Armor in Runequest

[Utgardloki]

I have not had a chance to do much thinking about armor, how it works in Runequest, and how it should work in runequest. But somebody made a comment in another thread that gives me an idea of at least one problem, and another house rule to solve it.

I believe this is from Lord Twig:

Armor. So you have two master swordsmen with Greatswords (100% skill). One is in full plate and the other is buck nakid'. Who wins?

The nakid' guy of course! The full plate guy has -42% to attack and parry and now has a 58%. The nakid' guy can take -40% for 60% and totally ignore the plate armor and still parry at his full 100%.

Houserule: The attack penalty to bypass armor is twice the penalty imposed by the armor on its wearer. So the nakid guy has to take a -84% penalty to try to bypass the full plate guy.

It makes sense to me, and I've always felt that a straight 40% chance to bypass armor was 1) too easy, and 2) did not take into account the kind of armor worn, some of which would provide more protection than other kinds.

As a further refinement, smashing weapons such as clubs and unarmed/martial arts attacks would be assessed triple the armor's penalty, instead of double. So if a quarter-staff wielder joined this battle against full plate guy, quarter-staff guy would suffer a -126% penalty to hit.

Seems fair. How hard is it to bypass the armor of a guy in full plate when you're using something like a quarterstaff?

 

[Vadrus]

I have not had a chance to do much thinking about armor, how it works in Runequest, and how it should work in runequest. But somebody made a comment in another thread that gives me an idea of at least one problem, and another house rule to solve it.

I believe this is from Lord Twig:

Armor. So you have two master swordsmen with Greatswords (100% skill). One is in full plate and the other is buck nakid'. Who wins?

The nakid' guy of course! The full plate guy has -42% to attack and parry and now has a 58%. The nakid' guy can take -40% for 60% and totally ignore the plate armor and still parry at his full 100%.

Houserule: The attack penalty to bypass armor is twice the penalty imposed by the armor on its wearer. So the nakid guy has to take a -84% penalty to try to bypass the full plate guy.

It makes sense to me, and I've always felt that a straight 40% chance to bypass armor was 1) too easy, and 2) did not take into account the kind of armor worn, some of which would provide more protection than other kinds.

As a further refinement, smashing weapons such as clubs and unarmed/martial arts attacks would be assessed triple the armor's penalty, instead of double. So if a quarter-staff wielder joined this battle against full plate guy, quarter-staff guy would suffer a -126% penalty to hit.

Seems fair. How hard is it to bypass the armor of a guy in full plate when you're using something like a quarterstaff?

Makes it too easy to bypass light armour thought, leading to a plate or nothing situation as most leather/cloth armours would be easily bypassed and therefore useless.


Vadrus

 

[Utgardloki]

One thing I could do is some kind of armor vs weapon chart, whereby different weapons would have difference chances against different armors.

That could give sharp-edged weapons an advantage vs plate armor, while blunt weapons get an advantage vs leather. It could also ensure that the bypass penalty scales with the armor penalty, without making leather armor too useless.

Simpler options include:

1. Making the basic penalty triple the armor check penalty, making full plate armor almost impossible to bypass,

2. Giving each armor type a specific bypass penalty, listed with the armor description along with the other stats,

3. Basing the bypass penalty on the armor protection rather than armor check penalty.

 

[iamtim]

It seems to me that any warrior worth his salt is going to train while wearing his or her armor; it makes no sense to train, train, train wearing breeches and jerkin, only to get suited up only in combat. If that were the case, I'd wholeheartedly support the armor skill penalties. But I don't think that is the case.

So I've been toying with two different thoughts on the matter:

1. Don't use armor skill penalties in combat. Use them where they make sense -- when using Athletics (Swimming), for instance, or Stealth.

2. Why is there a Shield skill, but no Armor skill? Create an Armor skill (or a couple -- Heavy Armor, Light Armor, etc.). If the skill % is greater than the armor skill penalty, the skill penalty does not apply. Or roll the skill, and if it succeeds there is no penalty applied.

Thoughts?

 

[Utgardloki]

I can see that a peasant who never had a chance to try on heavy armor may be at a disadvantage the first time he wore the suit. (In D&D, I implemented a house rule requiring characters to spend a certain amount of time "getting used to their armor" before they got the full benefits, although my campaign also allowed enough downtime to allow for such "realistic" development.)

On the other hand, a character who mainly trained while wearing armor may be at a disadvantage if he did NOT have armor, because he'd be use to not having to keep much of his skin protected from harm.

What to do with the rules, I don't know. Maybe have a concept like D&D's "touch AC", whereby armor does not hinder "normal" dodge but hinders "touch AC". Or just not apply armor penalties to Dodge rolls.

OTOH, if you're wearing heavy armor, then really you'd probably be parrying blows instead of dodging them.

 

[Arkat]

2. Why is there a Shield skill, but no Armor skill? Create an Armor skill (or a couple -- Heavy Armor, Light Armor, etc.). If the skill % is greater than the armor skill penalty, the skill penalty does not apply. Or roll the skill, and if it succeeds there is no penalty applied.

Thoughts?

Armor is static, Shields are not which is why you don't have an armor skill. You manuever your shield to block blows and thus require a skill check for it. When you try to manuever your armored body to avoid blows that to require's a skill check, it's called Dodge.

 

[iamtim]

Armor is static

Is it? You just put it on and that's that? There's no training associated with learning how to move around efficiently with the extra weight and bulk hanging off you? You don't have to learn to adjust when swinging your sword armored as opposed to unarmored?

So anyone should be able to strap on a suit of armor, then, and be just as effective doing what they do as if they didn't have it on?

That seems not right to me -- there has to be some skill centered around wearing armor effectively.

 

[Utgardloki]

That seems not right to me -- there has to be some skill centered around wearing armor effectively.

It seems easy enough to make up a Use Armor skill, if you like.

In the "utgardloki" system, you can certainly specialize in armor usage, such as "Dodge in Full Plate". This can be useful if you intend to be wearing full plate armor very often when you get into fights. 8)

Another way to do this is to rule that a certain amount of time has to be spent getting used to the armor, perhaps 1 day per point of protection (ignore this for 1 point armor). No skill -- just some downtime is required.

 

[iamtim]

I know that d20 ist verboten round about these parts, but check this out:

ARMOR PROFICIENCY (HEAVY) [GENERAL]
Prerequisites: Armor Proficiency (light), Armor Proficiency (medium).
Benefit: See Armor Proficiency (light).
Normal: See Armor Proficiency (light).
Special: Fighters, paladins, and clerics automatically have Armor Proficiency (heavy) as a bonus feat. They need not select it.

ARMOR PROFICIENCY (LIGHT) [GENERAL]
Benefit: When you wear a type of armor with which you are proficient, the armor check penalty for that armor applies only to Balance, Climb, Escape Artist, Hide, Jump, Move Silently, Sleight of Hand, and Tumble checks.
Normal: A character who is wearing armor with which she is not proficient applies its armor check penalty to attack rolls and to all skill checks that involve moving, including Ride.
Special: All characters except wizards, sorcerers, and monks automatically have Armor Proficiency (light) as a bonus feat. They need not select it.

ARMOR PROFICIENCY (MEDIUM) [GENERAL]
Prerequisite: Armor Proficiency (light).
Benefit: See Armor Proficiency (light).
Normal: See Armor Proficiency (light).
Special: Fighters, barbarians, paladins, clerics, druids, and bards automatically have Armor Proficiency (medium) as a bonus feat. They need not select it.

Why wouldn't something like that work for MRQ? Some sort of mechanic that states a character is proficient in wearing a specific type of armor, and if so the skill penalty only applies to skills like Stealth and Athletics (Swim/Climb)?

My initial thought was make them Advanced Skills that could be improved, with the skill level offsetting the armor penalty; so a set of full plate (what's that, -48% or so) on a character with Heavy Armor Use at 35% would only take a 13% armor skill penalty. It could also, however, be an all-or-nothing thing; roll your Heavy Armor Use skill before any significant action and take the full penalty only if the roll is failed, with no penalty if the roll succeeds.

Although I think I prefer the former.

 

[Arkat]

Is it? You just put it on and that's that?

Yep pretty much. Do you need training to wear your snow suit?

There's no training associated with learning how to move around efficiently with the extra weight and bulk hanging off you? You don't have to learn to adjust when swinging your sword armored as opposed to unarmored?

There's a mechanic for that in the game already, it's called Encumberance.

So anyone should be able to strap on a suit of armor, then, and be just as effective doing what they do as if they didn't have it on?

There's a mechanic for this in the game too, it's called the Armor Penalty.

That seems not right to me -- there has to be some skill centered around wearing armor effectively.

No there does not NEED to be a skill for this, the other two game mechanics handle it already so adding a third one in is pointless. Armor IS a static defense.

 

[Vadrus]

2. Why is there a Shield skill, but no Armor skill? Create an Armor skill (or a couple -- Heavy Armor, Light Armor, etc.). If the skill % is greater than the armor skill penalty, the skill penalty does not apply. Or roll the skill, and if it succeeds there is no penalty applied.

Thoughts?

Armor is static, Shields are not which is why you don't have an armor skill. You manuever your shield to block blows and thus require a skill check for it. When you try to manuever your armored body to avoid blows that to require's a skill check, it's called Dodge.

Armour is definately not static, you use it actively in most fights. A very effective move is just to twist slightly as a blow lands, in most armours the blow slides past and most of it's momentum and energy is wasted, the same move without armour hurts like a bitch.

Armour does have a static component, but that's usually when you've messed up and been hit square on, then it distributes the impact over a larger area reducing it's point damage.

Funny thing is if you take armour off and then fight it takes a while to stop using the armours deflection as you're so used to it, so yes armour definately has an active component.


Vadrus

 

[iamtim]

No there does not NEED to be a skill for this, the other two game mechanics handle it already so adding a third one in is pointless. Armor IS a static defense.

Ok, dude. But I'm pretty sure I disagree with you. So I think I'm going to give it a try.

I'll post my results here.

 

[HyrumOWC]

I liked a solution I saw on RPG.net where the negative modifer was to skills that make sense (ala Tim's post) plus fatigue rolls.

I get the idea of the modifier and on paper it looks good, but in play it just unbalances things too much.

Hyrum.

 

[Itto]

Reading the companion today. In that the armour (and all other equipment) listed in the book is the basic stuff.

So well equiped soldiers may have plate, and its knights will also have plate. But the knights plate will be made by somewhat superior craftsman.

There is a realy good section in the companion about item quality, in that section weapons and armour can have additional qualities if they are of finer quality. One of the effects that can be chosen is called Bastion which minimises weak points raising modifer for bypassing the armour from -40% to -80%. This armour will cost 5 times as much.

So general troops in plate are not quite the same are the elite troops also in plate. Plus the craftsman who can make the better stuff at the same time would be able to add and additional 1 AP to each location or -1 ENC per location. A suite of armour that is not Bulwarked could also have the negative skill effect of armour armour reduced by upto 2 per location for the same price. If you shell out even more and can get hold of it even better stuff can be bought, and that's before any magic gets near it!

I hope that this has eased a few peoples concerns, 'cause it makes alot of sense to me.






[/list]

 

[Utgardloki]

I'm thinking of going with including armor skill check penalties and armor bypass penalties as separate stats listed with each type of armor. This allows for well-designed armor with little penalty to movement, or armor that heavily penalizes movement but offers superior protection, or whatever other combination the armorer is capable of making.

It also makes it possible to customize armor: perhaps better protection at the cost of a higher skill check penalty.

That, and enforcing the concept of downtime to get used to a new set of armor, and allowing for specialization skills, should be enough to get by.

Oh, yeah, and figure out how bullets are going to play into this. Is it worth it to figure whether modern vs archaic armor is better or worse vs bullets? My thoughts on this subject is to list an armor penetration value with each gun, with armor piercing bullets getting a penetration bonus and hollow point bullets or bullets made out of variant materials getting a penalty. (I suppose bullets made out of uranium or osmium would get a bonus; depleted uranium has been used on the battlefield, and osmium is probably the best substance to make bullets out of, except that it is very expensive.)

 

[Gnarsh]

Well, my general take on this is that you should not add extra rules if you don't have to. Creating a chart of weapon types against armor types is counter to the KISS approach to MRQ (in theory). Same deal with adding a armor skill. The skill that lets you twist your body so that blows glance instead of hitting solidly is called Dodge. It's already in the game. No need for another skill.

Adding a skill just to allow you to reduce armor penalties sounds decent on paper, but again requires an additional ultra-situational skill. Certainly, such a skill could be added as an optional rule (or house rule), but I don't think it works in a core-rule concept. It's also really not as realistic as some might think. It just plain doesn't take years of practice to be able to fight effectively while wearing platemail. If we wering an older RQ system of skill checks on skills used, I'd say it works (since you'd get a skill increase chance every time you wore armor in combat). With the system MRQ uses for experience this is not as good a deal.

I know that the companion allows for armoring skill and enchanting to reduce the skill minuses, but IMHO that's not really a "fix". The core rules should work by themselves, not require that additional rules (from expansions) be applied in order to work properly.

My suggestion on this is pretty much the same as it was the last time this discussion came up. Apply the armor skill minus to the fatigue rolls and to selected skills (swim, climb, etc). The idea being that you will get tired faster while wearing armor (true), and will be hampered doing certain things (also true), but that you wont really be affected doing something that armor is designed to allow you to do (like fight).


The higher quality armors and enchantment benefits in the companion still apply (and IMO more realistically). After all, what made high quality armor more usable on the battlefield wasn't so much that the soldiers had better skills when wearing the better armor, but that they weren't as tired when they got to the battlefield. The tactical advantages of equipping your soldiers in better armor should be obvious.

 

[Arkat]

Iron or other runemetal armors halved the ENC of a armor in RQ 2-3, so it likely does something similar in MRQ. So it's not really a new mechanic but still something very in keeping with Glorantha.

Well, my general take on this is that you should not add extra rules if you don't have to. Creating a chart of weapon types against armor types is counter to the KISS approach to MRQ (in theory). Same deal with adding a armor skill. The skill that lets you twist your body so that blows glance instead of hitting solidly is called Dodge. It's already in the game. No need for another skill.

Exactly..

 

[Utgardloki]

My suggestion on this is pretty much the same as it was the last time this discussion came up. Apply the armor skill minus to the fatigue rolls and to selected skills (swim, climb, etc). The idea being that you will get tired faster while wearing armor (true), and will be hampered doing certain things (also true), but that you wont really be affected doing something that armor is designed to allow you to do (like fight).

How about just applying the ENC value of armor, and using the normal ENC penalties for whatever skills are affected by ENC? Thus armor would count as a number of "things" you are carrying.

For guys like me, who are probably going to be tossing the ENC concept, the equivalent would be to determine the armor's "equivalent weight".

I can imagine that maybe some of the heaviest armor (such as that worn by the Parthenians in the 4th Century, or perhaps the armor made for, but never worn, by King Henry something-or-other of England) would establish serious penalties to movement. Only certain armor would have such penalties, and this would be listed in the armor's description.

So, if armor protects, and has weight, and costs money, and does not effect any penalties on the wearer, then there is little reason not to wear the best armor you can get, unless weight or money is an issue. As for weapons, they can be noted whether they are better or worse at bypassing armor. Each armor has a listing of the penalty to try to bypass it.

 

[RMS]

Iron or other runemetal armors halved the ENC of a armor in RQ 2-3, so it likely does something similar in MRQ. So it's not really a new mechanic but still something very in keeping with Glorantha.

ENC is the same for Iron in RQ2/3 as bronze, but Iron has 50% more AP. At least that's the way it works by default. Copper halved ENC at the expense of 2AP (?). Lead was heavier (50% or double), the same AP as bronze, but didn't reflect light or cause noise while being stealthy. Silver is identical to bronze, but all damage is considered magical. I think aluminum was that same ENC and AP as bronze, but floats so your armor is also a life preserver!

 

[RMS]

Well, my general take on this is that you should not add extra rules if you don't have to. Creating a chart of weapon types against armor types is counter to the KISS approach to MRQ (in theory). Same deal with adding a armor skill. The skill that lets you twist your body so that blows glance instead of hitting solidly is called Dodge. It's already in the game. No need for another skill.

Agreed. I don't like adding yet another table. It isn't worth it.

Adding a skill just to allow you to reduce armor penalties sounds decent on paper, but again requires an additional ultra-situational skill. Certainly, such a skill could be added as an optional rule (or house rule), but I don't think it works in a core-rule concept. It's also really not as realistic as some might think. It just plain doesn't take years of practice to be able to fight effectively while wearing platemail. If we wering an older RQ system of skill checks on skills used, I'd say it works (since you'd get a skill increase chance every time you wore armor in combat). With the system MRQ uses for experience this is not as good a deal.

Burning Wheel has an Armor skill. It doesn't have any levels. You buy it at default, like any other skill. However, just having the skill removes armor penalties to combat. Not having it imposes armor penalties. You could do the same in MRQ if you wished, or make it a relatively inexpensive Legendary Ability. Personally, I'd just skip it. I don't see the point. This penalty is no worse than attempting to use a different sword than you're used to, and yet the skill for 1H sword stays the same when you pick up a different sword.