Help me understand why this is so.
Current method: Armor matters in the world. We reflect this by adding an extra step to the process-- a bonus to the character's target number each time he goes into combat. Or not, if he's fighting somebody with equivalent armor, in which case it cancels out.
Robin's suggested method: Armor matters in the world. However, rather than introducing the extra calculation we have to perform each time, we assume that the value of the character's armor has already been factored into his base combat rating.
Why is A more believable than B?
>Sorry, forgot to add: under what circumstances would it *not* matter?
The character's armor is already part of his base rating. If it becomes a point in the story that his armor is either neutralized or increased in effect, you reflect this with a modifier. If he's caught by the riverbed while bathing and has to fight heavily armored opponents, it's a penalty. Or if his armor is cursed by an Uz priestess, or whatever. If his armor is enhanced by a spell, or he's fighting an opponent who has never seen that type of gear and quails in terror at the sight of it, it's a bonus.
> Not, I realise, that you are under any obligation to listen
> to me in particular, but I find this very disappointing news indeed.
My present feeling is that HQ should be a set of tools for each group to customize as they require, not a single set of rules that everyone ought to feel obliged to follow. My impulse on special case armor rules is to explain why they're more trouble than they're worth--and then provide them in an optional sidebar, for the benefit of groups who can't get their heads around the idea that they're not needed.
Take care >>> Robin
Powered by hypermail