Quote:
Originally Posted by Polydamas
In practice the Long Coat would probably cover about half the legs, so its area of 200% is being compared to armour that covers 250%. Its better to match actual weights (or a good guess at them) and fit a best guess of game stats than make the game stats balanced but not have the one thing you can measure be correct. Building a thick coat as armour couldn't hurt if you feel its a game balance issue.
|
The long coats can be dusters, and all dusters I've seen are ankle-length, so that makes it equivalent to full-length legs. They certainly would be for the amount of material included.
Even if it were only equivalent to half legs, the weight and cost comes out better than padded cloth anyways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
Quick check:
How is DR 1 "Better than armor"? There's a lot of armor, most of which is much better than DR 1.
|
The only armors available in the DR1 range all have the flexible mark (*), or worse (only DR0 and provide DR1 vs cutting). Protective clothing does not, even though there is a clothing item that does have it (moccasins), so we can't just assume it was left off of all clothing stat blocks for inscrutable reasons (like the Tough Skin note for animal write-ups).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
If you're referring to "by weight", please go double check the errata, the clothing weights have been increased significantly (Doubled, IIRC)
|
I'm aware of the errata, and they don't affect any of the protective clothing stats.