Re: Armor proposal 1

[Wright Frazier <khelek>]

> > Damn Skippy has some good stats there John. I only have 1 adventure with all
> > 3 defensive stats at 15 or above ( and I bought them up to that ).
> >
> 
> I was probibly unclear here ...
> 
> 1) I simplified the argument by only addressing combat mod
> 
> (as ripped up below because I didn't evaluate grappling for the argument
> ... that was not the point I was addressing ... i.e. percieved imbalance)
> 
> 2) For simplicity as well as to indicate what the maximum starting
> potential ought to be, I have, throughout my posts used a hypothetical 15
> for agi, str, wil, and per.  I agree this is not the average of 10 or 11.

That is way out of wack for average stats or good examples.  I have in
my years at AQ had only 1 character with stats like that on those 4.

> 
> What I have said, time and again, is that with the current IRON armor, if
> I put it on a physically good specimen, wind him up, and let him go, he's
> still only hittable by a natural 20.  This -appears- to be the basis for
> AQ's armor mechanics.  If this was in place before mods or other game
> developments, I dunno.
> 
> (inserting SEANML)
> 
> <POINT>
> 
> However, with the current mechanic, the most protective armor on
> the best unmodified specimen protects so well that an unmodified roll will
> only hit 5% of the time.
> 
> All other armor protects less.
> 
> To add 2 to the dv of the most protective, unmodified armor makes it
> IMPOSSIBLE to hit on an unmodified roll of a d20.

No, they still hit on a 20.  a 20 ALways hits.

> 
> </POINT>
>  
> IMHO, that makes bumping the DVs on armor up unbalancing

No, I disagree.  Its just an alternative take on the armor thing
to make it more of what it should be.

> 
> While Wright (and others) has made the assertion that armor is
> unbalanced, and has indeed illustrated that the heavier armors may have
> reasons for being UNAPPEALING, he (and others) has not illustrated that
> his proposal is in any way more mechanically balanced than the current
> setup.

> 
> But have these characters put forth a handful of special orders, or have
> they managed to actually make an industrial innovation?

Industrial innovation.  Chak and Karin turned a stone age culture into
an ironage one.  People have been going to Dom for years for his armor.

> Heavy penalties ought not be groused at for armor as nothing else requires
> expenditure of $ vs. ep for increasing DV.

Weapons give a bonus to DV..some better than any form of armor in certain
areas.

> 
> If you wish to not have ANY penalty and have your DV boosted, invest in a
> weapon, shield, helmet, clothing(or not) and spend the eps to get spells
> that boost your DV.

Did we say any penalties?  No.  Read what we say and stop spewing.
We've said the penalties are too harsh.  Read the proposal.  Penalties
are still absolutely there, they are just lessened in the proposal.

> Again, apparently I was unclear.  Increasing movement rates decreases
> ranged attack utility.  You get less shots before melee.  (for ALL ranged
> attacks)

No, not since the modification to missile wep skills that allows for extra
range.  I'll still plink you with my bow from 320' away.  This brings
things more into reason and line.  The problem with missile weapons
was never how long it takes to charge someone with one, it was how short
the ranges were vs. what they should be.  

This is the same thing...armor penalties are too heavy and silly for
what the armor is.  Common sense...strange word these days it seems...
says that a guy in 20-30lbs of metal armor that is distributed over
his body can run more 3mph, and walk at 1mph.  That is stupid and silly.
So again I say, the movement and stat penalties are too harsh and should
be lessened.

> 
> Yes, I may fashion a character in any manner I desire.
> 
> However, prescribing to the logic that innovation is driven by war, and as
> such I should be making my character the most proficient at making war as
> possible:
> 
> I can counteract an increase in DV by increasing my mods
> 
> As the potential for armor wearing opponents increases, I can best prepare
> for this (and the resulting higher average DV for opponents) by increasing
> my mods
> 
> BECAUSE EVERYONE has this first and formost in their minds (otherwise
> armor would not be innovated), EVERYONE will buy up their mods because
> it's something they CAN do.
> 


Noone says you have to run a combat beast. Try an auger.  People already
buy up their mods to hit the big monsters with high DVs.  Your points
above are invalid.  Get a character concept and stick with it.  Do you
want to play the guy who tries to be the best swordsman in the world?
Do you want to play a mediocre swords man?  Up to you.  Regardless of
armor benefits or penalties, GMs will still use them or not use them.
The point of all this, which you can't seem to grasp, is that armor
penalties are silly and ridiculous for what the armor is.

Flat out, Jaernian armor protects the torso, shoulders, and upper
arms.  No more.  Saying that that slows you to 1/2 or 1/3 of your
normal movment is foolish.

Wright