How do you fight high armor with a low ST character?

[Rick_Smith]

Originally Posted by Nils_Lindeberg

... What I would like to see is a general rule for bypassing armor, or at least halving armor by hitting the right or weaker spots. ...

Hi Nils,
I already have enough trouble getting players to wear heavy armour. ("It lowers my DX! It lowers my MA!") So rules that make armour LESS effective are not high on my priority list.

A fighter with a fairly typical ST of 12, is wielding a broadsword for 2 dice of damage. It really is not that hard to get thru 6 or 8 points of armour.

Warm regards, Rick.

[bluekitsune13]

Thanks everyone for your input. What I really want to do is adapt TFT rules to work with my Warhammer figures. I love models and painting, but don't really like playing the actual mass combat games. The tacked on skirmish variants don't do it for me either.

I forgot about aimed hits. That would be good for a horde of goblins to take a knight to the ground and Stan him through his face mask.

If I ever come up with a full conversion I'll be sure to post it. Thanks again.

[JLV]

Originally Posted by Nils_Lindeberg

... What I would like to see is a general rule for bypassing armor, or at least halving armor by hitting the right or weaker spots. ...

Then too, there's that whole issue of "GURPS-ifying" TFT with all kinds of special rules and exceptions to the exceptions, which both Steve and Guy have already stated they're not keen on. (For the record, I agree with them...)

[Nils_Lindeberg]

Originally Posted by David Bofinger

The main solution to armour historically was smashing through it with weapons like pollaxes and lucerne hammers. The alternate solution of agile rapiers with precision to spare that could find gaps wasn't considered effective. So I think if you do introduce this tactic then it should be more difficult and/or less effective than the high ST solution of punching through with increased damage. If it is to be a defining feature of a character then it should be represented by a talent that makes it less difficult or more effective.

There used to be armor, heavy armor all through history that were not completely interlinked. Look at ancient armor and really all armor except fully 15th Century armor. On those armors hitting the right spot was just as important as hitting hard.

And even with armor that gives more or less full cover, there will be weak spots that are not as well protected and easier to penetrate. Even an arm under a shield will feel the pain and become numb from a good hit on the shield with out penetration. The same goes for hands, wrists, joints, vitals, etc.

But we are talking fantasy here, and there is a trope about fencers and people going to war without a shield, hehe.

[Nils_Lindeberg]

Originally Posted by Rick_Smith

Hi Nils,
I already have enough trouble getting players to wear heavy armour. ("It lowers my DX! It lowers my MA!") So rules that make armour LESS effective are not high on my priority list.

A fighter with a fairly typical ST of 12, is wielding a broadsword for 2 dice of damage. It really is not that hard to get thru 6 or 8 points of armour.

Warm regards, Rick.

I agree, as long as you keep within the usual boundaries (normal levels of armor and DX and damage) it is not a problem. But if you start to stack heavy enchanted armor and enchanted shields and maybe a spell on top of that it can pose problems. Most things are on a random curve, like damage and to hit. But armor is not. So at certain points it might cause problems.

And if I remember your house rules correctly there are ways to increase damage alot all ready, which in turn makes armor less important. If everyone dies in one hit or gets knocked over in one hit, the only thing that matters is hitting first and never miss. The best type of defense is attack and all that.

But if you allow for by passing armor for Dagger marksmanship and the like, why not with a melee weapon. It is a lot harder to hit through a face guard with a throwing knife on a moving target than doing it with a lucern hammer in close combat.

And you don't really make normal armor less effective. The trade off is -1DX for you and -2DX for your opponent to ignore one point of your armor. You could equal it with a hay maker or all out attack that do more damage at the cost of DX and bypass armor the hard way. But that could also be used against unarmored persons and would be double and tripple in case of a crit and that would make everything even more deadly.

That is why I target armor high enough to make certain low level weapons and opponents almost useless, regardless how good the wielder of said weapons are.

But if super stacking of armor won't be a problem in the new version of TFT, maybe it is not needed. Time will tell. Very exciting. :-)

[Wayne]

Firearms ;)

[JLV]

We need a "thumbs up" button on here -- I'd have hit it for Wayne's post for sure! ;-)