Armor Updates/Changes

[aislinn]

I think that the first armor skill level should include all classes; not be cross class for rogues and mages. Perhaps different classes could be limited to certain types or amounts of armor, and further levels of that skill would apply something like metal armor (like chain) to the other classes, and would be cross class for rogues and mages? I'm exhausted, so I hope that makes sense.

[Jopper13]

There are a couple of changes to armor I have written down, so a few more ideas would be great.

I disagree that all classes should get armor as Class Skills, because they are meant to show that wearing armor is a skill much like fighting skills and such. Classes can take them, but they cost a bit less. This forces players to kind of fall into a specific niche for the character and cuts down on the "I have exp so I can take X, Y, Z" instead of taking skills that make sense for their character.

I am open to suggestions, but here is my proposed change.

All players start with the ability to wear GARMENT ARMOR and LIGHT ARMOR bracers (leather). This allows a player to wear up to 2 points of armor with no exp cost.

Armor Proficiency would then allow a player to wear LIGHT and MEDIUM armor, along with HEAVY helms.

Improved Armor Profiency would allow a player to wear layered and HEAVY armor.

[Jopper13]

Another change that has been bouncing around in my head has been an upgrade to heavy armor, see below.

Archery is a balance for armor since it punches through, but there comes a point, a threshold, where armor is useless simply because of the arrows piercing ability. Heavier armors become completely useless as the mobility of the archer means they will be able to take down armored opponents.

My proposed change is as follows...
Players wearing HEAVY ARMOR (plate mail, splint mail, etc) on all 10 locations of the body with a helm that is CLOSED with gambeson padding on all 10 locations would degrade all damage coming in from arrows. They would only inflict 1 point of damage instead of punching through and inflicting wounds.
The requirement of HEAVY ARMOR means that the wearer would have to be wearing heavier/thicker/bulkier armor that must qualify for the HEAVY ARMOR type. This means that leather, chain, or a combo of both could not qualify.
The requirement of both the FULL COVERAGE + PADDING and the CLOSED HELM means that every location must be adequately armored and the head and face must be protected. This means that the player would be heavily encumbered and restricted due to the level of armor required. A player in full plate that takes off their helm loses this bonus, since an arrow to the face would easily kill someone... the whole point is to reward players who adequately cover their entire body with HEAVY ARMOR.

Why can't a breastplate reduce this damage? Because the absence of other heavy armor means that the player is likely to take an arrow on a limb or some sort of unarmored spot. That is why the FULL COVERAGE is required.

This change would basically drop the power of arrows to almost nothing (but concentrated fire could still do quite a bit) but it would more realistically portray the heaviest armors in the game. Plate armor, properly padded, would deflect numerous arrows and bolts and it would not punch through nearly as easily as it does now.

[ungrim123]

I disagree entirely with the last post. Crossbows would punch through plate armor fairly easily, and at the ranges archery happens in any LARP it would go through like butter.

If you want to give a bonus when fully armored, give the player the pull arrow skill. If they have the pull arrow skill already it's cut down to 5 seconds from ten.

In my experience people usually don't wear the full face helms because we don't have the time to do the training actual knights did to get used to them.

[blueruby]

I could see something like wearing an approved gambeson underneath at least Medium armor basically giving you a point of "arrow armor", due to the fabric's ability to catch and slow an arrow down. If you're worried about an archer's ability to pick people apart, why don't we try play testing arrows that just punch through armor, but still need to chip away at hits? It stands to reason that Harlok in his badassery would be physically able to endure a few more arrows without being slowed down too much than would say, a mage who has spent their whole life trying to avoid actual combat. Maybe add in that arrows to limbs can progress to a Mortal Wound with that rule, so archers are still capable of killing people in some kind of timely fashion. I agree that our archery rules might be a little unrealistic at the moment, but I don't believe that letting the heaviest armored people in the game soak up a boatload of arrows without a second thought is the way to fix the problem.

[ungrim123]

The normal max hit points for a Human/Syndar is what...5? Aedan could get six, but that's offset by him having crippling nightmares, so I think that's a fair trade.

Ulven don't wear the plate armor needed to get to heavy, so that's why they aren't included.

Even if a person have max armor, hp and arrow pull already there would still be a 5 second window to stop the skill. Even if they don't stop arrow pull the guy has 4 more hp, so the whittling down can continue.

There's no also no reason why the classes have to be able to deal with everything, hard counters are ok. A decent mage looks at all my armor and huge shield and takes it away with two spells. All I can do is dodge, which is hard considering I have all that armor and encumbering shield.

Add push to that and one on one I have zero chance against a equal lvl mage, unless they make a mistake.

That's ok with me, because I'll never face that guy alone. Rob will fill em full of arrows and I can continue being a tank in peace.