Encumbrance AND mobility penalties on armor

[bigdamnhero]

An earlier post mentioned a heat increase as a penalty for wearing armor, which would explain why full plate is not a good idea in the Sahara. Perhaps use a form of Life Support to reduce the heating effect on a character? I could see each point spent offsetting one level of temperature increase, but perhaps only 1-2 points could be spent this way.

I like this concept. Tho the pricing of this is a little problematic, given that "Immune to Extreme Heat" only costs 2 points. I've occasionally toyed with the idea of building out a more granulated version of Heat/Cold resistance for Heroic games, but it doesn't seem to come up enough to justify the effort.

[Manic Typist]

How about: because only a tiny fraction of the populace knows how to throw fireballs?

Says you.

Because it takes extensive time, study and effort to learn how to do so?

Says you.

Because they're not equipment that anyone can buy at Ye Local Armour Shacke?

Says you – and if not, perhaps it’s just next door at Ye Old Magik Shoppe

[sigh] Please point to any post where I told someone else how to run their game or implied that they were badnaughtystupid?

I didn’t – but you dismissed the validity of the line of questioning with phrases like “force the player to spend points” and “inconvenience the character,” etc. That same reasoning would apply to offensive powers just as much as defensive, using your reasoning.

 

But your "Elven Arcana armor" and "Roman vs Samurai armor" examples neatly illustrates why I think the comparison to Weapon Familiarities doesn't track.

Actually, it does, but you seem to be missing it because you’re not acknowledging the assumptions that underline all your previous posts – which is what I was pointing out in previous posts.

 

With WFs, there are dozens of different types of weapons and most characters are only proficient with a handful of them, so it makes sense to say "I know these, but not those" and pay points accordingly.

That’s something that Someone Else decided, and for you (and me!) it makes sense. But we could just as easily have WF: Swords and WF: Spears and shorten the list to probably 5-6 total WFs for all conceivable weapons, from Stone Age to Sci-Fi

 

But what has been proposed here for AF is a single Familiarity that applies to any suit of armor (ie even if you only buy it at -1, that -1 applies even if you're wearing heavy plate). Which means anyone who wants to wear armor effectively has to buy the same AF. Which to me means, why bother?

I agree- I think if you’re going to go this route, you should keep it interesting and keep it as granular (or nearly so) as WFs in your campaign.

 

 

All IMO, YMMV, VCD, etc, since apparently we have to state that explicitly in every post now.

You can be snarky, but all I did was point out that you were relying on assumptions (many of which I employ in my own games because I like them!) rather than arguments (for the most part).

[Richgee]

Big, I can assure you wearing any kind of glove or gauntlet affects your manual dexterity. If you are in doubt next time you need an operation by all means insist your surgeon wears a pair of chain mail gauntlets rather than surgical gloves.

 

I've worked in operating theatres for years an can assure you even wearing surgical gloves affects your dexterity. Add to that lead coats and collars and you have a distinct drop in mobility. The current versions of these products are all designed for max comfort but you can still wring the sweat out of your shrubs after a 10hr shift.

 

If you are still in doubt put on a pair of regular gloves and try picking up and threading a needle.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Its true that weapon familiarities don't do enough to be interesting in a game.  I have changed them for my heroic games so that they also affect utility.  For instance, you cannot do simple repairs or use the weapon properly (like change the rate of fire on a gun, fix a jam, even reload it in some cases of very complex machinery) and combat use (you can only do use strike and haymaker, not block or other maneuvers).  On the other hand, a -3 OCV penalty is too high for many weapons, so I made it -1 for common, -2 for uncommon, and -3 for rare weapons in that culture.

 

Something similar could be done for armor familiarities, so that you can't do minor repairs, some you can't even figure out how to put on.  Its not like putting a shirt on to don most armor, its straps and layers and such.  Even some museums do it wrong when they set up a display.

[bigdamnhero]

I didn’t – but you dismissed the validity of the line of questioning with phrases like “force the player to spend points” and “inconvenience the character,” etc.

If anyone thought I was being insulting or dismissive, then I apologize - that wasn't my intent.

 

Says you.

...

You can be snarky, but all I did was point out that you were relying on assumptions (many of which I employ in my own games because I like them!) rather than arguments (for the most part).

They're assumptions that are common-if-not-ubiquitous in the fantasy genre, including every scrap of published FH material, and no one here (not even you) has indicated they're doing something so radically different that these wouldn't apply. So if your point is that my objections only apply to 99% of fantasy campaigns...ok, fine?

 

That same reasoning would apply to offensive powers just as much as defensive, using your reasoning.

It has nothing to do with offensive vs defensive. WF Clubs and WF Thrown Rocks are free for the same reason - they're ubiquitous, there's not much skill to learn, everyone knows how to do them at least a little, and making everyone pay points for them makes no sense. Similarly, if you're running a game where every PC and most NPCs get a free fireball wand that anyone can use, then you probably don't need to charge for WF: Wands either.

 

Big, I can assure you wearing any kind of glove or gauntlet affects your manual dexterity.

Yeah, fair point. I typically use sectional armor so few PCs run around wearing 6 Def gauntlets; but if yours do then a penalty on Sleight of Hand checks would be totally appropriate.

[Manic Typist]

If anyone genuinely thought I was being insulting or dismissive, then I apologize - that wasn't my intent.

And here the fault is entirely mine - I don't mean you were being dismissive in an INSULTING, belittling way, but in simply the most reserved sense of not considering the original, more expansive nature of the prompt. It was not an accusation that you were rude but rather a "Hey, you're smart, but in this case I don't think your using those smarts but rather relying upon common knowledge/assumptions instead of applying those smarts to THIS question instead of the question you already know."

 

They're assumptions that are common-if-not-ubiquitous in the fantasy genre...

I'll agree that they're common, and to the extent that they're ubiquitous I find it unfortunate that we so often pass on the opportunity to come up with something a touch more novel, rather than SameFantasyEverywherev.2000321

 

You don't have to reinvent everything, but when we are asked to consider how to make Armor Familiarities work in an interesting way, I'd just want us to try to focus on efforts that answer that question rather than suggest the question isn't worth the effort and instead you should rely on the Book of Fantasy Canon.

 

It has nothing to do with offensive vs defensive. WF Clubs and WF Thrown Rocks are...

Sure, I agree. But you could have a setting where magic is so common that it's just like clubs and rocks and... etc. The important point is to simply speak to your earlier question as to why bother? It is easy to imagine, and it has been done in both fiction and gaming, to have settings that emphasize "grit" and whathaveyou and the point of how you spend points is to specialize characters. Light fighters and Heavy fighters could be made very different through decision points such as highly distinct Armor Familiarities, among others.

 

 

I guess my objections came across stronger than I intended simply because I keep running into instances where people are suggesting "Instead of pursuing this new idea you're interested in, why don't you just use this Pathfinder/DnD/Tolkien idea that everyone knows?"

 

I still can't get over the time that on these boards someone tried to invoke "law of diminishing returns" when I was outlining the magical process by which orcs are generated in my campaign... smh.

[bigdamnhero]

I don't mean you were being dismissive in an INSULTING, belittling way, but in simply the most reserved sense of not considering the original, more expansive nature of the prompt.

Ah, fair enough. Thanks for clarifying, and my apologies for taking offense where none was intended.

 

But you could have a setting where magic is so common that it's just like clubs and rocks and... etc.

You absolutely could. But it didn't sound to me like that's what the OP was aiming for, so I addressed my comments accordingly.

 

I'll agree that they're common, and to the extent that they're ubiquitous I find it unfortunate that we so often pass on the opportunity to come up with something a touch more novel, rather than SameFantasyEverywherev.2000321

On this we're in total agreement! It's the main reason I pretty much stopped playing fantasy years ago, because it too often felt like I've been playing the same damn game since 1976. (I just kicked off a fantasy campaign, but it's very intentionally built around NOT being a standard D&D-style high-fantasy world.)

Edited July 8, 2016 by bigdamnhero

[Old Man]

Not to derail any further, but what is different about your new campaign? One of the things I liked about Dark Sun was that it was new and different at the time.

[bigdamnhero]

See this thread: http://www.herogames.com/forums/topic/92882-revelations-1001/

 

tldr: It's the Revelations 1001 mini-setting from Post-Apoc Hero. I'm trying as much as possible to make it feel historical rather than contemporary-influenced fantasy. Magic is low-powered and either explicitly divine or explicitly infernal. Non-humans are vanishingly rare. I'm not saying any of this is terribly awesomely original; I'm just making a deliberate attempt to avoid D&Disms wherever possible.

[Old Man]

Oh, that one! Yeah, it does sounds pretty cool. No elves?

[L. Marcus]

Elf Hater.

[bigdamnhero]

Oh, that one! Yeah, it does sounds pretty cool. No elves?

Spoilers...

 

Elves and fantastical creatures in 10th Century Europe are closer to urban legends. Everyone knows somebody who claims to have see one, but you're not exactly going to run into them in the marketplace. They're called The Hidden Folk for a reason.

[Cantriped]

Regarding the orginal post:

 

I very much like the idea of penalties associated with wearing armor that isn't purchased with CP. I believe it is worth noting that generally speaking the heavier you are armored, the slower you'll move, and the faster you'll tire, and the more restricted your movements are. However there is the notable exception of late era Gothic Platemail (which what most people today think of when referring to platemail), it was so well wrought that it's wearer retained almost full range of motion, and it's weight was so well distributed that it encumbered it's wearer less than it's raw weight would indicate if they tried to carry it in a sack.

 

Given that this is the case, I assert that any penalties associated with shouldn't automatically be dependent upon how much protection is offered by the suit of armor, and they should be in addition to any penalties a character suffers due to the Encumbrance system. As such, such penalties should be represented via the judicious use of the Side Effects modifier (using Change Environment to determine the APs of the Side Effect's penalties) on specific armors, instead of as a campaign rule affecting all armor. Even if players do not pay CP for their armor, I find this method preferable because this way you as GM know exactly how many "free" CP your players are really getting, just like you do when they pick up a sword or a spear.

 

Realistically there should be some suits of armor that simply aren't worth wearing (from a player's perspective) because the drawbacks typically outweigh the benefits; and other suits that are far less restrictive than their level of protection would indicate in a standardized system. If game balance regarding armor is an issue, the in-game costs of "inferior" armor will be significantly lower than the prices of the best armor. Gothic Platemail for example should always very, very expensive. In part because it is next to impossible to resize it to fit anyone other than whomever it was created for... The value looted gothic platemail is little more than it's value as scrap metal; especially compared to typically "inferior" armors which were designed to be mass-produced or easily resized (which often impose from greater penalties as a result, and are less attractive to the player, but worth more to the merchant or king). 

 

As for what penalties exactly to impose...

Penalties to Initiative, physical Combat Values, Perception rolls, Dexterity-based Rolls, natural forms of Movement (such as running, swimming, and leaping), and the imposition of increased Temperature levels (as proposed by Netzilla) are all appropriate to varying degrees. The imposition of penalties to spellcasting can be appropriate depending upon the magic system and the campaign setting (Tamriel as presented in the various Elder Scrolls games has little to no restriction on armored mages for example). In keeping with the concept that you get what you pay for, characters should generally be allowed to overcome the penalties for wearing armor through the expenditure of CP; because the opportunity cost of doing so will do most of the work of differentiating between "light fighters", "heavy fighters", and "spellcasters" for you; without having to make up new things for specific types of characters to spend points on.

 

I am unsure about requiring Armor Familiarities, or how to adjudicate the penalties for lacking the appropriate Familiarity. If pressed for an easy solution I impose a -3 penalty to DCV for lacking the appropriate Armor Familiarity; and I wouldn't divide armor into categories. Not because it isn't realistic to do so, but because it won't make the game more fun to do so. Instead Armor Familiarity would simply cost 2 or 3 points and include all armor you don't pay CP for.

[Christougher]

Arise ancient thread...  That's what I get for not being able to sit and read the forums for a while.

 

I like the original idea and may steal temperature level adjustments.

 

When I looked into implementing this, my answer to the heavy armor = slow debate was to give armor a Casual STR Min, and adapt a few things from weapon STR Min.  Why Casual STR - you wear it all day, if it's heavy enough to burden you, that's a problem.  A little work on Encumbrance led me charge END based on weight carried, including armor.  I'll have to dig up the details if anyone is interested.

 

Chris.

[NuSoardGraphite]

Arise ancient thread... That's what I get for not being able to sit and read the forums for a while.

 

I like the original idea and may steal temperature level adjustments.

 

When I looked into implementing this, my answer to the heavy armor = slow debate was to give armor a Casual STR Min, and adapt a few things from weapon STR Min. Why Casual STR - you wear it all day, if it's heavy enough to burden you, that's a problem. A little work on Encumbrance led me charge END based on weight carried, including armor. I'll have to dig up the details if anyone is interested.

 

Chris.

Casual STR mininum is a good idea. Worth looking into.