Helm

[Supplement Four]

I was thinking, Cimmerians wear helmets but little other armor quite often. Why? I wondered about the mechanics of it.

A standard open-faced helm is rated at DR 1. Any weapon with any AP number will negate that DR rating because we round down.

...but.


But, if we round up*, all of a sudden, there's a very small benefit to wearing a helmet. You get to soak up 1 point of damage from every successful hit against you. It ain't much, but it adds up.

And, it gives the Cimmerians a reason, mechanically, to wear helmets.

If an opponent doesn't want to give up that point of damage, he can always use Finness attacks. Then, again, the Cimmerian with the steel cap benefits because his defense just went up a point. It's a small thing--but it's something.

I think I'm going to implement this small change in my game so that helmets, by themselves, are useful to any who wear them, even if no other armor is used.





*Either round up or use a minimum DR 1 (it works out to the same thing) so that armor always provides some protection. Bypassing this armor would be very easy to do but requires a Finness attack.

 

[Jeffreywns]

I was under the impression that helmets only added to existing DR, but I could be wrong about the "+" meaning in the Helmet description.

 

[Supplement Four]

I was under the impression that helmets only added to existing DR, but I could be wrong about the "+" meaning in the Helmet description.

What's the existing DR of a Cimmerian in no armor? DR 0. I figure 0 + 1 = DR 1.





EDIT: It's not quite "official", but the Barbaric Treasures book has piecemeal armor rules. What I've described above is how they work. You simply add the DR ratings of each piece of armor together to get its total DR.

 

[Supplement Four]

I never round down with armour, if a fellow is wearing Leather and Steel cap DR 5 and is hit with weapon that does AP 5+, I round up to DR 3,

I think it's smart to play that way, but the rule in the book specifically states to round down.

I think I'll play your way, though. Makes more sense to me. Protection in this game is always good.

I think 0.5 Dr should not be ignored to I allow it to benifit user, whether NPC or PC, I not want to go to trouble of playing with half-points, evan though it feels better!

Yes, especially if you bring in the partial armor rules from Barbaric Treasures--which I think are very Conan. A Cimmerian will slap on some brass shin plates, if he has 'em, a helmet, and little else.

I give helm it full damage bonus, evan if they wear nothing else, I think that the way it ment to be, a cimmerian Barbarian, wearing just his traditional clothing and his Steel cap would have DR 1 and ir not get halfed, DR 1 is minimum Armour in my games.

Which is what I've done in my game by rounding up instead of down. The minimum damage resistance rating becomes DR 1.

 

[strategos14]

i use the piece armor from barbaric treasures also. i'm hesitant about rounding up with a helmet only thing however. don't like changing rules if i can help it. in my campaigns though, cimmerians in cimmeria don't have have a lot of helmets. from a historical standpoint, helmets in the middle ages were hard to come by. they were more difficult and more expensive to make than say, shields. which is why shields were easier to find. going by that and the fact that the cimmerians are not supposed to have much in the way of good steel armor and weapons, i just make helmets less common there. this is reflected in the price tag for even a simple helmet. it's pricey for anyone, especially for the common barbarian.
also, i know it states in some places that cimmerians tend to not use shields yet in other places they'll talk about shield walls. idk. from all the history i've read, i get the impression that most warriors tend toward shields if they have access to them. especially in cultures that lacked any "modern" armor. it seems shields were slowly discarded as heavy armor became more common on the battlefield. a foot soldier in plate didn't need a shield, plus he needed a 2-handed weapon now to go against his plate wearing enemies.
so anyway, more shields than helmets in my cimmeria

 

[Supplement Four]

don't like changing rules if i can help it.

I agree. But, I think it was needed here. And, it was such a small change--round up instead of down.

Otherwise, there's no reason, mechancially, to wear a helm and nothing else--and do that is soooo Cimmerian.

 

[tarkhan bey]

I use a simple system to make 'helmet alone' an armor option. In my D20 Conan game there is normally no such thing as the 'threat' of a critical hit. A weapon that has a critical range of 19-20 automatically crits on a roll of 19-20. That is unless the character is wearing a helmet or a broad girdle.(I borrowed the idea for an 'honour belt' from the old 'Celtos' skirmish rules but 'girdle' or 'harness' are better all round terms.)
If the character is wearing either (or both) of these items the crit is treated as a threat. This is rationalising that most(but not all) critical hits would probably be head or gut strikes.
1 AP is pretty much useless. This I think makes them a lot more useful and Frazetta-esque.

 

[Supplement Four]

I enjoy the varied add on rules being create in S4's Barbarian Books, was at my local games shop looking for it and still having no luck getting it, though he looking for me to get copies.

I thought those three books were pdf only. I didn't know that they came in hardback.

I know you can get them in pdf on the site. I wonder if Lulu has 'em? Might be able to get a hard copy that way. I'm quite happy with the hard copy of Thulsa's book that I got there.

 

[Supplement Four]

So home and big mug of lemsip (drink for colds and flu) and wala, as good as new again

Hope you feel better!

 

[tarkhan bey]

Nialldubh,
I do still use 'threats' of criticals where the aforementioned items are concerned. I think you may have misinterpreted what I wrote. Its when players choose not to wear helmets(broad girdles) that they automatically suffer a critical and no second roll is required.