Is Armor Properly Designed in Fantasy Games?

[Christopher R Taylor]

Perhaps its worth a discussion on what makes an attack armor piercing in terms of normal weapons.  Is a spear head AP?  The point of a rapier?  Arrowheads?

 

Remember, this is about what it does in game terms, not what its called in real world parlance.

[Beast]

43 minutes ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Perhaps its worth a discussion on what makes an attack armor piercing in terms of normal weapons.  Is a spear head AP?  The point of a rapier?  Arrowheads?

 

Remember, this is about what it does in game terms, not what its called in real world parlance.

What is AP in game terms is going to be on how the attack is bought(character points or money)
If I pay character points it is AP if I pay for it and the GM approves
If I pay money I should have to pay x10-x20 vs normal arrows and the GM approves
to a lesser degree if paying money for an AP weapon say x5-x10 vs a normal weapon, and the GM approves

 

In any case the classical case to deal with heavy armored foes is volume of fire
Example a force of 50 heavily armored knights(armor act-14)attacked by 200 archers should yield say 25 hits(area fire in reality)
14- activate is around 90% effective defense

so of the 25 hits 2.5 will penetrate for an average of 5.5 body done(1.5d6 weapon) to the poor knight hit(probably taking out something and making the knight combat ineffective
it now becomes a race for the knights to cover the distance to the archers and destroy or bypass the archer's defenses(trench with emplaced spears, high ground, defensive toops, etc...)

as for a rapier being AP, I'd say no as it is a weapon meant to slip into the joints and do damage( though a rapier is a street/ in the city weapon and is not meant for the battlefield)
Now I would either buy AP as a naked advantage or Penalty Skill levels to lower the activation roll to show the added skill of the wielder

[MrAgdesh]

14 hours ago, Beast said:

remember that this kind of armor does not cover everything perfectly, and there is an activation
so even a 14- will fail in time(the MacBeth and Adora sword and shield fight where won by strikes that got past the armor
the same is true vs arrows, enough tries and the armor will be bypassed or defeated

I'm personally not a fan of giving the armour an Activation Roll, simply because that makes it all or nothing. That simulates a hit to the face with an open helm or direct visor hit but doesn't work for hitting 'between the plates' where a chainmail hauberk and haubergeon should stop at least some of the trauma. I prefer the gaps in the armour being simulated by the actual damage rolled, so with the 1 1/2d6 medium bow maxing out at 9 BODY it has hit between the plates (or maybe penetrated slightly through the plate due to a 'perfect storm' of circumstances). 

 

 

[Christopher R Taylor]

Yeah I have not pulled the cord on this yet but I have a scheme I have considered for a while now to have armor be 14- activation to half armor protection to represent joints, etc.  So you still get armor, just not the full coverage in that particular spot, then make it a -6 OCV area to aim at.

 

I agree that the damage range does simulate different qualities of hits (you rolled a 2? OK it glanced off a plate of armor -- GM descriptions and role playing can really liven yet another bandit fight).  That's a really simple system to use and my yen for complicated systems that give super crunchy realism is waning over time.  But the activation system still has appeal to me because its an absolute mechanic: you know what happened.

[MrAgdesh]

10 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Yeah I have not pulled the cord on this yet but I have a scheme I have considered for a while now to have armor be 14- activation to half armor protection to represent joints, etc.  So you still get armor, just not the full coverage in that particular spot, then make it a -6 OCV area to aim at.

 

I agree that the damage range does simulate different qualities of hits (you rolled a 2? OK it glanced off a plate of armor -- GM descriptions and role playing can really liven yet another bandit fight).  That's a really simple system to use and my yen for complicated systems that give super crunchy realism is waning over time.  But the activation system still has appeal to me because its an absolute mechanic: you know what happened.

In FH I recall rules for targeting holes in damaged armour. Maybe something like this? 

[theinfn8]

19 hours ago, Christopher R Taylor said:

Yeah I have not pulled the cord on this yet but I have a scheme I have considered for a while now to have armor be 14- activation to half armor protection to represent joints, etc.  So you still get armor, just not the full coverage in that particular spot, then make it a -6 OCV area to aim at.

 

I agree that the damage range does simulate different qualities of hits (you rolled a 2? OK it glanced off a plate of armor -- GM descriptions and role playing can really liven yet another bandit fight).  That's a really simple system to use and my yen for complicated systems that give super crunchy realism is waning over time.  But the activation system still has appeal to me because its an absolute mechanic: you know what happened.

 

If you wanted really nitty gritty, you could have the players roll the random hit location, then apply the attack vs a separate DCV based on the armour type in that location. For example, someone wearing purely a breastplate might get +1 DCV when attacked to the chest area. Whereas someone in chain and a breastplate might get +2 DCV. (Numbers are for example purposes only) Then you know that they managed to slip around the armour. You still apply damage reduction normally, as the armour would likely still impede the strike.

 

I was using a borrowed chain shirt under my brigandine armour once that lacked a complete armpit section (hard part to build correctly and can be restrictive). I'm left handed and threw a straight shot against someone with a shield to bring the shield up and side step around to the right. Didn't move fast enough and the shield user hit me in the armpit with a rising cut. Luckily I had a gambeson, but even with that, the blunt steel hit with enough force to turn my armpit and left upper chest some nice shades of blue and green over the next few hours.

 

All that to say, yes, armour reduces damage, but it also (normally) makes you harder to "hit".

[MrAgdesh]

If there is one thing that I've taken away from the Arrows vs Armour videos its that plate is great vs arrows and chainmail not at all. But this ties in perfectly with the "Bashing, Slashing, and Piercing Damage" options (FH6Epg 205). So chainmail would only offer a 3rPD vs arrows if the archer makes a STR/DEX roll when they attack.

 

So (for Jolrhos) perhaps these (optional) rules are already there, just need highlighting to include them?

 

 

As Hugh said earlier, there are gameplay vs realism considerations, but having played 1E HarnMaster way back when - that had extensive rules for fighting against the multiple layers that something like a plate or chain wearer would have - it was incredibly drawn out and the nitty gritty was simply too much for me.

[GDShore]

I would like to speak to a couple of points here. I do not particularly like activation rolls , I can see where they are useful but do not like them. Rapiers are not armor piercing, one meeting between a rapier and broadsword, and the rapier either breaks in half or shatters. Also, the knight will be carrying a large shield (in addition to his armor) that will be verrry hard to get around. 

     Beast postulates a scenario where 200 archers takes on 50 knights but he leaves out a couple of important factors. 1. are the knights mounted,  2. at what range do the two forces spot each other, 3. if mounted it will take approximately 33 to 36 seconds for the knights to close to melee range assuming 300 meters. [ Richard the Lionheart said that if he could close an enemy to 300 yards no force on earth could stand before him] ( it takes 3 to 6 strides for a thoroughbred to achieve full speed, about 2 seconds) I rank as a ludicrous  bowman in the Society for Creative Anachronism which requires that you shoot a flight of 6 arrows each at 40 yards - 30 yards and 20 yards plus a speed round in which you have thirty seconds to fire as many arrows as possible. I generally average 6-7 rounds though my best was 9, I have a friend who regularly averaged 18 in a speed round with his best being 28.  120 points scored on a 60 cm. target face. The scoring is gold -5- (15 cm. circle), red -3-, blue -3-, black -2- and white -1- my best score was 126,  7 bullseyes and a 1. 

     My point is that personal experiance shows that a 12% hit rate is way too low. At Agincourt the worst archer on the English side would rate as good - very good, In tournament I have shot at clout and wand at 100 meter, The clout is at a circle 6 foot wide with circles at 1 foot, 2 foot and 4 foot. I never shoot less than all six in the 2 foot or 1 foot, the wand is a target 4 inches wide, 6 foot tall only the center 2 inches scoring. my worst 4 score 2 in the non score. These targets were based on those used by English yeoman archers during the Plantagenet era every Sunday after mass. So to Beasts posit, 100 of the archers will be good to very good, 50 will be excellent, 25 elite and 25 superlative. The first volley will loose as the knights approach 250 meters, the second as they approach 175 meter, a third volley as they approach the 100 meter mark. I doubt that there is a single one of the 50 still alive as the last living horse passes the 100 meter mark. You see, none will have charged with their visors down, (have you ever been on a horse wearing a helmet with visor down, I have, bupkiss is what you see) They won't lower the visor till about 50 meter out, the elites and superlatives will be aiming at the eye slot, about 2.5 cm. wide and 7.5 cm. long, remember there is fifty of them. 

     I will grant Beast his 10% penetration at 300 meter, but not his 12% hits to begin with, he has forgotten something else to begin with, THEY are not shooting at a target 2 meter high and less than 1 meter wide, they are shooting at a target closer to 4 meter high, 2,5 meter long and 1,5 meter wide. They are shooting at horse and man, a very big target. I posit a hit rate closer to 50%, that would be a hundred hits, 10 penetrations and a loss of 4 to 6 troops one way or another per volley. Trust me the best trained horse is not going to be happy shot in the rump or leg or eye. If the troop is dismounted their fate is more assured. 78 seconds is a long time to be under fire and not be able to strike back. From the 100 meter mark the knights would be looking at 5 plus rounds of fire, at probably 75% or more hits that would be 750 hits, 75 penetrations, 30 or more incapacitated. Penetration however is not my biggest beef, its accuracy, 

     At 300 meter I'll agree no aimed shots[unless aided] shots, same at 200 meter but ay 100 meter I know they are possible (even with a medium weight bow. {I have done it} In most RPG a bow cannot hit the broadside of a barn beyond 20-25 meter. At 100 meter I know I can hit a 5 cm. target, with less than a 2.5 cm. spread 4 time out of 6. I rank myself as an expert, not elite or superlative. To reach an expert ability I would have to have a missile OCV of +10 to 12, let alone think about being a superlative bowman.

[Beast]

2 hours ago, GDShore said:

I would like to speak to a couple of points here. I do not particularly like activation rolls , I can see where they are useful but do not like them. Rapiers are not armor piercing, one meeting between a rapier and broadsword, and the rapier either breaks in half or shatters. Also, the knight will be carrying a large shield (in addition to his armor) that will be verrry hard to get around. 

     Beast postulates a scenario where 200 archers takes on 50 knights but he leaves out a couple of important factors. 1. are the knights mounted,  2. at what range do the two forces spot each other, 3. if mounted it will take approximately 33 to 36 seconds for the knights to close to melee range assuming 300 meters. [ Richard the Lionheart said that if he could close an enemy to 300 yards no force on earth could stand before him] ( it takes 3 to 6 strides for a thoroughbred to achieve full speed, about 2 seconds) I rank as a ludicrous  bowman in the Society for Creative Anachronism which requires that you shoot a flight of 6 arrows each at 40 yards - 30 yards and 20 yards plus a speed round in which you have thirty seconds to fire as many arrows as possible. I generally average 6-7 rounds though my best was 9, I have a friend who regularly averaged 18 in a speed round with his best being 28.  120 points scored on a 60 cm. target face. The scoring is gold -5- (15 cm. circle), red -3-, blue -3-, black -2- and white -1- my best score was 126,  7 bullseyes and a 1. 

     My point is that personal experiance shows that a 12% hit rate is way too low. At Agincourt the worst archer on the English side would rate as good - very good, In tournament I have shot at clout and wand at 100 meter, The clout is at a circle 6 foot wide with circles at 1 foot, 2 foot and 4 foot. I never shoot less than all six in the 2 foot or 1 foot, the wand is a target 4 inches wide, 6 foot tall only the center 2 inches scoring. my worst 4 score 2 in the non score. These targets were based on those used by English yeoman archers during the Plantagenet era every Sunday after mass. So to Beasts posit, 100 of the archers will be good to very good, 50 will be excellent, 25 elite and 25 superlative. The first volley will loose as the knights approach 250 meters, the second as they approach 175 meter, a third volley as they approach the 100 meter mark. I doubt that there is a single one of the 50 still alive as the last living horse passes the 100 meter mark. You see, none will have charged with their visors down, (have you ever been on a horse wearing a helmet with visor down, I have, bupkiss is what you see) They won't lower the visor till about 50 meter out, the elites and superlatives will be aiming at the eye slot, about 2.5 cm. wide and 7.5 cm. long, remember there is fifty of them. 

     I will grant Beast his 10% penetration at 300 meter, but not his 12% hits to begin with, he has forgotten something else to begin with, THEY are not shooting at a target 2 meter high and less than 1 meter wide, they are shooting at a target closer to 4 meter high, 2,5 meter long and 1,5 meter wide. They are shooting at horse and man, a very big target. I posit a hit rate closer to 50%, that would be a hundred hits, 10 penetrations and a loss of 4 to 6 troops one way or another per volley. Trust me the best trained horse is not going to be happy shot in the rump or leg or eye. If the troop is dismounted their fate is more assured. 78 seconds is a long time to be under fire and not be able to strike back. From the 100 meter mark the knights would be looking at 5 plus rounds of fire, at probably 75% or more hits that would be 750 hits, 75 penetrations, 30 or more incapacitated. Penetration however is not my biggest beef, its accuracy, 

     At 300 meter I'll agree no aimed shots[unless aided] shots, same at 200 meter but ay 100 meter I know they are possible (even with a medium weight bow. {I have done it} In most RPG a bow cannot hit the broadside of a barn beyond 20-25 meter. At 100 meter I know I can hit a 5 cm. target, with less than a 2.5 cm. spread 4 time out of 6. I rank myself as an expert, not elite or superlative. To reach an expert ability I would have to have a missile OCV of +10 to 12, let alone think about being a superlative bowman.

I was just spitballing it for accuracy
but I'm also taking into account that 200 archers are not going to be able to target individuals(so in a perfect world  each knight would have 4 arrows per volley, it will be more like the front rank will take the most hits)
there is also the morale of the troops(at 50yds vs horseback 25 yds vs foot) depending on defending terrain/fortifacations and or foot troops archers will break and run
knights on foot can move in turtle(shields overlapping closer formation)
on horse shorter time under fire, but not as maneuverable to avoid field fortifacations

[Christopher R Taylor]

Quote

Rapiers are not armor piercing, one meeting between a rapier and broadsword, and the rapier either breaks in half or shatters.

 

While I agree, I don't think that is proof that a rapier is not AP, its proof that a rapier is brittle.  The test would be whether a rapier penetrates armor better than a dagger, for instance, in the same circumstances.  My guess would be that no, it is not armor piercing despite being a very small point, because it probably does not actually pierce through defenses any better than another sort of point with the same force.

[GDShore]

Nice volley Beast. I dispute it. A force of archers, with "Abatis" in front and a ditch will not break at 50 meter. More importantly those fifty knights will not make it to fifty meter alive, the archers are not shooting at the knights, they are shooting the horses. You cannot armor a horse to the level you can a man, at best the head is covered with lamellar the chest may have a plate but there are gaps and you can not armor legs. A point I grant to you, the front rank will receive the bulk of arrows, a horse going down not only sends its knight to the ground but the 1 to 3 ranks directly behind the fallen fall as well. The knight charges in an arrowpoint ( < ) formation as that front rank falls the remainder disperse they become easier targets to hit, they tend to slow down as they reform.  as they close from 100 meter to 50 meter all archers have stopped area effect fire and moved to aimed shots. the aim point, eyes and nostrils (while I have seen some barding for a horses head with cups over the nostrils but they are exceedingly rare. I contend that  at best out of a force of 50 attackers 6 maybe 7 reach the abatis where I give them at most a 3 minute lifespan. The attacking force is simply too small. To take out a defending force with fortification the attacker requires 4 to 5 time the numbers of the defense. 

     Now the turtle. Not going to happen with knights, maybe mercenaries but not the knight. The knight "is not a soldier" he is an honorable, chivalric warrior. To do a turtle successfully YOU must train for it. hIstorically  only 2 armies used it regularly, the Spartans and the Romans (I include the Byzantines as Roman, though they stopped using the turtle sometime in the eighth century AD. Only the Romans used as pro forma. The knights equipage does not lend it self to turtle, a heater shield does not allow for a successful turtle. The front rank must hold the shield with the top of the shield level with all the rest in the front rank, second rank must hold the shield at 45 degrees over the head of the front rank, the third and subsequent ranks will hold their shield above their heads point locked to the back of the shield ahead. Another issue, up to 20% of them won't even have shields they will carry polearms. Again it is the numbers 50 attackers is simply not enough. 

     I am going to preempt something here, "we have all seen movies where sword and board are marching in a shield wall." It don't look all that hard to me, and it isn't, turtle is. Takes about 3 months to learn to do properly. Finally both shield wall and turtle are immensely slow, the wall becomes close to 3 minutes and the turtle 3.5 to 4 minutes to traverse that distance. They might try the turtle but my bet is it would breakup at the first terrain deformation, a dip, a rise, a pothole or a boulder it is over.

     A final statement, you mentioned morale, what makes you think only the archer will run, if the knight sees 10%, 20% or 30% of their force falls won't break and run. 

[Christopher R Taylor]

Well, who breaks when is a different mechanic entirely, its down to psychology and training and presence.  Its an interesting thing to work up in Hero, but doesn't really have much to do with armor and how well its designed.

 

Its looking more and more to me like its valid to treat heavy plate armor as hardened but leave armor piercing on arrows, because they will rip through most lighter armor (although cloth, especially silk, will tend to wind up the arrowhead and slow its progress more effectively than you'd expect).

[GDShore]

Actually I would believe that about silk. We did some experiments shooting at various cloth. From 20 meter vs. cotton broadcloth with a 30# bow complete pass through and 2" penetration into butt, thru corduroy with penetration of 1.5 to 2", thru both sides of a jean pant leg and again a 2" penetration, sail weight denim .5" penetration, belt weight denim stopped the arrows about half to three quarters the length of the arrow. We also tried wool, linen and silk the arrows passed thru like the cotton broad but the silk depending on the type from reaching the butt kimono silk had the best stopping ability. Interesting factoid about silk, if it is pushed into a shallow wound it will not fester or otherwise infect.

[theinfn8]

While it is interesting to consider massed combat in regards to armour and arrows, the level of game play is usually skirmish level. Squad vs. squad, and much smaller distances. Distances that an individual in heavy armour can cover quite quickly on foot ("heavy" being relative). At this level, I would assume "geek the mage" will swiftly turn into "geek the archer" (which in fact is often the PCs tactic in games).

 

We could consider the armour piercing question similarly to the discussion of firearms and body armour that was had in the Dark Champions sub forum (a fascinating read with results I stole for my home use), with certain armour automatically giving arrows AP, rather than making AP an attribute of the arrow naturally. Perhaps taking the same kind of divide with "soft" and "hard" armours. There would be a good reason to want to stack various armour types (as was done historically). You could even go with the plate carrier idea to cover the use of that hard armour.

 

The more complexity that gets added, the longer each attack will take. It makes me inclined to hit the cinematic reality level and throw the rest into the realm of hand-wavium. Narration of attacks in games should be less "you hit for 10 damage? You cut a deep gash into his side and he keeps fighting" and more "You score a telling blow against his chest armour, you're pretty sure he has a bruised rib". Luckily Hero has a built in mechanic to help with his, the division between STUN and BODY. You can judge easily how serious a wound is by how much BODY is left and temper expectations accordingly.

 

I think I meandered off my point somewhere in there. It's been a long week...

[Christopher R Taylor]

Yeah I am leaning heavily toward arrows not being armor piercing so much as certain armors being vulnerable to arrows, so its not so much a characteristic of the attack as it is a weakness of the defense.  That way I can build alternate materials being vulnerable to arrows (copper, bronze) and iron and steel or better tends to bounce it.

[AlHazred]

As time goes by, I've come to believe that the resistant Energy Defense of armors in the boom is too high. The next FH game I run, I think I'll try halving the rED of most armors, and give fool rED to some padded or specially-made pieces.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Yeah that is one thing I have done for a while now, giving armor different ED and PD, because its definitely not the same in most armor.  Plus, the resistant and normal defense should be different.  You get more normal PD from a suit of plate armor than rPD; you can shrug off a punch or staff entirely without even noticing it in many cases.

 

What I have not done is vary the defense by location, despite how it should be.  Plate armor on your chest was always thicker than your head or feet, for example, because you wanted maximum protection where it mattered most, and weight savings where you could get it.  Jousting plate was a different sort of beast, because you didn't have to move around much and the weight was less of an issue.

 

Yes, the defense should vary but that's way too much work and too many huge charts.

[MrAgdesh]

 

[GDShore]

Good day, I have an admission to make. The tests we performed may have been flawed. The targets we used were plates of steel, not shaped armor (at the time no one in our circle was willing to risk their plate armor getting a hole in it) as such the physics changes completely. I have been watching various videos of archer to armor tests, against well designed well built breast plates the arrows shatter without penetration. As such this would limit to a very great level the ability to take the knight down directly but would likely increase the change in targeting from man to horse. The horse cannot be armored to the same level as can a man.  The head is armored with lamellar armor, the eyes will be unprotected as will the nostrils (I have seen some barding cups over the nostrils) a breastplate over the chest is standard and you cannot armor legs at all. The breastplate does not cover the entire chest, to do so interferes with the forelegs. I still contend that the mounted knights are still at grave risk but the foot knights may be a harder nut to crack. The archers would likely wait until the foot has closed to under 100 meter at which point the foot is only 25 seconds from the archers. This would limit them to 4 to 5 shots each and that would make it depend on what the helmets are like. Open faced advantage archers, visored advantage foot. 

[GDShore]

 I would like to make a point slightly off topic. Bows do not work indoors, in a corridor that is 3 meter by 3 meter by x meter long, bows are a problem, the issue is loft. The lighter the bow the larger the loft. Loft is the angle that a ballistic missile takes between point A and point B and the two primary variables are draw weight or energy production of the bow and the range between points A and B.  Here is a simple experiment to try, if you are about 6 foot tall or have a friend who lives at that rarified altitude, stand with arm held out parallel to the floor, then put a yard-meter stick in their hand, step back and look at the ceiling, The stick should be close to the ceiling, within 7.5 cm. The heavier the draw the smaller the loft. (personal anecdote when I was shooting regularly a group of much younger archers joined our shooting group, they were strong, vibrant young men, they were all 4 to 5 inch's taller than I am and all outmassed me by 50 lbs. minimum. At 40 I was 5'7" tall and a 110 lbs. I shot a 55lb. draw or 60 lb. weapon. Just starting out they were all shooting 30 lb. bows, at 40 yds. my loft is 6-8 degrees with an average of 29 out of 30 points,  at the 20 yard range my loft was 1-2 degrees, theirs closer to 15-20 degrees. ) My point, the heavier the bow the more accurate the shot. 

     Crossbows are a very different beast indeed. Designed to fire with little to no loft, and perfect for inside a corridor. 

[Christopher R Taylor]

The Spartans armored their horses immensely, in fact the breast plate was basically a big shield that protected the beast in charges.  Alexander's  equipment (largely designed by his father, then improved by Alexander) won him a lot of battles, because the cavalry were able to break a shield wall if they had to (and did, against the Persians).  But against really skilled archers, there's really not much you can do other than either hunker down and wait til they run out of arrows (the Romans vs Parthians) or charged them and hope to survive the distance.  Once you close with archers they are lightly armed and armored foot soldiers.

 

But the truth is, as someone pointed out above, this is all big tactical stuff, not likely to be an issue in fantasy hero games.  I have run large scale combat a couple times, but the players never seem to really like it much.  So what makes sense or is used in a massive battle does not necessarily affect player characters exploring a dank ruin.

[GDShore]

I have always run campaigns till lately for two separate group types, strict role players and wargamers. That is probably to be expected, as I started out with "Chain Mail" which unless I am mistaken was the first role play game. So I have been gamemaster or moderator of one or the other for more than fifty years but you are right, small unit tactics are different from large form units. In the SCA we found that the most successful shiltron was formed of two sword and board and three archers, or two archers, two sword and board and a pole arm. To explore a ruin you want an even more diverse group than that. One of the problems for armored characters is stealth and someone in plate is, not, stealthy. Not at all. Clang, clang, creek, thump, thump, thump. And that's just a plate wearer going thru a nice clean corridor. That is an aspect that should be examined, the actual wearing of the suit of armor, when and wear you are campaigning. 

[theinfn8]

Love me the sound of chain on plate. That jingle-rattle is so unique.

 

I would think, if we're talking about layered armour and exploring a dungeon, you would "layer down" to a level appropriate to the situation. Chain on its own is decently protective, and moderately quiet, so would likely be the most common exploration mode. You can tell there's something nasty coming up in the next little bit? Out comes the plate. Need to go full stealth? All that metal gets wrapped up and bagged and you push forward in your gambeson and hope the stealth makes up for the lack of protection. Bonus is, since you layered, you have all the armour anyway.

[GDShore]

Interesting "theinfn8" , first you have to pack extra cloth to wrap each piece in, then you need a bag to put the pieces in, then you need to sling that bag onto your back remember it weighs about 40 kilo's. Now we can reduce the bag weight by a little, the helmet you will likely wear, (4 kg) gauntlets, (3 kg) greaves, (4 kg) total = 11 kg. the bag now weighs 29 kg's. 

Course you just dump it and be rid of that extra weight but wait, it is worth a small fortune. As for putting it on just before combat, it takes the assistance of two who know what they are doing approximately 15 minutes to put plate on, longer if it is Gothic or Maximillian Plate. I suppose one of the mages might have a summon invisible servant to assist you, the average run time of combats in most of my games is 30 to 60 seconds. SOO about the time you get you legs on and settled the battle is over one way or the other. 

[Christopher R Taylor]

Very well made armor, the highest quality stuff doesn't make as much noise but that stuff costs as much as a house, and like GDShore said, you have a squire help you dress and it takes a long time.  And even that stuff makes noise to move in, its impossible to avoid this side of magic.  But its not just armor, its a lot of other stuff; discussions, the light sources, the smell of cooking food, etc.

 

A few simple things can simulate this (just common sense with light, scent etc) and I think using the END/phase cost as a positive PER bonus to be heard coming.  Yeah that pack can carry all the camping equipment but you sound like a percussion section in the orchestra walking through a mine.

 

There are a lot of aspects like this that aren't considered much in old school dungeoneering, like horses.  You cannot just park them outside the yawning entrance to an ancient ruin and go in and forget.  They need food, they're going to be prey to everything that hunts in the forest, or wander off looking for food and join another herd of horses, or get stolen, etc.  Horses aren't meat motorcycles.