Armour Fiddling

From: ttrotsky2 <TTrotsky_at_...>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 20:48:56 -0000

Robin Laws:

> 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?

Because the rating implies that that's the guy's combat ability. Having superior equipment enhances that under most, (but not, as Rory points out, all), circumstances. Option B *appears* to mean that we have to add an extra calculation in to remind us that, for a given amount of experience/hero points a Seshnegi is better than a Heortling. And, indeed, if the knight becomes wealthier, and buys better armour, his combat rating increases for reasons unrelated to the usual method of raising ratings (its his Wealth that's been raised, after all).

Now, I stress the word 'appears', because I don't think that is what you mean. But what is the other option? That a Seshnegi knight of given experience/hero points is actually weaker than a starting Heortling warrior, and his armour merely compensates for that weakness? That makes no sense to me, and that's where the suspension of disbelief comes in.

> 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.

That is true enough. And I'm serious when I say that I realise you're not under any obligation to listen to me in particular :)

> 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.

I suspect that came out as snider than you intended ;) My apologies if I've sounded the same!

Gamer and Skeptic

Trotsky's RPG website:

Powered by hypermail