Armor.

[Shinobi]

Presumably the dudes coding armor for 2.Arm will take a slightly more in-depth approach to the equations, though.

Most definitely. Armor will be very important to combat oriented players and will reflect a strong base of realism.

[Armaddict]

One thing I always wanted to see, but completely acknowledge that it would be a complete pain in the ass.  Of course, it could actually already be in without me knowing it, but I figured I might've noticed.

Basically, instead of a flat 'armor value' attached to armor, making liberal use of defensive modifications to armor.  Brief example...set resistances to each piece of armor to each weapon type, plus their 'base armor value' for the material it's made from, plus the effect on mobility (Lots of armors in game that talk about the mobility of the armor being the prime asset).  So each type of armor is stronger to certain things, such as quilted armor doing better against slashing attacks, while chainmail type things are stronger against piercing attacks and arrows, etc.  If mobility is to be factored in, every bit of non-mobile armor needs to affect the mobility...

My opinion was always that if we concentrated on doing that, you'd end up with very customized sets of armor, particularly when it came to uniforms of groups that work with certain purposes.  Overall, armor itself would be stronger, unless a weakness was exploited, but the mobility would become an actual issue.

Essentially, 'damage type resistances' added into armors in a logical way could drastically change the way a lot of people armor themselves.  For one...a hunter and soldier might finally actually dress differently.

[Sephiroto]

One thing I consider when purchasing armor in game is the design of the piece.  I often choose armor that looks easier to move in and has curved surfaces to deflect blows, rather than thick-plated pieces.  Basically, I look for the ability to turn attackss rather than stop them.  I have no idea if this is factored into the armor/defense code at all, but along with the concepts discussed in the post above by Armaddict, I'd like to see something like this make way into the 2.0 code base.

From an RP standpoint, I would be happy to see more people doing this, as well as seeking out weapons to exploit the weaknesses of their opponent's armor, whether or not the coded aspects currently exist.  It isn't always practical because of possible coded disadvantages, but it is quite a lot of fun to play a PC who chooses their armor and weapons based on IC factors, rather than metagaming.

[IAmJacksOpinion]

One thing I consider when purchasing armor in game is the design of the piece.  I often choose armor that looks easier to move in and has curved surfaces to deflect blows, rather than thick-plated pieces.  Basically, I look for the ability to turn attackss rather than stop them.  I have no idea if this is factored into the armor/defense code at all, but along with the concepts discussed in the post above by Armaddict, I'd like to see something like this make way into the 2.0 code base.

From an RP standpoint, I would be happy to see more people doing this, as well as seeking out weapons to exploit the weaknesses of their opponent's armor, whether or not the coded aspects currently exist.  It isn't always practical because of possible coded disadvantages, but it is quite a lot of fun to play a PC who chooses their armor and weapons based on IC factors, rather than metagaming.

I like this, and too some extent it does exist. A lot of pieces of armor/equipment hint at possible fringe bonuses in their descriptions. For example, one fairly common bracer hints that it may be used to turn blows (aka, parry bonus). I always seek them out for my lightly armored, or non-shield use combat types.

That is another point, sometimes I almost feel that my pcs have to -grow- into their armor as well, learn to function in the type of armor they are wearing. Which would make sense. Learning how to move in it, the limitations and what not.

It could be me, but when I change armor even within the same weight encumbrances I feel like I notice there is an adjustment period.

I like this idea a lot. Like, if there were a hidden "armor profficiency light/medium/heavy" skill that was dependent on class/starting region, the way some combat skills currently are. (It's been a year. I'm sure most of you have noticed that southerners start with higher dual wield and slashing, and northerners with higher chopping.)

For instance:
                Light    |    Medium   |   Heavy
-------------------------------------------------------------
Warrior  |    +10    |     +5         |     0
Ass.      |     +5     |      0          |     - 10
Ranger  |     +7     |      0          |     - 7
South   |     +10   |       0         |     -10
North    |      +2    |     +5         |     0


*These numbers would apply to something simple like chance to dodge. Some classes would start with bonuses or penalties with these general categories of armor. Light armor his high to offer a real benefit to it's usage. Heavy armor is low because I don't think you should be offered BONUSES to dodging shit in plate mail. But at the best, you could be granted no penalty. 
**This table is basically doodled from my understanding of class & regional factors in the coded aspect of defense, and the documented armor preference. Please don't derail into a debate about what you think the numbers should be. They don't exist.

In this way, a warrior with god strength couldn't just roll up, and find the heaviest armor he can afford, and simply get away with it. IN fact, he would likely need to train in lighter armor to begin with until certain defensive skills are higher, then move his way up to medium or heavy once his other combat experience will compensate for the thicker/heavier gear. His heavy armor would still absorb a lot of damage, but he would also get hit more often until he got used to the armor.

[Bacon]

I like this idea but think it should be more like this:


For instance:
                       Light    |    Medium   |   Heavy
-------------------------------------------------------------
Warrior          |    +10    |     +10       |     +10
Ass.              |     +5     |      0          |     - 10
Ranger          |     +7     |      0          |     - 7
Other Guilds   |     0       |      -5         |     -10
South           |     +5     |       0         |     -5
North            |     -5      |      0          |     +5

In addition to any encumbrance penalties/bonuses that would normally apply. Don't forget, light, medium, and heavy are relative to the strength of the character wearing them. A stronger pc is going to be able to move more easily in heavier armors. Those of the warrior guild would have a bit of background in training with various armors in general with an adjustment due to where they come from.

[janeshephard]

I like RPGs that have armor skills and their proficiencies in them. The higher it goes the better you are at "wearing" the armor. You know how to strap it on properly.

This proficiency should reflect what you can wear by type (heavy, light, medium) and how well you perform under it. It beats adding static bonuses.

[IAmJacksOpinion]

. Don't forget, light, medium, and heavy are relative to the strength of the character wearing them.

Not really. It's referring to the armor itself. Leather is obviously light. Some chitins/bones are medium. Plate, scale, etc are heavy.  Just because you're strong enough to wear platemail without turning into a slug doesn't mean that it's light. Just means you can handle it.

And what I was getting at with my table was that any armor that fell into the heavy catagory should have negs to dodge. I think the best you should hope for with heavy is that it reaches zero (doesn't slow you down at all). Under no circumstances should it also offer a bonus. Otherwise, every time you see a dwarf with bash, platemail, and a northern accent, RUN! :p


Though, this is all just my mind wandering. I like the way the armor is now. I think there's plenty of room bonuses to be offered for any style. (Heavy, light, codpiece-only, etc.) I've had bad-asses in tortoiseshell, and bad-asses in a thong and boots.

[Sephiroto]

To follow up what was said above:  Just because armor isn't that heavy to you because you're a buff stud, doesn't mean it is easy to move in.  "Heavy" armors are typically covered with solid plates or thick scales and that restricts mobility.

[X-D]

I'm going to have to not agree.

If your PC is average, so the average person can carry say 200lbs MAX, so, 30lbs of armor is light, say thats all leather types, and 31-70 is medium, chitin, bone, and 71-120 is heavy, most your plate armors and some scale and chain.

Alright, nobody that fits in the max lift weight of 200lbs will think that the heavy armors are light.

But, what if you have a PC with a max lift weight of 800lbs?  By ratio, the "heavy" armor IS light, and that PC should be able to move in it almost as good as the 200lbs max PC in light leather armors. Now sure, the plates etc might be more restricting, there is no getting around that point, which is why I said "almost" as good. But for encumbrance and moving the mass the stronger one should do A LOT better.

And if you are that extremely strong then you can and should be able to treat the armor as light for all intents and purposes. And Light armors should be treated as nothing at all.

Also, well made plate armors are far less restricting then you might think.  Scale and chain are made for the purpose of least restriction in fact. Both being flexible, often more flexible then the leather or quilted gear you wear under them.

[Bacon]

What X-D said I completely agree with.

Also, this isn't about making it even harder for people to use heavier armors, this is about making it a more dynamic system.

[Sam]

The logic X-D uses is sound, however, I still don't agree. Light is usually a synonym to highly manueverable. Heavy with little manueverability.

Instead of the OPs catagories of Light, Heavy, and Medium. I suggest we focus it on restriction. Light Restrictions, Medium, and Heavy.

[Bacon]

I disagree because not all armors that currently classify as heavy due to weight would necessarily classify as heavy due to being restrictive. And not all armors that are currently classified as medium due to weight would be classified as medium due to being restrictive, etc.
What you're talking about would require a complete and total overhaul of everything. The system, all armor items, etc. It would also need to include a way to compare armor's weight and restrictiveness to each other.

[Majikal]

Currently from my experience armors give a flat negative to damage in those locations and is very simplistic, with some armors hinting in their descriptions to give +/- to your offense defense skills. I love the idea of making armor a more complex part of the game so you don't have every HG/mul/dwarf walking around in silt-horror shell and every assassin/burglar/pickpocket rolling around in their inky-black/night-dark/midnight blue leather stuff.

Complex armor systems will make for more realistic character choices.

Though I don't like the idea of class-based armors systems, or class-based anything for that matter.

[Agent_137]

i don't see anyone in this thread calling for keeping armor simple. So i'll do it.

in a world with essentially no metal i fail to see what's wrong ICly with wearing the heaviest armor you can lift and afford as long as there is an appropriate stamina/hide penalty.

You can scream realism all you want, but that basic premise IS realistic to me. You will over-complicate things by making it more realistic and nuanced for what is, in my opinion, a small gain in playability.

[CravenMadness]

imo

Sandcloth - light
horror/bone scale or chain - heavy

everything else... - medium.

[Saellyn]

Actually if anyone cared to do the research, heavy plate armors were -not- nearly as restrictive as you think they are. In fact, medieval knights had complete and full maneuverability in their plate armors, and were able to fight just as well as anybody else could in their leathers. Better, in fact, because they had good training.

[Case]

Actually if anyone cared to do the research, heavy plate armors were -not- nearly as restrictive as you think they are. In fact, medieval knights had complete and full maneuverability in their plate armors, and were able to fight just as well as anybody else could in their leathers. Better, in fact, because they had good training.

Depends on the make, quality and weight of the heavy plate armour in question.

[X-D]

No, not really. It depends on if you are talking about weight/enc verses strength or restriction.

And yes, if you are a scrawny bookworm, the weight will slow you down and increase restriction. If you are not, well, it will not. One of the joys of spending so much time in the SCA is wearing of many different styles of armor in a combat situation. Which is why I already said that Chain, Scale and Plate are far less restrictive then many people seem to assume. In fact, many of the armors that people consider "light" in fact, weigh more then the ones people consider heavy.

[Morrolan]

I suspect it would be easier to code individual armor pieces to relate to specific armor proficiencies.  Working from that, characters with those skills (crafting and/or use) would be able (hopefully) to recognize which type of armor a piece related to.

>Inventory

A bone-plated leather gauntlet

>assess gauntlet

A bone-plated leather gauntlet is a medium armor.
A bone-plated leather gauntlet covers your right hand and wrist.
A bone-plated leather gauntlet will fit you.

[Saellyn]

Actually if anyone cared to do the research, heavy plate armors were -not- nearly as restrictive as you think they are. In fact, medieval knights had complete and full maneuverability in their plate armors, and were able to fight just as well as anybody else could in their leathers. Better, in fact, because they had good training.

Depends on the make, quality and weight of the heavy plate armour in question.

Sorry, forgot.

These knights would also do things like -run- and -sprint- and -dance- and -jump- in their armor.

Does that help?

[Case]

Actually if anyone cared to do the research, heavy plate armors were -not- nearly as restrictive as you think they are. In fact, medieval knights had complete and full maneuverability in their plate armors, and were able to fight just as well as anybody else could in their leathers. Better, in fact, because they had good training.

Depends on the make, quality and weight of the heavy plate armour in question.

Sorry, forgot.

These knights would also do things like -run- and -sprint- and -dance- and -jump- in their armor.

Does that help?

Depends on quality, articulation and weight, as I said. Some armour was flexible, some not.

[Barzalene]

I bet metal makes better armor than bone.

[Qzzrbl]

Hey guys?

There's some heavy armor IG that weighs around ten stones.

Now a rough translation of that into pounds is around twenty two pounds.

This is for just one bit of gear.... Whereas a full suit of steel plate mail weighed somewhere around 45-50 pounds.

Armguards.

Weighing nearly half a full suit of RL plate mail.

......

Adjust your arguments accordingly.

::Edited to add::

Besides, even if a full suit of Zalanthan heavy armor weighed less than 50lbs, I'd still contend that one would tire out -ALOT- faster than someone not wearing any.

Plate-clad knights flopping over on the battlefield from exhaustion wasn't exactly an unusual thing, back in the day. That's why they were mounted, more often than not.

[Saellyn]

The only inflexible armor in the middle ages was purely ceremonial in nature. I am talking full plate battle armor, not your full plate ceremonial garbage armor that wasn't even useful on a real battlefield.

[Qzzrbl]

The only inflexible armor in the middle ages was purely ceremonial in nature. I am talking full plate battle armor, not your full plate ceremonial garbage armor that wasn't even useful on a real battlefield.

Exactly.... Alot of "heavy" armor IG could be comparable to that full-plate ceremonial garbage armor that wasn't even useful on a real battlefield.