simonh said:Enpeze said:What this means? This means that armored knights with a standard riding skill of 50% or 60% will fall from horseback more often than not in the future. Funny
Yes, there's a difference between accepting that armour does restrict movement somewhat, and then looking at the actual practical effects of the rules on character abilities, which are a bit excessive. It's not untill you work out what the effects mean in a range of situations that you can make a ballanced assessment.
Simon Hibbs
GoingDown said:I might just use halved penalties rounded down, nothing more. This is sooo simple.
Elandyll said:GoingDown said:I might just use halved penalties rounded down, nothing more. This is sooo simple.
That's what I'll do as well.
The base idea is sound (applying a penalty to heavy armor), but the amounts listed are excessive.
Pretty simple fix...
Elandyll said:The problem is still there with precise attacks at high level, as in Why even wear heavy armor, if you are going to bypass it alltogether ?
The 40% penalty at high level won't even be a problem.
My take on this is that some more "exotic/high level" kind of armors (such as the kind wore by Parn in Lodoss for the neck as an example :
http://static.flickr.com/27/48724470_67d911f145_o.jpg
) have specific designs that will not allow for some /all precise attacks, or increase the penalty dramatically (80%+).
Rurik said:Just had a thought. What if add another penalty to precise attacks. I am thinking of you need to spend one CA aiming for the precise attack (similar to waiting until the final SR in RQ 2/3). So you spend your first action preparing the precise attack, second action roll the attack. Only characters with 4 CA's would ever get to make 2 precise attacks in a round. Characters with one CA wouldn't be able to make them. The bonus CA for an offhand weapon could not bu used to for the aiming action either.
atgxtg said:Or we culd go back to the old RQ method. No penalty, just that the ENC works against you as normal.
Simple, very RQ, probably more accuatre that the 42% skill penalty.
Rurik said:How about the sqare root of the Mongoose Encumbrance Penalty Squared, then subtract it again?
Rurik said:Just had a thought. What if add another penalty to precise attacks. I am thinking of you need to spend one CA aiming for the precise attack (similar to waiting until the final SR in RQ 2/3). So you spend your first action preparing the precise attack, second action roll the attack. Only characters with 4 CA's would ever get to make 2 precise attacks in a round. Characters with one CA wouldn't be able to make them. The bonus CA for an offhand weapon could not bu used to for the aiming action either.
algauble said:I do like the way this approximates previous RQ. I think it would work well together with random CA determination (a few different methods were discussed several days ago, iirc). I would probably even allow someone with 1 CA to make the precise attack the next round.
Elandyll said:The problem is still there with precise attacks at high level, as in Why even wear heavy armor, if you are going to bypass it alltogether ?
The 40% penalty at high level won't even be a problem.
I plan on running a few combats with highly skilled (120+) combatants to see how it plays out. No amount of skill will make up for lost CA's. And it is very reminiscent of the wait till end of round and strike at half chance rule from previous editions.
GoingDown said:Elandyll said:The problem is still there with precise attacks at high level, as in Why even wear heavy armor, if you are going to bypass it alltogether ?
The 40% penalty at high level won't even be a problem.
I am thinking - what if you just change it so that penalty for precise attacks is that you must halve your skill? It could work well.
Aye, you cannot both choose the location and bypass the armor.Hoitsu said:I maybe understanded wrong the previous discussions about precise attack to the head. If you meant that you can try to bypass armor while targetting the head, then i am right. It cant be done. You can choose only one of those possibilities, armor passing, targeting location or targeting weapon. not targeting head while trying to bypass the armor too. Still, hit in the head with 2H sword is deadly but i remind you that precise attack can be parried as normal. And parry is very easy. if you succeed, it always absorbs some of the dmg and armor does the rest. So guy with armor is in better position than guy with no armor. Sooner or later the guy in no armor will not succeed the parry as good as he should and then he almost certainly get a bad wound and dies very very soon. Guy in armor will get hits through but takes only little damage. If you didnt meant that you can do armor avoiding precise attack with targeting the location, then ignore this message
GoingDown said:Rurik said:How about the sqare root of the Mongoose Encumbrance Penalty Squared, then subtract it again?
LOL!
This is what I am going to use!
atgxtg said:I can only think of one way to do that, and I refuse to do j equations just to figure out an armor penalty. :shock: