House Rule: Armour damage reduction

[Zager Krahl]

Just thought I would share a rule that I am using in a LWMP game at the moment. I would be interested to here other ideas for armour rules as well.

Armour Damage Reduction
When a character takes damage while wearing armour, they can make a test to see whether their armour managed to reduce the damage dealt in some way. The sequence works as follows:

1) D = total damage dealt by single opponent during a single round
...if attacked by multiple opponents, this check will be run once per opponent
2) A1,A2,A3,... = ENDURANCE bonus given by each piece of armour the character has
3) Armour Score (AS) = (total A + 1d10) - D

- if AS>=0: each piece of armour reduces the amount of damage dealt by 50% of the ENDURANCE bonus that the armour gives when worn

- if AS<0: two options:
a) each piece of armour reduces the amount of damage dealt by 50% of the ENDURANCE bonus that the armour gives when worn _AND_ one piece of armour permanently reduces its ENDURANCE bonus by 1 point
b) take full damage from attack, but none of the character's armour is damaged

Example:
- wearing a Helmet (+2EP) and Chainmail Waistcoat (+4EP)
- take 9 points damage in single round from single opponent
- A = 2+4 = 6
- D = 9
- AS = (6+1d10) -9

- if AS>=0: damage is reduced by (2/2 + 4/2)= 1+2 = 3 points; only take 6 damage
- if AS<0:
Option a) reduce damage by 3 points, and one of Helmet or Chainmail has its ENDURANCE bonus reduced by 1 point
Option b) take full damage of 9 points, but Helmet or Chainmail not damaged (so both still give +2 and +4 respectively)

 

[Random Code]

Its too complex for the LW game in my opinion: Adding together some numbers, then subtracting a random number followed by a previously calculated number, then comparing two number to see if the armour degrades or if you want to opt for one of a number of options. It all just seems a laborious process for what its trying to do.

I don't even think some of the maths is right unless I'm reading it wrong... Isn't AS equal to -3 not -9 in your example?

(ie, AS = (total A + 1d10(10=0)) - D which is AS = (6 - 0) - 9 which is 6 - 9 which equals -3 not -9)

Also, I think your decision tree in the example has two >= checks and no < check.

*** ***

I'm looking at damage reduction but just going with an amount that gets subtracted from the combat results table and offsetting this with a damage bonus from weapons (leaving bonuses direct to CS only applicable due to magic or well made weapons). This way the mechanics are simpler and you can easily add armour degrading with each hit (ie, just apply -1 to a piece of armour for each time damage is applied to PC endurance) if you want to add such a layer of realism.

 

[Zager Krahl]

Okay, I have fixed some of the math to make it even easier to understand.

Basically:
- if (damage taken) <= (total EP bonus from all armour + 1d10)
then (reduce damage by 50% of all EP bonuses from all armour)

- else if (damage taken) > (total EP bonus from all armour + 1d10)
then (reduce damage by 50% of all EP bonuses from all armour AND reduce EP bonus of one piece of armour by 1 point)
or (take full damage and all armour remains undamaged)

 

[locarno24]

It's a nice idea - the concept of extra endurance for armour seems too simplistic sometimes - but the key with any Lone Wolf rule is simplicity.

Certainly once you start throwing options in there it's a bit convoluted.

A straight damage reduction is fair enough, but it is a very, very big deal - with most results on the hero side only being a handful of endurance points lost, reducing them by one or two makes them much nastier.

Not sure about armour degrading that fast, either - I'm not convinced about a helmet being destroyed in a couple of rounds of combat, for example (and why is everyone repeatedly striking my head?)


Last comment - Endurance is just that, endurance; an endurance loss doesn't necessarily entail stab wounds and blunt trauma - exhaustion plays a big, big part in it as well (especially for anyone who thought weaponskill with a two-handed sword would be a funny idea).