Board Thread:Off Topic/@comment-27144409-20170705210718/@comment-25936766-20170802015245

WC-83 wrote: What is our stance on armor for OCs? Like how do we figure if it's a thing that even needs to be present or not? It doesn't need to, obviously, since Aura already protects from damage. But it's not something that would be a bad idea at all, either, since it offers protection that can, at least, not let Aura do all the work, and also improve defense once it goes down. Besides, even "heavy armor" has semi-negligible drawbacks.

Plate armor (let alone other kinds of armors) isn't half as heavy as one might think from watching media; even in plate armor, the average knight back wasn't a slow, cumbersome tank. In fact, they were even perfectly capable of performing somersaults and cartwheels in a full set of plate armor, let alone chainmail and gambeson.

And that's, with normal, trained humans. Now, people who are far more physically capable than a normal person even before Semblances come into the equation? Please. A Huntsman could be almost a ninja even in a full set of armor, if they so wanted.

Of course, they still wouldn't be as fast and agile as they would be without armor, but still. Not everyone puts more emphasis on speed. And there is no real need to (one just needs to avoid being slow).

So overall, whether you give an OC armor for aesthetics or for practicality, there's no problem. Just some armor for appearance instead of defense, like Pyrrha, won't really make a difference, for neither good or ill.

And assuming they are Huntsmen or are of similar strength, any drawbacks from wearing an actual set of armor, more on the lines of Cardin, would be literally unimportant.