10-12-2016, 07:30 PM | #41 | ||
Wielder of Smart Pants
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
I am fairly sure they mean the flat part under the arm (since they list it as "side under arm" and that's the area that tailors measure as "side" too).
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
10-12-2016, 07:47 PM | #42 | |
Join Date: Aug 2007
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
Quote:
I'd say that potential fight-enders are assigned penalties in proportion to their worth and not their difficulty.
__________________
Fred Brackin |
|
10-12-2016, 08:58 PM | #43 |
Wielder of Smart Pants
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
Punches in your youth were probably Telegraphic and/or All Out. Mine certainly were both.
Last edited by sir_pudding; 10-13-2016 at 12:43 AM. |
10-12-2016, 10:33 PM | #44 |
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
|
10-13-2016, 12:14 AM | #45 | |
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
I think it's incorrect to go with abstract size when it comes to what mod to use for targeting chinks and weak spots. Armour makers (and those fighting in armour) were not stupid, these chinks tend to be in not just relatively small areas but relatively hard to reach areas as well, as well as easy to defend areas. They also tend to coincide with hard to armour places which were also tended to be out of the way normally in joints and other areas were lots of armour might interfere with freedom of movement. As well as being areas were weight could be safely saved as a relative trade off.
There's another point about targeting say the thinner areas of a plate harness (and not the gaps), you have to know where the plate is significantly thinner, armour plate was not identical in this regards even if there was some general tendencies. And remember you doing this in a second by second combat situation. And in combat you'd have to make some pretty specific attempts to hit this stuff. Everything's easier with Telegraphic and AoA(Determined)'s but there's an obvious trade off. Setup then Telegraphic attack's another, or Evaluate's another. Or you go with Targeted attacks, and we know from contemporary sources that specific training for hitting such weak points was a thing. And of course you can combine some of the above to suit the situation Quote:
Just going with DR per inch*, it has TL3 Strong Steel at 70, TL 4 Hard steel at 81, TL7 very hard steel at 90, TL8 Ultra strength Steel at 116 As a counter example TL2 cheap iron is 52 and good iron is 68 It has other steels as well. Variation in weight is also factor here, as is price (massively so once you get into TL5+) *given one of the GURPS constants is RHA = 70 DR per inch, it seems a good way to do it Last edited by Tomsdad; 10-14-2016 at 12:09 AM. |
|
10-13-2016, 12:42 AM | #46 | |||
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Compact Castles gives the gamer an instant portfolio of genuine, real-world castle floorplans to use in any historical, low-tech, or fantasy game setting. Last edited by DanHoward; 10-13-2016 at 01:05 AM. |
|||
10-13-2016, 12:52 AM | #47 | |||
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Most real life pub fights (or school fights) are really not much like fights in GURPS between trained fighters. Last edited by Tomsdad; 10-13-2016 at 06:30 AM. |
|||
10-13-2016, 01:06 AM | #48 |
GURPS FAQ Keeper
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
Kromm has clarified that AoA is so all-out/reckless that it is obvious to an opponent as an opening/opportunity. I suppose you can call it lowercase-t telegraphed in terms of opening/defenselessness.
|
10-13-2016, 01:07 AM | #49 |
Wielder of Smart Pants
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
|
10-13-2016, 01:12 AM | #50 | ||
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
|
Re: High/Ultra-Tech Versions of Low-Tech Armor
Quote:
Given the official cross over point between TL3 & TL4 is 1450 I'd don't think I have a problem saying you could get particularly exceptional examples of steel that would be 81 DR per inch in 1449 and earlier due to specific situations. These thing are never going to map to hard and fast cut off points. And that leaves aside the point specific TLs in terms of specific technologies vary when and where they appear anyway. The classic example that always seem to come up here being the Romans who seem to have hit different TL break points (in GURPS terms) in different areas! The Article specially makes that point that at TL5+ those steels become a lot cheaper but not actually significantly better until as you say TL7+ (for the reasons you give) But I'm interested that your saying TL 3 here not TL4 (which IIRC you previously said) are you saying that this kind of hardened DR81 steel was a mature technology generally available throughout the TL3 period i.e. roughly 600AD and should be considered TL3. As say opposed to pockets of TL4 being available earlier than 1450 in specific circumstances? Although I admit given pre industrial production systems that last that is pretty nebulous distinction! edit to respond to your later bit: Quote:
Yep I don't disagree (and nether does the article) it just gives earliest TLs it doesn't say it's only available at those TLs. If nothing else not all metal is produced to withstand physical attacks in combat, I'm sure there's plenty of uses such cheap iron can be put to at higher TLs. The article gives iron the same benefits of reduced cost as TL5+ as it does steel, and as the iron starts cheaper at its the Introductory TL than steel as well of course, that means it gets really cheap in comparison. Last edited by Tomsdad; 10-13-2016 at 06:42 AM. |
||
Tags |
armor, armour |
|
|