|
I have been working on something similar to this for a while, though not explicitly in d20 terms.
Armor is split into 2 stats:
Coverage: the amount of the body covered, or the chance the armor will get hit, and not the occupant
Resistance: the amount of damage from an individual attack that armor absorbs
---
To be complete this system requires a slightly different notation of AC.
Base/Shield/Armor
Base is the current touch AC. If the attack roll exceeds your Base AC you are getting hit somewhere.
Shield is your Base AC, + your shield's coverage. If the attack roll exceeds your base, but does not exceed your Shield AC, you are hit in the shield
Armor is your shield AC + your armor's coverage. If the attack roll exceeds your shield AC, but not your armor AC, you are hit in the armor. If the attack roll exceeds your armor AC, you are hit in the squishy meaty parts.
If you are hit in the shield, the full DR of your shield, the full DR of your armor and the DR of your body, if applicable all apply
Hit in the armor, you get armor and body DR
hit in the body, you yell "ow" like a sissy girl, and hope you have DR
---
Determining DR is a function of material. A steel breastplate absorbs the same damage as a full suit of steal plate, assuming you aren't hit in the arm.
---
The system would allow piece work armor, with a steel breast plate, chain sleeves and skirt, with leather bracers and boots.
No numbers yet, but they are coming.
Thoughts?
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I have been working on something similar to this for a while, though not explicitly in d20 terms.
Do you plan on coupling this idea with a 'hit location table' ala Battletech to determine where an attack hits on the body? You could do a simple 1d6 system like so:
1 - Torso
2 - Left arm
3 - Right arm
4 - Left leg
5 - Right leg
6 - Head
Although, since realism seems to be your goal, perhaps you should scale the hit location chart to reflect the various size of the targets in question. For this, we'll use a d12.
1-3: Torso
4-5: Left arm
6-7: Right arm
8-9: Left leg
10-11: Right leg
12: Head
Then, you can look at what type of armor is located on that part of the body, if any (since you mentioned piece-work armor), and apply the appropriate DR.
This adds another roll and more complication to the combat system, however, and combat tends to bog the game down enough already. Figuring out a way to adjust armor check penalties, movement speeds, and various other factors based on 'partial' armors might also be a headache. At higher levels, I think this might be a nightmare, but if your players are all for it, then I say do it.
One house rule that I saw before incorporated a very unique system for shield use: Miss chance. A buckler gave any incoming attack that the wearer was aware of a 10% miss chance. Light shields gave 15%, heavy shields gave 20%, and tower shields gave a 30% miss chance (they could also be used as cover, which translated to 100% miss chance). This miss chance was reduced by 10% if the defender was flat-footed against the attack. The miss chance was in addition to miss chances for darkness but, again, if it was sufficiently dark that the defender couldn't see the attacks coming, then his miss chance bonus from the shield was reduced. I didn't play with these rules long enough to see if they were unbalancing or not, but I thought it was very original. Naturally, the miss chance only applied against physical attacks (melee and ranged).
Additionally, if the shield's miss chance was successful, the attacker would still deal normal damage... to the shield. This made magical (and particularly adamantine) shields highly sought-after because, otherwise, shields got destroyed pretty regularly. As per the normal rules for sundering, piercing damage was halved against the shield (which made tower shields very useful against arrows).
Armor is split into 2 stats:
Coverage: ...
Resistance: ...
Now, I know you're using DR as opposed to armor HP, but it's still sounding suspiciously like Palladium's method, using AR (number to bypass armor) and SDC (armor HP).
I don't know that this really improves the quality of play; it adds a level of complexity to armor that I'm not all that happy with. Of course, this is just my personal preference, and other folks might prefer it.
Also, from what I understand 4e is going to an "Armor as DR" standard, and possibly giving the classes a defense bonus, entirely seperating armor from the mechanic of how hard it is to hit you, and making it responsible for how hard it is to damage you.
I like this latter idea because we can see a couple of statistics Go Away, like touch AC and Natural Armor bonuses. Instead, we'll see the defense bonus take over AC entirely, leaving us with AC, and /possibly/ flat footed AC (which only discounts dex, insight, and dodge bonuses). And, we'll see creatures that would have sported high AC from natural armor instead sport DR to represent their thick hides.
Hmmm. Looks like my house rules might see a couple of additions...
|
|
It is similar to the palladium system, as well as the armor as DR system from UA.
If you are hit in the armor, and it does more damage then the DR of the armor, your armor takes 1 point of damage. This doesn't alter the damage you take.
Even the finest armor will eventually be damaged and need to be repaired.
As for locations, my current thought is to avoid it, and use "averages". A plate breastplate will have low coverage but good DR. A plate breastplate with leather sleeves and skirt will have better coverage, but less DR.
As an option, location could be used but the table would be crappy, since one person could be wearing full armor, and the bikini clad swordsmith model wearing just a leather bracer, and each would need a completly different table.