Does wearing armor need a skill ?

[SolarBear]

That question just popped up in my mind, and I ran to my HERO book to find out the answer (awakening everybody in the house, but I'm getting off-topic on my own topic). And it wasn't there : probably one of those Up To The Game Master thingies (UTTGM), I figured.

So : considering that corrrectly wielding a weapon requires a skill (WF, to name it), would you consider that wearing armor need a skill ? If so, what kind of penalties (DEX, OCV, you name 'em) would occur ? And how about shields ?

[Curufea]

I'd say yes - I've worn both mail and articulated plate.

When you first put armour on, your fighting skill suffers, it's a new weight and you don't judge distances/articulation correctly.

Armour always affects your combat skill - you tire more quickly and are less nimble/dextrous when wearing it, BUT it is worse when you first wear it.

I'd recommend an "armour familiarity", but not a skill. Familiarity would reduce the penalties slightly.

However, if you did make it a skill, it could represent so much experience with a certain type of armour that you can put it on/remove it at a faster rate.

Shields - definitely.

Without skill you block your line of site, hit yourself in the legs/stumble over the shield (especially with kite shields), or put it in the way of your weapon arm.
With skill, you can charge spears correctly, shield bash effectively and deflect blows, rather than absorb the kinetic energy of them (and possibly numbing or breaking your arm).

[RDU Neil]

That question just popped up in my mind, and I ran to my HERO book to find out the answer (awakening everybody in the house, but I'm getting off-topic on my own topic). And it wasn't there : probably one of those Up To The Game Master thingies (UTTGM), I figured.

So : considering that corrrectly wielding a weapon requires a skill (WF, to name it), would you consider that wearing armor need a skill ? If so, what kind of penalties (DEX, OCV, you name 'em) would occur ? And how about shields ?

In our crunchier, grittier, lower level fantasy games, we have required the wearing of armor to require a Weapon Famaliarity. Anything above soft leathers, or you double your Encumbrance minuses (or something like that... it was a long time ago).

So... 1 pts for splint/banded... 1 pt. for ring or chain... 1 pt. for half-plate... 1pt. if you had full set of integrated armor. Something like that.

I think we dropped the rule after years of gaming, and we players just stopped doing silly D&D stuff like stealing the armor off of every tom, dick and orc that happened by, because we all realized just how impossible and stupid that would be.

Good role playing often saves the need for a lot of rule minutia. :)

[Markdoc]

For cultures where shields are common (ie: most "quasi-medieval european" settings) shield use is subsumed into "common melee weapons". For a seting where it isn't common (feudal Japan, or post-renaissance Europe, say) it isn't and has to be bought as a 1 pt familiarity.

For armour, see all the "armor penalties" threads. I don't require a FAM as such but do institute penalties on CVs, certain skills and PER, which increase as the bulk of the armour increases. I allow people to buy some of these off with PSLs - but not all. An experienced fighter who is used to his armour won't, for example have CV penalties any more, but he'll always have the PER penalties: experience can never fully compensate for the restricted vision inherent in wearing a full face helm, for example.

cheers, Mark

[Krim Haneth]

I have never required a skill for wearing armor. Usually, it just a roleplaying aspect, like not seeing through your helm as well and a few minuses to your PER. It does sound like a good idea for the wearing of plate though.

[Shadowpup]

For armour, see all the "armor penalties" threads. I don't require a FAM as such but do institute penalties on CVs, certain skills and PER, which increase as the bulk of the armour increases. I allow people to buy some of these off with PSLs - but not all. An experienced fighter who is used to his armour won't, for example have CV penalties any more, but he'll always have the PER penalties: experience can never fully compensate for the restricted vision inherent in wearing a full face helm, for example.


Yeah, like that.

[Rick]

The Skills for armor in our game are the points spent on penalty skill levels to negate the CV modifiers for wearing armor. If a character has experiece in armor already, I'd let them buy a level or 2 only to negate the DCV modifer for wearing there protection.

[AlHazred]

As Markdoc said. We use PSLs for Armor DCV penalties. With more magic, it becomes less necessary to have them; I run a Harn Hero game, and they're essential for my knightly NPCs to effectively oppose PCs with higher point totals, since that -3 DCV for wearing heavy plate and chain really eats into CSL bonuses.

Use of Armor PSLs is supported in Hero Designer.

[RDU Neil]

As Markdoc said. We use PSLs for Armor DCV penalties. With more magic, it becomes less necessary to have them; I run a Harn Hero game, and they're essential for my knightly NPCs to effectively oppose PCs with higher point totals, since that -3 DCV for wearing heavy plate and chain really eats into CSL bonuses.

Use of Armor PSLs is supported in Hero Designer.

Yeah... our use of Weapon Fam: Armor came from the days long before PSLs existed. They seem to cover what is needed under 5ER rules.

[HewhoisMatt]

I would say yes. I would also say the skill would allow you to maintain the armor thru simple repairs (straps etc) and allow you to put the armor on faster if you were in a hurry.

[garadan]

I would say yes in my campaign we run an armour fam skill similar to weapon fam. so 1pt for a single type soft leather for example, 2pt would allow you to wear leather armour eg, cuirboli, soft leather, studded leather etc.

The three armour groups we have are leather/hide, flexible metal (Chain, splint etc) and rigid (plate, field plate, chitin, laminated)

These really equate to light, medium and heavy armour.

so to be skilled in wearing all armour types would cost 6 points, but I havent as yet heard a good enough reason for me to allow people to buy this. As a general rule we allow one group (ie soft leather), then the rest are bought a point at a time.

[Vondy]

I would make it a "weapon familiarity" and apply penalties based on that.

[Curufea]

The three armour groups we have are leather/hide, flexible metal (Chain, splint etc) and rigid (plate, field plate, chitin, laminated)

These really equate to light, medium and heavy armour.


This is a common fantasy assumption. However, if you would like realism - mail weighs more than plate. Flexible metal weighs more than rigid (or articulated).

So - light, heavy, then medium.

[joen00b]

I do have Armor Proficienies in my game. 3 points will buy 1 Level (1 DCV). so far it's amxed out at 3 levels, and not one character has bought any. They will soon though (cue maniacal laughter and thunder/lightning effects).

[Starwolf]

For non-powered armors I use a WF, but for powered armors I use RSR only to offset PSL s.

[austenandrews]

I've never done that in a FH game, but if I were running a more "realistic" game, I'd consider WF for armor.

[AmadanNaBriona]

I've done a fair bit of fighting in real life in various forms of armor and using various weapons and combonations and I tend to agree that PSL's for removing armor penalties are the way to go. As for sheilds, they should require a WF. I've fought with them, I've fought against them, and given my experience they are more help than hinderance unless you have the experience and practice to use them right. In a FH campaign, I'd call the WF part of Common Melee familiarity, but in modern I'd put it as an unusual (not nearly as many folk outside of the reenactment/LARP communities ever learn how to really use a shield right).
A lack of familiarity should inflict some DCV harm, which kinda messes with the system, but would be realistic...If i'm facing a fighter who's never used a sheild before (assuming a medium "target" sheild), I see a guy with a huge opening on his off side(from the shield base to the ground), a hard part to avoid, and a potentailly great way to convince him to blind himself or tangle up his own weapon. A well trained "targeteer" (to use the 16th century term) however, can do a lot of things to make life hard for someone using a two handed weapon (I tend to bastard sword, greatsword, and greataxe as my prefered weapons, with the occasional dirk on the side)

[tetsujin28]

Great. More rules. Just what Hero needs...

[Curufea]

Great. More rules. Just what Hero needs...

Realising of course that the purpose of a thread in a forum is to talk about ideas. And using ideas or added rules of any sort is entirely voluntary and not compulsory.

But, good to have your helpful $0.02 there, anyway :)

[Rick]

There already are DCV modifiers for wearing armor. I haven't found a need to compound them.

[Vanguard00]

There already are DCV modifiers for wearing armor. I haven't found a need to compound them.
Ditto that. With DCV modifiers and Penalty Skill levels it seems everything you need is already in place. Just change the PSL definitions from "attack" to "armor" and you should be good to go.

[cndblank]

It already does.

Considering any Skilled heavy fighter (or any Knight) would have at least 5 points in +2 DCV Only Against Armor Penalties and might have +2 Dex Skills Only Against Armor Penalties for a total of 5 to 10 points.

So a trained heavy fighter is going to pay 5 points to be fully trained in using his armor. More if he wants to really be able to move around.

I would certainly expect any NPC Knight to have the first plus the PSL for OCV while riding.

I’m surprised to not see it on more than just PCs and Major NPCs. The Romans used extra heavy shields and weapons while training in full armor. Full time warriors are often described as being able to move in armor like it wasn't even there. I expect there is some embellishment, but when all you do all day is wear the armor…

[Cosmosemeritus]

An interesting caveat...

Weapon Fam's don't just allow a character basic proficiency in a weapon type but also covers the character's skill in maintaining the same weapon type. In the absence of a "Armor Familiarity" how is the ability of the character to maintain their armor in the same fashion to be modelled?

While I definatly believe that for reducing/eliminating the penalties to DCV/Dex due to armor and encumberance PSL's are the way to go, I think there is a disparity in FH as written when it comes to unskilled use of armor. So my idea is as follows:

Analogous to the introduction of the Armorsmith skill (FH5 p85) would be the introduction of an "Armor Familiarity" skill. This skill should work much the same as a WF. A 1-point armor familiarity would, by parallel, cover maintenance, donning, appraisal, and wearing of the armor. It should only compensate for "unfamiliarity" penalties the GM decides is appropriate for his/her game (perhaps -3 DCV like the -3 OCV unfamiliar weapon penalty?). An armor familiarity should NOT compensate for encumberence penalties due to wearing armor, just as a WF doesn't compensate for a weapon's inherent OCV or Rmod penalties.

Also analogous to WF's, make AF: Light (or however the lightest armor is defined in your game) a free skill, like WF club.

[Outsider]

Personally, I've never been fond of allowing PSLs to completely overcome the DCV/DEX disadvantage that comes with high encumbrance/armor wearing.