How should armor function?

[GarfunkeL]

Thanks to DA:O we got an lively argument in GDRPG where one of the arguments was the role of armor in RPG's.

As far as I know, there are only two versions ever implemented - the D&D version where armor helps you avoid damage completely but if your opponent overcames your armor you take full damage (ok, they got dmg reduction but that was separate from actual armor).

Then there is the Rolemaster version (it's the earliest usage that I know) where armor does not help you avoid damage, shield and dodge are for that, but they absorb damage, meaning that your opponent can trickle your health away but was unable to do devastating damage.

Some systems pick'n'mixed both - iirc Cyberpunk 2020 pretty much just had both whereas armor first allowed you to avoid incoming damage and if it "got through", then it absorbed part of it.

Pro's and con's people! Which one do you prefer?

Ps. no kingcomrage option, this is sirious bisiness! _Ninjaedit: No poll at all because it doesn't let me add it. Oh shucks.

 

[Wyrmlord]

Armor should work as simply damage reduction, and be seperate from defense, which should simply be tied to the appropriate defense skill or somesuch.

Attack and defense be related to whether the attack is successful at all; armor just to see how much damage is taken.

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

Armor should work as simply damage reduction, and be seperate from defense, which should simply be tied to the appropriate defense skill or somesuch.

Attack and defense be related to whether the attack is successful at all; armor just to see how much damage is taken.

I'm inclined to agree. Armor should be DR, whereas avoiding being hit altogether should be DEX/dodge or some other form of defense skill.

 

[racofer]

Armor should work as simply damage reduction, and be seperate from defense, which should simply be tied to the appropriate defense skill or somesuch.

Attack and defense be related to whether the attack is successful at all; armor just to see how much damage is taken.

This. Defense should be related to, say, shield skill (and even shield size), parry skill and dodge/avoid/evade skills, plus dexterity modifiers.

Armors should only affect mobility, as in, it actually decreased above mentioned defensive skills, because a guy with rags is surely to dodge much faster than someone in full plate mail, plus armors should be taken in account of damage reduction, and if durability is in place, the reduction in damage has to be proportional to how conserved the pieces of armor are.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Or, armor could increase damage thresholds like in Twilight 2013. I'd say that T2013 in general is about as realistic as you can get without getting bogged down to the point of being unviable.

 

[GarfunkeL]

Please elaborate, I've only played Twilight2000 and that was years ago. How's it in T2013?

 

[Panthera]

The system I like best is in the somewhat obscure Sanguine Production games like Ironclaw and Jadeclaw.

Everything is compared rolls, the stat being the die to be rolled. If the roll to hit is successful, you have a roll for damage.

So, let's say you've got d10, d4 breastplate and a d8 from your inherent toughness. The opponent is hitting with an ordinary sword for d8 + d8 from his strength. You roll all the die and compare them like so:

damage: 7, 4
defense: 8, 3, 2

That'd result in one wound because the second pair beats the defense. Everyone has a fixed HP, but their toughness means they're more or less likely to lose them. This is a best of both worlds system where armor can, depending on rolls and circumstance, reduce the effect of an injury, avoid the injury all together, or be bypassed.

Furthermore, if the sword gets what's basically a crit, he could claim the sword's special bonus of either armor piercing (remove the lowest armor die) or slashing (extra d6), which either makes the armor easier to penetrate or increases the maximum possible damage.

In general, I think more systems need to move towards GURPS/Sanguine/Vampire style curved results.

 

[Panthera]

Armors should only affect mobility, as in, it actually decreased above mentioned defensive skills, because a guy with rags is surely to dodge much faster than someone in full plate mail, plus armors should be taken in account of damage reduction, and if durability is in place, the reduction in damage has to be proportional to how conserved the pieces of armor are.

I can tell you that this is false from personal experience. Armor tires you out faster, but it doesn't really restrict your mobility except maybe for your maximum sprint speed.

 

[racofer]

Thus reducing your ability to dodge/avoid/evade....

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Please elaborate, I've only played Twilight2000 and that was years ago. How's it in T2013?

Basically, Twilight 2013 is the third edition of Twilight. Much of the system has been overhauled, and the backstory has been updated to modern world situation.

The combat system (please note that I didn't get to play this, but last weekend one of the design consultants, Tatu Salonen, explained the system and his own improvements on it). What I understood was that the game doesn't deal with HP damage, but rather varying degrees of being hit (Slight, Moderate, Serious and Critical; the best part of this system is that like in reality, death will result most likely from bloodloss instead of bodily trauma), where armor comes into play by modifying the damage threshold of the body part. The system is, of course, improved further by the skill system, where attacking is done by rolling a number of D20s equal to skill, taking the best result, and adding modifiers to the number.

Tatu put a lot of emphasis on his discarded suggestion to improve the bodily threshold system towards more realism, since at the moment the system uses the unrealistic order where Torso has the highest threshold, Limbs the middle, and Head the lowest (in reality, and in Tatu's version, it goes in the order of Limbs highest, Torso low, Head lowest).

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Thus reducing your ability to dodge/avoid/evade....

Through fatigue, yes. But armor itself wouldn't lower your defensive and mobile ability at all. It'd be the fatigue from continuous strain due to your overall weight carried.

 

[Panthera]

Thus reducing your ability to dodge/avoid/evade....

I didn't know dodging was sprinting.

But it does take time to practice and work the muscles up, so I'm generally for an armor proficiency/skill/feat.

 

[racofer]

Thus reducing your ability to dodge/avoid/evade....

I didn't know dodging was sprinting.

But it does take time to practice and work the muscles up, so I'm generally for an armor proficiency/skill/feat.

What part of

Armor tires you out faster

did you miss?

 

[Overweight Manatee]

The fact is, while armor doesn't allow you to dodge things entirely, certain types of attacks like say, a sword slashing at the front of a suit of plate mail, are entirely ineffective.

I've always understood D&D based systems to mean that armor adding to your chance to dodge simply meant that, for a +2 armor, some number of attacks hit the armor for no damage, while the other ones are attacks that hit somewhere the armor didn't cover, or are attacks that manage to penetrate. This could be modified further, such as certain armors being especially weak against blunt hammers yet strong against slashing swords. Which makes sense, get hit by a warhammer directly while wearing plate mail and the armor is pretty much useless, but on the other hand it would still protect you from glancing blows.

Personally I prefer a combination of the two.

 

[Shannow]

As it happens I had similar things on my mind:

I'd go with a four pronged system.
1. A defense roll against an attack roll. If a char can learn to attack better, he can learn to parry, too. EG, if a goblin with a bab of 2 (+2 through modifiers) attacks your fighter he'd roll a d20 +4 to see if he hits you. You are lvl 5, have 14 dex, a large shield and a feat that grants +1. --> Base defense Bonus (BDB) 5 + 2 +2 +1 = Defense Bonus (DB) of 10. so you roll a d20 + 10 to defend against the goblin's attack. If your roll is higher, you successfully paried/evaded/defended.
I'd make every consecutive attack in that round cause a malus of -2 to -3 to your DB. So swarming weak enemies can be a threat. Feats could open up options like full defense where you increase DB by sacrificing your attacks, or ripost, where you'd sacrifice an attack for the option to ripost on a successfull defense roll, etc...
2. Armor would give absoption. If you failed a defense roll you get hit. Damage is absorbed depending on the armor, EG, padded armor gives 2 of absorption that are detracted from any physical dmg against you. Full plate mail would give 10 absorption and ancient dragon hide 15. Those would be the ranges I was thinking about.
3. I'd give armor AC, that would represent how well it covers the body and how many weakspots it has. EG, padded armor is a weak armor, gives little absorption, but covers the body very well, thus it has high AC, around 18, full plate'd have 19 and a breastplate'd have maybe 12 since it only covers the torso. The idea is that if the attack roll surpasses the defensive roll by more than 18, 19 or 12 respectively it by-passes the armor absorption. But only when using light and medium weapons. Especially with light weapons one could take feats that allow for a fighting style that is aimed at by-passing armor.
4. But armor doesn't just have bonuses. I never liked the arbitrary way D&D cuts off the max possible dex bonus.
Armor maluses: Every armor decreases attack bonus and DB and movement speed depending on its weight. Those maluses can be decreased by three armor feats (that D&D already has). Depending on weight armor also causes dex maluses that cannot be decreased (unless one introduces a new feat for that, too) but doesn't impose a max dex bonus.
So in the end different armors would be balanced around absorption, AC and the maluses.

Weapons and "criticals": There'd be light, medium and heavy weapons. "Criticals" wouldn't happen through rolling of a 20 but by surpassing the defensive roll by a certain amount.
Light weapons: Lower damage range but suited to armor by-passing (counts as "critical). Feats like sneak attacks, precision and improved critical would effectively decrease the armor's AC to achieve this.
Medium weapons: Higher damage range, but not as suitable for sneak attacks, precision, etc. Armor by-pass on crit unless power attack is chosen, in which case they'd count as heavy weapons.
Heavy weapons: Highest damage range. No armor by-pass but max dmg + doubled str modifier on crit. "Critical" happens when attack roll surpasses defensive roll by 20 or 19 or 21 or etc. depending on exact weapon (eg: two handed sword vs two handed axe vs medium weapon in power attack) and feats.

 

[Yeesh]

I don't think there's much good to be said for the D&D system, other than that it condences attack/defense/damage resistance into a single die roll. But I don't think anyone can make a good case for bulky armor somehow making you harder to HIT, instead of harder to damage. And since you have to roll again for damage anyway...

The fact is, while armor doesn't allow you to dodge things entirely, certain types of attacks like say, a sword slashing at the front of a suit of plate mail, are entirely ineffective.

And for this reason, I think it makes a lot of sense to have at least rudimentary damage types, which I think were indeed in D&D. I'm not a physicist, but I think that suit of platemail that would easily save you from a slashing attack would do very little for you if someone smacked you in the sternum with a big old club. I am seriously saying I don't know, but I'm at least comfortable suggesting the armor would do less in that case. So plate could have a massive slashing DR and a smaller clubbing DR.

Because who's going to let you into the club dressed like that anyway?

 

[Zyrxil]

Armor should work like armor - By absorbing kinetic energy in the form of damage. Absorb all the damage, and it's effectively avoided. However, there needs to be a durability type stat, so you can't just stand there absorbing 10000 5 damage hits without your armor breaking. Negative armor modifiers to dodge/parry make sense.

Also, there should be special modifiers for certain types of armor vs certain types of damage, e.g. Plate armor deflecting blades while being smashed by maces, and piercing damage having chance of bypassing armor.

 

[mondblut]

But I don't think anyone can make a good case for bulky armor somehow making you harder to HIT, instead of harder to damage.

It does not make you "harder to hit". It reduces a statistical probability you'll suffer "damage" in a given period of time. Which is just how real armor works, statistically.

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

And for this reason, I think it makes a lot of sense to have at least rudimentary damage types, which I think were indeed in D&D. I'm not a physicist, but I think that suit of platemail that would easily save you from a slashing attack would do very little for you if someone smacked you in the sternum with a big old club. I am seriously saying I don't know, but I'm at least comfortable suggesting the armor would do less in that case. So plate could have a massive slashing DR and a smaller clubbing DR.

Because who's going to let you into the club dressed like that anyway?

Actually, a club wouldn't be effective against plate armor. It's heavy metal shaped to avoid a clean blow from a wide surface. You'd need the historical warhammers against it, with a small point of impact.

 

[Berekän]

I've always seen HP in games as Physical Resistance more than the blood you have left in your body, you can't really survive 10 sword cuts but it makes more sense if it hits you not dealing any cut but you get, obviously, more damaged for the fight until you get a final blow.

In that case when you get hit in the armor you should still receive damage but reduced, ever had fallen with a helmet in your head? You don't break your skull but you're still hit.

 

[Mystary!]

Im in favor for a more lethal, fast combat. A rock-papper-scissor kind of system, wherein the loser is dealt serious damage or ourtright killed. No hp. Armor would work as an extra life that is spent, broken, when a fatal blow hits you.

 

[Derek Larp]

Armor should work as simply damage reduction,

+1

Also, I like the CP2020 system, where armor and damage values are modified by ammunition/weapon type, eg. AP is 1/2 armor and 1/2 damage after armor is subtracted, JHP is 2x armor and 2x damage, slashing weapons halve soft ballistic armor etc.

 

[Armacalypse]

Damage reduction is better than the D&D system because it doesn't rely on chance. Also, it's not less realistic, because HP shouldn't represent health, but rather exhaustion and the time you can hold out according to the statistical average counting hits, misses and armor penetration.

 

[zenbitz]

well it obviously depends on how deep a level of abstraction you want, and what types of combat / damage you are worried about.

Whether or not armor add "defense" (lowers chance to hit) depends on whether or not you want to model the difference between "absorbing" damage and "deflecting it".

GURPS, I believed used Passive Defense (PD) to represent the fact that some types of attach would just "skip" off something like plate armor (for example). At least, that's how I interpreted it.

How armor "should work" in a game is going to be dependent on stuff like:
* whether you model the difference between cuts, hacks, slices, and thrusts.
* whether some types of armor absorb damage in a linear fashion or have some kind of catastrophic failure.

As an example - do clubs work against plate armor? Well, below a certain force level - absoutelyl you can pang on a guy all day. But now make that club heavier, like a mace (still no spikes or anything) and if you hit the plate hard enough, it will crumple, passing force "damage" to the wearer in a non-linearly manner.

Other types of armor are ablative - that it absorbs some damage or a single blow, but then is useless.

mondblut is totally correct here - at the abstract level, all that matters is the probability of you suffering damage. IIRC, a "melee round" in D&D is like _6_ seconds (at least originally, I never played past 1st Ed AD&D). You can swing several times in that amount of time.


Also, I think Runequest had the first "damage absorbing armor", probably predated Rolemaster by several years.

 

[lightbane]

What happens then with the "magical armors" or power armors or whatever justification these special gear have?