Quote:
Originally Posted by Rasna
Hitting 'Em Where It Hurts IMHO is a good and simple "quick&dirty" rule, but can be quite inaccurate.
Taking arms and legs as example, if you use that rule, thighs (22,5% each) are at -6 to hit (-2 for legs plus -4 for the rule), while hands and feet (5% each) are at -4 to hit. Same for shins (25%) which are at -5 to hit according to HTWIH rule. And this is a bit self-contradictory, because it must be: the bigger the area, the smaller the malus to hit. That's why I prefer my House Rules in this case, where shins and thighs are at -3 to hit (-4 for their upper and lower sublocations, -5 for ankles) and knees are at -5 to hit.
|
I think your conflating Hitting them where it hurts from HT and the armour location rules from LT
"Hitting them where it hurts" (HTpg69) doesn't line up sub locations with specific chances, it only talks about partial cover of locations in general
so the unprotected part of a hand with 2 in 6 armour partial cover is -5 (-4 for the hand and another -1 for the 2 in 6 partial cover)
the unprotected part of a leg with 2 in 6 armour partial cover is -3 (-2 for the leg and another -1 for the 2 in 6 partial cover)
The armour location table (LTpg100) does reference sub locations.
Both by area as a percentage of torso for the purposes calculating armour weight and cost.
and as a chance of being hit as a further 1d6 sub location.
They are kind of doing the same thing in different ways so I don't think you can take the same way of calculating the extra penalty to avoid partial armour based off n-in-6 from "hitting em where it hurts" and apply it to derived n-in-6 values from the sub locations in LT.