Gear, looks, and the need to be fully equipped at all times

[jdripley]

So in roleplaying games that frequently involve combat, generally speaking the players want access to all of their fighting toys when it comes time to roll initiative. Deprive the fighter of his armor, or the barbarian of his mighty battle axe, and players get nervous and the combat gets skewed - since the challenge rating thing assumes your group is fully armed and equipped for their current level.

But I'm interested in breaking up that paradigm. A more subtle party may not be able to afford to carry around all of their arsenal at all times. Why would the fighter wake up in his home town, think to himself "maybe I'll run a few errands, hobnob down at the local watch garrison for a few hours, take lunch with the rest of the party, maybe catch a matinee show, and spend the evening at the Rusty Mug. I hear a new bard is in town." - and then immediately get into his full plate, grab his tower shield and his longsword, and march out the front door? Wouldn't he be more likely to put on some light leathers, tuck a dagger into his belt (you know, just in case), maybe put a few healing potions in his pocket, and stroll out into the sunshine?

I wonder if the IKRPG will be a game where DMs can easily throw combat situations at the party in times when they're not geared for combat? I'm not saying "oh snap now you have to take down a warjack in your pajamas." I'm saying "oh snap as you leave the duke's ball at 3am you get jumped by a few muggers." Nobody goes to the duke's ball in full plate, but I can see having a sabre at your side, some daggers, and perhaps a few potions tucked away.

Maybe this is a style/expectation thing rather than something specific to any particular set of rules. What are your thoughts, other roleplayers/DMs?

[PG_Cloud-Gatherer]

Yeah, honestly, if your Fighter is heading down to his local tavern to check out the new bard, he's probably just in his regular clothes. If he walks in all geared up for battle, people are going to get nervous. Why would he even put on light armor or take healing potions (this last part is especially true in the IK, where you can't just grab a six-pack of "CLW Code Red" off the shelf)? I can see a dagger on the belt or tucked into a boot, because that's a useful tool and not just a weapon, but there's no reason to be in your full adventuring panoply unless you're actually, you know, adventuring.

[Cynical Cat]

Players should go to bars packing plasma rifles or do their shopping in full plate, regardless of the RPG. While going armed to a tavern isn't crazy (some cities are pretty dangerous) the idea that a character conducts their daily business in full war panoply is ridiculous.

[allistorpreist]

In D&D/ Pathfinder, especially with the IK lack of bonified magic items, you got punished so harshly for this that it was terrifying to go drinking without full plate and a battle axe when you have a choice. (yes, I know some classes are immune to this more or less, but you know who isn't? My gunmage, that's who!)

All it would take is a certain level of equiptment free competence to make many players less paranoid. In games where getting caught flat footed in your PJs wasn't quite as brutal, people I played with tended to worry less about, "but I still have my axe with me." I recall a seventh sea swordsman character who never carried a sword cause if he really needed one, he could usually get someone to give one up and he usually had enough ticks to get away till he could get one. In D&D we would call that guy, "so whats your next character."

GMing has something to do with it as well though. If the fighter gets attacked by monsters whenever he goes out to run errands in his hometown, exect him to go shopping like he is going to war. but yeah, I hope tools are tools and not half your character.

[Carnage]

That's one of the reasons I have always preferred characters who wore light armor or no armor at all. Pretty much wherever I go, aside from formal functions/noble audiences, I am in appropriate attire, and not having access to armor isn't a huge hindrance to the character since it only provides a nice little stat bump instead of my sole form of protection

[Kalranya]

Symptom of D20 System. Gear-dependence is too great after the first few levels. With the way D&D is "meant" to be played, this isn't a problem; fighting is what happens in dungeons, not in towns.

Hopefully IKRPG Mk II will follow another path, that doesn't require a given character to have a specific set of equipment in order to perform his role. We'll see what happens, though, given that at least one profession DOES explicitly require a specific item in the fiction: Gunmages.


Oh, and for the record: If I lived in a world where spontaneous gunfights erupting in the streets was an unremarkable occurrence, you can be damn sure I'd be wearing at least a vest with soft-armor inserts under my coat any time I stepped out of the house. Sure, going shopping in full plate with a longsword and a shield strapped to your back is unusual looking... but if you're perusing the new flavors of iPhone at your local Apple store and a guy walks in with an SG 550 over his shoulder, are you gonna mess with him?

[Iron_Peanut]

I think there are a couple of exception cases: I imagine most people in Five Fingers actually do go down to the bar with swords and guns on their hips and chain mail under their coats. People in Caspia not so much.
Also I'm a very visually oriented persona and I'm keen to give players leeway in imagining the look of their character as somewhat "separate" from their on-sheet equipment loadout.

Oh, and for the record: If I lived in a world where spontaneous gunfights erupting in the streets was an unremarkable occurrence, you can be damn sure I'd be wearing at least a vest with soft-armor inserts under my coat any time I stepped out of the house. Sure, going shopping in full plate with a longsword and a shield strapped to your back is unusual looking... but if you're perusing the new flavors of iPhone at your local Apple store and a guy walks in with an SG 550 over his shoulder, are you gonna mess with him?

Shadowrun is already happening! 2012, the turning of the Great Wheel and the dawn of the Sixth Age!

[HerrDeux]

Why would the fighter wake up in his home town, think to himself "maybe I'll run a few errands, hobnob down at the local watch garrison for a few hours, take lunch with the rest of the party, maybe catch a matinee show, and spend the evening at the Rusty Mug. I hear a new bard is in town." - and then immediately get into his full plate, grab his tower shield and his longsword, and march out the front door?

It's called PTSD, and surely every adventurer must have it by second level, right? I mean, after going to the Philippines (in real life) to smuggle Japanese war gold and ending up in a Manila hotel room with three guys (a crazy eyed one with a 12" butcher knife, another with a 9mm and the third with way too much 3/16" cord for my comfort zone) I had low level PTSD for at least a year. Now, I didn't think I did at the time, but with the perspicacity of hindsight, I was definitely affected. Imagine if I'd seen a dozen undead thralls come at me!

[FrankJaeger]

I mean, after going to the Philippines (in real life) to smuggle Japanese war gold and ending up in a Manila hotel room with three guys (a crazy eyed one with a 12" butcher knife, another with a 9mm and the third with way too much 3/16" cord for my comfort zone) I had low level PTSD for at least a year.

Ok, wait, you know what? You really need to elaborate on that one!

[Psychomancer]

Shadowrun is already happening! 2012, the turning of the Great Wheel and the dawn of the Sixth Age!

Bull. The Dragon didn't show in December.

Possibly related to Shadowrun, seems like everyone in the IK loves their long coats. A good greatcoat provides 3 DR against most attacks, and an armored one 5 DR. Plus, it can be worn everywhere: To the opera! On the docks! To the tavern! Into the Corvis Undercity! The foundry! In the middle of summer!

EDIT: And yeah, HerrDeux- sounds like you were a real-life PC once.

[Weaselcreature]

I think this is something better governed by the GM than by rules, but it will also be location-dependent, like Iron Peanut said (Five Fingers vs. Caspia).

It's up to the GM to set the mood and lay down the expectations, though. Players are going to walk around with full gear until you tell them they are being watched, or everyone is avoiding them and looks fearful. Once the players start going around "safe" towns with minimal gear, it's up to the GM to throw fair fights at them; if you toss a unit of Man-O-War Shocktroopers while the players are at the swimming hole and leave them no option but to fight, they aren't going to leave their gear behind ever again (although, that same unit of MoW's at the swimming hole would be a fun plot twist if it ended up in a chase or a detainment where the PCs had to talk their way out).

[Sthiel]

As a GM how the players are equipped / look / act deffinitly impacts their interactions with NPCs in my game. I have more than once thrown PCs in jail for inaapropriate public behavior. The City watch doesn't give a crap about do process (especially in the more affluent areas of town).

[Sosthenes]

Symptom of D20 System.

D20 has some issues with that (though I blame the optimizers mostly), but it's hardly the only system. Reality has a slight bias towards being fully armed and armored, too.

I don't have a problem at all, if a surprised party has to take cover, sneak around and maybe even run if they're hunted by Protectorate Assassin Monks while stumbling around after a visit to the local bro…, erm, theatre.

[StJason]

It's not a symptom of D20. It's a symptom of lazy GMing.

"Okay, you wake up in the middle of the night because you hear something moving in the bushes."

"I jump up and swing my axe!"

"You take your axe to bed with you?"

"Well, right beside my bedroll."

"Hrmph. Okay. So a arrow wings out of the darkness and *rolls*... what is your AC?"

"I have AC 23"

"Wait, how does that work?"

"Armor, shield, and good dex."

"You wore your armor to bed?"

"Err... yeah?"

"Really?"

"...yeah?"

"Really?"

"Well, good thing I did!"

"Really?"

"What? People are going to ambush me in the middle of the night, of course I am!"

"...Really?"

Sign of a good GM: Call PCs on their BS.

[allistorpreist]

But is it the PC's BS? If I were in danger of constant attack, weapons and armor would be nearby and I would definately get geat that could be slapped on in a hurry.

In the real world, just having a weapon evens the fight up quite a bit, but in D&D AC 10 is a recipe for an early grave. I am not even assuming the players need to win all the time, after all the point of ambushes and night raids are to catch your enemy off guard. But some equiptment free (or light) way to defend yourself goes a long way.

Monks, the only people in D&D who get a comfortable nights sleep.

[FrankJaeger]

But is it the PC's BS? If I were in danger of constant attack, weapons and armor would be nearby and I would definately get geat that could be slapped on in a hurry.

In the real world, just having a weapon evens the fight up quite a bit, but in D&D AC 10 is a recipe for an early grave. I am not even assuming the players need to win all the time, after all the point of ambushes and night raids are to catch your enemy off guard. But some equiptment free (or light) way to defend yourself goes a long way.

Monks, the only people in D&D who get a comfortable nights sleep.

I agree, completely. If the GM constantly throw ambushes at the party, he have no right to demand anything else than paranoia from them.

Hell! I live on a peaceful little city and I sleep with knife under my pillow and a rifle besides my bed! If I lived in a world full of monsters, undead and other types of bad stuff that eats you in the night, I'll probably wouldn't even sleep at all!

[StJason]

Why not? Because sleeping in armor SUCKS.
Have you ever fallen asleep with your shoes on? Then you know what happens, a couple of hours into nappytimes, you wake up because you tried to shift but your feet were all big and weird and uncomfortable. Imagine that but on your whole body.

Nobody is arguing having your weapons nearby. Reasonable. Having an armored longcoat nearby to throw on? Go for it. Sleeping in armor that takes a good ten minutes to strap on? Yeah. Right.


Also: Interesting how suddenly everyone jumped on the "DMs interrupting EVERY SINGLE NAP with orc invasions!!!" Hyperbole? On the Internet? NEVER!

[allistorpreist]

I never said every single nap was attacked, I simply pointed out that being without your gear in D&D (I can only vouch for v 1-3.5) is such a disadvantage that I think most adventurers would be well within reason to sleep in as much of their gear as they could.

Soldiers sleep in their gear quite a bit, they have throughout history when nessisary. It is uncomfortable, it sucks, but it is better than AC10. It is a side effect of the current D&D/Pathfinder system that it is much easier to gain too-hit and damage bonuses with little or no gear than it is to gain defenses or damage reducing ones. Thus, in most cases, armor and a bad nights sleep are the more sensible choice.

[jdripley]

Speaking of the whole "ambushed while sleeping" thing: D&D further exacerbates the problem by requiring wizards/clerics to have slept/rested for a full 8 hours before they can get new spells. Why? Who knows? But it's in the rules that way. So not only do the fighter types freak out when something goes bump in the night, but the wizards and clerics put a pillow over their heads and say "NO! I want my spells, darn it, NO fighting tonight!"

Best player moment was when our ranger led the midnight ambushers off on a merry chase through the woods to save the party the trouble of the combat.

[allistorpreist]

Yeah, the eight hors thing is problematic. I don't know when I last got 8 hours when I have a home, bed, and complete lack of hungry trolls trying to eat me. Although it seems like Pathfinder just sticks that to wizards.

I wonder how the new IKRPG will handle it.

[The Happy Anarchist]

D20 has some issues with that (though I blame the optimizers mostly), but it's hardly the only system. Reality has a slight bias towards being fully armed and armored, too.

Really? Because it has been my experience that the overwhelming vast majority of people throughout history have not trended towards being fully armed and armored at any time they were not going to battle. As evidence, Police Officers, who at any given time may be shot at, and that is a full expectation of the job - they work with a bulletproof vest and a small sidearm, maybe a club and some mace. Might or might not have a long arm of some sort in the trunk. They only break out the big guns when the situation calls for it. There is a good reason they don't go around fully armored with assault rifles in their daily business.

Soldiers sleep in their gear quite a bit, they have throughout history when nessisary. It is uncomfortable, it sucks, but it is better than AC10.

Source? Because I am fairly certain a large portion of the reason for watches is that you don't have to sleep in armor, which as anyone that has actually worn armor could tell you would be virtually impossible.
I am almost 100% certain that soldiers do not sleep in their gear quite a bit. In fact, none of the soldiers I have met talked about it, but even then you are talking about modern armor, which is really quite a different situation. Even then, there was a big problem with soldiers not wearing their body armor in the last several major wars, because they didn't think it was worth the hassle. These were soldiers going into combat in Vietnam and Afghanistan/Iraq. If the armor is uncomfortable enough that soldiers don't want to wear it going into combat, how many are actually going to sleep in it?

[Psychomancer]

Just as an aside, we have found that implementing the Class Defense Bonus rules from Unearthed Arcana has gone a long way toward discouraging characters from tromping about in full plate all the time. Only a few characters now actually wear armor at all, and that is because they have armor that provides them with a benefit besides basic protection in the form of AC.

As far as carrying all of your weapons around at all times...well, mechanically speaking, there's really not a lot you can do about it short of really enforcing encumbrance rules, which I will acknowledge is a pain. Some places will enforce "no weapon" policies, but even in a setting like the IK,there's a lot of places where carrying a weapon will actually be less conspicuous than not carrying one.

As for our group, every player has at least three lists of gear, roughly categorized as "everyday business," "moderately dangerous," and "expecting a fight." Our GM didn't declare this or anything, everyone just kind of mutually decided it was the thing to do. By now, when the GM asks "what's your character got on him?" we can answer "moderate load" and he knows basically what we've got.

[Sosthenes]

Really? Because it has been my experience that the overwhelming vast majority of people throughout history have not trended towards being fully armed and armored at any time they were not going to battle.

I was talking about being dependent on your gear for protection, i.e. the fact that armor does help you a lot if someone is slinging sharp bits of metal at you. I'm not the biggest fan of D20, but saying that being screwed if you're caught without armor isn't a fault in my book. Sure, in other systems your defense/parry/dodge might be better, but on the other hand, you probably don't have that many hit points.

Regarding wearing armor/arms in public, I'm totally on your side. I'm all for odd looks, interaction & legal penalties, peace-bonding, etc., at least in most situations/societies. A few fantasy scenarios often thrust the PCs in quite warlike circumstances, where I'd consider a full-plate-clad/greatsword-wielding character as about the equivalent of a gunslinger with two colts in his belt.

Source? Because I am fairly certain a large portion of the reason for watches is that you don't have to sleep in armor, which as anyone that has actually worn armor could tell you would be virtually impossible.

This is just another bunch of hearsay, but I remember someone telling me that sleeping in a well-adjusted and padded suit of plate is actually quite okay, as opposed to modern combat armor. You wouldn't want to do it for a stretch of time, but if you're expecting trouble one night, it's probably acceptable.

I did once sleep in chainmail, and it wasn't too bad. Doesn't really compress your breathing more than bedside partners and/or pets.

[The Happy Anarchist]

Ah, yes. Armor is important.

I think a large part of it comes down to whether or not the GM has set up an adversarial relationship with the players. Most of the time the players should be able to trust the GM enough to know that if they are being attacked in their sleep in an inn or something, it won't be to just attempt to off the character.

[FrankJaeger]

Why not? Because sleeping in armor SUCKS.
Have you ever fallen asleep with your shoes on? Then you know what happens, a couple of hours into nappytimes, you wake up because you tried to shift but your feet were all big and weird and uncomfortable. Imagine that but on your whole body.

Nobody is arguing having your weapons nearby. Reasonable. Having an armored longcoat nearby to throw on? Go for it. Sleeping in armor that takes a good ten minutes to strap on? Yeah. Right.

Well, I don't know about chain and plate, but when I was in the army, I used to sleep in full gear. At most, I would take my coat to use it as a protection against insects and/or cold, but that's it. And dude, I slept like a baby.

But then, I sleep like a baby in a hurricane, so I might not be a good parameter in this discussion.

I did once sleep in chainmail, and it wasn't too bad. Doesn't really compress your breathing more than bedside partners and/or pets.

My dog would bark at you for that, but she'll have to grudgingly admit that you are right! Hahahaha. =p

[commissarmoody]

I Have to agree, I did slept in full kit quit a bit when I was in the army. But when I was inside the wire I would opt to not sleep in it. Its mostly a commons cents sort of thing. And you are not going to sleep in full kit, if you just paid for a bed and bath after weeks out in the wilds. You going to be awww thank the gods! I just had a bath, all my chafing and rashes are finally starting to go away and now time to settle down in a nice bed with clean sheets.
Then then flying monkeys come crashing threw the window.

[Galwe]

Well, I don't know about chain and plate, but when I was in the army, I used to sleep in full gear. At most, I would take my coat to use it as a protection against insects and/or cold, but that's it. And dude, I slept like a baby.

Red in the face from screaming inconsolably for four hours straight and stewing in a pantload of your own runny feces?

[PG_Cloud-Gatherer]

I don't even like to sit down in my armor (lorica segmentata if you're curious). I can't imagine trying to sleep in it. That stuff is clearly made for fighting and only fighting.

[Lord of ???]

Armour and weapons would really be dependant on where they are and what they are doing.

On the road? It's not unreasonable for the PC to sleep with their gear on and their weapons beside them. You can just put negatives onto how well that sleep heals/recovers them.

In a small isolated unfortified building? Again not unreasonable.


In somewhere fortified? it would very strange. A fortified building should give them time to don their armour and get their more elaborate kit on.


It would be a case of reminding them that they are in a safe location from outside threats.

[Munindk]

I've slept in chainmail once and I wouldnt recommend it. The padded coat that all sane people wear under chainmail keeps you warm, uncomfortably warm. The weight of the armour isnt a big issue unless you sleep on your back, I found the noise it makes when you move (or breathe) more annoying.
If my life depended on it, I'd sleep in leather and chainmail, but I wouldnt be well rested.
I've only worn plate for a couple of hours at a time, but there's no way I'd wear it to go shopping, to the tavern or anywhere else I wasnt expecting serious combat and I would never consider sleeping in it.

How much armour is too much is not only dependant on where the characters are, but also on who they are. If the armour is part of a uniform they could wear it around town without too much hassle. I wouldnt find it odd for a Paladin to wear armour around town either, same goes for nobles.
The party I'm currently running the Witchfire trilogy with dont have any characters with a lot of armour, no one wears anything heavier than a chainshirt, but I often ask them which weapons they take along with them. The ogrun rarely carries his Warcleaver in town and the gunfighter makes do with a concealed pistol instead of his normal brace of 3-4.

[AshenFang]

I've always felt odd about armor, is it 'realistic' to wear it to bed, no.. but we aren't talking about something based in realism. I think the problem largely comes from a few things:

First and foremost, d20 has had a very unforgiving system about putting on and taking off armor. This typically takes minutes, depending on the type of armor, and by the time you have it on, the combat has no doubt already been decided one way or another. Rules for donning are pointless, as either you just don't don it and fight naked, or as with the post, you wear it to bed.

Second, as stated, it falls to the GM, if they have done things to instill such paranoia in their players that they feel the need to wear their armor to bed, then perhaps the GM needs to stop looking at the players for fault. This mentality is reactionary to what has been done to players in the past, whether it be the current or another campaign.

The CR of encounters take in account a group at their peak, or near it, this includes all gear. You can't expect a Fighter to run into combat with a beholder without his sword. The point here is, if you are going to throw encounters at a group when they shouldn't have their armor on, be sure to take this into account..

You as a GM can guide your players out of these habits.. ..the most important thing, for those already in the habit I'd say, is to give them some night encounters, and let them see, through the encounter itself that they would have been fine without their armor. If they do have their armor on, and they walk through this with ease, there's no real loss, they had an easy fight in the night. The following day follow up with the fatigue rules that apply to sleeping in armors, which might make their normal daily encounters a bit harder to press through, though not impossible. After all, the GM isn't the enemy of the players, he's there to tell a story for the enjoyment of all, andd to challenge the players, not kill them.. if you want to kill them.. it's really not that hard, but that's not really the point, and not fun for anyone.

In either case, enough of the 'soft' encounters, they should learn to go without their armor when sleeping as desired, but that's not to say once this finally occurs, to then hit them with something hard, that would only serve to cement their former behavior with a 'fool me once' thought process.

Either way, try to find a way to work with the players, and not simply against them.

[Lieutenant Obvious]

Really? Because it has been my experience that the overwhelming vast majority of people throughout history have not trended towards being fully armed and armored at any time they were not going to battle. As evidence, Police Officers, who at any given time may be shot at, and that is a full expectation of the job - they work with a bulletproof vest and a small sidearm, maybe a club and some mace. Might or might not have a long arm of some sort in the trunk. They only break out the big guns when the situation calls for it. There is a good reason they don't go around fully armored with assault rifles in their daily business.

Many do carry concealable handguns for protection off the job, many of which fire pretty big rounds. Unarmored isn't always unarmed. Too, many German police officers noted that suspects tended to give up without a fight about a third more often when faced with drawn H&K Mark 23 autopistols than when faced with the handgun it replaced as police standard issue. The Mark 23 was a third again as large, but fired the same .45 ACP cartridge as the previous gun. Sometimes a big, intimidating weapon is an asset in human relations. Just ask any knight.

I'd expect most PCs to at least strap on their blades and pistols if they were heading into the rough part of town, just to send the local goons a nice, loud 'Back off' message. Okay, maybe not the party Troll, but he doesn't have to, does he? A Trollkin is a weapon.

I am almost 100% certain that soldiers do not sleep in their gear quite a bit. In fact, none of the soldiers I have met talked about it, but even then you are talking about modern armor, which is really quite a different situation. Even then, there was a big problem with soldiers not wearing their body armor in the last several major wars, because they didn't think it was worth the hassle. These were soldiers going into combat in Vietnam and Afghanistan/Iraq. If the armor is uncomfortable enough that soldiers don't want to wear it going into combat, how many are actually going to sleep in it?

In Vietnam, armor was hot, heavy, very uncomfortable, and nearly useless against the Cong's standard weapon, the AK-47. It got even more useless at shorter ranges. In a hot, wet climate, there were very practical reasons for ditching the stuff, even in the field. Many flak jackets ended up stacked on the floors of Hueys and APCs as supplemental protection from ground fire and mines, where they weren't quite as useless. A lot of Huey door gunners and machine gunners wore the things, but then again, they weren't marching and conducting operations in the tropical heat like the rest of the grunts.

Newer ballistic armor is a lot less useless and a lot more comfortable, so the grunts in Iraq and Afghanistan don't have nearly as many excuses for going around without protection. The advances still don't make it pleasant, though. Most soldiers I've spoken to won't wear the stuff unless they're in the field under combat conditions.

It's not unreasonable to expect the same of most PCs, even in the IK.

Just as an aside, we have found that implementing the Class Defense Bonus rules from Unearthed Arcana has gone a long way toward discouraging characters from tromping about in full plate all the time. Only a few characters now actually wear armor at all, and that is because they have armor that provides them with a benefit besides basic protection in the form of AC.

I've always been amazed that that idea didn't catch on in regular D&D, as it made so much sense. There was the 'rules pull' problem of changing one thing and having to adjust dozens of others you never even thought of. Then again, the last DM I suggested this to just used this as an excuse whenever I or anyone else suggested any rules changes for any reason.

As for our group, every player has at least three lists of gear, roughly categorized as "everyday business," "moderately dangerous," and "expecting a fight." Our GM didn't declare this or anything, everyone just kind of mutually decided it was the thing to do. By now, when the GM asks "what's your character got on him?" we can answer "moderate load" and he knows basically what we've got.

Also a good idea. Half the PITA factor of going around without any gear is just from having to remove armor, weapons, and such from a character sheet.

Still, I agree with another poster that a lot of the problem is simply an adversarial relationship between players and the GM. A lot is also crappy GMing, mostly the idea that adventures are a lot of fights separated by 'talking', but just as much is a group that doesn't want anything else.

A good GM can make an adventure out of a shopping trip, especially with a good group that trusts him to work with their level of protection (or at least to leave them a way out if something happens that they're not tooled up to handle). And a lot of that 'talking' can get more done than just fighting all the time, if you're talking to the right people. It never hurts to encourage this mindset in your GM, or your players.

[The Happy Anarchist]

It sounds like you are trying to disagree with me, while agreeing with everything I am saying. It is weird. Maybe just reading too much into the internet.

So we both agree that going into combat armed and armored is a good idea. Casual strolls through a city is likely smaller arms, and little if any armor. I happen to work for a police dept and while officers to carry guns off duty, they are not supposed to be riding on their hips, intimidating potential criminals. They are in case of emergency only. In my time in the military, I never saw the Marines around town carrying any sort of side arm unless they were MPs or something. I never was in any place like Afghanistan where that would be more common, but I still hold that if you are in a friendly town, carrying more than a knife, pistol or maybe small sword would be considered paranoid at best. Not tiny sword, necessarily - dueling saber I could see. In rougher towns, carrying your main weapon could be pretty common, but I still doubt many people would walk around in full plate. Menites maybe, but their crazy.

Your comments on armor are exactly where I see things, though for not having excuses not to wear armor, they sure were making them. That is more the environment I think though, you don't really want to wear extra layers of anything out there.
In any case, wearing armor when not expecting trouble or "on duty" is likely to be very unusual. Paladins of the Wall and Exemplars might do it, and it would be extremely noticeable if they do, and considered a sign of their fortitude and faith, and willingness to endure duress.

[Lieutenant Obvious]

It sounds like you are trying to disagree with me, while agreeing with everything I am saying. It is weird. Maybe just reading too much into the internet.

A little disagreement, but more of emphasizing a couple points you didn't hit very hard. I have a name to live up to.

I happen to work for a police dept and while officers to carry guns off duty, they are not supposed to be riding on their hips, intimidating potential criminals.

Hence the mention only of concealable handguns. Most of those wouldn't intimidate anyone.

I never was in any place like Afghanistan where that would be more common, but I still hold that if you are in a friendly town, carrying more than a knife, pistol or maybe small sword would be considered paranoid at best. Not tiny sword, necessarily - dueling saber I could see. In rougher towns, carrying your main weapon could be pretty common, but I still doubt many people would walk around in full plate.

No, but they probably wouldn't be completely unarmored. Those nifty greatcoats from the IK would fill such a 'town armor' role nicely, as would leather under a mantle or a surcoat. They'd be especially handy if a rougher town (or a friendly one) suddenly turned into Ground Zero.

Menites maybe, but their crazy.

And Menite towns are a great place to make sure you're armored and armed to handle trouble.

Your comments on armor are exactly where I see things, though for not having excuses not to wear armor, they sure were making them. That is more the environment I think though, you don't really want to wear extra layers of anything out there.

Definitely the environment. Fighting in a similar climate, Crusaders covered up as much of their metal armor as they could with cloth. Aside from the stifling ambient heat, uncovered metal in direct sunlight quickly soaked up heat, turning a breastplate or chain hauberk into a body-shrouding oven. Modern armor doesn't have that problem, but it doesn't breathe worth a wooden nickel, either. In Vietnam, the weight and bulk of the near-useless flak jackets persuaded most troops to get rid of them. It simply wasn't worth the trouble, especially with a full combat load besides to lug around in tropical temperatures and humidity.

In any case, wearing armor when not expecting trouble or "on duty" is likely to be very unusual. Paladins of the Wall and Exemplars might do it, and it would be extremely noticeable if they do, and considered a sign of their fortitude and faith, and willingness to endure duress.

A Paladin of the Wall would see his ancient armor and gear as protection and statement of identity equally, and would probably wear it in public often for just that reason, as might some Exemplars. For them, it's a uniform. For everybody else, it's a great sign of who not to mess with.

[PG_Geist]

And this is why I like high dexterity characters, with some unarmed brawling abilities.

[Dacian]

Though its another system than d20 my character in an exalted - infernals, game rarely actually goes about with his full panalopy of equipment, maybe armour if doing some form of representational tasks, otherwise not so much. And the vast majority of the time my big ticket items, such as main weapons etc are left with another party member or in a safe location, unless of course the party is going to be expecting trouble.
Otherwise it would just be wierd.
Admittedly my character has ways and means of still being effective without the full compliment of gear