Forums of the Megaverse®

Recon doesnt have armor rules that I can think of.
the thing with recon is its supposed to be ultra leathal. roll 1d100...k thats your hp....ak's do like 4d10 (this is all from my memory sorry if im off) so most people die with one max 2 shots, your real lucky to take 3 shots and live.
if you had to add armor in Id say light armor gives you 10 to 15 points reduction in the first 3 shots and then its worthless. hard would be more like 20 to 40 off 3 to 4 shots. (class V armor is usaly rated to take 3 shots of AP 30.06 if I remember)
Not alot of people wore much armor in vietnam so in that setting id say no armor.

Recon was written at a time when practical body armour against rifle rounds just didn't exist. As a result there are no such rules in the system.

I personally reduce the damage of the incoming rounds based on the strength of the armour. A light armour will reduce the damage by 5 points per round. Medium by 10 points but you are -5 to AG while wearing it. Heavy by 20 points but -10 to AG

I personally go with Nam era Steal Helmets and Flack Vests being -5 Damage per hit from Small Arms and Light Support Weapons and -10 per hit from Fragments and Melee Combat

Modern (mid 90's onward) Kevlar (Helmets & Vests) -10 on it's own -15 with light Trauma Plates -20 for Heavy Trauma Plates in Vests and -15 to -20 for some of the advanced combat helmets that get trialed but not adopted due to "Logistical Issues"