Armour house rule

Adventure in the world of J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings. Learn more at our website: http://www.cubicle7.co.uk/our-games/the-one-ring/
Corvo
Posts: 851
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 12:02 pm

Re: Armour house rule

Post by Corvo » Fri May 02, 2014 10:28 am

Falenthal wrote: I just meant that I don't know if the probabilities of survival have the same flaws if we increase the number of opponents.

To make an example:
We know what the results are agains 1 attercop.
What if we simulate the same combat against 2 attercops? And against 3? Etc.
Does the probability of winning of the heavy armored hero increase against those of the light or non-armored hero? Against more enemies, the chances of receiving a Wound would increase, and so the usefulness of heavy armor.

That's my logic, without having it tested. If it worked this way, I would suggest not making any tweaks to the RAW.
I tried it.

Against many opponents the efficency of armour goes up, exactly as if you raised the Edge of all weapons by +1 (in other words, some armour becomes useful).

Against 2 or 3 enemies, armour becomes useful, provided they got weapons with Edge 10 or better.
Against weapons withe Edge 12 (Axes) going naked is still the better option, both against 2 and 3 opponents.

3 vs 1, against axes, add Yepesnopes rule, and finally armour becomes useful.

Again, it's Edge 12 the problem. Heroes pay an overall performance price (combat, travel, social encounter) to wear armour, and by the RAW they are shafted every time they are against an axe or in 1-1 combat.
Yepesnopes rule reduce this weird artefact.

PS: thinking about lowering fatigue cost for armour... watch out, this rule messes up with travel rules: lower fatigue means that failing travel rolls far less a problem, and travel is a big thing in this game.

Writing in a hurry, hope it makes some sense :lol:

Michebugio
Posts: 431
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 8:55 pm

Re: Armour house rule

Post by Michebugio » Fri May 02, 2014 3:34 pm

Since it has been cited twice, I went back to zedturtle's proposal (I called it Ablative Armor house-rule) and analyzed it a bit. As I said earlier, it's a great intuition but at my table it would definitely need some tweaking, for three reasons:

1) The damage reduction shouldn’t be linked to Encumbrance value, otherwise a Cunning Make Quality will simply worsen the absorbing properties of your armor. And anyhow, how many times do you need to reduce 20 points of Endurance loss?
2) Since the armor gets Damaged automatically (at players’ choice), Absorb Impact effectively works just ONCE for every Adventure Phase, which in my opinion is way too low to make any real difference in game;
3) For the same reason before, a full Hauberk gets broken as easily as a leather shirt, the only difference being the damage reduction they give: some distinction should be made about this, but I wouldn't add anything like “armor hit points” or any other kind of buffer (like somebody suggested), it would be very far from the RAW and too much book-keeping in my opinion.

But I like the concept so much, and I also like the idea of heroes going around with a battered armor. Since somebody also liked my Roll for Knockback house-rule, I would really like to implement a version of it that could incorporate zed's mechanic.

Premise: why am I insisting on Knockback rule modifications? Because it's the only way by RAW to reduce Endurance loss. My thesis is: if something (like armor) can reduce Endurance loss, then it should work in the context of Knockback, enhancing it or somehow using similar mechanics.

That said, I devoted an entire rainy evening to develop and playtest a further refinement of my Alternate Knockback rule, making a "zedturtle-Michebugio mash-up" adding his Ablative Armor mechanics to mine. The result - I hope - may be quite interesting to many of you. So here’s the Alternative Knockback, version 3 – Ablative Armor mash up house rule.

In the Adventurer’s Book, page 160, replace the Knockback paragraph with the following:
Characters have two ways to reduce Endurance loss: letting themselves to be knocked back by the blow, or try to absorb the force of an attack with their armor.

KNOCKBACK:

Fighters soon discover that sometimes it is better to literally ‘roll with the punches,’ and reduce the force of an attack by stepping back or to the side or by kneeling under the force of a blow – in gaming terms, they learn to let themselves be ‘knocked back’ by their opponent.

Characters may reduce the Endurance loss caused by a successful attack making a roll of Athletics. The TN for the roll is equal to 10 plus the Attribute level of the opponent who hit the character.

On a successful roll, the companion halves the Endurance points lost from the attack (rounding fractions up) by letting himself to be thrown off-balance. If the knock back attempt fails, the acting hero suffers the normal Endurance loss AND is thrown off-balance.

A character who is knocked back (whether on a failed or successful knockback attempt) cannot change his stance and will spend his following round recovering his fighting position, unable to take any further action that turn.

If an adversary attacks while a hero is recovering from knockback, the attack is resolved normally. If the companion is hit again, he may attempt another Athletics roll to halve the Endurance loss, but a great or extraordinary success is needed this time.


ABSORB IMPACT:

Protection given by armor helps to prevent wounding blows, but it can also soften the impact of less dangerous attacks. Instead of letting themselves to be knocked back by their opponent, fighters may use their armors to absorb the shock of an attack, exposing none but the most protected parts of their body.

A character attempting to do so makes a Protection Test against a Target Number equal to the Injury rating of the weapon used by the attacker.

If the result doesn’t produce any T icons, the absorb impact attempt fails, even if the total result matches or beats the TN.

If the roll doesn’t match or beat the Target Number and the player gets an Eye icon on his feat die, a piece of the armor breaks and it becomes damaged. Damaged armor can’t be used to absorb impacts and all Protection Tests are now made as if the character is Weary.

If the roll matches or beats the Injury rating AND the player obtains at least one T icon on his rolled Success dice, he halves the Endurance loss caused by the attack.

Now, some considerations.

First, you’ll notice a substantial difference: Knockback is now, essentially, an Athletics roll to get the RAW effect, with an option to roll against multiple attacks. You’ll always lose the next turn recovering now, regardless of how many T you rolled.

Absorb Impact is instead a roll that has a symmetry with called shots, and it lets you halve the damage like Knockback but without losing your next turn. It’s made against a TN equal to the Injury rating of the attacking weapon - it makes sense, since weapons with a high Injury rating, like Axes and Mattocks, are also the ones with the greater “breaking” power; it “procs” less frequently (only on Great and Extraordinary successes); and of course, it has a chance of breaking your armor.
But, unless in zedturtle’s rule, now it has a lesser chance of breaking, proportionally to his protection dices (more dices rolled = less chance to fail and break it).

Overall, the two options seem quite balanced to me. They shouldn’t be cumulative, though: either you roll for Knockback, or you roll for Absorption, but not both. In play-test it performed quite well, though now characters will roll for Absorption quite a lot, since breaking armor is a relatively rare instance (which can be rather annoying, however).

Regarding how to repair a damaged armor: personally, I would stick to what the AB says at page 110: “If a hero loses or breaks any of these items, they can be replaced automatically, at the next friendly settlement they reach or other appropriate moment in the narrative. At most, a small favour may be demanded if the settlement is not of their own culture, such as the performance of a task, or simply a song or tale.”

And now, I’m so much eager to hear your feedback ;)

Glorelendil
Posts: 5140
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:20 pm

Re: Armour house rule

Post by Glorelendil » Fri May 02, 2014 5:10 pm

@Michbebugio: I see what you're thinking, but it feels...complicated. More complicated than other rules. Maybe it's just trying to combine knockback, absorption, Athletics, and armor stats all in one rule.

(Independently of the armor issue, I sort of like making Knockback something you have to roll, using Athletics, though, but only if there is a benefit to tengwars.)
Michebugio wrote: 1) The damage reduction shouldn’t be linked to Encumbrance value, otherwise a Cunning Make Quality will simply worsen the absorbing properties of your armor. And anyhow, how many times do you need to reduce 20 points of Endurance loss?
2) Since the armor gets Damaged automatically (at players’ choice), Absorb Impact effectively works just ONCE for every Adventure Phase, which in my opinion is way too low to make any real difference in game;
3) For the same reason before, a full Hauberk gets broken as easily as a leather shirt, the only difference being the damage reduction they give: some distinction should be made about this, but I wouldn't add anything like “armor hit points” or any other kind of buffer (like somebody suggested), it would be very far from the RAW and too much book-keeping in my opinion.
I agree with all of these points. Here are a couple of (simple?) options, not necessarily mutually exclusive, to tweak Zed's suggestion:
1) Have each die of protection be a checkbox. When all boxes are checked your armor is Damaged.
2) Roll vs Something(*), using the same dice as your armor, to succeed at absorbing half damage. On a fail you are off-balance next turn; on a Sauron your armor is damaged. Absorb one extra point for great success, two extra for extraordinary.

*TN:
10 + opponent's attribute level?
12 + opponent's weapon skill? (+ attribute level?)
Injury rating of weapon hitting you?
10 + damage taken?

EDIT: Just want to add that the other thing I like about Zedturtle's suggestion is that it's something you do proactively, with downside/risk, instead of just a passive "my armor passively modifies numbers". Ideally I think the rule should be something you would use only, because of the downside risk, when getting hit by a huge blow, or if your endurance is low and you're getting worried about losing.
The Munchkin Formerly Known as Elfcrusher
Journey Computer | Combat Simulator | Bestiary | Weapon Calculator

User avatar
Yepesnopes
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 4:55 pm

Re: Armour house rule

Post by Yepesnopes » Fri May 02, 2014 5:41 pm

I have been thinking about the wound thing. If we will be NPCs, it is clear that we would like to wear the heaviest armour (or at least one that gives a decent protection against the injury rating of the weapon you currently face) because wound = dead.

So may be someone can explore this way of house ruling armours, giving to the wounded condition a more detrimental effect. For example (besides its current effect) wounded makes you weary, while wounded you roll one less die when testing skills and combat skills, while wounded you throw two feat dice and pick up the lowest...

Yepes

Michebugio
Posts: 431
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 8:55 pm

Re: Armour house rule

Post by Michebugio » Fri May 02, 2014 6:05 pm

Elfcrusher wrote:I see what you're thinking, but it feels...complicated. More complicated than other rules.
Well, the Knockback part is as complicated as the RAW, except for the Athletics check. And the Armor Absorption part is perfectly symmetrical with Called shot, so again no more complicated as other rules. In fact, part of my effort was put into staying in line with the existent rules, instead of creating completely new ones.

And, of course, we are adding a house rule about armors where none exist: so there *is* a slight complication, otherwise all would stay the same ;)
Elfcrusher wrote:1) Have each die of protection be a checkbox. When all boxes are checked your armor is Damaged.
2) Roll vs Something(*), using the same dice as your armor, to succeed at absorbing half damage. On a fail you are off-balance next turn; on a Sauron your armor is damaged. Absorb one extra point for great success, two extra for extraordinary.
Well, point 1) is a lot of book-keeping, I fear. Plus, there's nothing like this in the RAW regarding equipment: think about shields, they're either whole or broken, regardless of their size or how many times they got hit.

Point 2) brings the rule back when Protection roll could be used in Knockback (Alternative Knockback, version 2), but adding the Damaged condition on a Sauron and the extra damage reduction...
Elfcrusher wrote:Just want to add that the other thing I like about Zedturtle's suggestion is that it's something you do proactively, with downside/risk, instead of just a passive "my armor passively modifies numbers". Ideally I think the rule should be something you would use only, because of the downside risk, when getting hit by a huge blow, or if your endurance is low and you're getting worried about losing.
That's exactly the purpose of my proposal ;)

User avatar
Rocmistro
Posts: 777
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 12:24 am
Location: Albany, NY

Re: Armour house rule

Post by Rocmistro » Fri May 02, 2014 6:35 pm

When you guys have decided on the Armor Knockback ruling that you like best, would you mind posting a well-written and concise summary of how it works for me (and others)?
Rignuth: Barding Wordweaver Wanderer in Southron Loremaster's game.
Amroth Ol'Hir: High Elf Vengeful Kin Slayer in Zedturtle's game.
Jakk O'Malli: Dwarven Orator Treasure-Hunter in Hermes Serpent's game.

Michebugio
Posts: 431
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 8:55 pm

Re: Armour house rule

Post by Michebugio » Fri May 02, 2014 7:31 pm


Corvo
Posts: 851
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 12:02 pm

Re: Armour house rule

Post by Corvo » Fri May 02, 2014 7:34 pm

Yepesnopes wrote:I have been thinking about the wound thing. If we will be NPCs, it is clear that we would like to wear the heaviest armour (or at least one that gives a decent protection against the injury rating of the weapon you currently face) because wound = dead.

So may be someone can explore this way of house ruling armours, giving to the wounded condition a more detrimental effect. For example (besides its current effect) wounded makes you weary, while wounded you roll one less die when testing skills and combat skills, while wounded you throw two feat dice and pick up the lowest...

Yepes
I think it's fair. Even Francesco Nepitello wrote that it was a good idea to make Great Size npc become "weary" when wounded or reduced to 0 endurance. Fair is fair :)

By the way, I did a lot of tests with your rule (+1 edge to PCs and NPCs): unlike RAW, it's very difficult to discern clear patterns of efficiency. Apparently there is no easily discernible optimal choice, and that's really good.
The only guideline that emerged is that, the longer the combat, the more useful is the armour. So, if you plan on going naked, better pack a 2-handed spear or such, so to kill the orc before he wounds you. It makes sense to me :)

User avatar
tomfish
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 9:45 pm

Re: Armour house rule

Post by tomfish » Fri May 02, 2014 8:43 pm

Yepesnopes wrote:I have been thinking about the wound thing. If we will be NPCs, it is clear that we would like to wear the heaviest armour (or at least one that gives a decent protection against the injury rating of the weapon you currently face) because wound = dead.

So may be someone can explore this way of house ruling armours, giving to the wounded condition a more detrimental effect. For example (besides its current effect) wounded makes you weary, while wounded you roll one less die when testing skills and combat skills, while wounded you throw two feat dice and pick up the lowest...

Yepes
I really like the "take lowest of feat dice while you are wounded" idea, maybe to apply only while the wound is untreated.

To be honest, I'm struggling with the idea that a wounded character should not really face any kind of penalty whereas most adversaries simply die after a wound (something that I recently discovered, by the way...), it feels a bit too asymetrical to me. So I'll be taking this simple rule to my next sessions and see how it goes.
An adventure set in Dale : viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4503

Glorelendil
Posts: 5140
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:20 pm

Re: Armour house rule

Post by Glorelendil » Fri May 02, 2014 9:14 pm

Yeah, I kind of like that rule as well. It's been suggested that increasing the penalties for wounded fix armor by making things harder for heroes, but LMs can adjust by making adversaries slightly easier.

I'm going to add this rule to the sim. BRB.

Done. It's called "Tomfish's Rule" (looks like Yepesnopes suggested it but he already has a rule; if there's a more appropriate source tell me.)

I tested it out a little bit and it's a little hard to interpret results. As expected, it makes it harder on the hero, which means win rates drop across the board when the rule is turned on. So the question is how much win rates drop by, and it looks like they drop slightly more with more no armor than with armor. By this measure it seems to reduce the penalty of heavy armor. But not by enough.

I tried a maxed out dwarf versus a Great Orc ("Great Size" means the orc will also suffer a relative penalty from the rule, instead of simply dying when wounded) and the difference with and without the rule was barely discernible.

Would be curious if anybody can find a scenario where armor really shines using this rule.
The Munchkin Formerly Known as Elfcrusher
Journey Computer | Combat Simulator | Bestiary | Weapon Calculator

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: beardo1976, Winterwolf and 5 guests