Invisible Helmets and Shots to the Eye

[WhiteLily]

Dungeon Fantasy Magic Items P. 47 gives us "Invisibility...By the piece: The enchantment makes the individual piece (helmet, single glove, breastplate, etc.) making it invisible."

In my game, the majority of kills are from shots to the eye. So I think a helmet featuring a full, invisible faceplate would be something a BBEG would routinely commission.

The armor table on Adventurers P.109 gives the Heavy Plate helmet as 6 pounds plus an optional 2.4 for the (Full Face) and gives DR 7.

Therefore, shots to the eye would still be allowed as they could be seen through the invisible faceplate, but the eyes would now have DR 7.

Adventurers P.109 says that you can still get to the eyes by targetting chinks in the armor at -10, but I'm assuming this would not be the case if the armor was invisible?

[Stormcrow]

You can't target chinks if you can't see them.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by WhiteLily

Adventurers P.109 says that you can still get to the eyes by targetting chinks in the armor at -10, but I'm assuming this would not be the case if the armor was invisible?

Yah. That assumes eyeslits or the equivalent opening. A magically transparent face shield has no gaps or chinks to target. Your ruling that "sure, you can shoot there, but it faces DR 7" is solid.

[Imbicatus]

Targeting the eye through chinks in armor in a solid full face helm with no eyeslits would mean going up from under the chin past a gorget, and would be really impossible for a straight non-flexible weapon. As Doug said, you can shoot there but have to overcome DR 7, unless there is magic like steelwraith in play.

[Harald387]

From a practical standpoint, a full-face helm that offers no eyeslits or other chinks would also be really unpleasant to breathe in, but I don't know that it would be much more unpleasant than any other full-face helm - I think worrying about that detail is below the resolution of the rules.

(If the way my glasses fog up in this age of masks and COVID is any indication, it might be harder to see in, too, but again - probably below the resolution of GURPS rules.)

That said, such a helmet is vulnerable to negation effects and low-mana zones - the wearer will be blind if something turns off their magic item!

[Dalin]

Originally Posted by Harald387

From a practical standpoint, a full-face helm that offers no eyeslits or other chinks would also be really unpleasant to breathe in, but I don't know that it would be much more unpleasant than any other full-face helm - I think worrying about that detail is below the resolution of the rules.

I wonder if there could be perforations in safe places that would help with airflow.

Originally Posted by Harald387

(If the way my glasses fog up in this age of masks and COVID is any indication, it might be harder to see in, too, but again - probably below the resolution of GURPS rules.)

A handwavy way to get around this might be to say that the condensation becomes invisible too.

Originally Posted by Harald387

That said, such a helmet is vulnerable to negation effects and low-mana zones - the wearer will be blind if something turns off their magic item!

I wonder if dwarf smiths or gnome tinkerers have come up with complex helms with face plates, eye covers, and whatnot. Invisible normally, but can be used as a regular helm in a pinch.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Harald387

From a practical standpoint, a full-face helm that offers no eyeslits or other chinks would also be really unpleasant to breathe in, but I don't know that it would be much more unpleasant than any other full-face helm - I think worrying about that detail is below the resolution of the rules.

We have plenty of real world examples of transparent faceplates (they're plastic or glass, not invisible steel, but that shouldn't make any difference to the design). None of them have holes in front of the eyes, though they may have holes in other places.

[ArchonShiva]

Conceivably, every piece of armor has better and worse angles to hit it from, and the "half DR" chink rule could be used to represent this even if the piece has no actual holes.

In that case, because the helmet is invisible, you can't see those. But someone making an armory roll to determine what angle to hit the invisible helmet at would be most likely to halve DR? That sounds way more interesting than "You can't."

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by ArchonShiva

In that case, because the helmet is invisible, you can't see those. But someone making an armory roll to determine what angle to hit the invisible helmet at would be most likely to halve DR? That sounds way more interesting than "You can't."

You can probably do it at the normal -6 penalty for attacking an invisible target.

An interesting quirk about invisible helmets: they're a problem when fighting invisible enemies, because if you cast See Invisible to see the invisible enemy, your helmet is now blinding you...

[Dalin]

Originally Posted by Anthony

An interesting quirk about invisible helmets: they're a problem when fighting invisible enemies, because if you cast See Invisible to see the invisible enemy, your helmet is now blinding you...

That's hilarious. I want that to happen in a game now. (Though I've never really had anyone with an invisible helmet yet.)