Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: Suggested house rule

  1. #11
    Keeper of Secrets
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    317

    Re: Suggested house rule

    Well I thought I had this in the past now and then that some of my contributions did not appear (without specific reason). Maybe just write again?

  2. #12
    Keeper of Secrets
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    154

    Re: Suggested house rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Damon View Post
    More armor is better in the context of a large battle: when you have 10 different low-skilled enemy combatants taking swings at you, the more armor you have the better. You want reduced armor when you're expecting to be facing a single skilled opponent.

    I don't have a problem with this at all.
    What most people miss (including GR-people) is that skill is only a secondary factor. It's the weapon damage that is the dominant variable. Without critical hits in play, the break-even point is roughly at 5 damage, below you want full plate, above you want splint. Then there's a second break-even point between splint and padded at 10 damage. So against a squad of guards with their halberds, you'd want the splint mail, while against a single knight of quality with his longsword, you'd go with full plate. The trade-off is between avoiding taking more damage (less DoS against you on average, which means less damage to be soaked) and the armor soaking more damage. So there will always be an equilibrium damage value when comparing different armors due to the damage per DoS mechanic, exactly where that equilibrium damage value is depends on your unarmored combat defense and opponent's attack dice pool and modifiers. Critical hits in play will tilt the scales in favor of higher defense, obviously.

    Eyeballing some numbers, against 7d6k5 and 6d6k4, with a pre-armor combat defense of 13, the break-even is very close to 5 in the fighting 5 scenario, and it actually looks like the break even is lower than in the fighting 4 scenario. I think I can explain why if I bothered to start drawing graphs, but I have better things to do.
    Last edited by Zorbeltuss; 02-13-2018 at 02:30 PM.

  3. #13
    Inceptor
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    5

    Re: Suggested house rule

    I think the problem with armour is that it involves two contradictory mechanics. You gain damage soaking and you lose CD.

    As Zorbeltuss said, whether it is better for you to wear armour depends on the damage your opponent deals. If he deals 2 per degree of success then full plate is the way to go. On the other hand if the damage is around 7 or 8 then losing 6 of your CD is more than one DoS, so armour can be counterproductive. And that is without considering critical hits.

  4. #14
    Keeper of Secrets
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    154

    Re: Suggested house rule

    I suspect that they want to model a Bronn vs Vardis or Oberyn vs Gregor scenario of lightweight and mobile vs heavily armored, but the overall combat system doesn't really accommodate such an approach overly much, though it's true enough that as far as armor choice goes, the system follows the books in case of Gregor, but that isn't the case with Vardis at all, SIFRP Bronn would be better off with splint because the system doesn't really give his tactics anything to work with, aside from maybe a benefit or two. Arguably, doesn't really give much to Oberyn either (although he did use poison).

  5. #15
    Inceptor
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    5

    Re: Suggested house rule

    I think the problem with armour is mechanical. Right now there are 2 ways to reduce damage, you can reduce the DoS of your opponent or you can soak damage. The problem that armour has is that it's mechanics is in internal conflict. In order to soak damage you must increase your opponent's DoS. This then makes the decision to wear armour to depend on your opponent's damage output.

    I understand that this decision was made in order to balance armour.foe the game, but I think it is not the right way to do that. Also personally I find the idea that armour should be a choice to be a bit out.of place in SIFRP since the setting is pretty realistic. But this last thing is a matter of taste.

  6. #16
    Inceptor
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    8

    Re: Suggested house rule

    Quite a few of the responses involve "if you don't use ctitical hits"
    Do most people not use crits?

  7. #17
    Keeper of Secrets
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    138

    Re: Suggested house rule

    Using fatigue/destiny to ignore armour penalty also adjusts the optimum armour choice, although in my own campaign (in real life and online) I set full plate armour penalty to -4.

  8. #18
    Keeper of Secrets
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    439

    Re: Suggested house rule

    Quote Originally Posted by Grolsh View Post
    Quite a few of the responses involve "if you don't use ctitical hits"
    Do most people not use crits?
    I don't know about "most people", but I generally don't. Because they activate when the attack roll is double the defender's CD, they tilt the odds still further in favour of skilled warriors who can routinely expect to roll high. A typical knight of quality will roll about 20-21 on average, meaning they'll crit anyone with CD 10 or lower on an average roll (as long as it includes at least one six). CD 10 is a fairly average CD for warrior NCs and many PCs, so critical hits will occur relatively often. Even a single six grants a significant boost to the attacker's damage, so you can expect short, one-sided fights when a skilled warrior meets a lesser foe (or foes), and swingy bloodfests when two skilled warriors fight each other. I find that annoying, and ultimately unnecessary - skilled warriors already do plenty of damage simply by virtue of routinely getting 3-4 DoS.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •