[HT] Body Armor - errata?

[safisher]

Originally Posted by jacobmuller

Then the silk vest insert may be the only new errata: it covers torso front, weighs 6lb and is DR5F; the corselet covers both front & rear, weighs 12lb but has DR10?

We are back to coverage issues again I'm afraid, as I chose not to impose the N/d coverage roll as baseline. If the armor was designed to protect the torso, so be it. If it had larger or lesser gaps, there is a rule for that in Basic Set. I didn't sweat it beyond that. Dan, on the other hand, approached armor with a generic design system, something I was told not to do. I was told to approach the subject from a catalog perspective -- thus the items weigh what they weigh and protect as they protect. The two are not the same. In addition, I used the value benchmarks in Basic Set, and I'm fairly sure Dan jiggered his own based on his own research and that produced from fairly subtle to significant differences with Basic Set. So really, in no way are the two approaches comparable. If you don't like this, I'll simply point out that I wrote my book first. So, take it up with Dan. =)

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by johndallman

The armour I know a little about is the kind that came in thick slabs on TL6 ships. The effectiveness of that approximately doubled during TL6 (as in, half the thickness was as good) mostly due to improved alloys and heat treatment.

Some of the effects that made TL 6 steel superior would have been available at lower TLs, just either not predictably (due to differing grades of ore with different impurities) or not in a way that would have been practical on the scale of naval armor.

[jacobmuller]

Originally Posted by safisher

I'll simply point out that I wrote my book first. So, take it up with Dan. =)

LOL. naw, I'll consider it answered. TQ.