> Sorry, forgot to add: under what circumstances would it *not* matter?
> If the characters are truly powerful, sure - but then a +5 bonus
> probably isn't that much for them, anyway. And if they're equally
> matched, sure - they can just cancel out. But under other
> circumstances... when wouldn't drama dictate that it matter? I'm
> struggling to think of an example.
A fairly standard fantasy* trope is the unarmored guy who relies on Dodge and Precise Strikes (the "Rapier guy takes down fully-armored knight" trick), or just Dodge and wait for the knight to exhaust himself. My sensai taught Filipino knife strikes designed to go around armor (Helmet and back & breast, rather than full armor, but the "full armor" of, say, the 15th century isn't available on Glorantha).
Ambush/surprise attacks - Naked Guy with Dagger is able to attack Big Bruiser In Armor before BBIA is able to mount a defense. Similar would be the "knight tripped and then stuck through the eye socket" scenarios, or the "jumping out of trees and landing on the horse behind the knight" scenarios.
Bad footing/heat exhaustion/etc. penalties can often be applied to the BBIA and not the NGWD - penalties that would much more than offset the possible equipment differences.
*including fencers nowadays that claim they can take on an armored SCA knight.
A lot of the above relies on NGWD doing something other than standing toe to toe with BBIA - and that's the point. BBIA is relying on the armor to aid him, NGWD is doing *something* that negates the armor advantage. It's all included in the combat abilities of the two protagonists.
RR
He was born with the gift of laughter and the sense that the world was mad
R. Sabatini, Scaramouche
Powered by hypermail