Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

[Jkeown]

So you could use Penalty Skill Levels to train away your DCV penalties from armor, should a PC be allowed to buy off the entire penalty? I was thinking allowing a fraction to be bought off, but is it realistic to allow the whole banana?

 

That, and I need to think of a good name for that skill. Armor Training seems a bit boring. Moving in Armor 101, 102 etc seems a bit much.

[Markdoc]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

So you could use Penalty Skill Levels to train away your DCV penalties from armor, should a PC be allowed to buy off the entire penalty? I was thinking allowing a fraction to be bought off, but is it realistic to allow the whole banana?

 

That, and I need to think of a good name for that skill. Armor Training seems a bit boring. Moving in Armor 101, 102 etc seems a bit much.

 

I allow the whole penalty to be bought off: people who spend their lives training in armour presumably get to be pretty good at it.

 

cheers, Mark

[Doc Democracy]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

So you could use Penalty Skill Levels to train away your DCV penalties from armor, should a PC be allowed to buy off the entire penalty? I was thinking allowing a fraction to be bought off, but is it realistic to allow the whole banana?

 

That, and I need to think of a good name for that skill. Armor Training seems a bit boring. Moving in Armor 101, 102 etc seems a bit much.

 

This depends entirely on the kind of game you want to play. If you want one that people walk about in armour and almost need armour to be competitive then you might allow buying off the whole penalty.

 

If you want one where people choose to wear armour for certain activities but choose small sections or armour or none at all for other activities then you might not even allow any penalty to be bought off.

 

You might give certain types of armour the levels built in - so it is easier to wear - very light even mail that provides all the protection of chainmail but feels like just leather.

 

You might allow people who are trained by a particular guild to buy talents only available to initiates of the guild. A reason for players to affiliate themselves and tie themselves into the politics of the game.

 

Comes down in the end what you want to allow in the game and the tone and tenor of the game you are running.

 

 

Doc

[Bismark]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

Ripping off a skill name from Rolemaster, try "Maneuver in Armor' (I would tend to differentiate for heavy/light and rigid/flexible armour types);

 

As for how much of the DCV penalty to eliminate using that skill/PSL setup; I would tend to let people get rid of all of it except in cases of the clumsiest (not necessarily the heaviest) armour types, where I would allow the character to eliminate most of it, still leaving a final penalty of -1.

 

For armour that is heavy but not clumsy (full Milanese plate comes to mind), if you enforce the Long-Term END rules (and penalties on fine manipulation while wearing gauntlets, PER penalties for closed helmets, etc.), then the old 'game balance' thing (which a lot of people seem to be obsessed with ) can be satisfied as well.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

Can you buy off DCV penalties with PSL's? My recollection was that only OCV penalties can be offset, but I could be mistaken.

 

If you have to buy +X DCV, only in Armor, plus +X levels with DEX skills, only in armor, that changes the costing considerably, especially as the more time you spend in armor, the lower the limitation falls.

[Jkeown]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

I decided on a simple build:

 

Manuvering In Armor I: Penalty Skill Levels: +1 vs. armor penalties to DCV with All Attacks Real Cost: 3

 

Manuvering In Armor II: Penalty Skill Levels: +2 vs. armor penalties to DCV with All Attacks Real Cost: 6

 

Manuvering In Armor III: Penalty Skill Levels: +3 vs. armor penalties to DCV with All Attacks Real Cost: 9

 

That, of course, suggested a magic item:

 

Ring of Free Movement

Created by the deadly Yodza Kye warrior mages, the Ring of Free Movement allows one to manuver effectively, unhindered by armor.

Ring of Free Movement: Penalty Skill Levels: +3 vs. armor penalties to DCV with All Attacks (9 Active Points); OIF (-1/2) Real Cost: 6

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

I allow it to be bought off entirely. Why not? If a player wants to pay points for it, good on them. Of course, I also require Armor Familiarities, the lack of which imposes even more severe penalties. So, being able to wear armor and be completely comfortable in it imposes a bit of a cost.

 

Here's my write up on it: Armor

[mikesama]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

Allow them to buy off all the penalty, I know people in modern times who are good enough in armor to do cartwheels and forward rolls back to standing in full plate, I see no reason to believe that someone from a time where full plate is common couldn't be better than it.

[Alibear]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

There has never been a time where full plate was common.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

I decided on a simple build:

 

Manuvering In Armor I: Penalty Skill Levels: +1 vs. armor penalties to DCV with All Attacks Real Cost: 3

 

Manuvering In Armor II: Penalty Skill Levels: +2 vs. armor penalties to DCV with All Attacks Real Cost: 6

 

Manuvering In Armor III: Penalty Skill Levels: +3 vs. armor penalties to DCV with All Attacks Real Cost: 9

 

 

 

I use the same things.

[Curufea]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

I'd only allow partial, unless playing a pulp/high fantasy game.

 

No amount of experience in real life will mitigate the penalties of wearing armour. People in plate will always be unable to scratch under their arms, or touch hands behind their backs. People in mail will always have difficulty swimming.

[Curufea]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

Allow them to buy off all the penalty' date=' I know people in modern times who are good enough in armor to do cartwheels and forward rolls back to standing in full plate, I see no reason to believe that someone from a time where full plate is common couldn't be better than it.[/quote']

 

I don't think that's buying off the penalty though - I think those folk would be better at those tasks when not wearing armour. At the barest minimum, there should be increased END use from any action.

[Markdoc]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

No amount of experience in real life will mitigate the penalties of wearing armour. People in plate will always be unable to scratch under their arms' date=' or touch hands behind their backs. People in mail will always have difficulty swimming.[/quote']

 

These are separate from the game mechanic questions, though: there the penalties refer to effects on combat and general movement. There's no real reason to believe that a person who can do handstands in armour would be better without it - it's more that he's become so used to it, it no longer hinders him significantly. When I did a lot of backpacking, I got faster at walking while wearing a heavy backpack and more mobile while wearing it. I didn't get any faster at walking without it, or more agile in general.

 

In my game, I allow the mechanistic penalties to be bought off, but heavy armour still makes you sink in water, rigid armour makes you less flexible, and any armour will chafe and wear holes in your skin over time: that's all part of the "real armor" limitation and since it's not inflicting a direct penalty on your kill rolls, cannot be bought off.

 

cheers, Mark

[mayapuppies]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

I'd only allow partial, unless playing a pulp/high fantasy game.

 

No amount of experience in real life will mitigate the penalties of wearing armour. People in plate will always be unable to scratch under their arms, or touch hands behind their backs. People in mail will always have difficulty swimming.

This is my take as well.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

These are separate from the game mechanic questions, though: there the penalties refer to effects on combat and general movement. There's no real reason to believe that a person who can do handstands in armour would be better without it - it's more that he's become so used to it, it no longer hinders him significantly. When I did a lot of backpacking, I got faster at walking while wearing a heavy backpack and more mobile while wearing it. I didn't get any faster at walking without it, or more agile in general.

 

In my game, I allow the mechanistic penalties to be bought off, but heavy armour still makes you sink in water, rigid armour makes you less flexible, and any armour will chafe and wear holes in your skin over time: that's all part of the "real armor" limitation and since it's not inflicting a direct penalty on your kill rolls, cannot be bought off.

 

cheers, Mark

 

Generally agreed, except that when I used to have to lug a pack around back in my military days, I did walk faster without a pack than I previously had thanks to added leg muscle. Of course, on the other hand my mile run time went down from about a 6 minute mile to about a 6 minute and 5 to 10 second mile; about half a minute for a three mile run, also because I had bulked up a bit and wasn't as fast, but that aside...

 

 

Mechanically, the penalties represent a detriment in combat for wearing such armor; I don't think its unreasonable to allow characters that wish to pay for the privilege to not have to suffer such penalties. It's just a mechanic like any other. There are other aspects of wearing armor that are more long term (ie potential LTE), or flavor / circumstantial that either have separate mechanics around them or else are in the hands of the GM to enforce as part of the backdrop and to the level of verisimilitude they are aiming for.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

I decided on a simple build:

 

Manuvering In Armor I: Penalty Skill Levels: +1 vs. armor penalties to DCV with All Attacks Real Cost: 3

 

Manuvering In Armor II: Penalty Skill Levels: +2 vs. armor penalties to DCV with All Attacks Real Cost: 6

 

Manuvering In Armor III: Penalty Skill Levels: +3 vs. armor penalties to DCV with All Attacks Real Cost: 9

 

That, of course, suggested a magic item:

 

Ring of Free Movement

Created by the deadly Yodza Kye warrior mages, the Ring of Free Movement allows one to manuver effectively, unhindered by armor.

Ring of Free Movement: Penalty Skill Levels: +3 vs. armor penalties to DCV with All Attacks (9 Active Points); OIF (-1/2) Real Cost: 6

 

Technically, it's not Penalty Skill Levels, but DCV Levels w/ a Limitation "Only To Offset DCV Penalties From Wearing Armor(-1/2)". One level comes out at 3 RP, but due to rounding, buying two or three of these costs 7 and 10 RP respectively.

 

Ring of Armored Mobility: 3 DCV Levels - OIF(Ring; -1/2), Only To Offset DCV Penalties From Wearing Armor(-1/2) Real Cost: 7

[Vondy]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

I'm pretty liberal about PSLs. And it makes sense that someone who trains in armor constantly would build both the strength and skill to compensate for the weight. We could nitpick certain activities that require unusual balance and agility - riding a unicycle, walking a tightrope, doing a triple flip - that would be extremely difficult in armor, but those can be simulated by assigning more penalties that the character has PSLs.

[Edsel]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

Can you buy off DCV penalties with PSL's? My recollection was that only OCV penalties can be offset, but I could be mistaken.

 

If you have to buy +X DCV, only in Armor, plus +X levels with DEX skills, only in armor, that changes the costing considerably, especially as the more time you spend in armor, the lower the limitation falls.

This is basically how our group has always handled it. Often I have allowed player to buy off up to half the normal armor penalty. Of course we often design our armor so that it has a DCV penalty other than the traditional encumbrance penalty.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

I'd only allow partial, unless playing a pulp/high fantasy game.

 

No amount of experience in real life will mitigate the penalties of wearing armour. People in plate will always be unable to scratch under their arms, or touch hands behind their backs. People in mail will always have difficulty swimming.

 

Indeed, I tend to agree. However I would allow a player to buy off the entire DCV penalty. The "Maneuvering in Armour" skill does not however, reduce the penalty for Dex-based skills at all. Thus, no DCV penalty, but performing backflips, swimming and scratching under ones pits....still difficult.

[Sir Ofeelya]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

I let people buy the entire DCV penalty off if they want to so spend their XPs. There is still the END penalty for encumbrance so it is not as if they are wearing nothing (unless they have enchanted armour that negates weight penalties). I figure if Conan can fight in full plate as King of Aquilonia at 60+ years of age, any decent adventurer shoudl eb able to.

[LordGhee]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

Alibear,

 

One reason that the Spanish and Venice navy won the battle of Lepenato is that the army was in plate. From about 1480's to 1580's full plate was the norm for a soldier. Plate legs depend on foe and location went in and out of favor with the infantry. There are plenty of paintings that show armies in full plate. granted it was easier in Italy where generaly the armies where smaller. by the end of the 1500's high hard leather boots came in and troops both infantry and cav started to lighten there load.

 

Lord Ghee

[NanDispute]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

So you could use Penalty Skill Levels to train away your DCV penalties from armor' date=' should a PC be allowed to buy off the entire penalty? I was thinking allowing a fraction to be bought off, but is it realistic to allow the whole banana?[/quote']

 

It depends on the level of nit-picking "realism" you want. In reality, some historical types of armor are simply better designed and fitted than others. In turn, what types of armor, and the quality of their construction, were historically available depends on the place and time, as well as the wealth of the the wearer (or whoever provided the armor to the wearer).

 

For simplicity, go with what you think is reasonable and dramatic.

[Tandem Esk]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

I wouldn't allow buying off any of the penelty. But I'd set the penelties more apart from each other.

 

You want too move easy? Buy light armor or don't wear any. You want good DEF? Buy major armor. It makes char's more different. There's too much alike-ness in char's as it is; I encourage differencing char's.

[Rapier]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

I have, in the past, allowed it. To an extent.

 

A person in full plate is not going to be doing cartwheels. I don't care if you are locked inside that can for 365 days a year, you just aren't going to be doing back-flips of a friar's pate!

 

Lighter, less cumbersome armour can have the penalties nullified completely while heavier armour can only have it mitigated.

[SteveZilla]

Re: Training away DCV Penalties from Armor

 

I have, in the past, allowed it. To an extent.

 

A person in full plate is not going to be doing cartwheels. I don't care if you are locked inside that can for 365 days a year, you just aren't going to be doing back-flips of a friar's pate!

 

Lighter, less cumbersome armour can have the penalties nullified completely while heavier armour can only have it mitigated.

 

IMO that method would speak to making the buydown limited to a specific amount, across the board. The total would be enoug to remove the penalty from light armor, but not enough to overcome that from heavier armors.

 

Yes?