Armour penalty
- Thread starter gran_orco
- Start date
RosenMcStern
Mongoose
Only the biggest.
Trifletraxor
Mongoose
So I could wear five leather shirts and a leather hauberk, and get a whopping 7 AP for only 4 % skill reduction? 
SGL.
SGL.
Durand Durand
Banded Mongoose
I haven't got my book with me but I think the intent is that you only get the best of the AP bonuses and all of the penalties.
DD
DD
Trifletraxor
Mongoose
Vatras said:Haha, good try
Read page 38 completely:
Only the highest AP and its penalty is used, wearing multiple armor has no effect except to increase your encumbrance.
Darn!
SGL.
RosenMcStern
Mongoose
Furthermore, it is explicitly stated that the protection values for chainmail already include the leather padding that is worn underneath.
RosenMcStern said:
I think this was pretty much assumed in the earlier versions too. I always hated the munchkinism in RQ-2 / RQ-3 when people wanted to have padding under their maille.
Heck, what did they think the default was? People wearing maille over a regular linen shirt parhaps? Gah
Trifletraxor
Mongoose
Anyone know which thread contains atxatg's fleshed out armour tables? The one found in the wiki? Would like to see a bigger version.
SGL.
SGL.
Durand Durand
Banded Mongoose
Nagisawa said:
Nipples of Steel [Legendary Ability]
4 Hero Pint, Resistance 90%+, Con 15+
You have nipples of steel and can wear metal armour withough padding with no chaffing.
DD
[Edit]
Durand Durand said:Nagisawa said:
Nipples of Steel [Legendary Ability]
4 Hero Pint, Resistance 90%+, Con 15+
You have nipples of steel and can wear metal armour withough padding with no chaffing.
DD
[Edit]
Brilliant! Also enables the wearing of chainmail-bikini's. (Glorantha gamer and writer Jane Williams recently said that the only place to use the word chainmail (as opposed to maille) is in conjunction with -bikini)
I have to say I appreciate Mongoose putting an armour penalty into their version of RQ. It makes sense and is realistic. Personally I'd propably round it up to the nearest 10% for ease of gaming though.
Adept said:
This has been extensively debated here.
A character with a full suit of Plate armour suffers a 42% penalty on their attack, parry and dodge skills.
Their opponent can completely ignore the plate armour, and any magical defences they may have, for only a 40% penalty on their attack chance (precise attack) but of course can still defend at full chance.
The prefered solution round here seems to be to only apply the armour penalty to fatigue rolls.
Adept said:
I don't know a single SCA'er (as in someone who actually fights in armor) who likes the Armor Penalties in MRQ.
simonh said:
Or just halving the armor penalty. I like the approach of using it as a fatigue modifier - I just worry about game balance.
Three things that were heavily criticised when the game first came out was were the potentially very high starting skills (weapon skills 80+ being pretty easy), the bypass armour precise attack, and the armour penalties. Any of these taken singly seems bad, but as whole together they balance out. If you take away the armor penalty completely then starting characters can make very effective precise attacks.
There seems to be a concept of allowing you to do things with high skills. If you get a weapon skill to 125 and then cast some magic (say bladesharp 6 - you are a badass after all) you can do things with all those extra skill points, like wear plate and flurry or precise attack. In theory I like that approach - in practice it has some rough edges.
That is why I started using armor penalty again. The 'Unholy Trio' of High Skills, Precise Attacks, and Armor Penalties don't look so good from a theoretical point of as far as rules vs. realism go, but as far as gameplay goes they work well together.
And let's face it, anyone deciding to use MRQ over RQ2/3 has decided they can live with less realism from the game mechanics.
Rurik said:
I think they work appalingly together. PA/armoour penalties kind of work for strating characters, but break horribly at much over 100%.
Let's consider two 'typical' highly skilled characters, with say 120% sword skills. The can each wear as much armour as they like as they're successful adventurers, plus they have 4 points of magical protection available either from personal Rune Magic, Shield, a magic item, etc which seems reasonable.
Character A opts for plate mail at 6 points protection and -42% armour modifier. Character B opts for no armour at all and precise attacks all the time.
Character A has both attack and parry at 78% due to the armour penalty, and his armour and magic are irrelevent.
Character B attacks at 80%, but parries at 120% and his 4 points of magical protection are in full effect.
I know who's shoes I'd rather be in. Strong armour is useless deadweight for skilled characters, exactly the kinds of people you'd expect to be able to afford it and use it, under the unmodified rules.
Rurik said:
Correct. Outside of fatigue and some (noncombat) skills, the armor penalty makes absolutely no sense if you want realism. The people of past ages weren't dumb enough to wear around armor that hampered their ability to actually fight. It also doesn't hamper most other athletic skills to any appreciable degree: swim (and to a lesser extent climb) being obvious examples of where this is not the case.
simonh said:
I've run a number of combats just to try the rules, and what you say is true in a duel. But when a Highly skilled character is beset by more numerous foes the armour is very nice for those blows you cannot parry/dodge. Ditto for being ambushed by missle fire, etc.
The best defense against a skilled foe in a duel is a big sheild. 10 AP that cannot be bypassed.
And as I stated at the beginning of my post I halve the armor penalty, so full plate is -21%, which is not nearly as crippling as the RAW.
