Topic: armor question
Started by: coryblack_666
Started on: 6/13/2003
Board: The Riddle of Steel
On 6/13/2003 at 2:40am, coryblack_666 wrote:
armor question
I don't even have the book yet, but will first chance i get. But when me and some friends were doing some combat tests we came across a question that we couldnt find in his book. If you take a definite hit but your toughness and armor put the damage in the zero or negatives, do you take a minimum of a level one hit or is it nothing?
On 6/13/2003 at 2:43am, Ashren Va'Hale wrote:
RE: armor question
no, its a level 0 wound, unless you would like it to be a houserule that if you are hit its a level one min. that would make the game even deadlier!
On 6/13/2003 at 2:45am, demiurgeastaroth wrote:
RE: armor question
However, blows to the head can still stun a victim, causing shock, even if no damage penetrates. So you might be able to stun him long enough to get a practically unopposed attack in, and that should be able to get through high armour.
On 6/13/2003 at 3:00am, coryblack_666 wrote:
RE: armor question
oh ok, we used minimum damage 1, because when my character was fully suited some of the other guys had a hell of a time hurting my guy. I was going to be the brute force of the team. The description of him was "Built like a brick shithouse." Big stahlnish guy who relied on his armor for the most part. He carried a dopplehander.
It was my first time playing, but my stratagy became to swing or thrust with full force everytime. If i landed i usualy did some pretty heafty damage. If i missed i usualy got a scratch. Im sure we were probably doing the combat while missing some aspects of it, but that's what happend when we were running combat tests.
On 6/13/2003 at 7:26am, Salamander wrote:
RE: armor question
coryblack_666 wrote: oh ok, we used minimum damage 1, because when my character was fully suited some of the other guys had a hell of a time hurting my guy. I was going to be the brute force of the team. The description of him was "Built like a brick shithouse." Big stahlnish guy who relied on his armor for the most part. He carried a dopplehander.
It was my first time playing, but my stratagy became to swing or thrust with full force everytime. If i landed i usualy did some pretty heafty damage. If i missed i usualy got a scratch. Im sure we were probably doing the combat while missing some aspects of it, but that's what happend when we were running combat tests.
Again, be careful about this. If an opponent decides to counter, you are stuck with nothing and he feeds off of your successes. This means that the harder you hit (pending his successful counter) the harder he hits you. If he is smart and packs a warhammer and ends up faster than you & or feints etc, he can kill you pretty quick, regardless of your armour.
On 6/13/2003 at 5:05pm, Bankuei wrote:
RE: armor question
Right, and let's not forget...
In face to face play, there's tons of strategies one can pull off to counteract armor... Such as kicking them down a flight of stairs, tripping, running them down with a horse, running away and dropping something heavy on them, dropping a net on them, etc. For nasty siege battles, pouring burning hot oil on fully armored guys is particularly mean.
Or you could always do the peasant move, kill the horse and either pike the guy to death, or mob him and stick'em with dagger in the eye.
Chris
On 6/13/2003 at 5:16pm, Valamir wrote:
RE: armor question
The armored guy of doom is a very nasty combat monster (there are other ways to get nasty combat monsters also), but also has its vulnerabilities
Vulnerability #1) Accuracy and Improved accuracy. I bet there's some portion on your body that is not sword proof. And the guy with the accuracy edge will find it and make you pay for your lack of defense.
Vulnerability #2) Fatigue. Keeping track of fatigue isn't that cumbersome, but goes ALONG way towards cutting the armored tank down to size. Play defensive, full evade like a big dog and wait for armor boys CP to dribble away due to fatigue. Then kill him dead.
Vulnerability #3) High strength opponents with anti armor bonuses (like half swording and pole axes). Want to see an armored tank cut down to size in a hurry...give a pole axe to a strength 5 or 6 opponent with a decent size combat pool, and see how long the no defense tactic works.
Its a hell of a nice thing to have a full suit of plate...but don't get too cocky with it.
On 6/13/2003 at 5:20pm, Bankuei wrote:
RE: armor question
Also, let's not forget some of the fun things that also have worked historically...
1) Dehorsing
Kill the horse, watch him fall. The armor is not designed to absorb falls that well, and now you've got 20-60 extra lbs on you as you take the big dive. "Falling well" is not just training, but also a serious part of being able to see how your falling, which is tough if you've got the full face mask helmet going on.
It may not kill ya, but stun you enough to catch a dagger in the eye.
2) Get kicked down stairs
Again, falling, and also doesn't require massive damage be done.
3) Drop something heavy on the guy
What's that? Your helmet reduced your Perception...awww, too bad.
:)
Chris
On 6/13/2003 at 6:15pm, Morfedel wrote:
RE: armor question
My problem with the heaviest armors is that it seems to make a full-harnessed-character almost impossible to land a blow on an unarmored foe, combat pools being equal; generally, it seems like the following happens:
1) Heavy armor guy launches an attack; Unarmored Guy parries with a larger dice pool, having more dice left for stage 2.
2) Stage 2: Unarmored guy either bounces his blow off armored guy completely, OR he does a level 1 wound, over and over, whittling the armored guy away.
With the first possibility, it seems like you end up in a stalemate, while in the second, the unarmored guy whittles away at the armored guy, who doesn't have the dice pool to keep up.
Then again, I haven't run much of TRoS yet. Are we doing something wrong? :)
On 6/13/2003 at 7:22pm, demiurgeastaroth wrote:
RE: armor question
Morfedel wrote: My problem with the heaviest armors is that it seems to make a full-harnessed-character almost impossible to land a blow on an unarmored foe, combat pools being equal
This is a concern of mine, too. While looking through old threads, I seem to remember noticing Jake say if he were to do armour again he'd probably use lower CP penalties. I wonder what those penalties would be...
On 6/13/2003 at 8:05pm, Mike Holmes wrote:
RE: armor question
But this is totally realistic.
If I'm a guy in heavy armor, and you're not, and we have all the time in the world, you're going to just staty out of range (evades, big parries), and wait for me to make a mistake. Eventually, I'll tire. That's when you hook my leg, send me sprawling, hop on top, and pry me open like a can of sardines.
Armor is effective. That's why people wear it. There is no "balance".
Mike
On 6/13/2003 at 8:12pm, demiurgeastaroth wrote:
RE: armor question
Mike Holmes wrote: If I'm a guy in heavy armor, and you're not, and we have all the time in the world, you're going to just staty out of range (evades, big parries), and wait for me to make a mistake. Eventually, I'll tire. That's when you hook my leg, send me sprawling, hop on top, and pry me open like a can of sardines.
I don't dispute that. The question is when they are actually exchanging blows (rather than one keeping out of range), does the advantage shift too much to the lightly armoured foe?
I don't know, but it concerns me that it might.
After all, as you say:
Armor is effective. That's why people wear it. There is no "balance".
But if you take two equally skilled people using the same weapons, give one light armour and the other heavy armour, and know that the light armoured character is more likely to win, then there is a problem.
If this is the case, armour is very much not effective - it is a hindrance.
At the level of normal but still competent soldiery, I suspect this is the case. (But they won't be able to afford the heaviest armour, anyway.)
On 6/13/2003 at 8:40pm, Mike Holmes wrote:
RE: armor question
That's why armor is for the battlefield, and not for duels. Actually, I still give the advantage to the guy in the armor, even in the duel (he has automatic successes to compensate). All he has to do is play smart, and he'll win before fatigue becomes a factor.
In a battle, you have to win quick. No time to let that armored foe get tired, or you'll be fighting two armored foes. Kill your target and move on. This is really hard when you aren't armored yourself. Better get some friends to help.
That all said, if you want to go more realistic, just reduce each armor pen by one to start and see how that does for you.
Mike
On 6/13/2003 at 10:15pm, demiurgeastaroth wrote:
RE: armor question
Mike Holmes wrote: Actually, I still give the advantage to the guy in the armor, even in the duel (he has automatic successes to compensate). All he has to do is play smart, and he'll win before fatigue becomes a factor.
Just to nitpick: yes, the armour guy gets automatic successes for the purpose of taking damage. So he can afford to defend with fewer dice - but in doing this, he is relying on losing his parry roll, just not by enough to actually hurt. And he needs to win to counter-attack.
One valid tactic for the armoured guy may be to let his opponent strike, and put enough in defence to make it a weak or no blow, thus forcing the attacker to put more of his dice into attack. The armoured defender holds back a small number of dice - 1-3 say. Sooner or later that attacker, as he gest frustrated, will make a big first exchange attack, and a low second exchange attack. The armoured defender lets the second attack land and strikes with his few dice, hoping to finish his undefending opponent.
Either that or steal initiative and terrify his opponent.
On 6/14/2003 at 12:35am, Wolfen wrote:
RE: armor question
And he needs to win to counter-attack.
Negative, Ghost-rider.
He needs to win an exchange to attack *first*. A large difference. Now, if armored guy is also packing a shield, it is perfectly viable option to opt not to defend, then use simo. block and strike as his attack. His strike is automatically the second strike, but his defense is in there in time to meet his opponent's attack. Likewise, if you think you're lucky enough, tough enough, or just desperate enough, you can opt to ignore defense altogether, and just smash his head after a few exchanges, when he gets into the routine of you defending. Of course, be wary of feints at this point, but...
To throw in an example, as I so enjoy doing.. My player party was once attacked by a small band of brigands; hungry peasants driven to highway robbery to supplement their income by an insanely grasping king. As such, they weren't the best of fighters, but they managed to survive the chain-mailed man on horseback to the point that he didn't even bother drawing his weapon, but defaulted to brawling and kicked the peasant in the forehead after getting nailed a few times for no damage. The peasant died with a broken skull and neck (7 ST with 8 dice thrown into the attack will do that..). The armored man on horseback was uninjured, despite being hit three times with no defense other than his chainmail.
On 6/14/2003 at 1:21pm, Morfedel wrote:
RE: armor question
Well, and that's the thing. A guy in heavy enough armor, and with a high enough toughness, can be incredibly hard to harm; but by the same token, unless the armored guy has a HIGH dice pool, the dice penalty for full harness and shield will hvae difficulty landing any blows at all against a comparitively skilled fighter without any armor.
And my question is: is this by design? Is this historical and realistic? and if so, how do two fighters in this situation end it without incredible luck or just falling down from exhaustion (which will happen to the Harnessed fighter first, of course).
On 6/14/2003 at 1:38pm, demiurgeastaroth wrote:
RE: armor question
Wolfen wrote:And he needs to win to counter-attack.
Negative, Ghost-rider.
He needs to win an exchange to attack *first*. A large difference. Now, if armored guy is also packing a shield, it is perfectly viable option to opt not to defend, then use simo. block and strike as his attack.
Ah yes, that might work.
I think this also comes back to the ST/TO variation that baseline TROS allows: with limited variation in these traits, plate armour without a shield can be relied on to stop even high dice attacks.
On 6/14/2003 at 2:19pm, Wolfen wrote:
RE: armor question
Ah yes, that might work.
Not might. Does. ...sometimes. It's when it doesn't that you wish you hadn't have done what you did. But such is the risk you take when you get into a fight with pointy steel objects.
On 6/14/2003 at 3:42pm, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: armor question
Morfedel wrote: Well, and that's the thing. A guy in heavy enough armor, and with a high enough toughness, can be incredibly hard to harm; but by the same token, unless the armored guy has a HIGH dice pool, the dice penalty for full harness and shield will hvae difficulty landing any blows at all against a comparitively skilled fighter without any armor.
And my question is: is this by design? Is this historical and realistic? and if so, how do two fighters in this situation end it without incredible luck or just falling down from exhaustion (which will happen to the Harnessed fighter first, of course).
The disadvantages caused by armor exist, but they're extraordinarily difficult to conveniently model in a game. As I've said before, I'd lower most of the CP penaltiles some, though I like fatigue where it is. How much, you say? I dunno...1 CP-ish...
Jake
On 6/14/2003 at 11:41pm, Morfedel wrote:
RE: armor question
I think I like the "Armor is transparent and people can point and laugh at your privates" disadvantage myself. Its more amusing, and leads to some wild speculations in social circles.
Sorry, i'm having my caffeine really late in the day. Its a crime, i tell ya. :)
On 6/15/2003 at 3:58am, tauman wrote:
RE: armor question
Jake Norwood wrote:Morfedel wrote: Well, and that's the thing. A guy in heavy enough armor, and with a high enough toughness, can be incredibly hard to harm; but by the same token, unless the armored guy has a HIGH dice pool, the dice penalty for full harness and shield will hvae difficulty landing any blows at all against a comparitively skilled fighter without any armor.
And my question is: is this by design? Is this historical and realistic? and if so, how do two fighters in this situation end it without incredible luck or just falling down from exhaustion (which will happen to the Harnessed fighter first, of course).
The disadvantages caused by armor exist, but they're extraordinarily difficult to conveniently model in a game. As I've said before, I'd lower most of the CP penaltiles some, though I like fatigue where it is. How much, you say? I dunno...1 CP-ish...
Jake
Being a WMA practitioner, I'm really interested in what sort of effects it has (I concentrate on Rapier, Italian Duelling Sabre, & Bolognese Cut & Thrust--so I've never had the opportunity to try sparring in armor).
So, hypothetically, what sorts of penalties would you apply? By this, I don't mean in exact mechanics, but general descriptions (although I assume it would be different for different types of armor as Mail has a different weight distribution than Plate, for example).
Steve Reich
On 6/15/2003 at 6:13am, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: armor question
ach, you got me. I haven't spent enough time in well-made harness to really say. The helmet is the worst of it, though, cutting off vision, hearing, and air.
Jake
On 6/15/2003 at 2:10pm, Salamander wrote:
RE: armor question
Jake Norwood wrote: ach, you got me. I haven't spent enough time in well-made harness to really say. The helmet is the worst of it, though, cutting off vision, hearing, and air.
Jake
Yeah, I know, that is going to part of the fun when I finally get a chance to try Harnischefechten. Just gotta save, save, save!!!
After I get the harness (long time to go yet, the suit I want costs US$6,200.00) and have had a chance to train in it, I can get back to you... Mybe hit up the guys at places like the Royal Armouries, or even a few of the guys at the end of june at the ARMA meet?
On 6/15/2003 at 6:36pm, demiurgeastaroth wrote:
RE: armor question
One thing that could perhaps be handled better for armour is fatigue. As it stands, very heavily armoured fighters tire just as quickly as naked people.
I don't think the solution is to give an EN penalty for armour, because that could lead to people tiring too quickly.
On 6/15/2003 at 11:02pm, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: armor question
Is that so? They roll twice as often...
Jake
On 6/16/2003 at 1:14am, demiurgeastaroth wrote:
RE: armor question
Jake Norwood wrote: Is that so? They roll twice as often...
They do? Can you elaborate - I must have missed that.
On 6/16/2003 at 6:02am, Crusader wrote:
armour penalties
First of all...
Fine game, Jake. Really. I just got my copy last week and am blown away. It really breathes new life into the fantasy genre. It is nice indeed to see that someone cares enough to construct a set of rules with an eye toward accuracy and realism. Great work. I actually started gaming again just because of this game.
Now...
I have had a deep interest in the traditional Medieval Western Martial Arts for years, and no aspect of them fascinates me more than Armoured Combat. I spent a small fortune on my newest harness, photos of which can be seen here:
http://justus.pair.com/DiscussionPhotos/Josh/PANA0041.jpg
http://justus.pair.com/DiscussionPhotos/Josh/PANA0045.jpg
...and so on. These were taken during a fitting at the armourer's shop. Sorry the arm harness and headgear didn't make it into the pictures.
In any case (while I hate to criticise this excellent game...), I have to side with the folks who insist that some of the armour penalties are a bit high. Speaking as a person who has spent a very great deal of time in many harnesses, of both good and ill fit, I'd have to say that the difference between armour that is bought "off-the-peg" and custom-made harness is indescribably tremendous. If any of you ever have the opportunity to commission your own harness, tailored to your own body's exact measurements by an armourer who is intimately familiar with historical pieces and techniques, do so. The admittedly somewhat alarming price is worth every penny if you're seriously into the hobby.
I've worn crappy, excessively-heavy SCA armour whose speculative CP penalties I would estimate as being near the -4 CP penalty that a full plate harness with helm saddles you with in the game. But armour made for SCA sport use is well-known to be far heavier than historical examples, and is almost always bought ready-made, "off-the-peg", with pieces perhaps being available in a few standard sizes. A real historical reproduction or speculative reconstruction of real medieval harness is a joy to wear...as long as the weather's not too hot.
While I think some of the CP penalties are too high, I think Jake is dead on with the endurance penalties. After a few solid minutes of hard fighting without a breather, I can tire pretty rapidly, even indoors or in cool weather. No matter how many breaths the visor has, a closed helm still restricts your oxygen intake to some degree. There are, if i'm not mistaken, a handful of records of men who died in battles here and there as a result of raising their visors for a breath at the wrong time.
On 6/18/2003 at 1:26pm, Salamander wrote:
Re: armour penalties
Crusader wrote:
I have had a deep interest in the traditional Medieval Western Martial Arts for years, and no aspect of them fascinates me more than Armoured Combat. I spent a small fortune on my newest harness, photos of which can be seen here:
http://justus.pair.com/DiscussionPhotos/Josh/PANA0041.jpg
http://justus.pair.com/DiscussionPhotos/Josh/PANA0045.jpg
...and so on. These were taken during a fitting at the armourer's shop. Sorry the arm harness and headgear didn't make it into the pictures.
Link's busted...
Crusader wrote:
In any case (while I hate to criticise this excellent game...), I have to side with the folks who insist that some of the armour penalties are a bit high. Speaking as a person who has spent a very great deal of time in many harnesses, of both good and ill fit, I'd have to say that the difference between armour that is bought "off-the-peg" and custom-made harness is indescribably tremendous. If any of you ever have the opportunity to commission your own harness, tailored to your own body's exact measurements by an armourer who is intimately familiar with historical pieces and techniques, do so. The admittedly somewhat alarming price is worth every penny if you're seriously into the hobby.
Yeah, I am planning on spending a regular sized fortune on mine...
Crusader wrote:
I've worn crappy, excessively-heavy SCA armour whose speculative CP penalties I would estimate as being near the -4 CP penalty that a full plate harness with helm saddles you with in the game. But armour made for SCA sport use is well-known to be far heavier than historical examples, and is almost always bought ready-made, "off-the-peg", with pieces perhaps being available in a few standard sizes. A real historical reproduction or speculative reconstruction of real medieval harness is a joy to wear...as long as the weather's not too hot.
Jake has mentioned something about reducing the CP penalties if he had the choice. Perhaps in Flos Duelatorum?
Crusader wrote:
While I think some of the CP penalties are too high, I think Jake is dead on with the endurance penalties. After a few solid minutes of hard fighting without a breather, I can tire pretty rapidly, even indoors or in cool weather. No matter how many breaths the visor has, a closed helm still restricts your oxygen intake to some degree. There are, if i'm not mistaken, a handful of records of men who died in battles here and there as a result of raising their visors for a breath at the wrong time.
Well, waddya know... I hadn't thought about the breathing part, maybe that's where we get the term, "taking a breather"?
On 6/18/2003 at 3:25pm, Wolfen wrote:
RE: armor question
Oh, I can attest to how hard it is to breath in a closed-face helm. My first helm was a pig-faced bascinet, very authentically designed (though probably insanely heavier than historically) which was meant for live-steel use, in the sport sense that the SCA has, except that the SCA does not use live-steel. Not only was it immensely heavy, but I was only able to see about 2-3 feet of my opponent at optimum range, and it was incredibly hard to breathe in. All the same, I'd probably give it a AV of 7 or 8.. I really doubt anyone would be capable of splitting my skull in it.. my neck would sooner break.
On 6/19/2003 at 12:51am, buddha wrote:
RE: armor question
demiurgeastaroth,
In answer to your fatigue question...
I'm not absolutely certain, but I think that those in heavy armor take fatigue after every number of rounds equal to their endurance, while those unarmored take fatigue after EN x 2 rounds.
Buddha
On 6/19/2003 at 1:19am, demiurgeastaroth wrote:
RE: armor question
buddha wrote: demiurgeastaroth,
In answer to your fatigue question...
I'm not absolutely certain, but I think that those in heavy armor take fatigue after every number of rounds equal to their endurance, while those unarmored take fatigue after EN x 2 rounds.
Buddha
I thought everyone take it after EN rounds, but now that you mention it, that does sound familiar. Thanks, that would explain Jake's cryptic comment :)
On 6/19/2003 at 2:24am, Jake Norwood wrote:
RE: armor question
Ah grasshopper, now you see.
Jake