The way I work out how much to knock off is to say that the lack of the proper gear implies a state of adversity - something's not optimal. If the lack of gear hurts their capabilities they're at -3, if it impairs it they're at -6, if it injures it they're bumped down and require a commitment roll and if it completely kills their chances they've failed a credibility test. Not having a shield hurts a Saxon Thegn's ability to fight in a shield wall. Without his glass cutter a burglar's housebreaking is impaired and a drag queen that's lost his costume and make-up is going to have to work up a lot of balls to go on-stage and hope sheer talent can carry him through. A knight forced to fight without weapons and armour and on foot is effectively dead as a knight.
Using states of adversity like this has got some really cool fictional benefits as well. At the end of a conflict you can describe how a Saxon Thegn's hurt is actually his shield being wrecked, a burglar's injured is getting through all their glass cutter blades and a drag artist's injured or dead is someone stealing or damaging his costume. A knight being overcome and captured (having his weapons and armour taken) in my book is far more interesting for the character to get out of than killing them. Instead of a smoking boot yelling "Medic!!" he's got to work out how to get enough gear to be effective again.
This is really another way of assigning situational modifiers but I like it as it explicitly makes states of adversity a two way street. A character can pick up a state of adversity by loosing a conflict OR by having something happen in the fiction of the game outside of a conflict. Giving your sword up at the door to the Tribal King's longhouse hurts or impairs your ability to use violence as much as someone giving you a wallop. Giving the scarf that your beloved gave you to another woman injures or kills your relationship with her as much as a bad argument at the end of a messed up contest.
It's a shame the rules didn't go completely general with states of adversity - all the stuff about situational modifiers could have been easily covered by them. Even so they're still a good rule of thumb for working out situational modifiers.
Ash
> From: michaelL <michaelalewis25_at_...>
> Subject: Re: Armor and equipment
> To: HeroQuest-rules_at_yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wednesday, 9 November, 2011, 14:30
>
> Anyone else?
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In HeroQuest-rules_at_yahoogroups.com,
> "Jeff" <richaje_at_...> wrote:
> >
> > > How can armor and equipment be used? Since
> there is no armor class or damage reduction, how would a
> mail hauberk protect you?
> >
> > Armor and equipment fall into fourcategories:
> > 1. Requirement to use certain skills. If you have
> Sword Fighting and you lost your sword to the Lunar guards,
> you probably can't use that ability to make your escape
> (unless you cunningly carve a sword out of soap using your
> Carve Anything Out of Soap ability).
> > 2. Situational modifier or credibility issue. A
> Narrator might decide to give a bonus or penalty to armored
> characters against non-armored opponents. Additionally, if
> you don't have certain items, you might lose a credibility
> challenge.
> > 3. Color. Lots of people like to describe their armor,
> clothes, equipment, you name it.
> > 4. Named stuff. If the item is actually really
> important to the character, than it should be a named
> ability with a rating.
> >
> > Jeff
> >
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> To Post a message, send it to: HeroQuest-rules_at_...
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: HeroQuest-rules-unsubscribe_at_...
>
> For assistance, contact the list ownerYahoo! Groups Links
>
>
> HeroQuest-rules-fullfeatured_at_yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
Powered by hypermail