Unarmored in town?

[JohnPaulB]

So your group has just finished off the dungeon and you've retired to the big city. You now have money to burn and after cleaning up and resting at the Waldor-Astoria, you head to Maxine's .... in your chainmail or plate armor?

Its not likely that you will always be in armor. I'm sure sleeping in armor for expediency for a couple of nights might be tolerable. But to spend all your time in it would probably lead to soreness, surliness and unhygieneness.

Towns and cities probably have ordinances that you can't walk around in metal armor. Its for the good of the rulers to not have fighters walking the streets that they can't easily penetrate with their own weapons. And it probably worries the citizens having armored fighters strutting about like mercenaries.

If you are in a secure town for a month, where you think you are safe from military or government attacks, you will probably go unarmored.
If you're worried about rivals or brigands, you will probably at most, go around in leather (because your rivals are probably under the same governmental restrictions as you are.)

Have you ever had your fighters take off their armor to sleep in the wilderness or walk about in town?

If there was an attack, would you have them rush out to fight with what they had on or would they take the time to put armor on then fight?

Also, it seems to me that those who beef up their Dex to wear heavy armor might do well in this kind of scenario because they won't have adjDex to worry about.

[Chris Rice]

It depends on the town and how the local laws work but I frequently would not permit characters to wander round town as if they were in a dungeon. Some urban areas will have very strict codes and anything more than a dagger will be banned. Usually I would permit the wearing of a sword but again, it depends on the local laws.

[Steve Jackson]

Strongly agree. Armor will invite questions; weaponry may invite very pointed (heh) questions. Of course, in the oart of town where you NEED armor, there will probably be fewer restrictions about wearing it.

Peace bonding is a real thing, and some areas may allow you to carry a sword only if it's wired into the scabbard!

[Nils_Lindeberg]

It would be nice if there was some penalties to wearing armor, weapons and shields in a non combat setting.

For example:
When you travel you lose fST on a regular basis and regain them when you rest. So that loss could be doubled or trippled if you walk around on the road in full armor. The regaining of fatigue from rest could be halved or even getting worse.

So if you are in a chase, forced march, normal travel where speed is more important, going without some or all of your armor should be a tactically valid option.

Reactions rolls could be affected so if you head down town to do some errands you go lightly armored or have no armor at all. Maybe a short sword is ok, but heavier gets you a bad reaction, which in turn costs you more money when buying stuff, etc. Harder to get information too.

Heavy armor, adjDX, adjMA should probably affect a lot of saves, talent use and so on. So if you are out hunting, you don't bring your plate unless you stalk a deaf predator of unusual size.

Weather might affect your choice of armor. What should go in to your saddle bags and what should stay on. Freezing, hot and sweaty or wet and rusty? Your choice.

Wearing your helmet or not should probably be connected to perception checks and maybe how friendly you can be with your fellow travelers.

In short, some generic rules might mean that PC now and then actually takes off their armor, skip carrying around a battle field shield or a Pike Ax where ever they go or what ever they do.

Example for generic rules:
Categorize your armor and weapons as either Civilian, Armed or Battle. If one thing is Battle, everything is considered Battle.

In a civilian setting -1 reaction for being Armed unless you are part of the official military or police. -2 for being Battle equipped no matter your status.

Double fatigue loss for being Battle equipped and half for proper Civilian equipment.

Half the armor and weight DX adjustments to IQ checks, round down, when the equipment could interfere. So pure knowledge checks and the like should not be penalized, but almost everything else.

Removing gloves and helmet (takes one turn to put them back on if your hands are free) will lessens the penalty to IQ tests with one. And Battle equipment reaction penalties will be one less. So it is well worth taking off your helmet and gloves before shaking hands or reading an inscription on the wall.

Resting while Armed will only yield half the fST. Resting while Battle equipped will result in half the fST back - armor adjDX modfier. So a night spent in chainmail will give you back fST at half speed and leave you 3 fST short in the morning.

[Jim Kane]

Also, within a city (based on it's prevailing culture and laws) certain things such as the open carrying of arms may be quite acceptable, such as in the Thieves Quarter; whereas, in the Military Quarter or the Religious/Temple Quarter of the same city, there could be strict ordinances against any weaponry or armor being carried (unless being transported for purposes of commerce) or without a city-issued permit by the local Magistrate or Captain of the City Guard.

Some cities could be so squeaky-clean, wholesome, and lawfully-oriented, that the PCs may have to actively disguise their true vocation, including who and what they are; whereas in other cites - nefarious and seedy by nature - one would be a fool to walk through those city gates without their sword firmly on their hip.

Ah... the variety of city-life on Cidri....

JK

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by Steve Jackson

Strongly agree. Armor will invite questions; weaponry may invite very pointed (heh) questions. Of course, in the oart of town where you NEED armor, there will probably be fewer restrictions about wearing it.

Peace bonding is a real thing, and some areas may allow you to carry a sword only if it's wired into the scabbard!

This is how I usually prefer to play when taking a campaign seriously, which is my preference.

However, my first campaign (and some later ones) had more of a Wild West weapon tolerance, and in those games, having unthinkingly not set expectations that anyone would disarm, and having had some violence break out in towns and cities, the players tended to balk severely at any suggestion they would ever not wear their armor and have their weapons nearby.

It helps to have consequences as Nils suggested for wearing arms & armor in social situations and weather conditions, sleeping in armor, trying to see/hear/do things, etc.

(And while I think TFT's armor DX penalties are too high for purposes of reducing chances of hitting people, I think they are fine in terms of speed and trying to do tasks that want agility.)

[Kirk]

I've had midnight raids etc. where it would be a risk to assemble and don armor, usually just a grab for a weapon in your nightshirt and move on.

Also, in more civilized areas often the wearing of battle gear will draw immediate attention from the locals and police, so that it up to the PCs.

It is one advantage of being a wizard, it's often hard to tell what one can do with a wave of a hand!

Here in Texas, at least in San Antonio, anyone can carry a rifle in the city, though discharging it is illegal except in certain circumstances, and with a License to Carry one can wear a pistol visibly or hidden almost anywhere that doesn't have the necessary signage to prohibit it.

So someone could stand on the sidewalk in front of someone else's house with a rifle and holstered pistol and as long as they are not "brandishing" them, be perfectly within in the law.

Would it be smart? No. Would it draw attention from the homeowner? Yes. Would the police probably arrive on the scene? Maybe.

Point is, even if something is legal, a character in Cidri might need to be prudent and forego their rights to walk around with full battle dress with a tower shield and broadsword when entering a butcher shop!

[ecz]

Originally Posted by Chris Rice

It depends on the town and how the local laws work but I frequently would not permit characters to wander round town as if they were in a dungeon. Some urban areas will have very strict codes and anything more than a dagger will be banned. Usually I would permit the wearing of a sword but again, it depends on the local laws.

this!
plus I add an increasing ST penalty for fatigue if players stay too longer in armor. Doubled if it's a full plate armor. halved for leather and no penalty at all for cloths. All depends on the contest and on the weather condition.

In "my" towns when wearing armor and carrying heavy weapons is forbidden by local laws and the PCs are simple visitors/tourists (no a house or a place to stay at disposal), usually they can leave their stuff for a moderate fee in a barrack or at the "sheriff's" office.

[Skarg]

Another thing that happens (especially in my more serious campaigns) is that if/when PCs start to take on the appearance and/or reputation of people strong enough to be of interest and significance to powerful people, that those people will tend to take an interest in them and want to know what they're like and whether they are dangerous or useful to them, and react accordingly.

Avoiding that can be a good reason to not go around ready for battle.

But if PCs actually make a consistent good impression on local authorities and form positive relationships with them, then it may not been unwelcome for them to go about town armed.

[ak_aramis]

Response to weapons is going to vary, and quite a bit.

And to which weapons.

But, as a general principle... Prior to the 17th C increase in the use of silverware, just about EVERYONE had a knife, and at all times. Knives weren't weapons, they were eating utensils and general utility tools. Even slaves often had a small knife, again, for eating with. Not having the dagger would be the red-flag.

Swords were another matter entirely - often a symbol of status (Only freemen and nobles carried a sword.) Might be tied into the sheath... (but to be honest, a good yank will break most such ties. I've done so.)

While many don't think of it, liveried soldiers have been a thing since before Rome... and the armor was part of the daily wear uniform. Why? because they didn't have a better way to store it unless in a bivouac camp. Also, because when out of camp, the locals weren't always on their side... But further, to project the imperial presence.

Spanish officers wore the breast-and-back with the comb morion for centuries, and into the 19th. Even NCO's (and they go back in a form we'd recognize to the early 17th C worldwide, and even into the 15th C in Spain, Britain, and a few other places)

Spears, bows, polearms, axes, and maces are likely to draw unwanted attention. They're weapons for hunting and war. OTOH, some cultures (cough England Cough) made them a weekly drill item for the subjects. And, for centuries, the national weapon.

Halberds and glaives had special meanings in various contexts... specifically, for "I kill mounted noblemen-warriors"... the back spike for pulling them off and for opening their skull or chest, the axe blade for shattering arms, and for pulling shields away, and the thrusting point for "Here, ride on to this!" (set vs Charge)...