More Armor Makes You More Killable?

[Carriker]

Hello, all. I've seen this crop up here and there. I have some suspicions about all this, but I'm curious - where is this coming from? Can anyone explain this to me succinctly? If it's genuinely a difficulty, I'd like to see about addressing it, but I have to admit that it hasn't been a problem in my own game.

Thanks!

[Kival]

As far as I understand with the current stats it's better to have less of an armour if you fight a higly skilled enemy (5-6). I did not calcuate it myself so far but, if it's true, I don't have a big problem with that and think it's quite realistic that heavy armour can become a hindrance in a duel against an higly skilled enemy. I still reduced AP of the standard Full plate -1. (In my game exists a heavier version, Full plate on chainmail instead of Full Plate on padded armour... but that's only a side note)

[aprewett]

Hello,
I don't have a straight answer but from what I have read, heavy metal armour's like plate, maille, scale etc should be fairly impervious to most edged blows. Bruising and broken bones would happen, but actually cutting through metal should be very rare. Maybe even impossible to a 'human' strength person.
Piercing and Blunt can hurt, so its more a matter of aiming for the soft bits or bludgeoning. Which is why most swords had a pointy bit and different tactics were required v's the opponents armour.
I have tried to stay away from house ruling too much with this game but it seems to have been a hot topic.
Hope that helps.
Allan

[Kival]

Okay, some quick calculations, ignoring Bonus-dice, always round down if necessary. Note that this is in no way a complete mathematical analysis, the used numbers could be problematic because damage is not monotonically increasing.

We have a Knight with 4 in athletics, awareness, agility -> combat defense 12

Now we will consider one enemy with fighting 3,4,5 and 6 and with damage of 4,5 and 6 base damage

Wearing Full Plate (AR 10; Combat Defense 6) the expected value of damage is:

Some guard with Fighting 3 (average 10,5)
Base-Dam 4 -> 0
Base-Dam 5 -> 0
Base-Dam 6 -> 0
Some standard knight with Fighting 4 (avg. 14)
Base-Dam 4 -> 0
Base-Dam 5 -> 0
Base-Dam 6 -> 2
Some exceptional knight with Fighting 5 (avg 17,5)
Base-Dam 4 -> 2
Base-Dam 5 -> 5
Base-Dam 6 -> 8
A legendary enemy (avg 21)
Base-Dam 4 -> 6
Base-Dam 5 -> 10
Base-Dam 6 -> 14

Wearing Chainmail (AR 5, Combat Defense 9):

Some guard with Fighting 3 (average 10,5)
Base-Dam 4 -> 0
Base-Dam 5 -> 0
Base-Dam 6 -> 1
Some standard knight with Fighting 4 (avg. 14)
Base-Dam 4 -> 3
Base-Dam 5 -> 5
Base-Dam 6 -> 7
Some exceptional knight with Fighting 5 (avg 17,5)
Base-Dam 4 -> 3
Base-Dam 5 -> 5
Base-Dam 6 -> 7
A legendary enemy (avg 21)
Base-Dam 4 -> 7
Base-Dam 5 -> 10
Base-Dam 6 -> 13

Wearing Padded (AR 1, Combat Defense 12)

Some guard with Fighting 3 (average 10,5)
Base-Dam 4 -> 0
Base-Dam 5 -> 0
Base-Dam 6 -> 0
Some standard knight with Fighting 4 (avg. 14)
Base-Dam 4 -> 3
Base-Dam 5 -> 4
Base-Dam 6 -> 11
Some exceptional knight with Fighting 5 (avg 17,5)
Base-Dam 4 -> 7
Base-Dam 5 -> 9
Base-Dam 6 -> 17
A legendary enemy (avg 21)
Base-Dam 4 -> 7
Base-Dam 5 -> 9
Base-Dam 6 -> 17

To sum it up: Full Plate is better then Chainmail against Fighting 3,4; nearly equal for 5,6. Both are clearly better then Padded. For higher damage and fighting values Chainmail maybe better than Full Plate. Still I can't see a big problem here; it's fine for me that Full Plate does not help in comparison to Chainmail against very skilled enemies.

[Lord Ben]

Hello, all. I've seen this crop up here and there. I have some suspicions about all this, but I'm curious - where is this coming from? Can anyone explain this to me succinctly? If it's genuinely a difficulty, I'd like to see about addressing it, but I have to admit that it hasn't been a problem in my own game.

Thanks!

Mathematically speaking ignoring say 8 points of damage might be worth 3 degrees of damage against some opponents while only 1 degree against others. Against someone has a greatsword with a few benefits making it do more damage it's more important to not get hit by lots of degrees than it would be to ignore an extra few points of damage. Whether your opponent has athletics with a +1 longsword for 4 base damage or 4 athletics with a greatsword and weapon mastery and improved weapon mastery for (off memory) 9 base damage is going to be the deciding factor I think (not even to mention the one adding strength bonus dice!).

But against opponents with low or average athletics and normal weapons you're probably best off with heavy armor.

If you're looking a tweaking the rules I might suggest a benefit for heavier armors that gives -1 degrees of damage to a minimum of 1 degree which would alleviate that math issue somewhat (making the benefit more valuable against big weapons than small) or some tweak of those numbers a bit to keep the gain/loss ratio somewhat the same (hide is best if I remember correctly, no book atm) between the armor types. Hide armor with the two benefits is like +8/-2 whereas plate is 12/-6 right? Hide has 4x where plate is only double.

However, I personally think it's fine to have no clear cut best armor in all situations. Against some weaker militia with 3 damage a plate wearing guy is invincible mostly. That's not a benefit that should be overlooked.

[Eothar]

As a related aside...why would more armor lower your CD but not your attacks? If you're slower...you're slower...

[Kival]

@Lord Ben

I think that's fairly logical that very heavy weapons like Greatswods and Warhammers don't care much if you wear a Full Plate Armor or not. Do you use the errata values for hide armor?


Just to check for base-weapon damage 10:

Wearing Full Plate (AR 10; Combat Defense 6) the expected value of damage is:

Some guard with Fighting 3 (average 10,5)
Base-Dam 10 -> 0
Some standard knight with Fighting 4 (avg. 14)
Base-Dam 10 -> 10
Some exceptional knight with Fighting 5 (avg 17,5)
Base-Dam 10 -> 20
A legendary enemy (avg 21)
Base-Dam 10 -> 30

Wearing Chainmail (AR 5, Combat Defense 9):

Some guard with Fighting 3 (average 10,5)
Base-Dam 10 -> 5
Some standard knight with Fighting 4 (avg. 14)
Base-Dam 10 -> 15
Some exceptional knight with Fighting 5 (avg 17,5)
Base-Dam 10 -> 15
A legendary enemy (avg 21)
Base-Dam 10 -> 25

Wearing Padded (AR 1, Combat Defense 12)

Some guard with Fighting 3 (average 10,5)
Base-Dam 10 -> 0
Some standard knight with Fighting 4 (avg. 14)
Base-Dam 10 -> 9
Some exceptional knight with Fighting 5 (avg 17,5)
Base-Dam 10 -> 19
A legendary enemy (avg 21)
Base-Dam 10 -> 19

So if the enemy is a good or exceptional fighter (5, 6) armour becomes a hindrane when he wears a Greatsword or similar. Though it's against a Fighting 5, damage 10 enemy still better to wear Chainmail then just Padded.

[Carriker]

As far as I understand with the current stats it's better to have less of an armour if you fight a higly skilled enemy (5-6). I did not calcuate it myself so far but, if it's true, I don't have a big problem with that and think it's quite realistic that heavy armour can become a hindrance in a duel against an higly skilled enemy. I still reduced AP of the standard Full plate -1. (In my game exists a heavier version, Full plate on chainmail instead of Full Plate on padded armour... but that's only a side note)

Personally, I think this system reflects things fairly well. If you're fighting on foot in plate, you're at a severe disadvantage. It's why the preferred method of dealing with a plate-wearing individual is to pull him from his horse.

So, is the idea that on foot, if you're in mail of some sort, you're probably better off than if you're in plate against a slightly above average opponent? Because I'm frankly not seeing a problem with that.

[Carriker]

As a related aside...why would more armor lower your CD but not your attacks? If you're slower...you're slower...

Because your attack roll doesn't reflect a single swipe of your weapon, but is an abstraction of any variety of feints and strikes. It's why when you're using an off-hand weapon, you don't roll twice - it just adds to your base damage, reflecting blows from both weapons.

[Lord Ben]

@Lord Ben

I think that's fairly logical that very heavy weapons like Greatswods and Warhammers don't care much if you wear a Full Plate Armor or not. Do you use the errata values for hide armor?

No, I didn't even know they existed. I'm looking them up now though!

EDIT: Ouch!

[Kival]

Personally, I think this system reflects things fairly well. If you're fighting on foot in plate, you're at a severe disadvantage. It's why the preferred method of dealing with a plate-wearing individual is to pull him from his horse.

The problems of fighting in full plate on foot are mostly exaggerated in the usual RPG/TV. By the way half-plate is considered more cumbersome than full-plate because it was mostly not fitted perfectly to the wearer, not sure if that is represented in the system. I assume we're speaking about normal Full plate armor, not the pure tournamental ones from the very late medieval times/Renaissance.

However I don't think fighting on horse or foot makes a big difference here in game terms. The only difference is that your bulk value is ignored on horse. The bulk value is not very relevant in fights as it does not effect attack/defense. It might be a good idea to think about reducing Armor-Penalty on horse to reflect your idea.

So, is the idea that on foot, if you're in mail of some sort, you're probably better off than if you're in plate against a slightly above average opponent? Because I'm frankly not seeing a problem with that.

I don't have much of a problem with it either. Just wanted to sum up what I understood from complains I read here and wanted to give some quick mathematical inside.

PS: Why is ringmail and splint mail in the game by the way? It never really existed except for body-part armour.


EDIT:

As a related aside...why would more armor lower your CD but not your attacks? If you're slower...you're slower...

Because your attack roll doesn't reflect a single swipe of your weapon, but is an abstraction of any variety of feints and strikes. It's why when you're using an off-hand weapon, you don't roll twice - it just adds to your base damage, reflecting blows from both weapons.

I do not really see how that can explain no attack reduction. I would rather argue that the Agility penalty already represents the slowness (enemies with less armour will have the first strike in the round).

[Pytorb]

I don't have much of a problem with the armour rules as they stand, or the scenario described where heavy armour is of little additional benefit against the most skilled of warriors. The armour penalty for Full Plate might need changing from -6 to -5 to avoid a situation where someone with a 2 in Athletics, Awareness and Agility has a Combat Defence of 0 and so any blow swung at them hits automatically with infinite degrees of success [EDIT: The infinite degrees of success part of this sentance is wrong]. (The armour penalty for Half Plate might then also need changing to -4.)

To be able to replicate the epic fights between two skilled warriors that lasted for an hour or more what might be better is to change the rules on fighting defensively. At the moment you sacrifice -1D to gain a static +3 to your combat defence. How about changing it to you sacrifice -1D to your fighting to gain your fighting rank to your combat defence?

[Paedrig]

Pytorb
We did make it excactly the way you say it (armor penalty for full plate only -5 and for half plate -4) and until now it seems to work.

Plus the (house rule, a little supported by some of the examples in the campaign book) possibility to buy 'castle forged' armor (which reduces the armor penalty or the bulk by 1). It makes the plate armor (in reality the peak of knightly armor and certainly not so bulky and slowing down that it is said sometimes) more useful.

Until than it seemed that splint armor was the 'best' one...

Concerning your idea of increasing the fcombat defence by your fighting rank...
Sounds not bad. Perhaps (just a quick idea) combined with some (very hard) Fighting test which even increases the defence further by +1 per aditional degree...
Or would this make a good fighter to strong...

[Kival]

(The armour penalty for Half Plate might then also need changing to -4.)

I'm inclined to disagree here. Half Plate is as already mentioned not less cumbersome than Full Plate. In my game I changed the values as following (similar to what someone else posted here in the forum:

Code: Select all

Half Plate (padded) 8 -4 3 Includes Padded. – 1200 ss – 15+5 kg
Half Plate (Chain) 9 -5 4 Includes Mail. – 2000 ss – 15+20? kg (this is the normal Half Plate mentioned in the Game)
Full Plate (Padded) 10 -5 3 Includes Padded. – 3000 ss – 20+5 kg? (this is the normal Full Plate mentioned in the Game)
Full Plate (Chain) 11 -6 4 Rare, only for tourneys 3800 ss – 20+20 kg

Weights include helmet etc.

Until than it seemed that splint armor was the 'best' one...

Why not? As it never existed, you can just assume it's the perfect armour.

[Sturn]

Due to an old discussion here, I slightly tweaked the armor lists. I've playtested these, they work great, some realism is added, and they make the more expensive armors actually better (penalty vs. rating issues). It's a "house rule", but really doesn't change much at all from the core (see notes after the list for what I mean by "includes" and "integral"):

Armor / Rating / Penalty / Bulk / Notes
Light Clothing 0 0 0 Standard clothing.
Heavy Clothing 1 0 1 Robes, any vestments, heavily furred (northern garb)
Padded 1 0 0
Soft Leather 2 -1 0
Hard Leather 3 -2 0
Bone/Wood 4 -3 1
Ring 4 -2 1 Hard Leather is an integral part.
Hide 4 -2 2
Mail 5 -3 2 Includes Padded.
Scale 5 -3 2 Soft Leather is an integral part. More common in Dorne and across the Narrow Sea.
Breastplate (padded) 6 -3 3 Includes Padded.
Splint 6 -3 3 Rare, except across the Narrow Sea.
Breastplate (mail) 7 -4 3 Includes Mail.
Brigandine 7 -4 3 More common across the Narrow Sea. Includes Mail.
Half-Plate (padded) 8 -4 3 Includes Padded.
Half-Plate (mail) 9 -5 3 Includes Mail. "Plate mail".
Full Plate (padded) 10 -5 3 Includes Padded. "Field plate".
Full Plate (mail) 11 -6 4 Rare, but sometimes used in mounted tourneys. Includes Mail. "Tourney plate".

I take note of lesser armors that are an integral part of other armors. For example, Padded Armor is "included" or worn under Mail. So, a player could take off the Mail to wear only Padded. Some armors could be destroyed to reduce them to a lesser "integral" component (such as tearing the rings off of hardened leather to reduce Ring to Hard Leather).

These included armors don't do anything to the "higher" armor. They are part of it. As in if you put Padded on then Mail, you aren't combining any armor values, just jumping from Padded's stats to Mail's stats once the mail is in place.

[Kival]

I would get rid of Ring Mail and Splint Mail completly though. If it's wished I can also post my complete list which is similar but not exactly the same as Sturn's list (e.g. Chainmail is slightly better in my game and Hide much worse).

[Sturn]

If it's wished I can also post my complete list which is similar but not exactly the same as Sturn's list (e.g. Chainmail is slightly better in my game and Hide much worse).

Please do!

I would get rid of Ring Mail and Splint Mail completly though.

Why?

If you are suggesting these don't exist in the Song of Ice and Fire, I would argue against you.

Ring is mentioned repeatedly. Using the "Citadel" of Westeros.org I found several entries in the books for ring mail (I may have missed a few).

•Ring-mail armor is worn with boiled leather, and wool in cold weather (Book 1 page 2)
•Gilded ringmail (Book 1 page 261)
•Silvered ringmail ( Book 1 page 309)
•Mail hauberks or shirts of sewn rings are very common armor among the lords and soldiers of the North (Book 3 page 226)

Note: I agree the author seems to be using the common misnomer of Ring Mail instead of Ring armor.

I couldn't find a direct reference to Splinted armor, unless you consider Martin's "lobstered" armor to be a reference:

•Skirts of lobstered metal covering to mid-thigh (Book 1 page 365)

(Note: the only reason I consider the "lobstered" reference to possibly be splint is because it mentions "skirts of metal covering to mid-thigh", this is open to interpretation)

But, the books tend to be focused on Westeros of course. That is why I suggested the Splinted armor (note I'm saying Splinted armor, not Splinted mail) of the SoIF RPG to be something rare in Westeros, more typically found in the far east (Qarth? Asshai? Yi Ti?, the areas around the Jade Sea). Just because we haven't found it mentioned in the novels yet, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Martin's works have many historic references, so if the real world had Splint armor primarily from the far east, perhaps Martin's does too. We just haven't visited it much in the novels. So, I've retained Splint, but it doesn't mean it will be something encountered by players unless they meet a unique foreign visitor or take sail to far off lands.

[Carriker]

I would get rid of Ring Mail and Splint Mail completly though.

Splint armor is intended to be this sort of armor, inaccurately referred to as "mail," no doubt. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splinted_armour

Ring armor is included in the system because Martin includes that type of armor in his setting. The Song of Ice and Fire RP system is intended to reflect his setting, rather than the real world. Hence things like, you know, dragons and Others.

[Kival]

I think Martin has been tricked by mentions of Ring Mail in other RPGs etc. I don't think he deliberatly used an armour that historically never existed. But I understand your reasoning, I'll still delete them in my game.



Regarding Splinted Armour I'll write something later with more time.

[Sturn]

I think Martin has been tricked by mentions of Ring Mail in other RPGs etc. I don't think he deliberatly used an armour that historically never existed. But I understand your reasoning, I'll still delete them in my game.

I wouldn't go so far as to say it "never" existed. To clarify I'm speaking of Ring armor, NOT Ring Mail. You say Ring Mail above, but I'm referring to the Ring armor of SoIF RPG not Ring Mail which I agree is a misnomer for either Ring armor or Mail. SoIF RPG doesn't have Splint Mail or Ring Mail, but Splint and Ring, as if the authors understood the differences and misnomers.Yes I've read articles for and against the existence of Ring armor beyond what wiki says. I don't recall any of them saying Ring armor never existed. In the end the speculation seems to be that Ring armor existed but was rare.

http://www.arador.com/articles/chainmail.html#foot7
From Wiki: "Ring armour, however, seems to have also been used in Asia but was rare."
Picture from Wiki of Ring armor: http://www.arador.com/articles/chain2.jpg

Whether it exists historically or not, Martin did include it. You CAN construct ring armor as described by speculative historians. So if Martin includes Ring armor in his novels, I'm going to include it in my game about Martin's novels. I could be swayed about splint, but not ring since Martin obviously included such armor.

[Kival]

I should probably have clarified that it never existed in Europe as I do not know much about eastern armours and I think Westeros armour and weapons are modelled after medieval europe. Anyway, you may have convinced me to reinclude Ring armour...

Splint armour though was only used for arms and legs as far as I know. I don't see why any one should want to use or make splint body armour. Splint meaning long vertical not horizontal. The only thing somehow similar I know is an indian armor: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... _armor.JPG

I will post my own armor list later, need to retranslate the names first .


PS: Sadly there is not really a word like mail instead of chain mail in German, so I need to stay witch Chainmail

[coldwind]

... where someone with a 2 in Athletics, Awareness and Agility has a Combat Defence of 0 and so any blow swung at them hits automatically with infinite degrees of success.

This is the second time I've seen you post this, and I'm wondering where you get that?

1. Sure, an opponent will hit automatically, but still need to beat the Defense of 0 by 5 for 2 successes, by 10 for 3 successes, and by 15 for 4 successes. There's no multiplication or division, so I don't know where you're getting the infinite from.

2. Even if there were multiplication or whatnot, degrees of success are limited to 4.

Just curious on your reasoning here.

[Rabbit]

As far as I understand with the current stats it's better to have less of an armour if you fight a higly skilled enemy (5-6). I did not calcuate it myself so far but, if it's true, I don't have a big problem with that and think it's quite realistic that heavy armour can become a hindrance in a duel against an higly skilled enemy. I still reduced AP of the standard Full plate -1. (In my game exists a heavier version, Full plate on chainmail instead of Full Plate on padded armour... but that's only a side note)

Personally, I think this system reflects things fairly well. If you're fighting on foot in plate, you're at a severe disadvantage. It's why the preferred method of dealing with a plate-wearing individual is to pull him from his horse.

So, is the idea that on foot, if you're in mail of some sort, you're probably better off than if you're in plate against a slightly above average opponent? Because I'm frankly not seeing a problem with that.

Errr... it really depends on the plate and the person using it.
I've seen people clad in plate be just as agile as the guy next to him in the chain-mail.

Anyways, as I see it, plate needs to have a few more distinctions, maybe even a reduction in it's Penalty.
(How Full Plate could be ANYTHING but castle-forged is beyond me... It's a bitch trying to fit into another man's plate, and that's only the breastplate)
The inclusion of a actively rolled defence, such as suggest in the "Parrying" thread, might also help avoiding getting people in full-plate reduced to tin-canned beef.

This is the second time I've seen you post this, and I'm wondering where you get that?

1. Sure, an opponent will hit automatically, but still need to beat the Defense of 0 by 5 for 2 successes, by 10 for 3 successes, and by 15 for 4 successes. There's no multiplication or division, so I don't know where you're getting the infinite from.

2. Even if there were multiplication or whatnot, degrees of success are limited to 4.

Just curious on your reasoning here.

4x10 is still 40 pts. of health. Even under the best of circumstances, you'd still be dead twice.
You got a page ref for the degrees of success limit?

[Pytorb]

... where someone with a 2 in Athletics, Awareness and Agility has a Combat Defence of 0 and so any blow swung at them hits automatically with infinite degrees of success.

This is the second time I've seen you post this, and I'm wondering where you get that?

1. Sure, an opponent will hit automatically, but still need to beat the Defense of 0 by 5 for 2 successes, by 10 for 3 successes, and by 15 for 4 successes. There's no multiplication or division, so I don't know where you're getting the infinite from.

2. Even if there were multiplication or whatnot, degrees of success are limited to 4.

Just curious on your reasoning here.

The reasoning is obviously to demonstrate the dangers of making rules posts on the train to work when I don't have a copy of the rules to hand, my bad!

My getting the degrees of success rules, 0-4 one degree, 5-9 two degrees, 10-14 three degrees, 15+ four degrees, confused with the critical rules, double opponent's combat defence then look at the number of sixes, does highlight to me another aspect of the "more armour makes you more killable" possibility that hasn't been touched on yet in this thread. If you are wearing heavy armour you are more likely to have a critical scored against you. In one sense this is actually a good counterweight and stops heavily armoured opponents becoming invulnerable to a field full of smallfolk. On the other hand though it does mean a skilled fighter can 'one shot kill' a heavily armoured but easy to hit opponent. Perhaps an additional benefit of Armour Mastery should be to ignore the result of a 'Solid Hit' critical result. Improved Armour Mastery could also reduce a 'Powerful Hit' to a 'Solid Hit'.

[Kival]

As requested my list so far (at the moment without ring and splint); weight is not set in stone; it is meant to include the complete armour set (Helmet, limb protection, body armour etc.), it's mostly determined from the original game values but tweaked to some degree; I'M not sure what I meant with banded armour ("Bänderrüstung"); maybe something like lorica segmentata or samurai armours or something which I thought splinted mail armour might mean. If I should reinclude ring armour I'd probably give it more then 4 AR... have to think about it.

Armor / Rating / Penalty / Bulk / price / weight
Light Clothing 0 0 0
Heavy Clothing 1 0 1 3 ss – 10 kg
Soft Leather 1 0 0 – 200 ss – 4 kg
Padded 2 -1 0 – 200 ss – 5 kg
Hardened Leather 3 -2 0 – 400 ss – 7,5 kg
Bone/Wood 4 -3 1 – 300 ss – 12 kg
Hide 4 -3 2 – 400 ss – 15 kg
Chainmail (Padded) 5 -2 2 – 1000 ss – 20 kg
Scale 6 -3 3 800 ss – 18 kg
Breastplate (Padded) 5 -2 3 - 800 ss – 12+5 kg.
Breastplate (Mail) 7 -3 4 - 800+800 ss – 12+20 kg
Brigandine (Mail) 8 -4 3 – 1000 +500 ss – 20+10 kg?
Banded Armour 7 4 -3 - 1200 ss - ??
Half Plate (Padded) 8 -4 3 – 1200 ss – 15+5 kg
Half Plate (Mail) 9 -5 4 – 2000 ss – 15+20? kg
Full Plate (Padded) 10 -5 3 3000 ss – 20+5 kg?
Full Plate (Mail) 11 -6 4 – 3800 ss – 20+20 kg

Other then Sturns list mine is not particularly playtested.