Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: korishinzo@*****.com (Ice Heart)
Subject: Layered Armor (was: Rolling the bones...)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 07:31:28 -0700 (PDT)
> > Total Armor: 7/4 (Armor jacket + 1/2 vest)

> The problem I have with that line of thought (and I have thought of
> it, plus it's right there in the book) is that realistically (and,
> yes, you shouldn't argue physics in a world of magic, or reality in
> a fantasy game), adding another layer of armor *should* increase
> your resistance to bullets. My players argued the point, and I tend
> to agree.

Do what I do then. I do something a little different than giving them
the full value of their highest piece of armor, followed by half the
value of their second piece. I give them the full value of their
outermost layer of armor. I then give them half the value of any
layer armor worn underneath, round down, to a minimum of 1/1. So if
the player actually wants to layer on armored clothing, an armored
vest with plates, a long coat and a form fitted suit, they get
benefit from every piece of armor worn. The long coat would give
them 4/2. The vest (IIRC 3/2) would give them +1/1. The armored
clothing would give them another +1/0. The FFBA would add its 4/1.
Slap on some forearm guards for an extra +0/1 in melee. Result 10/4
(10/5 in melee). Now, I think it is a bit ridiculous that FFBA
incurs NO layering penalty. I add half its value (round up) to the
layering calculations [shirt: 1/0, partial suit: 1/1, full suit:
2/1].

So, the layering total for the armor combination would be long coat
(4/2) + vest (3/2) + clothing (3/0) + FFBA (2/1) = 12/5. So a
character with a Quickness of 6 will, in my game, suffer a -3 to
Combat Pool, and find their effective Quickness reduced by 3 for
calculating movement. Any Athletics test depending on agility (read:
most of them, running/jumping/climbing/etc) will suffer a +3 TN
penalty. Note that a character with a Quickness of 4 (high end human
average) will be completely unable to move in this amount of armor
(effective Quickness of 0 for calculating movement). I am all for
letting PCs wear a bunch of armor, and giving them some benefit for
all that protection... right up to the point where they immobilize
themselves... making all the armor in the world moot. :)

======Korishinzo
--Can I offer you gel-packs to go with that, sir? ;>



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Message no. 2
From: davek@***.lonestar.org (David Kettler)
Subject: Layered Armor (was: Rolling the bones...)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 15:41:11 +0000
On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 07:31:28AM -0700, Ice Heart wrote:
> Do what I do then. I do something a little different than giving them
> the full value of their highest piece of armor, followed by half the
> value of their second piece. I give them the full value of their
> outermost layer of armor. I then give them half the value of any
> layer armor worn underneath, round down, to a minimum of 1/1. So if
> the player actually wants to layer on armored clothing, an armored
> vest with plates, a long coat and a form fitted suit, they get
> benefit from every piece of armor worn. The long coat would give
> them 4/2. The vest (IIRC 3/2) would give them +1/1. The armored
> clothing would give them another +1/0. The FFBA would add its 4/1.
> Slap on some forearm guards for an extra +0/1 in melee. Result 10/4
> (10/5 in melee). Now, I think it is a bit ridiculous that FFBA
> incurs NO layering penalty. I add half its value (round up) to the
> layering calculations [shirt: 1/0, partial suit: 1/1, full suit:
> 2/1].
>

Woah, wait a minute. If I'm reading that right you're adding the full value of the
form-fitting armor to the total armor value. While it is true that the canon rules say
that form-fitting armor doesn't impose layering penalties, there is nothing that says it
doesn't follow the normal halve-its-value-when-layering rules. Getting an additional 4
points of ballistic armor added to whatever you're wearing without would be...insane.

Anyway, all this talk about layering armor and penalties reminds me how cheap an elf with
quickness 12 would be. You really could walk around looking like the tire man without
suffering penalties. Makes you think, though...why are layering penalties based entirely
on quickness? Shouldn't body and strength matter at least as much?

--
Dave Kettler
davek@***.lonestar.org
http://davek.freeshell.org/
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
Message no. 3
From: msde_shadowrn@*****.com (Mark S)
Subject: Layered Armor (was: Rolling the bones...)
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2004 09:38:00 -0700 (PDT)
--- David Kettler <davek@***.lonestar.org> wrote:
> Anyway, all this talk about layering armor and penalties reminds me
> how cheap an elf with quickness 12 would be. You really could walk
> around looking like the tire man without suffering penalties. Makes
> you think, though...why are layering penalties based entirely on
> quickness? Shouldn't body and strength matter at least as much?

The 5kg per point of strength before you start resisting stun damage
from encumbrance usually keeps things in line. I don't think there's
anything tying body to weight of the armor, but if you did, troll armor
would probably encumber even a strong troll, so I don't know if it's a
good idea.

Mark




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Message no. 4
From: korishinzo@*****.com (Ice Heart)
Subject: Layered Armor (was: Rolling the bones...)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 12:56:02 -0700 (PDT)
> Woah, wait a minute. If I'm reading that right you're adding the
> full value of the form-fitting armor to the total armor value.
> While it is true that the canon rules say that form-fitting armor
> doesn't impose layering penalties, there is nothing that says it
> doesn't follow the normal halve-its-value-when-layering rules.
> Getting an additional 4 points of ballistic armor added to whatever
> you're wearing without would be...insane.

Yep, my mistake. My math was a bit hasty there. :)

> Anyway, all this talk about layering armor and penalties reminds me
> how cheap an elf with quickness 12 would be. You really could walk
> around looking like the tire man without suffering penalties.
> Makes you think, though...why are layering penalties based entirely
> on quickness? Shouldn't body and strength matter at least as much?

No. No matter how big and strong you are, eventually the amount of
armor you are wearing will impede your range of motion. The
penalties for layered armor have nothing to do with weight, only
bulk.

======Korishinzo
--in fact, I'm wearing too much armor right now... can't type for
drek ;p




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Layered Armor (was: Rolling the bones...), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!