Re: [Adonthell-devel] Shield and Armor Rules

[Andrew Phillips]

I meant to preface my remarks with something, but I forgot. It's been
a busy day. I tried to run some numbers in an attempt to make sense of
coverage modifiers, etc. I decided to run a small armour set and a
coverage modifier with sum 1 and a larger set of armour with sum
coverage of 2.

Of course, with a large coverage modifier for chest armour, it clearly
becomes the most significant factor in determining total armour
rating. The total base armour value for the other items is 3 times the
base armour value of the chest armour, but because of the modifiers,
their total armour value is barely more than half the other.

With the coverage modifier of two, it looks somewhat more equitable,
though that is without the shield.

BTW, this is a hypothetical armour outfit for a monk, which explains
all the organic armours and the lack of a shield.

I have also thought about -why- the shield should be a seperate
category of armour with its own coverage modifier. Including the
shield in the sum 1 modifier would penalize players who prefer heavily
armed melee characters, or more lightly armed characters who
specialize in ranged combat or melee with two-handed weapons. These
characters can wear armour everywhere else, but their chosen style of
combat precludes carrying shields.

Just my thoughts.

Andrew

On 3/16/06, Andrew Phillips <address@hidden> wrote:
> Test Armour
> Type       Coverage     Armour Item          Base value Base * coverage Total 
> Armour value
> Chest            0.5    Heavy Leather Vest      8                4            
>            4
> Boots            0.1    Heavy Leather Boots     6             0.6             
>           2.5
> Gloves           0.1    Heavy Cloth Gloves      4              0.4
> Bracers          0.1    Wood-slat Bracers       6              0.6
> Greaves         0.1    Stiff Leather Greaves    5              0.5
> Shoulder        0.1     Traveler's Cloak          4               0.4
> Total Coverage  1
>
> Type     Coverage       Armour Item          Base value         Base *Cov   
> Total Armour value
> Chest           0.7     Heavy Leather Vest         8                5.6       
>          5.6
> Boots           0.2     Heavy Leather Boots       6                1.2        
>              4.2
> Gloves          0.1     Heavy Cloth Gloves         4                 0.4
> Bracers        0.2      Wood-slat Bracers          6                1.2
> Shoulder       0.1      Traveler's Cloak              4                0.4
> Shield           0.5                                          0               
>    0
> Greaves        0.2      Stiff Leather Greaves       5                 1
> Total              2
>
> On 3/16/06, Andrew Phillips <address@hidden> wrote:
> > I think one thing that might be complicating our attempts to arrive at
> > a sum 1 coverage modifier is the inclusion of the shield. What if all
> > worn armour has a sum coverage modifier of 1 and shields (as armour
> > that is carried, but not worn) have their own size/coverage modifier.
> > A small buckler would have a different coverage modifier than a large
> > kite shield or tower shield.
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> > On 3/16/06, Andrew Phillips <address@hidden> wrote:
> > > > > Also, should individual parts of paired armour be individually
> > > > > equipped? For example, bracers and gloves come in twos. It makes no
> > > > > sense to split up greaves or boots, but sometimes gloves or greaves
> > > > > don't come in pairs and don't even -need- to come in pairs. For
> > > > > example, why wear a bracer on your shield arm?
> > > >
> > > > That's true, but I'm not sure whether we should go into such detail. I
> > > > would add one equipment slot for each of these items, and wouldn't
> > > > distinguish between ones and pairs.
> > >
> > > You have a good point. In this case, individually equippable bracers,
> > > or even gloves, would need to be sufficiently powerful to make it
> > > pointful to wear them individually. But since we're not spitting them
> > > up, gloves and the like should probably have a single coverage
> > > modifier. This would make the numbers easier to work out as well.
> > >
> > > > To explain this idea a little more: a inventory is a list of slots.
> > > > For equipping items, each character will have a special inventory that
> > > > holds a list of slots named after the type of equipment that fits into
> > > > this slot. What slots this equipment inventory contains can (easily)
> > > > be changed at runtime, if necessary. I might have to refine the code a
> > > > little that is already in place, but the implementation of armour sets
> > > > based upon this shouldn't pose a big problem.
> > > >
> > > Thanks for the clarification. And many of the equippable items will
> > > have restrictions on them anyway - mostly based on class and
> > > alignment. For example, monks cannot equip metallic armours. As a
> > > compensation, I think they should get an automatic +1 agility at first
> > > level and the ability to train skills and combat feats that increase
> > > their ability to dodge and parry. These rules, of course, are just a
> > > proposal.
> > >
> > > Another armour restriction that might make some sense is too tie one's
> > > move silent ability to the weight of one's armor. For example, if a
> > > thief, ranger, or even fighter has ranks in move silently, equipping
> > > half-plate and full plate armours may disable this ability.
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> >
>