Armour and weapons

[num1]

"rise from the dead and be reborn"

i think the armor is a great idea

but i think it should just add to defense value

and i like the idea of while wearing it you become more tired because the armor is heavy stuff

[shapukas]

If we talk about plates or chains then there should be padding as well. Armour like full plate should wheit about 7kg in cantr. Beciuse a worrior could have armour, wheapon, shield, some light food and some madicines. Medicines shoulde be very little, cos whith full plate, master in defence would be allmoste invincible.

Padding whould bee one of ingredient of full plate or chain mail. Leather armour coud be in padding and whithout one.

If some one will say that thay wont need padding then its not true. Just try to wear ful plate or chain mail whothout padding. It whould hurt eaven while not fighting.

P.S. and i think that there should be separet parts, like spoulders, breatplate, leggings, arm protections, helmets. All those parts coud be of warious materials. example:

Protections:
helmets=>chainmail hood, leather helmet, plate helmets (barbute, shugar loaf and others.
body armour=>spoulders (iron, steel, leather), breastplate (iron, steel, leather), chain mail hauberg, scalemaile (iron, steel, leather).
leggings=>iron, steel, leather chainmail leggings.
arm protections=> steel, iron, leather.

And one more thing. If there would be sepatare armour peaces, the maby there coud be a chants to aim your strike? Like if your rival have shield ant wears brest plate, then you could aim at his head. In that case hiting chance would be smaller.But when hit, he would reseve fule weapon damadge. Afcourse there could be some injuries like brokes arm. then you coudnt handle your weapon. It coud be done if shield would be put awhay. Or maby it is too much of work to do such a thing?

[Nakranoth]

Gah... spelling worse than (or maybe just as bad as) Pie's... breathe... breathe... Okay...

Balance is bar-none the biggest reason against armors... and if a truly balanced methoed were properly detailed, there's still the matter of actually getting it coded...

That said, we really cannot make armor so effective that it forces weapons to be stronger, or it becomes a necessity of life... and I know almost no feudal era peasentry wore the stuff. Then at the same time if it's not beneficial enough, it becomes "just another item" cluttering the databases. Also, to say a suit of armor will prevent x damage even based on skill is lunacy... even shields don't always block... That said, armor would need to be restricted to 5-10 points for the set, with the distinct possibility that their weapon bypasses it anyway.

Even still it needs more drawbacks... added fatigue (and thus detrimented work)... heavy and thus reasonably expensive to make.

I'd say make a full set 3 pieces max. Helm, breastplate, and leggings/greaves... Helm 1-2, breast 3-5, leggings 2-3 depending on type worn.

Honestly though, before we try dedicating valuable ProgD resources on that, we'd need a system in place to eliminate (or at least reduce) the effectiveness of lock and key assassinations, else the armor becomes just another minor prolonging of the inevitable.

[num1]

and I know almost no feudal era peasentry wore the stuff.

and the knights that fought them in full armor almost always won

and armor is always at the location of the hit so it would always block unless you hit in a spot that was less armored such as the armpit, the neck, and the groin. and there were weapons to pass through armor such as the rapier, the crossbow, and my favorite the claymore.

and by lock and key do you mean getting locked in a room to starve?
if so they already made a way around that its called a crowbar

[Gran]

Shapukas, why are you so interested in warfire equipment?

[Zanthos]

Honestly though, before we try dedicating valuable ProgD resources on that, we'd need a system in place to eliminate (or at least reduce) the effectiveness of lock and key assassinations, else the armor becomes just another minor prolonging of the inevitable.

I have one - put a limit to how many attempts one can try to pick a lock with a crowbar until it actually breaks. Set it at 3 max, so that wailing on the lock with a crowbar takes just as much time as carefully taking it apart with a screwdriver if things don't go as planed and you keep failing. Its just rediculious seeing someone fail 8 days in a row when they're bashing a small lock with a crowbar. I mean, realistically the entire door except for the lock had to be gone by then.

Now on the other side, lock picking projects should then be allowed to be cleared, also an asthetic change - because who else hates those ancient lockpicking projects for locations that arent even there anymore -_-

Now this (^) has probably already been said, but I didn't have time to read through the entire post.

[Nakranoth]

and the knights that fought them in full armor almost always won

That is, up until the invention of the longbow... then peasentry became a much more effective force.

But reguardless, my point there is that it really should never become common-place for non-militant charries to run around in the stuff, and the only way for that to happen is if it's not so benificial as to appear neccesary for basic survival.

and armor is always at the location of the hit so it would always block unless you hit in a spot that was less armored such as the armpit, the neck, and the groin. and there were weapons to pass through armor such as the rapier, the crossbow, and my favorite the claymore.

And it's because of being able to hit unarmored spots that it wouldn't always block. "Punching through" it is just a matter of exceding its protective value with damage.
On a side note, higher skill weapons (such as the rapier) should have higher percentages to bypass worn armor, while things like battle axes need to function as can openers.

and by lock and key do you mean getting locked in a room to starve?
if so they already made a way around that its called a crowbar

Actually, I meant the slightly more active, stepping in, hitting them, then leaving before they can retaliate... and a crowbar'll only be of any use if you happen to carry one. And even still, there's no gaurentees it'll get you out in time to put up any reasonable fight.

[Solfius]

i think the best way for armour to work is as a small fixed damage reduction.

This could be improved upon if damage types are implemented (eg, piercing, slashing, etc) as different weapons could be better against different armours, thus reducing the damage reduction afforded by armour. e.g. piercing weapons good vs leather armour, and bludgeoning weapons good vs metal armour

However, I don't see it happening, and quite frankly would prefer more fundamental changes to the combat system before adding new features

[shapukas]

i think the best way for armour to work is as a small fixed damage reduction.

This could be improved upon if damage types are implemented (eg, piercing, slashing, etc) as different weapons could be better against different armours, thus reducing the damage reduction afforded by armour. e.g. piercing weapons good vs leather armour, and bludgeoning weapons good vs metal armour

However, I don't see it happening, and quite frankly would prefer more fundamental changes to the combat system before adding new features

You are totaly wrong. Slaching, piercing and bludgeoning is better when hit leather armour. Bludgeoning damadge doesnt stop chainmail, but plait mail stops that damadge, not comlpeltly, but still stops. Platemail is week only agains piercing damadge whith war hamers. Those are just like ordinary hamers only whit one spiky end. Those strike through armour quite easy. Chainmails is good against slashing damadge, but very week at piercing and bludgeoning. Leather is a little bit good against slashing, but not very good. Leather is good only becouse it wheights less.

P.S. I think that those kinde of damades should have their own post. Cos daggers and war hamers both do piersing damadge but only war hamer can strike through plate armour.

[Solfius]

I'm not a weapons expert, but I think the examples I gave, although incorrect, got my point across.

[Nakranoth]

Chainmail not good against piercing? It's designed to stop arrows. Ring-mail would be weak vs piercing, but chainmail's like feudal kevlar. A rapier could pierce through a bit, but that holds true with pretty much anything but plate... Problem is, there's a lot more at play then 3 pure types of damage...

Swords can be either to swing or thrust, axes both cut and shatter bones, arrows are typically broad-headed, which do more against leather/skin... but a thin-headed arrow has an easier time slipping through chain...

Hrmm... that actually gives me an idea... but too complicated...

[Racetyme]

Well, the nice thing about all this armor is it would make, blunt, strength based weapons more useful. Maybe a bit too useful though actually, since they are so much more effective against armor. The game would suddenly shift the opposite way that it is in currently.

[shapukas]

Chainmails or ring mails are all the same. Those are good only agains slashing. Piersing is quite easy to go through that kinde of armour. Bludgeoning damadge is allso powerfull against chainmail. Now, platemails is kind a week against piersing damadge. But. What is piersing? Daggers do piersing damadge right? But you wont be able to strike through plate armour. Well maby through weak joints?

[Zanthos]

Stuff like Pilums and strong bows i guess.

Crossbow would def do piercing damage. basically, anything currently listed under ranged would do piercing damage, as it currently includes polearms and bows.

of course, slingshots would not cause piercing damage unless you were shooting little diamond projectiles sharpened to a point.

[shapukas]

Quite right. But what about daggers? Thos will sertently will do piercing, but not to platemail. Singshots only bludgeoning. Not eaven whith dimonde projecktiles, slingshots wont make piersing. Eanyway to make such a thing would be wery dificult.