Blended Armor/Agility Mechanics

[Levyathyn]

Hey, I'm new here and I figure the best way to break the ice would be to ask a question I've been dwelling on for a while now. I'm tired of HP systems and I was thinking about coming up with a system where a character's agility and armor would combine to a sort of pool where any attacks recieved would have a chance to miss the higher your dodge pool is, and each attack that misses reduces the pool slightly. I know, I know, it's kind of like hit points, but the signifigant fact is that health would be a seperate function, and every attack that hit could be potentially dangerous. The problem area lies in how I would combine the armor and agility into one. I understand that heavy armor greatly reduces personal freedom of movement (but can offer unique resistances), but I have very little idea of how to structure this. Does anyone know of any game that uses similar mechanics?

I hope I explained myself well enough here. =)

[David C]

White Wolf is probably the closest system to something like what you're talking about.  White Wolf works like this...

Attacker rolls attack, gets  X success
Defender dodges, gets X successes
Compared to determine dodge/hit

On a hit,
Attacker rolls damage, gets A successes
Defender rolls "soak" (which would be armor in your case), gets B successes
A - B = damage

Then, they have like 7 body levels that range from nicked to "pale and faint" and finally, death.   

If you don't like dice pools, which I personally loath (turn 1 task resolution into rolling 8 dice? no thanks), your number of successes is how much you beat the target number by.  (Roll 1d20+skill, TN 10, result of 14 would be 5 successes)   Keep in mind, the bigger the dice is, the more likely somebody is to do lots of damage (in this case, somebody could do 11 damage in one hit with 0 skill when the defender has 0 skill as well)

[Vulpinoid]

You've indicated that the pool reduces slightly for every attack that misses.

What happens once a hit is taken?

Does it replenish?

Or is this pool simply like a fatigue effect that will always go down while the combat continues?

Either of these options can flavour the way combat is perceived in this system.

Just some questions to think about...

V

[Callan S.]

Hi Levyathyn, welcome to the forge!

Just posting because I've mulled over the idea of 'dodge points' rather than hitpoints before. Do you want it all blended neatly? If so here's a suggestion: armour has a certain dodge point score and you use that instead of your own. If your natural dodge pool is higher, the armours points kick in once its been reduced to the armours rating or lower - half of the dodge pool reduction goes onto armour, the other half onto the characters personal pool, thus sharing the load. In terms of agility, each armour could reduce the characters natural dodge pool by a set percentage (sure armour might slow you down, but does it matter to someone who wasn't very agile to begin with?)

Okay, that doesn't cover your unique resistances thing, though. Why do you want to cover those? Because they exist in real life, so they aught to be covered? Or because it might provide a provocative issue in terms of tactics?

Just on a side point, when I've mulled over dodge points I've thought getting rid of hit/miss rolls and the 'to hit' roll always applies damage (a random amount...it could be fixed, though). And the big plus is that each roll actually has an effect - that whole whitewolf thing doesn't do much at all for all the rolling - roll attack, roll defend...after all that? Miss and nothing happened at all. While if even the lowest attack roll still whittles away some dodge points, something still happened! That makes me a little excited, anyway!

[Levyathyn]

Brilliant. =) I like how people here actually respond to my queries.

Well, last night I looked over some of my old notes, and I think I really don't know where I was going. However, I've been reading and rereading some different RPG's (in case you're wondering, I'm aiming towards a generic/universal system) and I think I have a goal in mind.

David: When it comes to dice pools, the only game I've seen that I llike the use of them in is GODLIKE. I like working with small amounts of dice, although I prefer one-two each roll, such as percentile dice. I like the stages of death, and I had completely forgotten about White Wolf. =)

Vulpinoid: I was aiming towards moderately realistic, somewhat gritty combat, where, as hits 'glanced' off or were dodged, a PC became fatigued or perhaps lost a little of his luck. I was mulling over starting the armour/agility points over after each combat, and I was thinking about implementing certain bonuses or penalties for situations where surprise comes into play.

Callan: Thanks. =) I like the idea of reducing agility by a different percentage by different armour, and I'm ctually surprised I didn't think of that, as I mainly based the armour and agility scores off of percentile in the first place. Mainly, what I'm trying to achieve is a system where no single armour is better. I like D&D 3.5's use of higher armour scores joined with higher penalties to your Dexterity granted armour class, as well as a set penalty to certain skills, such as Swim and Move Silently, which would suffer from wearing heavier armour. JAGS Revised is a system I'm beginning to love, and I think the way they present armour is great.

For those who don't know, different armour have different saves to roll against to see if one can convert damage taken from piercing weapons, like bullets or arrows, into impact damage, which reduces damage taken. In addition, a static resistance is listed for each which reduces all damage taken by a small number of points.

In terms of unique resistances, what I mean is individual different methods of blocking different attacks, as does indeed exist in real life. The many tactical situations involved could be a good bonus, but I don't know if it would make the experience good enough to suffer the complications of such a system, as well as adding a few touches that could add versimilitude to the ability of the system to portray multiple genres.

One problem, which I think I can solve. The problem is that no matter the percent, if someone has a much higher agility than someone else, even the heaviest armours seem to favor the more agile character. This isn't necessarily untrue, but it still makes for a game where everyone will wear the highest armor regardless of agility cost. I think dividing the armours into Heavy and Light would make things work, where light armor imposed no penalty (or a small one) to agility/dodge, and heavy armours limited the agility/dodge to a maximum score that becomes lower as the weight increases.

I do like the idea of rolling and using the number or quality of successes in a simple equation to determine success in any given situation. I do like the argument that even a untrained man in a rusty old sword will rarely miss his target, but I think that a high enough sucess should allow the odd miss, whether the attack be blocked, dodged, or soaked up by the defender's armour.

[Callan S.]

Are you worried they'll all wear the same (the best) armour, not because they'll be all wearing the same thing, but because they'll be doing it as the best move toward winning, or such?

If not, I don't see the problem with everyone wearing the same armour, unless the setting dictates they wear different stuff so as to fit that setting. In that case, I wouldn't leave it to player choice - or not entirely. Have something like they roll twice to see which armours they are capable of wearing, then they pick one out of the two.

If you don't want the setting to dictate armour worn, but you also don't want 'make the winning move!' to determine the armour worn, that's a different matter. It depends on what your inner muse wants.

[Levyathyn]

My inner muse, or rather more accurately, my inner player, wants all the choices of armour to be good for different reasons, so at the end player preference of being able to take more damage or to not have to makes me think this way. I mean, sure, plate mail was great, but a crossbow bolt or solid hammer blow would basically make you wish that instead, you had just worn a simple surcoat, and maybe some chainmail. I mean, I don't want uber-realism, and if all of my players choose the same armour, then I would let them, and I would let them with vigor, but if one of them wanted a different experience, or perhaps a little uniqueness to his character, then I don't want to penalize that player.

That's my goal. Equal choice, equal consequence. And maybe, a little off-hand realism. That, and the tactical choice should come into the mix somewhere to, hopefully, make a respectable and intelligent armour system. A tank character, a real tough guy who wants to deal the most damage but realizes that, unfortunately, that often means taking the most damage, would want it all. The heavy duty suit that protects him from impact, concussion, bullets, lasers, razors, and car crashes. But maybe the dude in the back, who uses an antimaterial rifle as an antipersonnel weapon, maybe he wants to be able to quickly move from place to place, and be a little stealthy. Really, it's the same premise as listed, but I want a little more middle-ground versatility. I understand that there's more, and hopefully, the system will also be able to provide for people who wear no armour at all. I play a lot of video games, if you must know, and situations where armor is all important piss me off. In the end, I will always prefer the freedom of player choice. Right now I'm working on making scrapped together armour a viable protective force, for post-apocalyptic games where worn armor stitched together with random items is the norm.

[Creatures of Destiny]

Well to use the example of Medieval armour - it was great in battle, but sucked outside of battle. There's at least one case of knight boiling alive in his armour and dying from heat exhaustion. Then there's cost. Then there's stealth, climbing and just walking into town, all things that characters might need to do in an adventure. D20's idea of a big armoured guy and a lightly armoured nifty guy is actually quite limiting - an OD&D fighting man might where plate mail in combat but at another point in the dungeon take it off to sneak around.

In your post apocalypse scenario, if it's like Mad Max in the desert, then heavy armour would be potentially lethal unless it has some kind of cooling system. And of course it might restrict driving, parachuting, leaping from vehicle to vehicle and there's always a limit to armour - against a missile you're dead no matter what (and the guidance system may be attracted more easily to your armour!), so lurching around under masses of equipment is not a great idea.

Anyway I'm also using a separate Edge and wounds system. I also agree that keeping rolls to a minimum is a good goal.

Another thing to think about is whether your dodge pool protects against other effects - such as trips and grapples - in which case there might be an unarmoured bonus dodge die. That way armour gives more protection dice, but not against all attacks. Against grapple attempts, your unarmoured guy has more dice.

[Levyathyn]

Well to use the example of Medieval armour - it was great in battle, but sucked outside of battle. There's at least one case of knight boiling alive in his armour and dying from heat exhaustion. Then there's cost. Then there's stealth, climbing and just walking into town, all things that characters might need to do in an adventure. D20's idea of a big armoured guy and a lightly armoured nifty guy is actually quite limiting - an OD&D fighting man might where plate mail in combat but at another point in the dungeon take it off to sneak around.

Good points. One thing I don't want, though, is characters having to suffer through tedious armour removal segments.

In your post apocalypse scenario, if it's like Mad Max in the desert, then heavy armour would be potentially lethal unless it has some kind of cooling system. And of course it might restrict driving, parachuting, leaping from vehicle to vehicle and there's always a limit to armour - against a missile you're dead no matter what (and the guidance system may be attracted more easily to your armour!), so lurching around under masses of equipment is not a great idea.

Indeed. If you want to see my idea of Post-Apocalyptic heavy armour, check out the Fallout game series. Brotherhood of Steel power armour is, well, powered, to provide strength enhancement while giving protection. The setting also uses lasers and other advanced weapons, but indeed, lacks guided armaments, such as laser targeting or seeking missles.

Anyway I'm also using a separate Edge and wounds system. I also agree that keeping rolls to a minimum is a good goal.

Another thing to think about is whether your dodge pool protects against other effects - such as trips and grapples - in which case there might be an unarmoured bonus dodge die. That way armour gives more protection dice, but not against all attacks. Against grapple attempts, your unarmoured guy has more dice.

That's a good idea, and one I hadn't though of. It furthers the reasons I should split the pool, as there are definite situations where either having more armour or better reflexes would be preferable. =)

Thanks for the input, CoD.

[Vulpinoid]

It's been touched on by a couple of people, but I seriously think you should look further into cost as a balancing factor between armour types.
Both initial cost and maintenance costs.

Good armour is expensive for a reason, people want it, and people want it because it does a better job. The best quality armours might only be available legally to certain factions within you setting, two different factions might allow cheaper access to different armour types for their members. Otherwise you'd have to kill a faction member and strip their armour to get your hands on some.

Compare this with armour maintenance. Cheap armour can probably be repaired with inexpensive materials in a shoddy workshop. Good armour might require advanced forging, ceramic or polymer techniques that can only be employed in a serious, heavy duty factory. If you're wearing stolen armour from a faction, people outside the faction may not be able to repair 100% of the damage to it (if at all)...and do you really want a workshop owner asking question around their local neighbourhood about how to repair a specific advanced armour type.

Can you tell me someone who knows about repairing the T-1000 armour suit??
Yeah, just send it over to the faction HQ.
No, my client doesn't belong to that faction...
Then why does he have the T-1000 armour??

This has the bonus of adding an instant level of intrigue as well.

V

[Creatures of Destiny]

Well to use the example of Medieval armour - it was great in battle, but sucked outside of battle. There's at least one case of knight boiling alive in his armour and dying from heat exhaustion. Then there's cost. Then there's stealth, climbing and just walking into town, all things that characters might need to do in an adventure. D20's idea of a big armoured guy and a lightly armoured nifty guy is actually quite limiting - an OD&D fighting man might where plate mail in combat but at another point in the dungeon take it off to sneak around.

Good points. One thing I don't want, though, is characters having to suffer through tedious armour removal segments.

Well even if it takes the character a long time, for the player it's just, "You take off your armour". What it comes down to is more a matter of having characters need to make a choice about whether to wear their armour or not depending on the situation they expect (keeping a low -profile in the city, marching into the open deserr to hunt down heavily armed bandits, chasing renegades down the freeway...)

Thanks for the input, CoD.

Your welcome.

[Callan S.]

Mmm, I'm inclined to give a kink suggestion: Each player has points and they simply spend them upon impact, to represent their chosen armours qualities (the points buy damage reduction or whatever your going to have in the system). The cost to do so is doubled if the GM wants, which facilitates the GM giving guidance but not absolute control. Not sure when/how it regenerates, but when it does, everyone gets points back at the same time.

In other words, give up trying to make the perfect armour list and just leave it to players to spend their points to portray it in the actual moment of play. Even if you had some perfect armour list, the player choosing from it would effectively be exactly the same thing, just more hidden under the guise of merely shopping for amour rather than being explicit player authorship.

[Levyathyn]

Mmm, I'm inclined to give a kink suggestion: Each player has points and they simply spend them upon impact, to represent their chosen armours qualities (the points buy damage reduction or whatever your going to have in the system). The cost to do so is doubled if the GM wants, which facilitates the GM giving guidance but not absolute control. Not sure when/how it regenerates, but when it does, everyone gets points back at the same time.

In other words, give up trying to make the perfect armour list and just leave it to players to spend their points to portray it in the actual moment of play. Even if you had some perfect armour list, the player choosing from it would effectively be exactly the same thing, just more hidden under the guise of merely shopping for amour rather than being explicit player authorship.

True, but it would all but eliminate any advance planning. It's a sound idea, though, and one I'll have to check out. What about points that you spend when you purchase the armor? That way higher quality armour can be represented with more points, and the players will have to deal with the advantages or disadvantages their armour brings. Does that sound playable? I wouldn't know myself, not without testing it, but I trust you should have more experience with such systems.

Vulpinoid: I like the interplay of cost and maintainence, especially in a post-apocalypse setting I mentioned, as people who have the skills to repair such armour may number few, or be quite well hidden, or perhaps all dead. Killing a faction member for their armour is something that reminds me of some games, such as Morrowind. Although in the games, there were often very few consequences, I think  PnP game should be able to handle that well. =)

Creatures of Destiny: True. I like the idea of the lightest armours having little or no penalty, which would be a unique bonus I believe is realistic and a handy trade for less protection; i.e, having it on always.

As an aside, I was wondering if any of you have ever heard of Fringeworthy?

[Callan S.]

Levyathyn,

If everyone in the group enjoys staying within the game worlds constraints, then no it doesn't kill off future planning. If they put on light armour, the player ought to enjoy only spending armour points in a way that represents light armour. Sure he could spend more, but the fact he doesn't shows how he deliberately carries the fiction along with everyone else. And in terms of that, I think everyone gets the same amount of points, always.

I'll be honest; I'm thinking of a simulationist agenda when I suggest these techniques and ideas.

[Levyathyn]

Levyathyn,

If everyone in the group enjoys staying within the game worlds constraints, then no it doesn't kill off future planning. If they put on light armour, the player ought to enjoy only spending armour points in a way that represents light armour. Sure he could spend more, but the fact he doesn't shows how he deliberately carries the fiction along with everyone else. And in terms of that, I think everyone gets the same amount of points, always.

I'll be honest; I'm thinking of a simulationist agenda when I suggest these techniques and ideas.

True, but off the top of my head, two of the people I play with are heavy Gamists, and one part-times as a munchkin. =) I just know there would be heavy system manipulation. From a simulationist standpoint, however, your reasoning is sound. I'd have to test both systems out to truly see the flaws and benefits of each. However, I believe the armor issue is settled, because they both appeal to me greatly, and I know for sure I'd use either. Thanks for the advice. If I could just get everything else settled. =)