Anonymous
7/26/2025, 5:27:24 AM No.96181148
What are your thoughts on fantasy RPGs wherein armor is mostly cosmetic?
It is one thing to simply divide armor into light, medium, and heavy, without going into individual types (e.g. Draw Steel). It is another matter to further simplify armor into either light or heavy, likewise without bothering with individual varieties (e.g. 13th Age).
Then there are fantasy RPGs wherein armor is just a cosmetic choice. These include the grid-based tactical ICON and the PbtA-descended Dungeon World 2. You can say that your character wears armor, or that your character is unarmored. It makes no mechanical difference, though the GM might see fit to adjust the narrative and fictional positioning on a case-by-case basis. Magic armor might also incentivize characters to wear armor.
In contrast, the PbtA-adjacent Daggerheart cares quite a bit about armor. It is a core facet of character durability and resource management. The armor rules take up a whole page in the core rulebook, and the armor tables occupy two more pages. This game is somewhat abstracted in the sense that each type of armor is mechanically "equal," just with different pros and cons. Armor is important for everyone, but gambeson is as effective as full plate; gambeson makes it easier to evade attacks, but full plate is better at absorbing the blows that do land.
As for me, I have no issue whatsoever with purely cosmetic armor. I gravitate towards a HoYocore-like aesthetic, so I do not particularly care for armored-up PCs. But I can understand why others might prefer armor to be mechanically significant and meaningful.
It is one thing to simply divide armor into light, medium, and heavy, without going into individual types (e.g. Draw Steel). It is another matter to further simplify armor into either light or heavy, likewise without bothering with individual varieties (e.g. 13th Age).
Then there are fantasy RPGs wherein armor is just a cosmetic choice. These include the grid-based tactical ICON and the PbtA-descended Dungeon World 2. You can say that your character wears armor, or that your character is unarmored. It makes no mechanical difference, though the GM might see fit to adjust the narrative and fictional positioning on a case-by-case basis. Magic armor might also incentivize characters to wear armor.
In contrast, the PbtA-adjacent Daggerheart cares quite a bit about armor. It is a core facet of character durability and resource management. The armor rules take up a whole page in the core rulebook, and the armor tables occupy two more pages. This game is somewhat abstracted in the sense that each type of armor is mechanically "equal," just with different pros and cons. Armor is important for everyone, but gambeson is as effective as full plate; gambeson makes it easier to evade attacks, but full plate is better at absorbing the blows that do land.
As for me, I have no issue whatsoever with purely cosmetic armor. I gravitate towards a HoYocore-like aesthetic, so I do not particularly care for armored-up PCs. But I can understand why others might prefer armor to be mechanically significant and meaningful.
Replies:
