Armors and Armor Rating

1st edition? 2nd edition? It doesnt matter! Let's just talk Palladium Fantasy.

Moderators: Immortals, Supreme Beings, Old Ones

User avatar
Blue Eyes
Dungeon Crawler
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 2:28 pm
Location: Denmark

Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by Blue Eyes »

Hello all,

i have some observations and a few ideas, would love to get input from experienced players and GMs.

Our Group has been playing PF for 20 years and i would say that everybody basically knows what they are doing by now, especially when it comes to character creation. What i mean is, if you want to create a warrior for example, you realize that Physical Prowess is as important as Physical Strength, so you make sure to build your character that way. Good damage is not worth much if you cannot hit a target.

Example: Having PP: 18 (+2) - added to the bonuses below.
Strike; +2 to strike from martial arts, +2 to strike from weapon proficiency, easily lands you at +6 to strike around level 4.
It would be possible to do the same math for parry as well; +3 to parry from martial arts, +2 to parry from boxing, +2 to parry from weapon proficiency, easily lands you at +9 to parry around level 4.

Most Men of Arms players in my Group are also quick to go for crafted weapons, once they have the coin for it, either kobold, dwarven or whatever crafted weapons and armor, for additional bonuses to strike, parry, disarm, entange and damage.

The point i am trying to make is that Armor Rating (A.R.) can sometimes seem irrelevant.
If you are attacked by something or someone that you can parry (block), with weapon or shield, most of the time your +9 to parry lets you block the incoming attack. In those situations A.R. never comes into play since the attackers attack was blocked.
In those situations where you fail your parry with +9, then odds are that the attacker hit a high number, and once Again your A.R. is most likely useless.
Many monsters have natural armor rating of 9-15, which when up against players with good attack bonus is more or less irrelevant.

Now i like A.R., the concept of it, and high A.R. armors have their uses of course, but more often than not, the monsters i use fall short because they have low armor rating compared to experienced players that know how to build a good fighter, or the players themselves return from adventure with armors that barely have a scratch on them, while they themselves have been reduced to HP.

The only place where A.R. functions really well in our game is whenever ranged weapons are involved. We use the RUE rules for ranged combat, total roll of 8 or higher to hit unarmored person, or must beat the A.R. of armor to hit armored one. Here you can only use applicable weapon proficiency and circumstance bonuses/penalties. A lot harder.

Now i understand that when two capable warriors meet each other in melee combat they should rely on their own swordsman skills to parry rather than the armor, a warrior knows the weak points of armor obviously, it just seems off to me that armors end up meaning so Little.

I have some ideas on how to handle this, but i would love to hear some comments from you Guys first. Are you experiencing the same "problem" and did you find a solution that makes sense?

cheers
User avatar
Whiskeyjack
Adventurer
Posts: 687
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 7:35 pm
Location: Thunder Bay, NW Ontario

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by Whiskeyjack »

One option is to use the base roll against the armour. So you roll a 12, with a +6 to strike and they fail to parry. The 12 is below the AR of 13 for that particular armour, so it hits the armour.
Another bit of unrealistic gameplay is the fact that weapons do so much damage to armour. In reality, a sword cut will do nothing to a breastplate. I still need to figure out a gameplay option for that.
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by eliakon »

Whiskeyjack wrote:One option is to use the base roll against the armour. So you roll a 12, with a +6 to strike and they fail to parry. The 12 is below the AR of 13 for that particular armour, so it hits the armour.

^this^
The best solution I have seen is to make it so that only the natural roll or better still natural roll + the bonus from WP and ONLY WP (thus allowing a more skilled fighter to bypass armor...but not stuff like PP, other skills or the rest of the stuff used to stack up PCs into the "automatic bypass the armor" level of strike bonuses that are prevelant.

Another system I have seen used was to simply make armor more or less always work... unless you make a called shot, with the AR the number you must beat to make said called shot. This allows for the logic of "if I am wearing a suit of plate armor... then I really should not be able to be hit by attacks unless someone takes the time and effort to try and aim at the few chinks."
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
User avatar
kiralon
Champion
Posts: 2800
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 10:05 pm
Comment: Kill it with Fire.

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by kiralon »

I do the same except I allow the wp + to strike also count, and I also allow armour to be enchanted above 19 AR.
I also give the metal armours damage resistance.
User avatar
Blue Eyes
Dungeon Crawler
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 2:28 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by Blue Eyes »

elloes,

thanks for the responses so far.

Eliakon Wrote:
Another system I have seen used was to simply make armor more or less always work... unless you make a called shot, with the AR the number you must beat to make said called shot. This allows for the logic of "if I am wearing a suit of plate armor... then I really should not be able to be hit by attacks unless someone takes the time and effort to try and aim at the few chinks.


i like this idea, but in melee combat in PF, making a called shot only uses up one melee attack. using a ranged weapon means using two (called) or three (aimed called) attacks. so, wouldnt that just mean that all fighters make called shots every single attack to try and bypass A.R, and how is that any different than regular combat? unless of course a penalty to attack is implied in what you write above, so the "A.R. bypass called shot" is done with a penalty, then i understand. i was thinking maybe -2 or -3, but giving that penalty effectively raises the A.R. of the defenders armor, and is that a good idea? Also, this seems like it would be a huge disadvantage to anyone using ranged attacks, they have to spend two attacks minimum to do damage.

Currently in our Group, making called shots is possible, since we also play with hit locations, currently it is -2 to strike an arm, leg og appendage and -3 to strike the head. If there is to be a called shot just to bypass the A.R. to hit the main body of the armor wearer, then i need to up the penalty to strike hit locations, but that could be done easily.

Also, using the idea you wrote above, Means, that all attacks, ranged or melee do no damage against any and all creatures with any amount of natural A.R., unless of course you try to bypass it. This i really like!

One more thing: Kiralon touched on it - damage resistance.
I am contemplating giving armor damage resistance, but only damage resistance that "makes sense".
So, if an attacker hits equal to or below the A.R. the armor absorbs the damage and the wearer takes none.
If an attacker hits above the A.R. then the armor still provides some protection, depending on the armor, and the type of weapon used in the attack.

Example: Wearing a chainmail: Chainmails were specifically designed to protect against slashing weapons. So any attack leveled against the wearer that does slashing damage that falls below the A.R. Means the chainmail soaks the damage and the wearer takes none. Any slashing attack that hits above the A.R. does half damage.
When attacked with piercing or bludgeoning weapons it Works same as above, except the wearer takes full damage from the attack if the A.R. is bypassed.

thoughts?
User avatar
ShadowLogan
Palladin
Posts: 7401
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 10:50 am
Location: WI

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by ShadowLogan »

I don't know if this would make AR more relevant or not, but what about using the attack type resistance ratings found in the system agnostic Weapons & Armor series and matching the weapons to damage rating in said series? Or convert the resistance into a damage reduction by type, but then you still have to classify the weapon's damage type.
User avatar
The Beast
Demon Lord Extraordinaire
Posts: 5956
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 3:28 pm
Comment: You probably think this comment is about you, don't you?
Location: Apocrypha

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by The Beast »

Blue Eyes wrote:elloes,

thanks for the responses so far.

Eliakon Wrote:
Another system I have seen used was to simply make armor more or less always work... unless you make a called shot, with the AR the number you must beat to make said called shot. This allows for the logic of "if I am wearing a suit of plate armor... then I really should not be able to be hit by attacks unless someone takes the time and effort to try and aim at the few chinks.


i like this idea, but in melee combat in PF, making a called shot only uses up one melee attack. using a ranged weapon means using two (called) or three (aimed called) attacks. so, wouldnt that just mean that all fighters make called shots every single attack to try and bypass A.R, and how is that any different than regular combat? unless of course a penalty to attack is implied in what you write above, so the "A.R. bypass called shot" is done with a penalty, then i understand. i was thinking maybe -2 or -3, but giving that penalty effectively raises the A.R. of the defenders armor, and is that a good idea? Also, this seems like it would be a huge disadvantage to anyone using ranged attacks, they have to spend two attacks minimum to do damage...


AFAIK, that rule is only in the RUE.
User avatar
Blue Eyes
Dungeon Crawler
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 2:28 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by Blue Eyes »

The Beast wrote:
Blue Eyes wrote:elloes,

thanks for the responses so far.

Eliakon Wrote:
Another system I have seen used was to simply make armor more or less always work... unless you make a called shot, with the AR the number you must beat to make said called shot. This allows for the logic of "if I am wearing a suit of plate armor... then I really should not be able to be hit by attacks unless someone takes the time and effort to try and aim at the few chinks.


i like this idea, but in melee combat in PF, making a called shot only uses up one melee attack. using a ranged weapon means using two (called) or three (aimed called) attacks. so, wouldnt that just mean that all fighters make called shots every single attack to try and bypass A.R, and how is that any different than regular combat? unless of course a penalty to attack is implied in what you write above, so the "A.R. bypass called shot" is done with a penalty, then i understand. i was thinking maybe -2 or -3, but giving that penalty effectively raises the A.R. of the defenders armor, and is that a good idea? Also, this seems like it would be a huge disadvantage to anyone using ranged attacks, they have to spend two attacks minimum to do damage...


AFAIK, that rule is only in the RUE.


true, which i already referenced earlier, our group uses RUE ranged combat rules. hence it is an issue i must consider
User avatar
xandarr2000
D-Bee
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:31 pm
Location: Dacono colorado

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by xandarr2000 »

I like the way another system handles it. Armor does nothing as far as making you harder to hit. If anything it makes you easier to hit. Also a longsword or short sword, crossbow bolt will have no problem getting through a breastplate if it is thrust. It will pass through it like a knife through a tin can. Slashing on the other hand it would be very resistant to. Use the armor rating as a soak off the damage, meanwhile keep their defense based on their PP and parry, block etc. Maybe use their PP as the active defense that is being rolled against, as that would represent how well they are moving and figure out a way to subtract based by armor type (and relative stiffness/inflexibility impairing movement of said armor) from their P.P. I realize this would require some tinkering with the combat system, but I think it makes sense in relative terms. Sure you can take a ton of abuse in your plate armor, but you are going to sacrifice mobility for it, making it more of a situational choice. Great for horseback or large-scale combats, crap for one on one or smaller skirmishes, whereby nature the combat is very mobile.

I have always felt like Palladium combat was 75% of the way there. Better than standard d20 systems but still lacking a few pieces to really capture the visceral nature of melee. I think with a few tweaks though it could be perfect.
Chris

"No matter how far you have to go, always take pride in how far you have already gone"
User avatar
Whiskeyjack
Adventurer
Posts: 687
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 7:35 pm
Location: Thunder Bay, NW Ontario

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by Whiskeyjack »

xandarr2000 wrote:I like the way another system handles it. Armor does nothing as far as making you harder to hit. If anything it makes you easier to hit.

What are you talking about? The whole purpose of armour is to protect the wearer. It was not decorative clothing.

xandarr2000 wrote:Also a longsword or short sword, crossbow bolt will have no problem getting through a breastplate if it is thrust. It will pass through it like a knife through a tin can.

No, they won't. Armour was very very effective. And it was angled and curved for a reason, to deflect anything that hits it. While a good hit from a bolt, hammer, axe, pike etc could pierce plate, it would not cut through like butter, and there was still the gambesson to go through. If you want to hurt the person underneath, you need to go through the gaps and pierce the mail.
User avatar
xandarr2000
D-Bee
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:31 pm
Location: Dacono colorado

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by xandarr2000 »

What are you talking about? The whole purpose of armour is to protect the wearer. It was not decorative clothing.



You are not near as evasive with a suit of plate mail on as you are with say leather. Thus as a target, you are easier to hit. Not sure why that does not make sense. Less mobility = much less chance of moving your mass out of the way with an attack. More protection from the blow itself but less ability to dodge or parry.

No, they won't. Armour was very very effective. And it was angled and curved for a reason, to deflect anything that hits it. While a good hit from a bolt, hammer, axe, pike etc could pierce plate, it would not cut through like butter, and there was still the gambesson to go through. If you want to hurt the person underneath, you need to go through the gaps and pierce the mail.


Read this than come back to the conversation. http://myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=25576 It illustrates my points wonderfully in terms of Joules of energy required to pierce various types of armor.
Chris

"No matter how far you have to go, always take pride in how far you have already gone"
User avatar
Whiskeyjack
Adventurer
Posts: 687
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 7:35 pm
Location: Thunder Bay, NW Ontario

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by Whiskeyjack »

Tests like that are junk. Unless they tested on a living person with an actual traditionally crafted suit it's completely unrealistic. The're on a static target, usually locked in place, and have everything set up to ensure a 90% strike. None of that is true on a battlefield. And even the conclusion there is that 2mm plate makes arrows obsolete, not being punched through like a tin can.
People in armour are also a lot more nimble than hollywood makes out. Knights didn't actually get lifted onto their horses with a crane.

Here's another thread on weapons and armour.
http://myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.9412.html
User avatar
The Beast
Demon Lord Extraordinaire
Posts: 5956
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 3:28 pm
Comment: You probably think this comment is about you, don't you?
Location: Apocrypha

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by The Beast »

Whiskeyjack wrote:Tests like that are junk. Unless they tested on a living person with an actual traditionally crafted suit it's completely unrealistic. The're on a static target, usually locked in place, and have everything set up to ensure a 90% strike. None of that is true on a battlefield. And even the conclusion there is that 2mm plate makes arrows obsolete, not being punched through like a tin can.
People in armour are also a lot more nimble than hollywood makes out. Knights didn't actually get lifted onto their horses with a crane.

Here's another thread on weapons and armour.
http://myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.9412.html


New Study Busts the Myth That Knights Couldn't Move Well in Armor
User avatar
xandarr2000
D-Bee
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:31 pm
Location: Dacono colorado

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by xandarr2000 »

15th-century armor weighed around 60ish lbs or 27 kilos, whereas 16th century, the armor you speak of weighed around 93-100 lbs depending on vestments. This is discounting for weapons and shields which would add an additional 7-10 lbs to the affair in total. As a veteran who wore Flak combat armor in both Afghanistan and Iraq which was around 60 lbs give or take for specific task-oriented gear (which was far more flexible and accommodating to movement), I can assure you in crappy conditions and physical exertion these guys were not running around like boxers. The increase in weight for 16th-century armor was made due to the advent of polearms and black powder weapons entering into the fray, caused an increase of 1-2 mm of thickness in some cases to breastplates in specific. In two digs alone multiple pierced breastplates and hauberks were found back in 2009 in which I was lucky enough to directly participate in while working on an exchange program with the University of York.

I can see you clearly have strong opinions brought on perhaps by some kind of LARPing experience. While many SCA chapters do strive for historical accuracy, They cannot emulate actual environmental conditions, the non-stop of actual battle and quite frankly the overall physical health that most individuals were in during the period of time they are replicating. Diets of salted meats, excessive alcohol consumption, and starchy vegetables all of which were super common amongst the soldiering types gave pronounced effects upon their physical capability for long-term drawn out fights. Quite frankly their hearts were not able to keep up with it nearly as well as those of us today who eat a moderately healthy diet. We have clear proof of this from bone samples etc tested from more recent digs. Metabolic health in this time period was abysmal, and this is from a portion of the population actually being fed regularly. So exhaustion played a much larger part as we are now realizing than first thought. In my RPG games I like to enforce certain realities, and this is one of them. The players at my table seem to like it, but most are also students of history themselves.

You are correct to say that putting a piece of armor on a post does not adequately represent the difficulty in hitting the person in it, but do not kid yourself into thinking these guys were Errol Flynn. Sure they could run, leap and move moderately well, but not for prolonged periods of time. Heat exhaustion and fatigue especially in the areas of France, Spain, and Italy as well as the Middle East areas of the crusades were very real factors and truly shaped the battlefields. By the mid 15th century, plate was slowly being reduced to just cover specific areas due to the fact weapons such as polearms and halberds, Ranseurs etc were quite good at opening the can up so to speak. Once black powder came into the fray and more powerful crossbows, walking around in a full suit of armor was more inhibiting than the value of protection it gave.

Notice I did not say arrows, I said crossbow bolts, which pack a lot more punch albeit at shorter ranges than an arrow packs. As far as them hopping onto horses, I concede that yes, of course, they did not have to be hoisted up into saddles. They could move, but my point is, not for long stints of time and battles were never short affairs. It was definitely a marathon, not a race.
Chris

"No matter how far you have to go, always take pride in how far you have already gone"
User avatar
Whiskeyjack
Adventurer
Posts: 687
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 7:35 pm
Location: Thunder Bay, NW Ontario

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by Whiskeyjack »

Never LARPed, just spent a lot of time reading and watching videos on medieval armour and weapons.
If you look at the pierced breastplates, were they pierced by swords? I would highly doubt it. They were likely pierced by a pole weapon of some sort or a spike on an axe or hammer. Weapons designed to punch through it.
This seems to be the only part we disagree on, as your initial description sounded like people in armour were lumbering brutes who were effectively helpless on the battle field.

You misunderstood my context on the armour on the post though. It's not the difficulty in hitting it, it's the actual effect that a weapon will have on mounted armour, versus armour on a person. A person moves and reacts to the hit, plus the body underneath is very different than a post or whatever other mounting they use. This makes the results effectively useless.

In regards to endurance, you also have to keep in mind that many battles lasted for extremely long periods of time, but the soldiers didn't partake in the entire battle. Groups would swap out and have rest breaks. And the people wearing breastplates were going to be the better off people, who would be in better health that the average soldier. Even with their health, I think a lot of them could go through more than most modern people even with our improved health. Not many people I know spend the majority of their adult lives in physical combat wearing armour, and then plow a field when you aren't fighting. While I would never want to personally go through the hell that they did, the prospect of imminent death can give you a significant energy boost.

Most of what we portray in our games is pretty far off from reality. Living in armour wasn't too common, and the gear that most adventuring groups carry is slightly on the impossible side. I just try to put as much realism into the aspects that are based on a historical world as I can.

That's awesome that you got to take part in an actual dig. That must have been a cool experience.
User avatar
kiralon
Champion
Posts: 2800
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 10:05 pm
Comment: Kill it with Fire.

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by kiralon »

From what I understood most people in full plate died from blunt force trauma rather than being pierced, well until crossbows and then guns. Even in a helmet you can get concussed from a good blow.

The lumbering armour that you get craned on to horses was only used for the jousts I thought, as it was too hard to lumber around in for long, which wasn't needed in a joust, just protection.

And I have even heard of theories that knights didn't really charge the battlefield on horseback, but charged to where the fight was, dismounted and the ran into the fight in their plate and chain. Horse Manoeuvrability giving them a big bonus when they flanked for example.
User avatar
Whiskeyjack
Adventurer
Posts: 687
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 7:35 pm
Location: Thunder Bay, NW Ontario

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by Whiskeyjack »

Here's a good article for you xandarr on the effect of full plate armour on endurance. About twice as much energy as unarmoured to move.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/cultur ... -the-test/
Last edited by Whiskeyjack on Sun Apr 01, 2018 10:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Whiskeyjack
Adventurer
Posts: 687
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 7:35 pm
Location: Thunder Bay, NW Ontario

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by Whiskeyjack »

Here's another good site with some information about armour and weapons. Should add a bit of flavour to a game.
https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/aams/hd_aams.htm
User avatar
Library Ogre
Palladium Books® Freelance Writer
Posts: 9800
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2001 1:01 am
Comment: My comments do not necessarily represent the views of Palladium Books.
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by Library Ogre »

ShadowLogan wrote:I don't know if this would make AR more relevant or not, but what about using the attack type resistance ratings found in the system agnostic Weapons & Armor series and matching the weapons to damage rating in said series? Or convert the resistance into a damage reduction by type, but then you still have to classify the weapon's damage type.



xandarr2000 wrote:I like the way another system handles it. Armor does nothing as far as making you harder to hit. If anything it makes you easier to hit. Also a longsword or short sword, crossbow bolt will have no problem getting through a breastplate if it is thrust. It will pass through it like a knife through a tin can. Slashing on the other hand it would be very resistant to. Use the armor rating as a soak off the damage, meanwhile keep their defense based on their PP and parry, block etc. Maybe use their PP as the active defense that is being rolled against, as that would represent how well they are moving and figure out a way to subtract based by armor type (and relative stiffness/inflexibility impairing movement of said armor) from their P.P. I realize this would require some tinkering with the combat system, but I think it makes sense in relative terms. Sure you can take a ton of abuse in your plate armor, but you are going to sacrifice mobility for it, making it more of a situational choice. Great for horseback or large-scale combats, crap for one on one or smaller skirmishes, whereby nature the combat is very mobile.

I have always felt like Palladium combat was 75% of the way there. Better than standard d20 systems but still lacking a few pieces to really capture the visceral nature of melee. I think with a few tweaks though it could be perfect.


At one point, I proposed a "simple" and "complicated" system that turn AR into a damage reduction system, rather than a "harder to hit" system.

The complicated version involved the system in CWA&C, with weapons doing different kinds of damage, which different armors resisted at different levels.... your padded armor might be good against bludgeoning weapons, but fair poorly against hacking weapons. The simple version took the current ARs, reduced them by 4, and made that the damage reduction from the armor against all weapons. In either case, armor took the damage it reduced from each hit... so, using the simple method, Cloth armor would have an AR of 1, and 6 SDC. Once you've taken 6 hits, your armor is in useless tatters. Full suit of chain would have an AR of 10. If you got hit for 14 damage, you'd take 4 and your armor would take 10. Get hit for 3 damage, and you take nothing and your armor takes 3. I also allowed critical strikes to bypass armor at -1 to the multiplier... so if you do a *2 critical, you can bypass armor and do normal damage. If you normally do a *4 critical, you could bypass armor and do *3.

As for a system that does this natively? Hackmaster. Armor provides damage resistance, but also penalizes your defense, weapon speed, initiative, and running speed. You don't walk slower in armor, but you might not be able to effectively sprint or run in the heavier stuff.
-overproduced by Martin Hannett

When I see someone "fisking" these days my first inclination is to think "That person doesn't have much to say, and says it in volume." -John Scalzi
Happiness is a long block list.
If you don't want to be vilified, don't act like a villain.
The Megaverse runs on vibes.
All Palladium Articles
Mutant Dawn for Savage Worlds!
User avatar
Blue Eyes
Dungeon Crawler
Posts: 306
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 2:28 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by Blue Eyes »

Mark Hall wrote:
ShadowLogan wrote:I don't know if this would make AR more relevant or not, but what about using the attack type resistance ratings found in the system agnostic Weapons & Armor series and matching the weapons to damage rating in said series? Or convert the resistance into a damage reduction by type, but then you still have to classify the weapon's damage type.



xandarr2000 wrote:I like the way another system handles it. Armor does nothing as far as making you harder to hit. If anything it makes you easier to hit. Also a longsword or short sword, crossbow bolt will have no problem getting through a breastplate if it is thrust. It will pass through it like a knife through a tin can. Slashing on the other hand it would be very resistant to. Use the armor rating as a soak off the damage, meanwhile keep their defense based on their PP and parry, block etc. Maybe use their PP as the active defense that is being rolled against, as that would represent how well they are moving and figure out a way to subtract based by armor type (and relative stiffness/inflexibility impairing movement of said armor) from their P.P. I realize this would require some tinkering with the combat system, but I think it makes sense in relative terms. Sure you can take a ton of abuse in your plate armor, but you are going to sacrifice mobility for it, making it more of a situational choice. Great for horseback or large-scale combats, crap for one on one or smaller skirmishes, whereby nature the combat is very mobile.

I have always felt like Palladium combat was 75% of the way there. Better than standard d20 systems but still lacking a few pieces to really capture the visceral nature of melee. I think with a few tweaks though it could be perfect.


At one point, I proposed a "simple" and "complicated" system that turn AR into a damage reduction system, rather than a "harder to hit" system.

The complicated version involved the system in CWA&C, with weapons doing different kinds of damage, which different armors resisted at different levels.... your padded armor might be good against bludgeoning weapons, but fair poorly against hacking weapons. The simple version took the current ARs, reduced them by 4, and made that the damage reduction from the armor against all weapons. In either case, armor took the damage it reduced from each hit... so, using the simple method, Cloth armor would have an AR of 1, and 6 SDC. Once you've taken 6 hits, your armor is in useless tatters. Full suit of chain would have an AR of 10. If you got hit for 14 damage, you'd take 4 and your armor would take 10. Get hit for 3 damage, and you take nothing and your armor takes 3. I also allowed critical strikes to bypass armor at -1 to the multiplier... so if you do a *2 critical, you can bypass armor and do normal damage. If you normally do a *4 critical, you could bypass armor and do *3.

As for a system that does this natively? Hackmaster. Armor provides damage resistance, but also penalizes your defense, weapon speed, initiative, and running speed. You don't walk slower in armor, but you might not be able to effectively sprint or run in the heavier stuff.


heya, very interesting.

so, if i understand it correctly, using the suggestion above, there is no way, except for critical strikes, to hit a person wearing an armor, until the armor is destroyed? i suspect that would extend battles significantly, or is that not your experience?

just out of curiosity, how would you handle natural armor damage reduction? (like dragons or any other creature with natural A.R.)
User avatar
eliakon
Palladin
Posts: 9093
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:40 pm
Comment: Palladium Books Canon is set solely by Kevin Siembieda, either in person, or by his approval of published material.
Contact:

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by eliakon »

I am personally a fan of Damage Reduction systems (I play a lot of GURPS). It allows for some great effects like differential armor, armor piercing weapons and the like.
The problem of course is that Palladium doesn't have it, and that there is no way short of totally rewriting every book ever printed to add it into the game.
As a house rule it is doable because you just need to convert what you use in your game, and can convert things on the fly as needed. But as an official rule it is off the table as an option.
The rules are not a bludgeon with which to hammer a character into a game. They are a guide to how a group of friends can get together to weave a collective story that entertains everyone involved. We forget that at our peril.

Edmund Burke wrote:The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
User avatar
kiralon
Champion
Posts: 2800
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 10:05 pm
Comment: Kill it with Fire.

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by kiralon »

One of my (many) house rules is a separate Armour penetration roll with only wp bonus to strike and some enchantments and an extra rank of things to buy on weapons. Roll 2 dice when you attack, you know your strike bonus and armour penetration bonus for the weapon your using so its barely slows things down at all, and I encourage them to know what these bonuses are because if I ask before you hit and you don't know and have to add it up rather then just look at it on your sheet they suddenly become 0 for both. Fixes the fleet feet issue of auto armour penetration. (fleet feet is the first spell every wizard I have dm'd takes when he can get it over every other spell).

This makes heavy armour worth wearing, especially when enchanted to have a higher AR (normally maxes out at 23, as +5 is about the extra you can get to penetrate armour with magic and well made bonuses, not including wp bonus). Then you make armour only be able to stop a certain amount of damage (ar for non rigid, double ar for rigid) so plate(rigid) with ar of 18 will stop the first 36 point of damage (this number can be buffed too) and leather(non rigid) with an ar of 12 will only stop the first 12 points of damage.
Surprisingly once you are used to it, it works out ok

Roleplaying: Fantasy math for masses.
User avatar
Whiskeyjack
Adventurer
Posts: 687
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 7:35 pm
Location: Thunder Bay, NW Ontario

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by Whiskeyjack »

kiralon. How does your system actually bypass armour though. Say a sneak attack from behind with a dagger, or a called shot to an unprotected area? A dagger would never do enough damage to bypass the reduction. I love the idea of it, but a lot of characters would be effectively immune to attack.
User avatar
Library Ogre
Palladium Books® Freelance Writer
Posts: 9800
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2001 1:01 am
Comment: My comments do not necessarily represent the views of Palladium Books.
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by Library Ogre »

Blue Eyes wrote:
Mark Hall wrote:The complicated version involved the system in CWA&C, with weapons doing different kinds of damage, which different armors resisted at different levels.... your padded armor might be good against bludgeoning weapons, but fair poorly against hacking weapons. The simple version took the current ARs, reduced them by 4, and made that the damage reduction from the armor against all weapons. In either case, armor took the damage it reduced from each hit... so, using the simple method, Cloth armor would have an AR of 1, and 6 SDC. Once you've taken 6 hits, your armor is in useless tatters. Full suit of chain would have an AR of 10. If you got hit for 14 damage, you'd take 4 and your armor would take 10. Get hit for 3 damage, and you take nothing and your armor takes 3. I also allowed critical strikes to bypass armor at -1 to the multiplier... so if you do a *2 critical, you can bypass armor and do normal damage. If you normally do a *4 critical, you could bypass armor and do *3.


heya, very interesting.

so, if i understand it correctly, using the suggestion above, there is no way, except for critical strikes, to hit a person wearing an armor, until the armor is destroyed? i suspect that would extend battles significantly, or is that not your experience?

just out of curiosity, how would you handle natural armor damage reduction? (like dragons or any other creature with natural A.R.)


Not quite. Armor stops all damage up to its AR, and takes damage equal to what it stops; anything above that bleeds over directly to the target, but doesn't do any additional damage to the armor. If your weapon doesn't do much damage (daggers, short swords) and you're facing someone with a lot of AR, then, yes, you have to work through their armor before you hurt them, personally... a dagger v. a suit of chain won't do anything permanent without a damage bonus or a critical strike. With AR 10 (base AR-4) and 44 SDC, stabbing someone with a dagger for 1d6 damage is going to take a while... about 13 hits where you're tearing up their armor before you actually get to the meat within. Add in some damage bonuses, and you cut that down (a +2 to damage means you only take 8 hits). With a larger damage weapon, you're likely to be hurting them the entire time, but you won't be hurting them as badly as you might... if you do 2d8+10 damage per hit, you'll destroy their armor in 5 hits (as the armor takes as much damage as it blocks), and be doing an average of 9 damage to their body in the meantime.

Natural armor works the same way, in the simple system. Natural AR - 4 = AR. So, Kankoran, with their AR of 6, have 2 AR at all times, even when unarmored. Either overcome it or get a critical.
-overproduced by Martin Hannett

When I see someone "fisking" these days my first inclination is to think "That person doesn't have much to say, and says it in volume." -John Scalzi
Happiness is a long block list.
If you don't want to be vilified, don't act like a villain.
The Megaverse runs on vibes.
All Palladium Articles
Mutant Dawn for Savage Worlds!
User avatar
kiralon
Champion
Posts: 2800
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 10:05 pm
Comment: Kill it with Fire.

Re: Armors and Armor Rating

Unread post by kiralon »

Whiskeyjack wrote:kiralon. How does your system actually bypass armour though. Say a sneak attack from behind with a dagger, or a called shot to an unprotected area? A dagger would never do enough damage to bypass the reduction. I love the idea of it, but a lot of characters would be effectively immune to attack.

If they only have a dagger and they are fighting guys in full plate something has gone wrong with the adventure for one, but I also have a lot of perks that can help back the other way, but a called shot can get the weak spots in plate, but its not easy to do, or its a thief with x2 - x7 damage from behind, depending on what level he is and can get through (I use first ed mostly and first ed thieves still have backstab). Someone in full plate is a hard target, so they don't run into them often, and try not to fight them if they do. The damage resistance only works with rigid armours so there are only 3 that are hard to get through, so chain and scale and leather are all as per normal, and the damage reduction for the rigid armour does mean that yes a standard dagger isn't really going to go through, grab a dagger and see how long it takes you to stab through a steel frying pan.
But it also means that giants can do enough damage to get through even full plate when they don't penetrate the armour, same with ballista's and sniping shots from longbows. If something has done 40pts of damage to your armour you would certainly know about it.
Crossbows and siege weapons ignore a certain amount of damage resistance. Pretty much the same with area effect weaponry, and some pole arms.
and Magic weapons (or weapons made out of magical materials) can ignore damage reduction too.
And there is of course the western empires enchantment that automatically penetrates armour.


But say you have +6 strike +3 AP(armour penetration) +3 damage.
roll to hit, get a 14, its a hit (he rolled a 3 to parry)
roll to penetrate armour and roll a 17, so that 20 with bonuses
he is wearing full plate with an ar of 19 and 200 sdc
you are using a battle axe so 3d6+3, you roll a 12 and get 15
5 damage is absorbed by steel full plate damage reduction and 10 gets through.

if the ap roll didn't penetrate the armour would have taken 10 damage (unless you have taken the extra damage to armour perk)
if it had been say 45 pts of damage instead from a jotans axe (ignores steels dr) the armour would have absorbed 5 pts, then the full plate would have taken 36 pts of damage, and the remaining 4 pts still carried on through. Magical SDC has to come of first though so if he ha d gotten the armour enchanted with an extra 40 sdc, that has to come off before bleedthrough damage can occur.
Post Reply

Return to “Palladium Fantasy RPG®”