|
|
|
#35 |
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
|
Yeah I get it. Already appended last post.
Does the rule I proposed in the first post address the issue? I'm looking for a simple rule that models the increased capacity of unpadded helmets to incapacitate the wearer without inflicting additional damage to the wearer. The additional damage is already covered by not having DR 1 padding If a DR 6 padded helmet is hit with 6 points of damage then the wearer suffers no harm. Take out the padding (helmet now has DR 5) and that 6 damage will cause 1 HP of injury and cause a roll for stunning. A 5 point hit will not cause HP loss but he still rolls for stunning. Or should no paddding be worse than this? Should there be a roll for stunning every time the helmet is hit regardless of its DR? This means that the chances of a stun are the same as if he wasn't wearing a helmet at all. Or maybe you roll for stunning if the damage is more than half the total DR. It seems that the skull's DR should count since you only roll for stunning if the damage is enough to cause a shock penalty. Last edited by DanHoward; 07-10-2011 at 05:48 PM. |
|
|
|
| Tags |
| armor, low-tech |
|
|