Armour house rules

[Anonymous]

I've finally been able to play Conan and, after a couple of sessions, our group has decided to try a couple of house rules. I just thought I'd try and get some input from the good people of this site before we use them for real.

The first house rule regards armour and the finesse attack. We had a thief attacking a plate-armoured soldier carrying a shield with a poniard. He stood no chance of finessing his way past the armour, which he was gutted about.

House Rule 1: when making a threat roll for a finesse weapon, the second toatl is added to the first to determine whether armour is bypassed.
e.g. our thief (attack +5) attacks the plate-armoured soldier (DV 17, DR 10) with his poniard and rolls 19 (threat) followed by 11. This does not cause a critical, and would not normally bypass armour. With this house rule, his total would now be (19+11+5 = 35), which bypasses the armour (requiring a total of 17+10 = 27). Of course, it is still not enough to cause a critical hit.
This rule does mean that wider threat range weapons (e.g. swords) are better finesse weapons than high multiplier weapons (e.g. axes), but this seems to make sense for us and isn't such a big deal as most finesse weapons are already 19-20/x2 and also swords cost so much.

The second house rule regards the way armour works, and especially how helmets work.

House Rule 2: The armour table is modified. The only things that change are the DR and the addition of COVERING (abbreviated to Cv). DR works as normal, but Cv determines how easily finesse attacks bypass the armour. For example:
Armour DR Cv
Chain Shirt 5 4
Scale Corslet 6 4
Mail Hauberk 5 7
Breastplate 10 3
Scale Hauberk 6 7
Plate 10 10
Stell Cap - +2
We think this will make things a little more realistic without too much work. An example: our thief (Attack +5 standard or finesse) attacks a soldier (DV15, Scale Corslet) with a poniard (AP3). For a standard attack, he needs to roll a 10 to hit and the DR6 will be subtracted from the damage (as his AP is less than 6). If he finesse attacks, he still needs 10 to hit normally, but on an adjusted attack total of: DV (15) + Cv (4) = 19 or more he will bypass the armour (i.e. rolling 14 or more). If the soldier is wearing a stell cap (+1 Cv), he now still hits on a 10, but requires a total of 20 or more to bypass armour (rolling 15 or more).
If anyone is interest, I'll post the full adjusted armour table on the forum.

Comments, anyone?

 

[Bailywolf]

The first house rule regards armour and the finesse attack. We had a thief attacking a plate-armoured soldier carrying a shield with a poniard. He stood no chance of finessing his way past the armour, which he was gutted about.

So.... An unarmored thief is trying to attack a guy in PLATE with a SHIELD using a BIG KNIFE... and you are surprised when he gets gutted?

A proper thief runs like hell from a guy in full plate until he can trip him, flank him, or otherwise sneak him. Jeeze... this knid of thing is nuts. Conan himself wouldn't try this kind of thing (until he hit fairly high level... and was desperate).

Please explain the circumstances... with just that minimal example, I see no issue with the thief getting hacked to pieces.

-B

 

[Yuan-Ti]

House Rule 2: The armour table is modified. The only things that change are the DR and the addition of COVERING (abbreviated to Cv). DR works as normal, but Cv determines how easily finesse attacks bypass the armour. For example:
Armour DR Cv
Chain Shirt 5 4
Scale Corslet 6 4
Mail Hauberk 5 7
Breastplate 10 3
Scale Hauberk 6 7
Plate 10 10
Stell Cap - +2
We think this will make things a little more realistic without too much work. An example: our thief (Attack +5 standard or finesse) attacks a soldier (DV15, Scale Corslet) with a poniard (AP3). For a standard attack, he needs to roll a 10 to hit and the DR6 will be subtracted from the damage (as his AP is less than 6). If he finesse attacks, he still needs 10 to hit normally, but on an adjusted attack total of: DV (15) + Cv (4) = 19 or more he will bypass the armour (i.e. rolling 14 or more). If the soldier is wearing a stell cap (+1 Cv), he now still hits on a 10, but requires a total of 20 or more to bypass armour (rolling 15 or more).
If anyone is interest, I'll post the full adjusted armour table on the forum.

Comments, anyone?

The first house rule seems like a taste thing though I might try it out. The second, however, is something I was thinking about. I would definitely like to see the whole table. I was thinking, for example, why it would be easier for a finesse attack to bypass a leather jerkin than a mail shirt. After all, in both cases, you are realistically bypassing the armor by getting in a good hit on weak points (areas not covered by the armor). I like this idea a lot -- please also let us know how it works out in playtesting.

 

[BhilJhoanz]

GMing the other week left me worried about the DR of plate armor as well. I was virtually unable to to deal more than a point of damage per attack (that's minimum btw) to my noble in Full Plate and Helm (DR12). Finesse was useless.

(Let me add that it was great to see his face turn white when a desperate opponent decided to full Power Attack and I rolled a 20 to hit! sadly it went unconfirmed )

However, I can see the argument for it completely. REH frequently describes the inability for foes to harm Conan in his armor (Was reading Queen of the Black Coast last night and the were-Hyenas were ripping at Conan but only succeeded in ripping his armor to bits. Kudos to Mongoose and Ian for presenting a combat system that accurately portrays this!)

Anyway. High DRs have the balancing factor of being damn expensive! While other classes' silvr can be closely regulated, it's not unusual for a Noble to have access to any armor he desires. It should be very rare to see NPCs walking about in Full Plate outside of the battlefield -- it's not even good adventuring gear as one would appear as absurd as a US Ranger in full Kevlar wandering around your neighborhood! I'd be more prone to apply roleplaying restrictions on high DR armor than change the DR values . . .

I do like your ideas for adding crit rolls to the finesse value -- i think. Let me think on it some more.

 

[Bailywolf]

Also, consider how damned heavy such a suit is. Trip the bastard, and while he's trying to get up, stick your steleto through the visor of his helm.

-B

 

[Johannixx]

I'm thinking of implementing a similar system to yours (in fact, I had been tinkering around with converting the standard D&D armors to this sort of system for my Hyborian game before Mongoose's Conan came out).

I think I'll have to do it before the next adventure, because I'm going to run an adaptation of "A Witch Shall Be Born," and Constantius wore plate armor in that story. The asshuri mercenaries will be tough, but defeatable, but Constantius is going to be pretty damn mean. At least I gave him an arming sword instead of a broadsword.

 

[Anonymous]

Bailywolf,

You are right, I do expect the thief in the example to have a really hard time of it. However, I would still like him to have a slim chance of being able to do some real damage. It should be possible, in my opinion, for a suitably good attack to bypass the armour. I imagine the thief running his blade between the plates of the armour with a particularly successful attack. As things stand, the thief has no chance of doing any damage at all, even with a critical, without a fairly high Str bonus. Even with the house rule I think the thief is still in serious trouble, which is as it should be. My only problem with this house rule at the moment is that it is almost certain that a threat roll will result in armour bypass with a finesse attack

Yuan-Ti, and anyone else who is interested, I'll post the full armour table I've put together tomorrow night. The DR's will reflect how hard the armour is to punch through (so breastplate is the same as plate for example), and the Cv's will reflect the amount of the body covered (so chain shirts and leather jerkins will have the same value).

More comments would be appreciated

 

[Johannixx]

How will you deal with the composite armors, like a breastplate over a hauberk?

 

[Yuan-Ti]

Bailywolf,

Yuan-Ti, and anyone else who is interested, I'll post the full armour table I've put together tomorrow night. The DR's will reflect how hard the armour is to punch through (so breastplate is the same as plate for example), and the Cv's will reflect the amount of the body covered (so chain shirts and leather jerkins will have the same value).

More comments would be appreciated

Should DR for breastplate and plate be the same? This seems to disadvantage melee attackers. After all, just because you are using your strength instead of finesse in an attack, does that mean you wouldn't try to hit arms and legs if attacking someone with only plate on his breast? I think DR should be somewhat related to the coverage, otherwise we are not only making things better for Finesse Attackers but worse for Melee Attackers. Or am I offbase?

 

[slaughterj]

Also, consider how damned heavy such a suit is. Trip the bastard, and while he's trying to get up, stick your steleto through the visor of his helm.

-B

And how do you do that in Conan/d20 games? Trip attack is straight-forward enough, but the stiletto in the visor? Bonus because he is prone? But wouldn't he have time to get up after the trip attack and before your stilleto in the eye attack?

 

[slaughterj]

My only problem with this house rule at the moment is that it is almost certain that a threat roll will result in armour bypass with a finesse attack

I saw that as an immediate problem as well - perhaps subtract 10 (or halve the die) from the following die for purposes of figuring out the finesse attack effectiveness (separate from the critical hit effect)?

 

[Anonymous]

How will you deal with the composite armors, like a breastplate over a hauberk?

My suggestion is to take a page from Rolemaster: make them easier to hit, but provide better protection. ICE really got that one spot on.

 

[S'mon]

I have helmets add to the Shield DV bonus, not DR. I'd say cap DR for Finesse purposes at 10, representing 90% or so of the body being covered in armour.

I think the RPG may make plate armour a bit more common than it ought to be, but OTOH it is hugely expensive - only wealthy nobles & elite knights will be wearing it, and such characters ought to be feared.

To simulate dagger-through-visor for downed knights, if a character is grappled & pinned I'd suggest it should be possible to bypass DR easily. I guess they have base DV1 (-5 for effective DEX 0, & +4 to-be-hit) so even with +10 for plate armour it should be possible to then finesse attack them pretty easily & bypass their DR.
Realistically, unless the plate-armoured warrior can be immobilised it ought to be pretty much suicide for a thief to go up against him anyway.

 

[rook111]

I guess they have base DV1 (-5 for effective DEX 0, & +4 to-be-hit) so even with +10 for plate armour it should be possible to then finesse attack them pretty easily & bypass their DR.

Remember a person who is flatfooted or otherwise immobile looses his dexterity modifier (and in Conan his defense bonuses), he would not get a negative modifier to his dex since his dex is not affecting his defense at the time. In any d20 game the base standing still DV would be 10, thats for a person being held, a wall or door, or a rock. If the target is prone and the attacker is not, a +4 is given to hit him. Since he lost his dex mod he is also subject to sneak attack by some one with that ability.

What you described above, is a helpless foe who is being held and immobilized he could then be the subject of a Coup De Grace. He would still get his DR unless the attack was finesse ( which, in a case such as that, i would allow automaticly) but the damage is a critical and if you have sneak attack you get that damage as well even if he survives the damage he still need to save at a DC 10+ damage delt or die.

 

[S'mon]

What you described above, is a helpless foe who is being held and immobilized he could then be the subject of a Coup De Grace. He would still get his DR unless the attack was finesse ( which, in a case such as that, i would allow automaticly) but the damage is a critical and if you have sneak attack you get that damage as well even if he survives the damage he still need to save at a DC 10+ damage delt or die.

Per the d20 grappling rules, I'm describing a foe who is Pinned - "immobilised but not helpless", so they have DEX 0 but cannot be coup-de-graced. You're wrong about walls, they do not have DV/AC 10, DV/AC 10 is for a human who is mobile but has no DEX bonus or penalty. In Conan this covers most flat-footed targets, if they have DEX 10+. If they have DEX 9 or less their AC/DV will be less than 10.

Eg: a human who is mobile but who has DEX 0-1 is AC 5, 10 -5 for the DEX penalty. Per 3.5 PHB a totally immobile man-sized target counts as DEX 0 and with an additional +4 to-be-hit.

 

[Bailywolf]

Also, consider how damned heavy such a suit is. Trip the bastard, and while he's trying to get up, stick your steleto through the visor of his helm.

-B

And how do you do that in Conan/d20 games? Trip attack is straight-forward enough, but the stiletto in the visor? Bonus because he is prone? But wouldn't he have time to get up after the trip attack and before your stilleto in the eye attack?

Hmmmm... yeah, actually you're right. There really isn't any provision for getting up in armor... it sort of just happens with a Move action.

My bad- I'm so used to houseruling this, that I had to go back and look at the SRD.

Still though, that +4 to hit would come in handy for Finessing past his armor.

-B

 

[S'mon]

Re trip - Improved Trip gives a free atack vs tripped targets, and standing from prone now provokes an attack of opportunity, so you should have a chance to do damage.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Also, consider how damned heavy such a suit is. Trip the bastard, and while he's trying to get up, stick your steleto through the visor of his helm.

Interestingly it is a fallacy that it is hard to get up in a suit of plate armour. watching demonstration fights at the Royal Armouries in Leeds UK (where the guys were wearing real plate armour) they could get back to their feet just as quickly as I could.

It was surprising to see, and very noisy(!) but it demonstrated that the articulation and design of their plate armour wasn't a hindrance to their mobility.

 

[S'mon]

Also, consider how damned heavy such a suit is. Trip the bastard, and while he's trying to get up, stick your steleto through the visor of his helm.

Interestingly it is a fallacy that it is hard to get up in a suit of plate armour. watching demonstration fights at the Royal Armouries in Leeds UK (where the guys were wearing real plate armour) they could get back to their feet just as quickly as I could.

It was surprising to see, and very noisy(!) but it demonstrated that the articulation and design of their plate armour wasn't a hindrance to their mobility.

Yeah, it seems to have been the sucking mud at Agincourt that prevented the French knights getting back up, and possibly caused the origin of this myth. Historical field plate armour weighed less than a WW1 infantryman's pack.

 

[Conan]

Historical field plate armour weighed less than a WW1 infantryman's pack.

And was more or less evenly distributed over a knight's whole body keeping his center of gravity the same where as a 50 lb pack puts it all at or above the hips and makes keeping your balance and movement more difficult.
There is no doubt that a person will never be as quick and agile wearing plate as when he is street clothes but training regularly in it will certainly teach and condition one so they can effectively move in it.