Armor

[Arkat]

Take a look at the armor table and you might have noticed that there are two types of Chainmail coverings for Abdomen & Legs (Skirt and Trews).

It looks like some of the #'s got transposed as one armor piece is 5pt and 3 ENC and the other is 5pt and 2 ENC and yet it costs less than the previous item. Why would you ever buy the more expensive (and more heavy) version?

Shouldn't the cheaper version be 3 ENC and the more expensive one 2 ENC?

 

[Rurik]

Well in real life the trews (pants)provide more coverage, though this is not modeled in the game.

I am considering not allowing the skirt to be used while mounted. That would give it a reasonable disadvantage.

 

[atgxtg]

Well in real life the trews (pants)provide more coverage, though this is not modeled in the game.

I am considering not allowing the skirt to be used while mounted. That would give it a reasonable disadvantage.

WHAT! YOU are not using the alternate armor table I wrote up that fixes that? You! After begging for cuirboilli.

Just for that I won't tell you about the dragonewt that I made the cuirboilli out of! :wink:

 

[Rurik]

Well in real life the trews (pants)provide more coverage, though this is not modeled in the game.

I am considering not allowing the skirt to be used while mounted. That would give it a reasonable disadvantage.

WHAT! YOU are not using the alternate armor table I wrote up that fixes that? You! After begging for cuirboilli.

Just for that I won't tell you about the dragonewt that I made the cuirboilli out of! :wink:

Doh! Busted!

Actually, he was using the table in the book I figured I'd answer his question in the context of the table.

That and I was too lazy to find and link too your table.

You know me, I'm all about the Cuirbolli.

 

[atgxtg]

Well in real life the trews (pants)provide more coverage, though this is not modeled in the game.

I am considering not allowing the skirt to be used while mounted. That would give it a reasonable disadvantage.

WHAT! YOU are not using the alternate armor table I wrote up that fixes that? You! After begging for cuirboilli.

Just for that I won't tell you about the dragonewt that I made the cuirboilli out of! :wink:

Doh! Busted!

Actually, he was using the table in the book I figured I'd answer his question in the context of the table.

That and I was too lazy to find and link too your table.

You know me, I'm all about the Cuirbolli.

If it were anyone but you,Rurik, they'd have gotten away with it.

"Alas, poor Rurik, I knew him too well."



Here is the link to my variant table that resolves most of the armor issues (I hope!).

[/quote]

Maybe I should fins some free webspace to put these charts. I've had a couple of people looking for them in the last few days.

 

[Arkat]

Nice table!

Ever wonder why there was no heavy leather for the arms? :shock:

One of the very few things that RQ3 did right was to make a better armor table, though admittedly they mucked up by bumping the armor values up.

 

[atgxtg]

Nice table!


Thanks, I want to go back to it again, and reformat it more liek RQ2, that is by location rather than by type. I find that is is easier to outfit a character that way. I'm also going to try to add in a few more missing types and pieces.

Ever wonder why there was no heavy leather for the arms? :shock:

I think the main reason why you don't see heavy leather for the arms is that RQ2 didn't provide heavy leather for locations where cuirboilli was avaialable. Probably becuase is was similar, provided better protection, and only slighly more expensive.

If you want them, I'll add them to the chart, for now you can just use:

Hard Leather Vambrances AP: 2, ENC: 1, Covers: Arms, Cost: 100 SP, Skill Penalty: -4%

One of the very few things that RQ3 did right was to make a better armor table, though admittedly they mucked up by bumping the armor values up.

I take it you are not a big RQ3 fan. Personally, I like RQ3 as much as RQ2, perhaps more (I don't like MRQ much at all).

I prefer the RQ3 armor values, too.

For one thing it gives you a lot more room to play around with to fit in different types of armor.

Secondly, since the average human's SIZ went from 10-11 to 13, most people get a +1D4 damage bouns anyway, so the armor vlaes helps to pffset that.

Lastly, a good suit of mail or plate will stop most sword blows. YOu might get some brusing (or chafing for that matter), but generally most strikes are not going to hurt let alone harm. 7 point mail and 8 point plate covered that nicely. That is one reason why there are stories about battles where no knight were seriously hurt.

NOw I can see lower AP values for Glorantha, both due to the weaker materials (glorantha bronze) and becuase "plate" in Glornatha refers to a breatplate, greaves, braces, and a helmet, and not articulated plate.

 

[algauble]

...
Lastly, a good suit of mail or plate will stop most sword blows. YOu might get some brusing (or chafing for that matter), but generally most strikes are not going to hurt let alone harm. 7 point mail and 8 point plate covered that nicely. That is one reason why there are stories about battles where no knight were seriously hurt.

NOw I can see lower AP values for Glorantha, both due to the weaker materials (glorantha bronze) and becuase "plate" in Glornatha refers to a breatplate, greaves, braces, and a helmet, and not articulated plate.

Other than Stormbringer's random armor, are there any rules/mods/tweaks that take into account the fact that some armor just covers better/more completely?
I'm looking for something other than just providing more AP. For example, instead of having Precise Attack -40% ignore armor, have a variable penalty based on how many chinks there are in the armor and how completely it covers. Is this one of those things that's best glossed over in the interest of playability? Is there a good way to handle this?
GURPS 3e PD or DnD AC, maybe come closer, but each have their own idiosyncracies, esp. if you were to try to bring them to RQ.
Something like:

Degree of Coverage_____% mod____example
LOW________10%______partial breastplate
MEDIUM__________20%_________full breastplate
HIGH___________30%___________full articulated plate armor

The % mod could be applied as a penalty to the attack roll or the precise attack to avoid armor roll or both?

 

[Rurik]

The problem with tying armor coverage to a modifier for precise attack is that Ignore Armor and Specify Location are two different precise attacks (that can't be combined according to the rules).

One thing we could do is give criticals a chance to ignore armor based on coverage. For example give armor a save rating. Chain Skirt (covers to just below knees according to rulebook) could have a coverage save of 50%, while Pants/Trews could have an 80% (making them worth the added cost/enc). If you take a critical roll against the armor save or ignore armor. Fully articulated Plate would be in the 80-90 range.

 

[atgxtg]

Other than Stormbringer's random armor, are there any rules/mods/tweaks that take into account the fact that some armor just covers better/more completely?
I'm looking for something other than just providing more AP. For example, instead of having Precise Attack -40% ignore armor, have a variable penalty based on how many chinks there are in the armor and how completely it covers. Is this one of those things that's best glossed over in the interest of playability? Is there a good way to handle this?
GURPS 3e PD or DnD AC, maybe come closer, but each have their own idiosyncracies, esp. if you were to try to bring them to RQ.
Something like:

Degree of Coverage_____% mod____example
LOW________10%______partial breastplate
MEDIUM__________20%_________full breastplate
HIGH___________30%___________full articulated plate armor

The % mod could be applied as a penalty to the attack roll or the precise attack to avoid armor roll or both?

Well ElgQUest started a rule to represnet jewerly that I always though would world fro bracers and such. Basically since the elves run around with no armor, they used to give a POWx3% chance of the item being hit and abosrbing AP (It is a POW roll as in RQ luck was always consdiered a factor of POW).

I could see something similar being used for things like greaves and vambrances.

Another posiblity would be to sub divide the body parts into smaller hit locations. So that R Leg would be something like 1-R Lower Leg: (Shin/Foot), 2=Knee, 3=Upper Leg (Thigh).


THe random roll concept from Stormbringer isn't a bad idea, but I think a bell curve word work better than the linear die rolls. So armor that should stop 5 points of average could roll 2d4 or even 2d6-2.

 

[atgxtg]

The problem with tying armor coverage to a modifier for precise attack is that Ignore Armor and Specify Location are two different precise attacks (that can't be combined according to the rules).

Yes, ithe rules don't allow fpr a precise attack to both bypass armor and hit a specific location at the same time, and does it strike you (sorry, bad pun) as being wrong? I mean what about thrust through the eyeslit on the helm?

Or what if you got a guy covered in plate, but without a helmet? Or who had a cloth cap, it would see that a precise strike to bypass armor would naturally gravtitate toward the underprotected parts of the foes anatomy.

One thing we could do is give criticals a chance to ignore armor based on coverage. For example give armor a save rating. Chain Skirt (covers to just below knees according to rulebook) could have a coverage save of 50%, while Pants/Trews could have an 80% (making them worth the added cost/enc). If you take a critical roll against the armor save or ignore armor. Fully articulated Plate would be in the 80-90 range.

I think a coverage idea, and modifying the precise attack chance makes a lot of sense (I've seen Henry VIII's suit of plate, and there are precious few spot where you can bypass the armor, none were in the cest, and at least two of the locations were impossible to hit on a standing man, and would still have to get through 3 point leather.

I thik I even have a table or two of % coverage somewhere from a couple of sources.


THe only drawback to this though it that it does add another level of complexity. Double so if you want to consider that in many cases the armors that covered better, like gothic plate, were made of superior quality metal and so should have more AP too.

I like it but the simplicity crowd probably won't.

 

[Rurik]

The problem is you won't know which modifer to use until you have rolled a location, which of course occurs after the attack roll being modified.

A full breatplate would have a high modifier, while vambraces abd greaves would have a low modifier. You wouldn't know which to use.

I never really had a problem with the original RQ rules, but then there was always a random chance of ignoring armor (criticals).

The armor save idea puts back in the chance of ignoring armor on a critical, but bases that chance on the coverage of the armor worn, and can easily be rolled after location is determined. It also adds a minimum of complexity, just one extra roll only on crits.

 

[Rurik]

Though I will add any solution that uses criticals may be trumped when the critical tables in the Companion come out. The nerfed criticals we have now could just be a placeholder for the table in the Companion. Maybe that table makes criticals twenty times more deadly than RQ2/3 for all we know.

Maybe it is like 1-50, Ignore armor. 51-52 Chop off Nose, -3 to CHA, etc.

The Critical Tables would make for an excellent preview of the Companion now that it is delayed (hint hint matt if you are reading this )

 

[zanshin]

I always think of the blow striking as aimed at a particular location, its just that you aim for it when an opening appears for a location , and you couldn't determine where the opening would appear- that made alot of sense with the RQ2 and RQ3 melee hit location tables as you were most likely to hit a limb.

Viewed like that , a precise attack 'bypass armour' means you are being even more selective about sending in your aimed strike - you are waiting for an opening in the armour and the guard before sending in a full blooded blow (there will be various passes, thrusts and swings that go as a matter of course in the battle, a miss on the roll may mean none of them had a chance of connecting) .

I am pretty sure that RQ2 described an attack in those terms, correct me if i'm wrong.

 

[Rurik]

I always think of the blow striking as aimed at a particular location, its just that you aim for it when an opening appears for a location , and you couldn't determine where the opening would appear- that made alot of sense with the RQ2 and RQ3 melee hit location tables as you were most likely to hit a limb.

Viewed like that , a precise attack 'bypass armour' means you are being even more selective about sending in your aimed strike - you are waiting for an opening in the armour and the guard before sending in a full blooded blow (there will be various passes, thrusts and swings that go as a matter of course in the battle, a miss on the roll may mean none of them had a chance of connecting) .

I am pretty sure that RQ2 described an attack in those terms, correct me if i'm wrong.

That is pretty much how it was described.

RQ2/3 had 12 second rounds, and you only had 1 attack (2 if skill above 100 and splitting). In that round there were many thrusts/parries/faints etc. What you were resolving was the 'one that counts'. The modifiers for aiming were explained the way you describe.

The system felt like you were rolling each attack and parry, but in fact it was an abstraction of a longer combat round.

MRQ by comparison has 1-5 attacks plus 1-5 reactions for a 5 second round.

 

[simonh]

Personaly I like the idea of giving players a choice. On a critical they can either ignore armour, or do double damage.

One thing that is pretty unrealistic about precise attacks to bypass armour, is that there's no chance that you fail to hit the gap in the armour, but still land a hit. After all, if I as a crap swordsman were aiming for a gap in someone's armour, chances are if I did hit I'd hit his armour but still miss the gap.

How about this for a compromise. It makes precise attacks to bypass armour much harder, but IMHO that's no bad thing.

Ona precise attack to bypass armour, apply the -40% modifier as normal. For every full 10% the character makes the roll by, ignore 1 point of armour on the location hit.

Simon Hibbs

 

[Arkat]

I think the main reason why you don't see heavy leather for the arms is that RQ2 didn't provide heavy leather for locations where cuirboilli was avaialable. Probably becuase is was similar, provided better protection, and only slighly more expensive.

Yet they had Soft and Hard Leather for other locations such as legs.. Why one set of limbs and not the other?

I take it you are not a big RQ3 fan. Personally, I like RQ3 as much as RQ2, perhaps more (I don't like MRQ much at all).

Ahh no.. Avalon Hill saw fit to add Halflings, Orcs and Sorcery to a game that didn't need them. Oh and lets not forget Slarges! *shakes head*

Lastly, a good suit of mail or plate will stop most sword blows. YOu might get some brusing (or chafing for that matter), but generally most strikes are not going to hurt let alone harm. 7 point mail and 8 point plate covered that nicely. That is one reason why there are stories about battles where no knight were seriously hurt.

I know a few guys in the SCA who would disagree with you.

 

[Rurik]

Ahh no.. Avalon Hill saw fit to add Halflings, Orcs and Sorcery to a game that didn't need them. Oh and lets not forget Slarges! *shakes head*

Thats not entirely fair about sorcery. That was added by the core Chaosium guys and alluded to in Gloranthan material before the release of RQ3.

The other races were part of making the system generic. They were not added to Glorantha.

I fully expect to see similar ones in the RuneQuest Monsters once released.

 

[Arkat]

You had two working magic systems in RQ2; Battlemagic and Runemagic. Tossing in a redundant third system is like adding.. ohh say PSIONICS to D20.

Adding Halflings and Orcs was a stab at making the game more like D&D so it would appeal to a wider audience. Kinda like adding water to your wine so you have more of it to sell. Nice in theory but the quality of the product goes out the window.

Part of RQ's charm is its uniqueness, something I hope Mongoose keeps in mind when they create thier products for it.

 

[Rurik]

You had two working magic systems in RQ2; Battlemagic and Runemagic. Tossing in a redundant third system is like adding.. ohh say PSIONICS to D20.

Adding Halflings and Orcs was a stab at making the game more like D&D so it would appeal to a wider audience. Kinda like adding water to your wine so you have more of it to sell. Nice in theory but the quality of the product goes out the window.

Part of RQ's charm is its uniqueness, something I hope Mongoose keeps in mind when they create thier products for it.

Sorcery would have been added even if the product had stayed in house at Chaosium. It was needed to support the Malkioni and other historical aspects written about before RQ3 was released.

I have always played RQ in Glorantha. For me they are the same. I didn't like the genericising of the game with the release of RQ3. I know people who play RQ2 to this day and I see why - it is in many way my favorite release. That being said the RQ rules and Glorantha are probably never going to be tied together like that again. Mongoose RQ is certainly going to be generic like RQ3. The Companion, Monsters, and Legendary Heroes books are all going to have both Gloranthan and non Gloranthan material.