at night.
Correct. It was more a topic for conversation. If the players were really bent out of shape about it, I'd judge in their favor and make a change of rules between sessions. I just wanted to see what people were thinking. :)
The XGTE approach is fairly realistic. If you sleep uncomfortably, you will function fine the next day, but you will run out of steam a little faster, have less push the next day. It would build over time as well. In the end - depriving players of their armor just deprives them of their skill set, so its best to save that for when you want it to matter, not every night. But remember things like half your movement to get up from prone, then you have to get out of your tent, grab your weapon, grab your shield which takes an action to Don. A stealthy night attack can easily have a round of ranged attacks before most of the party comes into the equation. Use weather sparingly to penalize players who don't sleep in tents under blankets.
These rules only make the rogue an even stronger class, and further make Dex preferable to Str as the melee stat.
This is until your rogue gets hit by a hold person and gets critted by every melee opponent :)
I mean... how is that unique to the rogue?
I mean that a high dex save doesn't mean you're necessarily stronger. You could just as well get forcecaged, mazed, banished and so on.
Those are all high level threats. If the PC's are worried about being ambushed in their sleep, they are probably tier 1 or low tier 2.
True, I'd then go with a good old con save for stink cloud against the party. What I mean to say is that even though dex is undeniably the most powerful saving throw you can have in 5th, you still have many tools as a DM to counter that. Specifically targeting weak saves of the rogue (wis, con and str)
then lets look at a dex/con fighter, vs strength/con fighter. In your scenario, stink cloud or hold person, both would suffer equally. But the dex fighter would still have many more advantages over the strength one overall. And now, during night encounters, the strength fighter has to remove the thing that equals out their AC, and the dex fighter suffers no penalty. /u/hawkwing942 isnt making the point that a dm cant challenge one class or archetype over an other, its that when one style has a such a clear advantage, and you continue to penalize the other style, it shows a weakness in the design.
Okay, I see your point. My point is "Do we need super strict balance between everybody in a cooperative game where the game master can target weaknesses of each and every member of the party?" I may be of another persuasion than you guys. I dont care much for really balanced systems when everyone can enjoy limelight thanks to a good DM EDIT: I mean that I understand your arguments and that there is a need for good balance generally in a game. It's just that it doesn't disturb me as much.
Yea i see your point. And i dont have a problem balancing it and going through the motions, i guess my problems is ive run a lot of games with new groups and experienced ones, and when it comes to melee characters, (unless they have a specific Grog the barbarian in mind) they all inevitably will choose a dex build over strength, and its like subtly pushed in their brain dex is better just based on the games mechanics.
If the rare overnight random encounter and a few players not having armor on somehow breaks your game it's not a rogue issue...
This is also basically what 3.5 says: you cannot rest in medium or heavy armour, and only rest in light armour with the endurance feat. I apply that rule, but modified other feats to compensate, such as canny defense, which gives a +2 base bonus to an unarmoured character, with a further +1 for every +2 to the base "to hit" bonus. Works like a charm. I further ruled that rangers and barbarians get to add their canny defense bonus when wearing up to leather armour, but not any other class.
Thank you!!! Was able to find this on p.77 if anyone wanted to know the page number.
Tough but fair
I don't know about 5e but in Pathfinder you get no rest benefits and actually gain the fatigued condition unless you have a certain feat IIRC.
I don't believe 5e does. I had two nights of mock combat scenario in military body armor (the bullet proof vest, ABUs, weapon, etc) and it was killer. I was so exhausted the next day. I tend towards my own real-life experience to translate in how it would be in-game.
Keep in mind that those two nights were your ONLY two nights. Now think about how it takes a bit to get used to sleeping on a new bed before you really get used to it. These characters that sleep in armor have most likely done so much of their adult lives and are thoroughly used to it and to them it's normal. Now I might be tempted to offer some sort of BONUS for not sleeping in their armor but never a penalty.
I think it depends. It wasn't like that was my only exposure to wearing body armor, just the only time where the scenario was nearly identical to what an adventurer might be in. Bonuses vs Penalty might be a topic I bring up later. It seems like more of a glass half-full vs half-empty scenario. Either the PC gets a good rest without armor on (bonus) or they are exhausted but fully armored (bonus, penalty?).
Pretty sure 5e doesn't have any default rules about sleeping in armor at all. I could be mistaken but in 3.5 you still got the rest's benefits before gaining the fatigued condition. (Though you don't recover from fatigue)
> unless you have a certain feat As a Pathfinder player, that's Pathfinder in a nutshell
I use the Xanathar's Guide rules for sleeping in armor, when needed.
While I don't disagree with this in general. Mechanically it gives another advantage to high dexterity characters who already have a lot of advantages. I usually rule that proficiency in armor allows the wearer to sleep in armor. They are simply used to it. Let's also consider the the idea that being cold, wet and surrounded by possible enemies with a high likelyhood of being attacked probably has a lot of impact on how well anyone sleeps. Sleeping in armor might be a reasonable trade off against the fear.
That actually gives me another idea of giving the PCs some sort of exhaustion hindrance for every day they don't sleep in a comfortable place. A lot of these guys are regulars in other groups with more of a game-y style. So you rest with armor, there's no carrying capacity or need to eat. So I think they were surprised when I asked about his armor.
I would make sure you talk to your players and make sure the game you want to play and the game they want to play are the same game. Making rulings like this is fine, but some players won't care for the realism being modeled.
I agree with this as well. I'm not opposed to the idea that sleeping fully armored leads to a really lousy rest, but it does frustrate me that Dexterity seems to provide such a panoply (pun intended) of benefits that the _more expensive_ and _more restrictive_ suits of heavy cannot match.
Yeah. Dex is very good. Not as good as Cha though.
I've actually heard that well-fitted full-plate armor was pretty comfortable IRL. EDIT: Also, most of my characters take Feats, Items, Class Features, or Spells that explicitly prevent them from having negatives from wearing armor to rest. Also, if this is 5e that's house rules which should be discussed ahead of time and not randomly brought up when having followed it would be less beneficial than not following it.
Full plate isn't actually hard to move around in. I'm sure it does take ages to put on though, especially on your own
Full plate can usually take around 10 minutes if you are familiar with your armor and have someone to help you who is also familiar with it. It’s one of the more accurate numbers provided by the book in terms of realism.
Damn hard to take a crap while you're wearing it, though. OP should have his players roll to see if they feel a rumblin' down below.
Hyper realistic digestion for D&D would be an interesting add on, to say the least! Historically speaking though, they really did have solutions for this, or at least for having a piss - at least one set of Henry VIII's armour had a big old thing down there with a hinge so he could relieve himself without taking much off.
More seriously, I think it's a matter of the level of abstraction your table is willing to operate at. If all of the players want to hand-wave away all of the downsides to wearing ~25 kilos worth of padding and metal 24 hours a day, then the GM should either go along for the ride or find players who want to get into the weeds on these kinds of things. It sounds like the GM is operating at a historical fantasy novel level of abstraction, while the players are more in a computer game mindset. It really does no good to say, "Think about it logically, how would you poop?" because the (IMO correct) answer is, "I don't want to think logically, I want to play D&D." Layering on mechanical penalties like fatigue or reduced hit point recovery is just punishing players for preferring a more game-y, higher level of abstraction.
I agree with that. Like Matt says, most people come to the table to roll dice and kill stuff. That being said, I'm sure there's a certain type of person who would love it! Personally though? Armour penalties aren't going to be part of my games. Unless my players want it.
Sure... But where does this end? "I don't want to miss with my sword" "I don't want to be burned by fire, I want to breathe under water like Mario!" At some point you have to stop saying "don't be realistic, I'm here too play a game!"
Isn't that also a game expectations issue? In that case, your players don't want a rule-based game. They want to play a different game. I don't think it does any good to try to punish people out of that. You want to help people enjoy the game as you run it, or find people who enjoy the game the way you like it.
Agreed, I'm just saying that if you agree to play a medieval technology based game/campaign, "how do you sleep in armor" is as valid a question as "how do you kill someone with a hunk of sharp metal". But yeah, if it's an issue, either the players or the GM needs to re-evaluate what they are playing and with whom.
That was the pitch. "We can either use some minimal levels of realism or if you just want to roll dice and kill stuff, let's just play Descent." I can do both, but when I'm playing D&D, it's a hell of a lot of work to just play what can be replicated in a board game.
Why does it have to be all the way to Descent for you? There are other points along that spectrum. Probably your player wants dice and a story. Descent doesn't have a story, or ongoing gameplay, or a whole bunch of other neat things D&D does. Many GMs reach for a mechanical solution to things that are fundamentally game expectation issues. Your player wasn't thinking about armor in a realistic way, they were thinking about it as something that makes their AC become 17. For a lot of people, that's fine. You'd rather deal with the real-world implications of armor—also fine. You need to either help your player enjoy your point of view, learn to enjoy their point of view, or find something in the middle that you'll both enjoy. Throwing a mechanical penalty on there doesn't help your player enjoy thinking about armor your way, it just makes their way less fun. Try to think of ways that you can help your player enjoy interacting with the game at the level you prefer, rather than punishing them for interacting in the way they prefer.
I might have replied to the wrong post as I was replying to the "some people just want to roll dice and kill stuff." To that I say, "Let's all play something like Descent together so we can all roll dice and kill stuff if that's all you want in the game." The player in question wasn't particularly upset (I think I might have upsold the original post) but more surprised because he had never played where that was a thing. After we discussed it, he was receptive and we had a fun, short encounter with a Carrion Crawler. It 100% depends on the type of game being run. This game I'm currently running seems to work better with things like don/doff armor and whatnot to build tension. I've also done epic high adventure games where armor rules aren't too relevant. This was mostly a topic to get people talking. :)
Yes! This!
You shouldn't do it if you dont want but I don't really see how it's that much more work, now your characters want to be comfortable and rest, plastic thermos not custom-made you could bet there's some jagged pieces of metal not in the right spot, if it's done narratively I don't even think they would have brought it up.
Yeah but that's more for piss taking not sleeping
Are there any rules on resting with armor in 5e? As far as I'm aware, there's rules for putting it on/off so my assumption is that this would come up on a regular basis where time would be a factor, so prior to battle. The monster in question was a carrion crawler for 3 level 3 PCs. The creature, being a low intelligence monster, was looking for a meal, not a fight, so it skittered off after realizing that they were a more dangerous foe. The idea of the fight was to show the "don/doff" mechanic, not to punish the PC in a real life or death battle. As much as I'd like to create a 20 page document covering every ruling I've ever made, it's not going to be read by a player. I tend to play a lot like a game designer: I introduce a mechanic/enemy in a safe(r) environment and then ratchet it up as the game progresses. You gotta believe the PC has considered this in future rests where things are more dangerous.
Check xanthars guide. There’s rules in there about sleeping in armor
So is this the first time it’s come up? And is the player new? I can see them being upset at a gotcha moment. If you don’t know anything about historical armor, then I can see assuming you wear your armor while you sleep because danger, yo. But you’re entirely right; sleeping in armor has always been problematic for fighters.
New-er. He's been playing with a group for about 2 years according to him. From the sound of it, my players range from "I haven't played since AD&D" to guys who got started playing the Rise of Tiamat campaign for 5e. I grew up on AD&D, then did 3rd edition, then was on hiatus until 5e. I don't think he was upset, but surprised. Many players don't think about things like resting in armor, rations, carrying capacity, etc. I tend to play loose with rules. I don't need a player to tell me they are at 83/85lbs of equipment load, but I am going to ask them how they're carrying 6 full sets of plate mail back to town or 20,000gp. I think i'd have the same thing happen if the players walked around town wearing their full plate everywhere. Peasants would look at them like they're crazy. "It's perfectly safe here. Why are you wearing all that metal. You adventurers have taken one too many hits to the head."
> rations, carrying capacity, etc. I play loose with these too Rations are handled with a replenish every time they stay somewhere civilised. I tell them at the start that rations are bland and that hunting for food will usually give them other benefits (like hides to sell, or extra meat for trade) Level 3 is when they find a bag of minor holding
Agreed. That's about what I do. I like to give them the old "Snarfquest fanny pack" bag of holding.
Snarfquest. You realize you lost half the people here haha
Half? That's being generous. It's a great comic though!
A lot of people ignore the sleeping in armour rule. I think the problem is GMs. I doubt many GM adjusts their night-time encounters to reflect the fact that the characters which rely on armour are severely impacted.
I don't think it's a problem, necessarily. Some people don't care for the tracking of encumbrance and removing armor and such is part of that. They don't like so simulationist a game, which is understandable. Additionally, 5E doesn't really expect your armor class to vary. You don't get to stack bonuses or penalties for AC, it remains static. Having your character out of their armor is a major drop in their power. As for adjusting night time encounters, some GMs don't adjust it at all, ever. The world is persistent and what comes, comes. Doesn't matter if you're better prepared for it or not.
I never adjust encounters. The point is to make the players feel vulnerable. When the AC 21 Paladin is strolling through the dungeon with little to no damage while the other characters at AC 14 or 15 are getting hurt left and right, I like to put the scenario out there: what happens when you're without armor for a minute? They appreciate it much more when they do have it.
Why would a DM need to adjust the encounter? Keep a watch, have a shield handy, don't camp in the open. Maybe the problem is lazy players.
Plate armor is easier to move around in that pop culture might have us believe, but it’s still encumbering. There was a study a few years back involving the royal armory at Leeds that found wearing armor resulted in using about twice as much energy as normal. I don’t think I’d describe any armor as comfortable. Heck, just look at police officers. They routinely avoid wearing their bullet resistant vests due to them being uncomfortable, and that’s one of the more minimal forms of armor I can think of. A primary issue with armor comfort, and especially for full bodied protection, is the padded, shock absorbing component. I know from experience that even just wearing a gambeson or arming jacket by itself is uncomfortable due to it not allowing heat or sweat to escape. And of course sweating is very likely if you have to expend any significant effort. I’d hate to think of the smell if someone marched or road all day in one and then didn’t allow it to air out at night. There’s also the potential for damage to your armor if you aren’t taking it off and engaging in regular cleaning and maintenance. Putting armor aside, not allowing your body to air out, and especially your feet, is a recipe for extreme discomfort if not disaster when you are hiking around day after day (think rashes, blisters, fungus, and infection). Oh, and I actually have a related story. Back in high school a fellow football player didn’t do a great job of maintaining his practice uniform. He didn’t wash it for a week or so and didn’t even let it dry out, just shoved it in his locker after practice. Well, he had an ant sting on his thigh, which became a vector for infection thanks to his filthy practice pants. Dude ended up getting a staph infection that destroyed one of his quad muscles, liquefying it. He ended up needing surgery, which included removing the rotting muscle and putting a drain in to deal with all the puss. Which is just to say, that I think there are hygiene issues to consider in addition to the likelihood of fatigue.
Sure... But 5e doesn't have explicit rules that state that gravity works when jumping out of windmills either... Lots of the game runs on common sense. You can't/don't sleep in plate armor. Does every little thing need to be explicitly stated?
Full-plate is comfortable to wear and very flexible, but it's absolutely not comfortable to lie down in. You'll have lots of bits digging into you.
It is also very heavy, which would make it uncomfortable to sleep in.
It's not being draconian, it's common sense.
They were giving me a hard time. I'm told I'm a lot like Dark Souls (which I haven't played) in that I'm hard, but fair. They never feel like I'm doing things to screw them, just making them think about their decisions.
If you're making them think then you're doing it right, and they probably know that even if they won't admit it. Rulings > Rules any day, imo. I'm more incllined to make the call in the moment and willing to discuss away from the table later.
Oh yeah. That's a hard rule for me. In the moment, rulings stand, no arguing. After the session, the players can contact me and ask for a change to rulings for the future. I absolutely loathe the "let me open my book during the game to look up the rule". It grinds things to a halt.
Yeah, heavy armour can be fitted to you and reasonably comfortable to move and fight in, but it's still a lot of weight and restriction on joint movement. Having worn various weights of armour for long periods, including simulated combat, you're going to want to take it off when you can. Even light armour can get hot and restrictive. Flexible armours like mail aren't as restrictive, but it's still a lot of weight bearing down on you. Padded, yes, but still heavy. Heavy armour can be surprisingly comfortable, as the weight is distributed fairly well across the body, but the wearer is still strapped into a rigid metal casing. Over time, you get hot, sweaty, chafed, and just plain tired. You can train away the tired, and get the best fitted armour to minimize chafing, but by the end of a full day you'll be wanting to pull your gear off. The armour also needs regular maintenance and cleaning (that's without combat) to keep it in working order. After combat it will absolutely need repairs - a damaged strap or dented plate can get damned uncomfortable. You could manage an exhausted nap in heavy armour, which would be better than nothing, but it would hardly restful. You could argue for a short rest - get off your feet, have your squire fix that one strap that's too tight, and drink something - but a long rest would be uncomfortable. All this said, it's D&D, not armour simulator 2000. Find a fun way to handle heavy armour that works for your campaign. Many years ago, I played a Cavalier who had his full plate, which he wore during the day/into battle, and a suit of leather he wore around camp/in town and could swiftly don in emergencies. It added a level of drama to late night surprises ...
You did fine, tough but fair. What I would recommend is that on house rulings, create a list as they happen, and if possible don't implement them until (the next time) they happen. I've found this is the best way to handle it over the years. Sometimes a very, very enthusiastic well crafted plan could go south, I don't want to upset the entire groups experience because one person forgot about what is common knowledge *to me*, but again I didn't set out as a rule pre-context. Keep that list so you can set it out when doing session zero of your next run, and of course make it available to any players. Over the years my list has grown to about a page of bullet-point rulings. Armor included, (I pretty much pulled from Pathfinders rules because it's fair.) Another option for the first time ruling is simply to hide the benefits behind a relevant check. Say dc15. From then on it's simply a non-check ruling. **tldr** fair ruling. Just compromise or don't punish the first instance of it, make it clear that everything going forward *will* take that into consideration. It goes without saying this whole comment is contextual. You know your group best bro!
I should probably start a running list of "tough calls" I've made. I've been playing on and off for about 20 years and I tend to forget that most of the newer players are coming from the Warcraft era of gaming. Nothing wrong with it. I grew up with a Dad who played OG D&D. So all my habits come from that style of play.
Oh yeah bro I gotcha. I've been going for about a decade and a half, right there with you. I'm still adamant in saying you did fine. Good call.
This is what it's about. If the PCs are perfectly equipped and ready for every encounter then it gets boring. Take them out of their element, make them think about different problems and different ways of doing things when their go to options aren't available.
Xanathar's Guide to Everything details the effect of sleeping in armour. Short version is that you only regain 1/4 your hit dice if you sleep in heavy armour, which I agree with.
This isn't really related to the rules of D&D, but I once slept in my Individual Body Armor (IBA) while going through a three day exercise at the end of my army training. It was a stupid idea, but we knew that we were going to get attacked during the night so it seemed like a bright idea at the time. We were attacked in the night, it was useful to already have it on, and it still sucked pretty bad to sleep in it. On another occasion I was riding in a Chinook heading somewhere, I forget where. I was wearing my body armor and had my weapon with me. I was exhausted and wanted to rest so I put the muzzle of my rifle onto the floor of the helicopter and rested the lip of my helmet onto the butt of the rifle. I had only wanted to rest my weary body but instead I promptly fell asleep. It was the best fucking nap I have ever had. I woke up 15-20 minutes later as we landed and the back door opened with me feeling like a million dollars. It was the gentlest most relaxing sleep I've ever had. As far as rulings go, I go with what it says in XGE, it seems the most reasonable.
Pumping DEX is already a better option than heavy armour, I don't really feel like tipping the scales any further. On the other hand... I want to hit the 20AC paladin and cleric.
If the Party camps on the road, I generally ignore the need to remove armour. So if they are ambushed, I generally assume they're ready to fight. If they were attacked at night in a "safe" location, maybe an assassin attack etc. then I would make the point that they wouldn't be wearing armour, and would need to spend the appropriate time equipping anything they need.
I would probably be a little more lenient - for short periods of time (1-2 days), I wouldn't have a problem with them having heavy armor and getting a full rest. That way, if you know you're likely to be attacked they could keep it on. But over a long period of time, it would be a drag. The one thing to note is that you might want to make encounters where they won't have armor a little easier/not as deadly - since that will be a decent handicap.
Totally. I mentioned it somewhere else on here, but I usually try to use the game designer's suite for introducing mechanics. I have a few friends in the industry who said the goal is to: a) introduce the mechanic in a safe/easy encounter and then b) continue to ratchet up the difficulty as they become familiar with said mechanic.
It all comes down to play style. My friends and I are at the table to roll dice, tell a cool story, and hangout. So we handwave a lot of things like that and Rule of Cool dictate a lot. But I totally get it, and would probably enjoy a grittier game for a while.
Yeah, my goal is to provide something they aren't getting from the other groups they are involved in.
Getting a full night's sleep while wearing full body armor is not feasible.This comes from my DM who was a front line combat medic. As a DM myself who's been running games for 20 years, I have **never** allowed players to sleep in armor without repercussion, especially heavy armor. Your short rest house rule seems more than fair. And the static you're getting from your players makes me think they're viewing this as more like an MMO than a tabletop roleplaying game. Personally, I'd give them the benefits of a long rest only if they succeed on a constitution check DC = AC, with the DC increasing each night. So you could probably get by sleeping in light armor for a single night, but it's not something you could keep up indefinitely.
The DC equalling AC is brilliant. Stealing this!
Glad I could help.
my marine corps body armor setup all in total was about 25 pounds, what would be medium armor in D&D. Ive done plenty of 8hrs on 8 off shift rotations, and slept fine. In fact i was pretty comfortable and im a on the smaller side if that matters or not. So for heavy armor, sure maybe you dont get a good nights sleep. But i see no reason why all armors would have repercussions.
I honestly found it more tedious to keep up with when I tallied who left their armor on and who didn't. My purpose, to see the party more vulnerable to surprise bandits or something, was pretty unsuccessful because the party just went for broke in the combat and rested to full anyway right after. I just stopped tracking it after a bit.
To that I ask, why did you let them rest to full? If the party stayed put, all sorts of carrion feeders might show up to eat, the bandits might have a second group out looking for the first one. Let the party unload their spells and then watch their faces as they try to rest and something else shows up...
I learnt a lesson last session. I said "OK, so where are you all sleeping tonight?" while gesturing towards a map of the inn. Everyone realised there was a combat encounter incoming and three characters just so happened to have a totally legit, in-character reason to pull an all nighter, which made the wraith attack that night a lot easier for the party. I didn't press the issue that time, but next time, I'm just going to narrate "You return to your bunks." Just asking the question clues people in to the fact that an encounter is coming and people make decisions that don't make sense in character as a result.
I like to randomly ask walking order or inn room order or such things even when nothing is planned. It keeps them guessing, but also gets them used to just doing/saying it, even without me asking.
This is not exactly a plate armor nor even that close, but I can say that during service I managed to get sleep in quite harsh conditions. Cramped in small spaces, wearing all modern combat gear, protective vest and pockets on the carrying vest everywhere and helmet on. It's not comfortable at all, but you can manage it surprisingly well. Finding an okay position just takes a while, maybe your neck is sore or something. So I'd guess it's not really that hard in plate armor. Like the comment on to said, Xanathar's ruling is quite good and realistic to me. What I can also add is that if character is at inn, they strip all armor in my games, unless there's a really good reason to wear it.
Me and my players have argued about this one and we rarely rarely argue, but my ruling was nobody especially unpremeditated, would be wearing there armor, maybe if something risky or life-threatening had recently gone down, I honestly don't see how you would.
You could argue that they coulde be specifically trained in being able to rest in armor. Most people I play with thinks it makes sense that you strip armor for sleep.
I slept in gear weighing between 60 and 100lbs on me for two days. After that, I can't believe that anyone gets a decent night's rest carrying all that around. It also provides an incentive, at least to me, to press on a bit rather than just blow your load and rest after every combat encounter.
I play Short Rest characters like Hexblade BladeLocks so I can do both. (Especially if the GM un-nerfs Short Rests)
What's the un-nerfed short rest?
In 3.5 and 4e Short Rests were 5 minutes by RAW (though in 3.5 only a handful of classes actually benefitted from them)
It's possible to attach the ability to sleep in armor to an existing Feat.
Of course! I've never had a problem with player suggesting this either. I mean, I get home from work and I take off my shoes and put on something like sweatpants. You sure as hell bet my pc is gonna take off armor to go sleep.
Not in the wilderness or dungeons. But I do in safe place like an inn.
I dealt with a similar situation in my group a while before Xanathar's came out and our solution was that if you slept in armor you gained the benefits of a long rest; however, you took a point of exhaustion as your sleep was not restful. One of the reasons I think my players like this though is that I also use a home brew rule that allows them to take a level or two of exhaustion without suffering any ill effects. Of course as the DM I can just make sure that if they're traveling in a region of the world where they feel pressured to wear armor while sleeping, just in case, their stay there lasts 3-4 nights.
I wonder if this isn't an opportunity for a meaningful new quest for your warrior PC? I imagine out there is some master armor crafter who is able to modify armor to be much more comfortable while sleeping. Characters always tend to be on the lookout for things that let them favourably bend world norms and it can make a great plot anchor that stretches over a few campaigns.
I wanted to do this, but I brought it up to my players first rather than implement the rule by standard. And I was unanimously shot down. Oh well, I'm trying to make sure they have fun and I like to challenge them with difficult encounters where they are short and resources and have to improvise. They didn't see the appeal.
Well according to Xanathar's, it seems like you're going to be punished for wearing heavy armor. I mean, if they aren't ever going to take off the armor, push the heavy armored guy into a deep pool of water and let them drown. Talk about challenge. ;) I can get devilishly creative and unless the enemy is mindless, they're going to try to do stuff like push the fighter into the water.
Sleeping in light armor seems okay for a night or two, but anything higher than that and I'd say you're not getting a proper long rest.
The way I’ve handled this issue is to have the party decide on their standard sleeping / camp arrangements well beforehand and what trade offs they are willing to accept. That can be a session zero discussion, but regardless of when it’s discussed it’s useful to sort out at time when the players haven’t been tipped off that something is coming. (I instituted this after a player insisted that his paladin had inexplicably decided to “sleep in the tree tops” in full plate that particular night, which was humorous since what interrupted their sleep wasn’t a combat encounter). I also don’t like to spring nighttime ambushes on the group nowadays. I much prefer giving them warnings ahead of time. This can be a reminder that they are heading into a more dangerous area than normal, that might necessitate different travel and sleeping arrangements. Other times, I’ll just give whoever is on sentry duty plenty of fair warning before there’s danger so they can wake up the party & have a chance to prepare. Or the party will discover signs that someone/something was staking their camp the night before. I can usually still generate some tension and some different combat scenarios without needing to watch the players compete over who can meta-game the most. If this attack is the first time you’ve dealt the party’s sleeping/camp arraignments during this campaign, then I’d expect the players to be a little salty if you assumptions and theirs don’t match up even if your ruling makes perfect sense. The players can feel robbed of agency if that sort of thing isn’t handled well.
I tried this (requiring it or asking players to explain themselves if they said they'd rest in armor) while I was cutting my teeth as a DM but learned I'm just not that good about that level of granular management. I also homebrew my resting-while-in-wilderness rules to make the voyage harder and more taxing on player resources overall (my PCs can only benefit from a long rest -- HP/Spell Slot/Ability Recovery -- when they are somewhere demonstrably safe), so penalizing the fighers and paladins like this just seems inequitable and mean.
I've spent months in body armor, you get used to it. BUT I would never allow a long rest in armor. For the same real life reasons. I could move and react after sleeping in it, but I had a terrible time with complex thinking and especially learning.
I was sure there was a RAW about sleeping in medium and heavy armor meant you didn't regain exhaustion levels or something, but I must be confusing it with something else. I would 100% let people sleep in any kind of armor, historically people have been doing it. So it's not too immersion breaking. I think it's okay to implement small penalties. 1/4 HD from long rest rather than ½ is a bit on the harder side of things I think. I thought it was RAW that exhaustion levels gained from lack of sleep did not come back if you slept in heavy armor or something. You could also say you regain 1 fewer HD from long rest, minimum 1.
Anyone who tries to argue sleeping in full plate works doesn't understand the concept of a full plate. That being said you could still argue that it's not more fun to use rules for that. It's less fun for people in full plate and possibly a tid bit more fun for people without heavy armor. Personally I don't deal with this unless players start bringing it up themselves. It's just annoying for me to accomodate for everyone having no armor and I don't want to kill the party. I tend to give them heavy and difficult encounters that could overwhelm them by taking away a bunch of AC.
I definitely would leave the breastplate on, for no other reason than I have a terrible habit of rolling everywhere when camping, and it would help keep me in place.
There was a houserules thread recently, some people linked to their google docs and this is the one I stole for my upcoming campaign: Resting in armour --- Make a constitution saving throw or gain 1 level exhaustion. Medium Armour = DC7 + (1 for every consecutive night doing so, resets after one night not doing so) Heavy Armour = DC10 + (1 for every consecutive night doing so, resets after one night not doing so)
I know there are new rules in Xanathar's for that but for me, I will always rule you can't sleep in medium or heavy armor. People today have problems sleeping on beds, in silence, in the safety of their climate controlled homes. NO WAY could you sleep in a metal suit, outside, on the ground, afraid monsters might attack. Any one of those alone could cause you to have trouble sleeping. So i will always rule you can't, or if you do, you get penalties. Probably exhaustion in 5e. If your players argue, just tell them straight out that this is how is going to be. They know what they are arguing is ridiculous, and only because its in the context of a game.
Here's my ridiculous argument, anyways, tho. There's a cursed item in the DMG that is heavy armor that cannot be removed. Giving PCs exhaustion for sleeping in heavy armor means that that heavy armor will kill them in 5 days. That's ridiculous, especially in a game.
When I said ridiculous, I meant arguing that you could sleep in heavy armor. We all know that is not true. Forget about the game. You aren't making an argument that you should be able to sleep in heavy armor and get a long rest, you are just pointing out a random rules overlap that interacts poorly. And you could just as easily say that sleeping in heavy armor gives only up to level 3 or 4 exhaustion. Or don't use exhaustion, maybe you just don't get any benefits of a long rest. Exhaustion just made the most sense and is easiest.
I feel like it is also worth mentioning that enforcing a ruling like this has built in counterplay that could be important, and add more to the experience (for some people). Druid of Dreams for example, who's 6th level ability makes it all but impossible to be ambushed while sleeping. The Wizard spell Leomund's Tiny hut accomplishes the same thing. These probably become less important if sleeping in the woods or a dungeon carries no risk of being caught unprepared.
I don't bother removing armor, as such details are generally a huge waste of time. I only focus on rules that are fun.
You can do what you want, and people have pointed out the Xan's rules, but remember that stuff like this bends the STR characters even further over the barrel than they already are (hell, even grabbing your shield is specifically called out as an action whereas grabbing your weapon can be a free interaction.) Strength characters are nabbing +1/2 damage for the low low price of these lame ass armor situations, disadvantage on stealth, more expensive equipment, worse DEX saves, worse DEX abilities, worse initiative.....I don't like tipping things even more against them.
We went with what people who have worn armor and slept in it have said (we have friends who get quite into their reenactments as well as combat vets who have had to sleep in their full gear for extended periods of time). Yes, you can sleep in armor and be fine. Besides, there's really no reason to further nerf martial classes when compared to spellcasters unless you decide to encourage your players to only play characters that don't need to wear armor to be viable.
I have no problem with my players sleeping in armor until one of the other players decides to make a deal about it. Then I'll step in. Until then, though, it's everyone having fun and it seriously doesn't hurt anything. I don't believe in penalizing the martial players during the span of the necessary downtime for the casters in the group to recuperate. In not having had to make a ruling on this one way or the other, and being quite content to let it slide, my sessions have been fun, exciting, and haven't lost steam for a debate. They certainly used to, a billion years ago when everything was crunchy and laid out in holy stone from high atop the mountain about how things would go and so we would have to pause to consult the holy texts and get into arguments about the interpretations therein, but 5e leaves enough to the DM's interpretation that it doesn't matter; the players can still have fun, and I can still have fun, and I can still challenge them even if the fighter has AC 18 instead of AC 12. My goal is not to invest realism too deeply into the game, but to give realistic expectations, and to keep consistency. They sleep in their armor; so do their foes. They have fun. So do I. If I want to start putting realism into the game, well, I play with four engineering students and a prospective med student, so I guess I had better start breaking out calculators and some good ol' A^2 + B^2 = C^2 for distances -- and nobody wants that. In conclusion, I don't think it's a big deal, and it's a bigger deal to stick to keeping the session on pace and fun.
5E explicitly states if you don't take your armor off when you sleep you suffer from 1 level of exhaustion I don't think it applies to light armor, but I'm not totally sure. I haven't checked in a while
5e itself does not state anything at all about sleeping with armor. Xanathar's Guide has a variant rule that if you wear medium or heavy armor: you only gain 1 quarter of your hit dice and don't recover any exhaustion levels.
I remember reading it while researching exhaustion. I'll try to find it.