Stone-Weapon Armor-Divisors and Blunt Trauma

[Trachmyr]

While creating a new campaign setting (now armed with the lovely new Low-Tech), I’ve run into a bit of an issue.

The primary society are a group of adapted River and Coastal People. They are roughly TL1, and while they lack metallurgy, they are advanced (TL2) in using other natural resources (e.g., Lye, Distilling, Ceramics). Their society is small as they are primarily carnivorous (fish eating) and organized through clan/caste lines. Wars are unknown, but skirmishes between themselves and non- “water folk” are fairly common.

For armor, they have access to Light & Medium “Leather of Quality” (Shagreen), plus other leathers (eel, crocodile, etc.), Layered (& Hardened) Leather making technology, as well as a supply of wild silk. A rare few use baleen, bamboo or rattan sewn between layers of leather for reinforcement. Yet they (and their neighbors) lack weapon materials beyond stone (albeit Obsidian, Flint/Chert, Chalcedony, Basalt and Jade). This presents a problem justifying the typical image of a warrior with a spear, or a raider with an axe.

Consider that even “cheap” armor is layered eelskin providing DR2... “good” armor is light layered shagreen with silk padding for DR4 (-1 vs. crushing), and the best armor is heavy layered shagreen with silk padding for DR6 (-1 vs. crushing, and +1 vs. cutting if also reinforced). This is supposed to be penetrated by weapons with a (0.5) armor divisor! Clubs are the only way to go with these numbers… and that’s not even taking into account the “Blunt Trauma and Edged Weapons” rule (LT.102) that I would like to use.

-----------------------------

[edited:] I had questions regarding "Blunt Trauma and Edged Weapons" when dealing with split DR, and concerning if Obsidian has a (0.5) armor divisor, but these have been answered by DAN and ASTA KASK... so thank you guys

------------------------------

Here is a Houserule I would like you to critique:

Instead of giving Stone Weapons a 0.5 Armor Divisor, the rules for "Blunt Trauma and Edged Weapons" (Low-Tech, page 102) would be extended to include Impaling Stone Weapons. For Cutting Stone Weapons, the rules for "Blunt Trauma and Edged Weapons" apply as normal but damage must exceed three times cutting DR before the weapon gets it's normal cutting wound modifier.


---------------------------

This Houserule is intended to make Spears and Axes still superior to clubs, while preserving the reality of using stone weapons. Furthermore, it gives me another variable to modify to represent superior materials (or inferior ones) and well honed edges (or those that have been neglected or have seen much wear).

Please Tell me what you think! I would greatly appreciate a response.

Thank You,
Trachmyr

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Trachmyr

2. Using the “Blunt Trauma and Edged Weapons” rules on page 102 of Low-Tech, does 8 points of basic cutting damage vs. Heavy Mail do 3 or 5 points of crushing damage? In other-words, if damage is converted to crushing because it failed to penetrate 2xDR, do you then subtract Crushing DR or Cutting DR. I personally think that you should subtract crushing DR on a failed penetration.

You subtract cutting DR, not crushing DR. crushing DR is only used when resisting weapons that do crushing damage.

[Kraydak]

Giving sharp (non-bullet) stone weapons an armor divisor of 0.5 doesn't really work as it often makes adding an edge to a stone weapon a downgrade. I would suggest instead listing a DR against which the point breaks, and treating the weapon as crushing against that DR level and up, possibly only after the hit. For more resolution you could list both a break DR, against which it keeps the cut/imp for the first hit, and a shatter DR against which even the first hit is reduced to cr. Stone bullets might get treated as hollow-points against heavy enough armor to make them shatter, but still lose the base 0.5 armor divisor.

[Trachmyr]

Originally Posted by Kraydak

Giving sharp (non-bullet) stone weapons an armor divisor of 0.5 doesn't really work as it often makes adding an edge to a stone weapon a downgrade. I would suggest instead listing a DR against which the point breaks, and treating the weapon as crushing against that DR level and up, possibly only after the hit. For more resolution you could list both a break DR, against which it keeps the cut/imp for the first hit, and a shatter DR against which even the first hit is reduced to cr. Stone bullets might get treated as hollow-points against heavy enough armor to make them shatter, but still lose the base 0.5 armor divisor.

Since a 0.5 armor divisor doubles the targets armor, it is ofcourse a problem for stone weapons. The Penetration Factor Houserule is an extension of the Blunt Trauma rules for cutting weapons (presented in Low-tech), and I think it does a good job of making stone points realisticly effective vs. armor.

Using a single DR theshold for when a weapon gets it's cut/imp bonus and when it breaks is problematic. Some stones (like flint and obsidian) hold an edge fairly well, but also shatter fairly easily. Other stones (like basalt and especialy jade, which is often regarded as stronger than iron) don't take or hold an edge very well, but are much more resistant to shattering.

[Anders]

Originally Posted by Trachmyr

-----------------------------

So I have a couple of questions, and some Houserules I would like you to critique. First the questions:

1. Does Obsidian have a (0.5) armor divisor, it seems that it would by the wording on page 275 of Basic.
-------------------------------

The Macauihatl (I probably butchered that) has, so I'd say yes.

[Kraydak]

Originally Posted by Trachmyr

Since a 0.5 armor divisor doubles the targets armor, it is ofcourse a problem for stone weapons. The Penetration Factor Houserule is an extension of the Blunt Trauma rules for cutting weapons (presented in Low-tech), and I think it does a good job of making stone points realisticly effective vs. armor.

Using a single DR theshold for when a weapon gets it's cut/imp bonus and when it breaks is problematic. Some stones (like flint and obsidian) hold an edge fairly well, but also shatter fairly easily. Other stones (like basalt and especialy jade, which is often regarded as stronger than iron) don't take or hold an edge very well, but are much more resistant to shattering.

Sorry, I started figuring to give a simpler set of HRs with similar results, then let my thoughts get away from me.

[Trachmyr]

Originally Posted by Asta Kask

The Macauihatl (I probably butchered that) has, so I'd say yes.

I didn't notice that before... Thanks for pointing that out!

[Ulzgoroth]

I suggest looking at things a little differently.

Yes, stone-edged weapons aren't going to be very good at punching through that sort of armor.

But that's not what they're really for, anyway. They're for doing horrendous damage to targets without heavy armor, or preferably without any armor

The heavy armor is quite serious protection by any standard. Even a round mace doesn't deal with it well. However, it is rigid armor, which means that it has gaps for a spearman to target, and that it can't realistically cover some areas. More importantly, though, it's expensive armor for elites (not sure how expensive, because I can't price the silk padding). It should provide pretty good protection.

The cheap armor is actually light enough I'm not sure it's a problem. A spear, wielded with two hands, puts 1d-2 imp through that stuff. That's not too bad compared against a round mace, which delivers 1d+1 cr after armor, but is unbalanced and only has reach 1. It's more of a problem for the axe. The axeman is going to regret his weapon choice unless he can aim for hit locations that lack protection. The neck is surely open at that TL, and limbs might be as well on partial armor.

The good armor is more of a problem. It stops a stone axe or spear (even a heavy spear) pretty much dead, and it's flexible so they can't count on going around it. Other than costing at least starting wealth per 100% coverage, it's short on weaknesses. All I can suggest there is beating them with a stick until they leak out of their armor. On the bright side, a spear does double as a big stick...

[Trachmyr]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

I suggest looking at things a little differently.

Yes, stone-edged weapons aren't going to be very good at punching through that sort of armor.

But that's not what they're really for, anyway. They're for doing horrendous damage to targets without heavy armor, or preferably without any armor

The heavy armor is quite serious protection by any standard. Even a round mace doesn't deal with it well. However, it is rigid armor, which means that it has gaps for a spearman to target, and that it can't realistically cover some areas. More importantly, though, it's expensive armor for elites (not sure how expensive, because I can't price the silk padding). It should provide pretty good protection.

The cheap armor is actually light enough I'm not sure it's a problem. A spear, wielded with two hands, puts 1d-2 imp through that stuff. That's not too bad compared against a round mace, which delivers 1d+1 cr after armor, but is unbalanced and only has reach 1. It's more of a problem for the axe. The axeman is going to regret his weapon choice unless he can aim for hit locations that lack protection. The neck is surely open at that TL, and limbs might be as well on partial armor.

The good armor is more of a problem. It stops a stone axe or spear (even a heavy spear) pretty much dead, and it's flexible so they can't count on going around it. Other than costing at least starting wealth per 100% coverage, it's short on weaknesses. All I can suggest there is beating them with a stick until they leak out of their armor. On the bright side, a spear does double as a big stick...

Exactly, and I agree... But I do want stone weapons to be able to inflict some damage (Blunt Trauma) even if they don't fully penetrate the (increased) armor... and to allow them to inflict serious wounds *if* they can punch through armor.

My "Penetration Modifier" works just like the Blunt Trauma for Edged Weapons rule from Low-Tech. It would make it still quite difficult to punch through armor, but wouldn't render stone weapons useless.

And I am aware that I could go the route of requiring warriors to aim for unarmoured locations, but I don't want that to be the requirement to do injury.

Basically the question comes down to: What's the difference between swinging and hitting someone with a Stone Mace vs. a Stone Axe? I simply don't think that the Axe should do only a small fraction of the damage a mace does against an armored opponent, so I'm looking for a houserule to correct this.

Consider a 2lb knobbed club vs. a 4lb Stone axe, both wielded by a ST11 man and targeting DR4 (-1 vs. Crushing). The knobbed club does 1d-1 crushing damage after armor, while the axe does 1d-5 damage after armor... and it will only inflict blunt trauma. Infact, that same man could punch for the exact same damage (or more if he had Brawling at a high enough level)!

These numbers just aren't right, and I think using Blunt Trauma via a Penetration Modifier would work. Using a P2 modifier instead of a 0.5 armor divisor, the above axe would do 1d-1 damage (the same as the Mace), but if the roll was a "6", armor would be cut through and the victim would take 5 points of cutting damage (7 after the wounding multiplier)... giving a reason to use the heavier (& less balanced) axe over the club.

[hal]

Hi Trachmyr,
This is NOT a criticism of your choices as a GM, but what I'd like to do is explore with you some of the options involved that you've chosen to utilize, and the ramifications thereof.

Originally Posted by Trachmyr

For armor, they have access to Light & Medium “Leather of Quality” (Shagreen), plus other leathers (eel, crocodile, etc.), Layered (& Hardened) Leather making technology, as well as a supply of wild silk.

They also occasionally use baleen, bamboo or rattan sewn between layers of leather for reinforcement.

Question the first: What precisely is "Wild Silk"? After reading a little more on silk, it seems to be implied that raw silk in and of itself, is not the same material as found in the silk armor. After googling it a little, and reading more on it in GURPS LOW TECH, isn't processed silk armor a time (ie labor) consuming materials intensive type of product? One would presume that silk armor should be relatively rare.

Question the second: What kind of tools are required in order to utilize leather of quality? For instance, would the cutting of the leather require constant sharpening of stone tools, such that their cost factor would be increased even more than had those same leathers been worked with bronze tools?

Question the Third: Just because it is possible to have splint armor reinforcement for a culture doesn't neccessarily indicate that your group should have it. From what I'm reading of your group, it almost suggests that they've been around for a long long time, and have a long history of warfare - else why would they have a highly developed technology geared towards armor? At what point would layered leather armor NOT be sufficient enough armor that they'd develop splints for arms and leg armor? Just a thought.

Originally Posted by Trachmyr

Yet they (and their neighbors) lack weapon materials beyond stone (albeit Obsidian, Flint/Chert, Chalcedony, Basalt and Jade). This presents a problem justifying the typical image of a warrior with a spear, or a raider with an axe.

Consider that even “cheap” armor is layered eelskin providing DR2... “good” armor is light layered shagreen with silk padding for DR4 (-1 vs. crushing), and the best armor is heavy layered shagreen with silk padding and bamboo reinforcement for DR6 (-1 vs. crushing, +1 vs. cutting). This is supposed to be penetrated by weapons with a (0.5) armor divisor! Clubs are the only way to go with these numbers… and that’s not even taking into account the “Blunt Trauma and Edged Weapons” rule (LT.102) that I would like to use.

So, what is the cost of this particlar piece of armor above:

Layered Heavy leather torso armor costs $525. Multiply this by the cost factor for Leather of Quality, and it bumps up to $2,625. This does not take into account the manufacturing issues of using stone age tools only (and I don't know if that would even be an issue, hence, the question I raised earlier). Now, you mentioned the silk layer. Per the rules, you could either create light layered cloth armor and then use the layering rules for multiple armors, or you could use an ordinary clothing garment as the underlayer made of silk. Ordinary clothing costs .2 x the cost of living for the character, while processed silk adds a +19 cost factor for clothing. In effect, it ends up costing 4 x cost of living (ie, .2 x 20). If these are status zero clothing items, then silk clothing costs $2,400.

Note: Ask Dan or others if I'm on the right track here, ie, don't take my word for it, as I can be wrong ;)

Mind you, this is just for the torso covering - nothing said about helmets, shoulder protection, abdomen armoring, etc. Note too, that this is rigid armoring (as Dan mentioned), which will have its own issues.

As a suggestion? Why not create an armor loadout for your fantasy warrior, and see what the end results are. Find out what the weights involved will be, along with the costs - and then see how many of the warriors will be outfitted to the highest standards of armoring possible. Once you do that, realize that such warriors in armor, will find themselves the target of every larcenous warrior out there. Then keep in mind, that one need not always engage in a slug-fest in order to win a fight. Disarming a foe and then grappling with them is one possible route to go. Working as a team, one fighter could edge to the back of the armored behemouth while the other works to stay in front of the invincible fighter. Then, use a grappling attack from the rear flanking hexes to take down the foe.

A sea faring nation might even resort to the use of nets as a weapon of war, which in turn, ignores the effects of Damage resistance ;)