Re: Armor proposal 1

[Flightgod5@aol.com]

In a message dated 11/26/1998 8:49:46 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
khelek@ns1.cioe.com writes:

<< Thought about that one, but wasn't sure it'd fly.  Further it'd be a pisser
 to base cost it.  What do you base it on?  What about this:
 take the total of the C,M and GDVs of that the armor gives and multiply
 this by 20.  This is the cost of the 'armor' skill.  
 
 So for leather skill it would be:
 	6(2+2+2) * 20	=	120
 Chain Mail:
 	8(4+2+2) * 20	=	160
 Plate:
 	12(6+4+2) * 20	=	240
 
 The material of the armor does not effect the skill used.  Also if those
 costs are too low add a +30 to the skill cost if the armor gives an
 inferior agility and/or strength.
 
 Plate then goes up to 300, Chain to 190, and Leather to 150.
 
 Now..what are the effects of such a skill:
 1) Bonus move.
 2) Cancel out Inferiors.
 3) Extra Defense?
 
 1) Bonus move.
 	With this one, for each d6 you roll you remove 10' from the
 	movement penalty.  
 2) Cancel out inferior stats.
 	Since warriors know how to wear armor effectively, by making
 	a 2d6 skill check, they can cancel out the inferior statistic
 	modifier that their armor gives.  Or possibly a 3d6 check.
 	Or a variable check based on circumstance.
 3) Extra Defense.
 	+2 or +1 per die rolled against your armor skill.  This translates
 	as you know how to use your armor to take the blow.  You twist
 	yourself around so that the sword blow lands on your armor.  You
 	twist your body so that the arrow skims off the sloped surface
 	of your breast plate.  You twist so that your opponent can't
 	find a good grip on your mail(something that is very damn hard
 	to grip to begin with).
 
 Opinions?  I personally would find this as acceptable as a blanket lightening
 of armor restrictions.
 
 Wright
 > How about making a skill for warriors that negates the penalties of armor
or
 > allows the warrior to move greater distances when they make a successful
 > check?  Will solve our little problem here and also give a little more
depth
 > to the warrior background.
 > 
 > Joel
 > 
  >>
Sounds good to me...except for the defense part.  Already working on a skill
for that, aren't we?

Joel