Damage to Armor

[aesir23]

I definitely wouldn't do 1-1 unless you're keeping VERY specific records of the location where the DR is damaged. Something more like Semi-Ablative may be appropriate.

Perhaps Low-Tech will contain rules for this as well.

[Turhan's Bey Company]

Originally Posted by aesir23

Perhaps Low-Tech will contain rules for this as well.

Companion 2 rather than LT proper, but yes.

[Sam Baughn]

I'm fond of replacing the '9,10,11' results on the Critical Hit table with 'in addition to normal damage, the attack reduces the DR of any armour on the affected hit location by 1 for every five points of damage'. Mostly because it 'fixes' a frequently complained about issue with the critical hit table and requires a lot less book-keeping than more detailed solutions.

[DanHoward]

As Matt said, there are armour damage riules in Companion 2, but all of the options examined in the Low-Tech playtest involve an annoying level of book-keeping. We did include a Quick and Dirty option but it isn't very satisfying IMO. I would only bother with armour damage when the PCs are involved in frequent fighting and don't have access to armoury services for extended periods of time - such as when exploring a dungeon or when in the middle of a military campaign. For the rest of the time I would just rule that the Cost of Living expenses includes keeping your armour maintained.

[Kuroshima]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

As Matt said, there are armour damage riules in Companion 2, but all of the options examined in the Low-Tech playtest involve an annoying level of book-keeping. We did include a Quick and Dirty option but it isn't very satisfying IMO. I would only bother with armour damage when the PCs are involved in frequent fighting and don't have access to armoury services for extended periods of time - such as when exploring a dungeon or when in the middle of a military campaign. For the rest of the time I would just rule that the Cost of Living expenses includes keeping your armour maintained.

If it's the option that appeared in the initial manuscript, then yeah, it isn't the most satisfying of them, but it required rather less bookkeeping than the others. Now I would only use it in a grim and gritty military campaign, since I feel that DF usually goes for quick and dirty rules. Now, I use damage to shields rules even in DF, and I'll probably add damage to armors...

[DanHoward]

I wasn't thinking of DF. Plenty of my campaigns involved the party exploring a "dungeon"* for extended periods of time. If they were involved in frequent combat then I would use armour and weapon damage just as I would keep record of their arrows, food, and light sources. Most of the time I don't bother with this level of detail since they would have ready access to supplies and services.

* mine complex, catacombs, ruined fortress, derelict spaceship, etc.

[Psychotime]

I'm actually surprised that there aren't any official rules on something like that (not that I'd use them). I mean...GURPS has a reputation to keep.

[demonsbane]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

I wasn't thinking of DF. Plenty of my campaigns involved the party exploring a "dungeon"* for extended periods of time. If they were involved in frequent combat then I would use armour and weapon damage just as I would keep record of their arrows, food, and light sources. Most of the time I don't bother with this level of detail since they would have ready access to supplies and services.

* mine complex, catacombs, ruined fortress, derelict spaceship, etc.

Very true, dungeons aren't by no means exclusive of Dungeon Fantasy!

(However, I believe Kuroshima was merely speaking from the point of view of one of his current campaigns and gaming mood.)

Originally Posted by Psychotime

I'm actually surprised that there aren't any official rules on something like that (not that I'd use them). I mean...GURPS has a reputation to keep.

I agree. And I would be up for a GURPS Basic Set with about 1000+ pages or more. . . These rules on armor damage are going to be very appreciated. They were expected.

Originally Posted by Kuroshima

(...) Now, I use damage to shields rules even in DF, and I'll probably add damage to armors...

I agree very much with that. It can contribute to enhance the game experience.

[Gudiomen]

It's not that there weren't rules for armor damage to this day, there were. I believe they were in Compendium II 3rd edition, but I'm a little lazy to dig it up, and I might be misremembering from all the discussions and house-rules that were flying about at the end of 3e.

It's more the fact that, like Dan said, they're not very satisfactory, and when they are they become (I assume) too crunchy and annoying to book-keep. I myself never liked the rules, although the simulator in me aches for armor that degrades, all the options examined up to now are more annoying than satisfactory, they leave a bad taste in your mouth or bog up your game.

It's quite possible that this was deemed too specific for Basic, while at the same time unsatisfactory and a possible obstacle for Fun. And Fun beats Realism in 4e. I can't speak for the game-developers and editors though, but the rules for it aren't new.

This is one area in which, in the absence of good rules, I prefer to eyeball things as the GM.

[panton41]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

As Matt said, there are armour damage riules in Companion 2, but all of the options examined in the Low-Tech playtest involve an annoying level of book-keeping. We did include a Quick and Dirty option but it isn't very satisfying IMO. I would only bother with armour damage when the PCs are involved in frequent fighting and don't have access to armoury services for extended periods of time - such as when exploring a dungeon or when in the middle of a military campaign. For the rest of the time I would just rule that the Cost of Living expenses includes keeping your armour maintained.

I know they're written for Low Tech, but how might these scale to High- or Ultra-Tech or does that idea give you a migraine to consider? (I seem to recall HT suggesting to treat bullet resistant armors as semi-ablative to simulate how they lose effectiveness after a few hits.)