10-12-2016, 05:18 PM | #31 |
Wielder of Smart Pants
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
I saw it a lot in my last DF game (or even worse like the Scout shooting eyes with two arrows at range pretty regularly). The swashbuckler in particular often targeted chinks in order to get anything through DR. With skill 24 a -8 still gives you an effective skill of 16; that doesn't even affect your crit chance!
|
10-12-2016, 05:24 PM | #32 | |
Untagged
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
Quote:
Bare eyes are -9 with no armor, and auto-end any fight with anything remotely fleshy. It seems like it would be a very narrow set of circumstances where a player let alone PC would number crunch for optimal results in that -1 difference. I'm not arguing that those times don't exist, of course. This being gurps, all sorts of games are possible and potentially fun.
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check. |
|
10-12-2016, 05:29 PM | #33 | ||
Wielder of Smart Pants
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by sir_pudding; 10-12-2016 at 05:53 PM. |
||
10-12-2016, 05:34 PM | #34 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
Because the general scaling of to hit modifiers is based on the size of the area, and the sides are most clearly larger than, say, the throat (-5).
|
10-12-2016, 05:40 PM | #35 |
Wielder of Smart Pants
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
They also take into account positioning, mobility and other factors. Besides -5 is the entire neck (which includes the area protected by a gorget, so the upper sternum too); a strip on the sides isn't less area than the neck.
|
10-12-2016, 05:42 PM | #36 | |
Untagged
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Forest Grove, Beaverton, Oregon
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
Quote:
Where is chinks in eye armor listed? Great helms with slits for narrow field of view is -10.
__________________
Beware, poor communication skills. No offense intended. If offended, it just means that I failed my writing skill check. |
|
10-12-2016, 05:48 PM | #37 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
Unfortunately they didn't show a map, but I got the impression that the thin area was quite a bit more than a strip.
|
10-12-2016, 05:52 PM | #38 | ||
Wielder of Smart Pants
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
10-12-2016, 05:56 PM | #39 |
Wielder of Smart Pants
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
Well, I'm slightly overweight, and my sides are still only a couple of inches (~2.4 it seems) wide. Since that's going to be split between the two halves of the corslet (which overlap significantly in that area) the actual area does seem like a strip to me (less than an inch where there's no overlap).
|
10-12-2016, 06:25 PM | #40 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
Depends a lot on what 'sides' means. It could be anywhere from a 2" strip to about an 8" strip. That's why a map would be nice. However, other thin areas included "Upper area between arm and neck (right side) - .035-.050" and "Center near the waist - mostly .040 - .050".
|
Tags |
armor, armour |
|
|