Armour table pg39 question

[atgxtg]

Here's an idea.

The same armour on certain locations could have less AP. For example, Chainmail skirts or trews might be made of lighter metal/thinner links, for added mobility, whereas mobility wouldn't be such an issue on the chest, and so would be the full AP.

Yes it is. I'm sort of trying to stick within the confines compatiblity of the core book. Basically this was a patch to fix a couple of things on the offical armor chart.

I woudln't mind adding in "light: version of some of the armors. Basically trading off some AP protection, reducing ENC and also the skill penalty. Looks like a -1AP, -1 ENC would work for about two-thirds the cost.

With a 6 point armor scale, there is going to be a lot of overlap though.

I would also love to bring back the layering rules-at least for padded armor. Mail (i'd rather use the corrent terms) is pratically uselss without padding, as are practically all metal armors.

Even tweaking coverage a little stuff like:

skirt covering loc 3, 6-10
Vambraces covering loc 14 & 17
rebraces coverin gloc 15 & 18

elbow and knee pieces, booots etc.

Very nice but probably more than what most people will want.

 

[Rurik]

I would also love to bring back the layering rules-at least for padded armor. Mail (i'd rather use the corrent terms) is pratically uselss without padding, as are practically all metal armors.

Kudos on using "mail" over "chainmail" (kind of redundant really).

I have always assumed the armor in RQ included the padding in the stats.

 

[atgxtg]

Kudos on using "mail" over "chainmail" (kind of redundant really).

Yes. That was a Gargy Gygax screw up that all the D&D players have perpetuated, and dragged into general usage . Chain=Mail. There is no such thing as "scalemail" just scale. Platemail is usualy slang for Plate & Mail, a combination of mail armor with pieces of plate providing added reinforcement (a breastplate with mail sleeves), and is also known as partial plate.

I have always assumed the armor in RQ included the padding in the stats.[/quote]

Not according to the past rules. RQ 2/3 used to let you wear light leather padding under other armors with no penalty (just add AP/ENC). Easy to tweak that into MRQ, and we could all use the extra point of AP, even for an extra -1%. Metal armor without padding should probably be at about half AP.

 

[Ozric]

Well done!

 

[atgxtg]

Well done!

Thanks.

It's not finsihed yet.

 

[Rurik]

Not according to the past rules. RQ 2/3 used to let you wear light leather padding under other armors with no penalty (just add AP/ENC).

Now that you mention that I remember using padding. Wasn't that a RQ2 thing? I don't think I used it with RQ3 (had higher AP anyhoo).

 

[atgxtg]

Not according to the past rules. RQ 2/3 used to let you wear light leather padding under other armors with no penalty (just add AP/ENC).

Now that you mention that I remember using padding. Wasn't that a RQ2 thing? I don't think I used it with RQ3 (had higher AP anyhoo).

In both RQ2 and RQ3. People were more likley to forget it in RQ3 due to the better AP ratings and a desire to avoid the extra ENC.

In RQ2 "Padded linen" was the best protection for your money.

I once saw a player do the "full knight" thing with plate over padded fdouble-layer mail. AP 23. Since the dragon he was going up against was AP 25, I didn't have a problem with it.

 

[Halfbat]

Wrap the

[url=http://x5.freeshare.us/119fs483248.png] ... [/url]

around the

[img]

tag. As in:

[url=http://x5.freeshare.us/119fs483248.png][img]http://x5.freeshare.us/119fs483248_th.png[/img][/url]

 

[atgxtg]

THanks, that will help out a lot with large charts.

 

[Enpeze]

good table.

but platesuit -42%? Much too much. Half the penalty is more than enough.

 

[simonh]

but platesuit -42%? Much too much. Half the penalty is more than enough.

Especialy bearing in mind that for the same penalty (-40%) your opponent can ignore it completely. This leads to an interesting problem.

Let's assume two characters with 80% sword skill each (let's say Great Swords), and both also know the Protection spell up to 5 points. Probably not an unusual combination. Character A opts for the heavy armour as well, B doesn't.

Character A is at -42% to hit, or 38%. All his hits will be reduced by 5pts of protection because he can't do precise atacks as the -40% penalty would reduce his skill below zero. Most hits that get through will do 4 points of damage.

Character B realy has to resort to precise attacks to bypass his enemie's armour, so his modified attack chance is 40% and ignores armour. Most hits that get through do 9 points of damage.

Also note that Character A's skill penalty applies to all his defensive actions, as well as his attacks. Character B's penalty only aplies to his attcks, his parries are at full 80% effectiveness.

Unless I'm missing something, character A is utterly screwed. He could opt to use Bladesharp instead of Protection. This would give him a 63% attack, which is a little better than the unarmoured guy, and usualy yield 9 points damage when his attacks get through, but his parries are still at only 38% so IMHO he's still at a significant disadvantage.


Simon Hibbs

 

[Rurik]

I personally do not plan on precise attacks ignoring magical armor. It makes them too powerful, and I have a hard time rationalizing it.

Worn armor has weak spots, and precise attacks simulate targeting weak spots/uncovered spots. Magical Protection shouldn't have these same weak spots.

Also, do precise attacks ignore natural armor? Wyverns and Wyrms better look out.

 

[simonh]

I personally do not plan on precise attacks ignoring magical armor. It makes them too powerful, and I have a hard time rationalizing it.

Worn armor has weak spots, and precise attacks simulate targeting weak spots/uncovered spots. Magical Protection shouldn't have these same weak spots.

If magic armour = spherical force field, then yes. It depends how the magic works. If it's actualy an etheral suit of armour, it will still have weak points.

Also, do precise attacks ignore natural armor? Wyverns and Wyrms better look out.

It says is ignores all armour points, so yes.


Simon Hibbs

 

[Rurik]

Also, do precise attacks ignore natural armor? Wyverns and Wyrms better look out.

It says is ignores all armour points, so yes.


Simon Hibbs

Dragons may as well not have any armor then. By the time characters are ready to face andy feirce monster they will be able to bypass armor.

Where exactly are the soft fleshy spots on Gargoyles?

 

[Signy]

Where exactly are the soft fleshy spots on Gargoyles?

Perhaps the eyes? :?:

 

[Rurik]

Where exactly are the soft fleshy spots on Gargoyles?

Perhaps the eyes? :?:

Hmmm, I'll give you that. There are six other locations to consider though...

 

[atgxtg]

good table.

but platesuit -42%? Much too much. Half the penalty is more than enough.

I agree with you. I'd rather have had NO skill penalty and just gave a modifer for fatigue rolls, or even just assume thatit was absorbed in the ENC.

But, I'm just making this chart to fix/expand the one in the core book, and not rewrite the armor rules. I'd probably get lynched for being to negative if I did something like that. So I kept the skill penalities from the book.

 

[simonh]

Dragons may as well not have any armor then. By the time characters are ready to face andy feirce monster they will be able to bypass armor.

Or just use a Fate spell, or decent pointage Bladesharp to offset the precise attack penalty.

Forget armour as a defense, the skill penalty isn't worth it. Instead learn a few points of Protection, which will either act as armour or force your opponent to blow 40% of his attack chance, and get as much healing magic as you can.

This is a long term strategy though. A 40% penalty to avoid armour is a significant penalty, especialy in the early game. I expect the game to work very well for starting characters, and the situation at higher power levels will emerge in play. All of this is just anticipatory calculation.


Simon Hibbs

 

[atgxtg]

I have had a big problem with the precise attack rules from day one. Basically, -40% to bypass armor or hit a speciic location becomes a minor penalty after acertain point. IMO the old RQ half skill idea works better. THat way the penalty is uniform no matter how skilled someone is the drop will be significant.

Or, I could certainly see such an attack taking extra time to set up and cost 2 actions instead of one.

BTW, I Agree that the armor penalty for the protection is too severe. Why spend 9,000 for plate if Rune are available. Pick up some leather, the Metal and Earth runes and get Protection 5 and Bladesharp 5. THat gives a character 7 APs (better than plate) a +11% to hit (after armor), +6 to damage (can't parry it withanything other that a shield, can't dodge it), +1 STR, +1 SIZ, +1 CON, and 5,000 SP to put into POW storage or enchancement crystals.

 

[HyrumOWC]

I have had a big problem with the precise attack rules from day one. Basically, -40% to bypass armor or hit a speciic location becomes a minor penalty after acertain point. IMO the old RQ half skill idea works better. THat way the penalty is uniform no matter how skilled someone is the drop will be significant.

But why should the penalty be more severe the better you get?

Farmer Bob with his Spear skill fo 30% is halved to 15%, while Rune Lord Mike with his skill of 150% is dropped to 75%. (And yes, this does bring up shades of the 100+% halving rule)

Hyrum.