Revised Armors

[Demivrgvs]

Now, those who are following this endless project a little more closely probably already know that after introducing 'encumberance penalty for heavy armors' the other aspect I always wanted to introduce was the different effectiveness of weapon types against armors as we discussed here.

 

What's changed? That I've ultimately realized that we shouldn't use physical damage resistance but re-organize the "hidden AC bonuses". Physical resistance would be more appropriate, but within BG engine and rules the "hidden AC bonuses" solution is better.

 

Why? Because stacking 'physical resistance bonuses' from different sources are a serious threat to game balance, especially because of Hardiness HLA (but it's not limited to this).

 

To summarize:

- slashing weapons can inflict deep and critical wounds against unarmored opponents but are much less effective against heavy armors

- blunt weapons are heavy, slow to swing and deal less damage than slashing ones (with higher min dmg though), but they are the most effective weapons against armored opponents (heavy ones in particular)

- piercing weapons are more or less "in the middle", being the fastest ones, with decent dmg potential (low min dmg, but mid-high max dmg) and good effectiveness against armors

 

Thus to implement this I'm going to slightly re-revise weapon base statistics as I mentioned here, and then change the following table:

 

Armor Class vs. Weapon Types (current behaviour)

Armor	Slashing	Piercing	Bludgeoning	Missile
Leather	0	+2	0	+2
Studded Leather	-2	-1	0	-1
Hide Armor	0	+2	0	+2
Chain Mail	-2	0	+2	0
Splint Mail	0	-1	-2	-1
Plate Mail	-3	0	0	0
Full Plate	-4	-3	0	-3

Into something like this:

 

Armor Class vs. Weapon Types (proposed change)

Armor	Slashing	Piercing	Bludgeoning	Missile
Leather	0	+1	-1	+1
Studded Leather	-2	-1	+1	-1
Hide Armor	0	+1	-1	+1
Chain Mail	-2	-1	+1	-1
Splint Mail	-1	0	-2	0
Plate Mail	-2	-1	0	-1
Full Plate	-3	-2	0	-2

 

I'm open to discuss this table and I've already few things to ask:

- are there any particularly clear exceptions to the "main rule"? For example it's well known that chain mails are much less effective against crushing weapons.

- full plate had and still has much more "hidden bonuses", but I'm not sure about it. Its base AC is already 2 points better than plate mail, isn't that alone enough?

[Ardanis]

Leather

I'd keep the piercing penalty as per vanilla. Thin piece of hide can't possibly stop a sharpened pole or arrow (heck, as we all know even a plate couldn't slow down a missile fired by english long bow).

 

Plates

Again, vanilla values are imo better.

[Demivrgvs]

Leather

I'd keep the piercing penalty as per vanilla. Thin piece of hide can't possibly stop a sharpened pole or arrow (heck, as we all know even a plate couldn't slow down a missile fired by english long bow).

Mmm fine, but I'd use a +1 penalty instead of +2. Even with a mere +1 penalty Leather armor would be 3 points worse than Studded Leather against piercing/missile weapons.

 

Hide Armor needs to be better than studded one though, thus even following your suggestion I'd either keep my suggested solution or a -2/0/0/0. What do you think?

 

 

Plates

Again, vanilla values are imo better.

Plate Mail or Full Plate? The former may get the same bonuses of the latter...while a -4 penalty for Full Plate seems really too much, and makes slashing weapons hugely disadvantaged considering they only deal +1 damage on average.

 

Keep in mind that these bonuses are on top of base AC, thus a Full Plate with -3 bonus already is way better than any other armor against slashing/piercing weapons.

[Jarno Mikkola]

Plates

Again, vanilla values are imo better.

Plate Mail or Full Plate?

Well, if you allow me to be the inturberer, it clearly says that the vanilla values in his oppinion are better, for both plate mail and full plate mail. Not to mention that if you insist to put the dex penalty to the armors, we'll loose a lot there already, plus there was a +5 plate armor, but only +3 full plate, if we do not count the Drow equipment that disintegrates eventually anyway.

 

Leather, ahh, you make my Bracers of AC 9 totally useless.

[Demivrgvs]

Plates

...if you insist to put the dex penalty to the armors, we'll loose a lot there already, plus there was a +5 plate armor, but only +3 full plate, if we do not count the Drow equipment that disintegrates eventually anyway.

Ehh?

 

Even with dexterity penalties heavy armors within IR are more powerful than ever, without them they're simply overpowered.

 

Then I don't know what you're trying to say about plate and full plate enchantments:

- there was no decent plate +5 (best one was Gorgon +4, and the only +5 was cursed and pointless), but with IR you have a powerful +4 specimen and two +5 plates

- you had only few full plates +3 in vanilla (one at the very end of the game), while IR has two +4 specimen and a +5 one

- IR also adds a lot of secondary effects to almost all armors on top of base enchantment

 

What was your point?

 

Leather, ahh, you make my Bracers of AC 9 totally useless.

There are no such bracers in the game. And if they existed what would be the problem?

[Jarno Mikkola]

What was your point?

The Dex penalty...

Shuruppak's Plate +5

...

Dexterity Penalty: 5%

 

Blue Dragonplate Armor +5

...

Dexterity Penalty: 15%

And my chars usually has 18 in dex, so... 18 * 0.95 = 17.1(+3), while 18 * 0.85 = 15.3(+1), making the AC exactly same.

Usually you should get better AC, if you put more money between yourself and the harm. Let's remember that making a full plate should cost out more than a plate mail, especially if they are enchanted in the same way(same + bonus ).

Of course it would be different if someone would make an effort and adjust this file, and extended greater Dex penalties, for more realism, along the lines of the 3ed.

But as it stands...

 

Leather, ahh, you make my Bracers of AC 9 totally useless.

There are no such bracers in the game. And if they existed what would be the problem?

Well the concept of the item is that they cost more(*20) but provide more protection than leather armor from piercing attacks.

And I said mine, the mod is not out, and might take a while yet, but it will make the items appear in both parts of the BGT, and also in Tutu's.

[yarpen]

- Studded leather is also very soft, so it doesn't provide any defence against bludgeoning weapons. Chainmails and studded leathers are the worst one against them. Maybe +2 penalty?

- Splint/plate mails and hide armor are the only one really effective type of armor against bludgeoning weapons. I think you should grant to them -1 bonus. Or even -2. Even leather armor (it isn't you know, soft but it's hardened) should grant one.

- The best weapon against plate mails was... piercing one. Daggers and spears allowed to pierce trought plate, maybe you know a weapon called misericordia? It's heavy stilleto which was used to kill knights who were suffering thanks to damages from crushed plates which were pushing their internal organs.

 

Damn I could re-organise my opinion a bit.

[Demivrgvs]

Usually you should get better AC, if you put more money between yourself and the harm. Let's remember that making a full plate should cost out more than a plate mail, especially if they are enchanted in the same way(same + bonus ).

You're a little unfair because you're not comparing a plate mail with a full plate, but a mithral plate with a full plate! And even in your case the hidden AC bonuses make full plate slightly better!!!!

 

I've explained this more times than I can count: even with dexterity penalties a character with dexterity 18 in full plate has better AC than in plate mail!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

P.S when you have tons of enchantments the base price of the non-enchanted item makes very little difference, but still I'm taking that into account for a particular case like full plate.

 

 

Leather, ahh, you make my Bracers of AC 9 totally useless.

There are no such bracers in the game. And if they existed what would be the problem?

Well the concept of the item is that they cost more(*20) but provide more protection than leather armor from piercing attacks.

I though the concept was to grant a base AC bonus to characters who can't use armors (who else has ever used them??!?), IR also makes them slightly more appealing for some characters because armors cause hide/move silently penalties, and add few unique specimen with additional enchantments.

 

 

And I said mine, the mod is not out, and might take a while yet, but it will make the items appear in both parts of the BGT, and also in Tutu's.

No offense but if I had to take into account every single custom item made by players/modders, or not even made yet, my work would be litterally impossible.

 

 

Yarpen, I need some time to elaborate your post.

[Jarno Mikkola]

Daggers and spears allowed to pierce trought plate, maybe you know a weapon called misericordia? It's heavy stilleto which was used to kill knights who were suffering thanks to damages from crushed plates which were pushing their internal organs.

Misericorde ? Wiki, google image...

 

You're a little unfair because you're not comparing a plate mail with a full plate, but a mithral plate with a full plate! And even in your case the hidden AC bonuses make full plate slightly better!!!!

Yeah, with a total of a +1. Yeah, I am comparing a mithral armor to an armor that's made from a hide of a creature that has AC -12, let's not forget that.

As you should realize, with the dex penalties, the only thing better in the full plate armor, is the hidden AC bonuses.

 

PS. I had hopped Demivrgvs wouldn't get angry... please don't get yourself too much worked out of this, it's always up to you what you decide. And I still respect you no matter what you decide. As if that would matter.

[yarpen]

I've explained this more times than I can count: even with dexterity penalties a character with dexterity 18 in full plate has better AC than in plate mail!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There are two solutions.

1) My fancy-cool-oh-yeah-boogie armor revision which will not work on BG2 but suits well non-magical total conversions. Armors are increasing damage resistance, you're lowering your AC thanks to Dexterity, wizardry and protection gear (belts, helmets, bracers, shields).

2) Make armours work like in 3rd edition. For example, max dexterity score with full plate mail is 10. If your character's dexterity is bigger than that, you're lowering it to this point (a lot of .eff and a lot of problems with items which are increasing dexterity).

Both of them sucks. We know that, right?

 

No offense but if I had to take into account every single custom item made by players/modders, or not even made yet, my work would be litterally impossible.

We know that Demi, but still there are some mods which needs your attention. I think that: SCS, RR, BG1TuTu, BGT and BG1 NPC Project could be those. That's your decision, still. You're the boss here

[Demivrgvs]

One thing I'd like to point out: if an armor has -2 bonus to AC vs. slashing weapons and no bonus vs. crushing ones, it's the same as saying that it has a +2 penalty vs. crushing weapons and works well against slashing ones. I know it's obvious but sometimes it doesn't seem to me you're taking it into account.

 

- Studded leather is also very soft, so it doesn't provide any defence against bludgeoning weapons. Chainmails and studded leathers are the worst one against them. Maybe +2 penalty?

As stated above, a +2 penalty is really too much imo.

 

Having an armor use a -2 bonus vs. slashing weapons and +2 penalty vs. crushing ones is a net +4 to hit bonus for blunt weapons, which in turn have only 1 point less of damage on average (and slower speed factor in v3).

 

Unless we make crushing weapons deal a lot less damage, their advantages against armors should be noticeable but not huge.

 

- Splint/plate mails and hide armor are the only one really effective type of armor against bludgeoning weapons. I think you should grant to them -1 bonus. Or even -2. Even leather armor (it isn't you know, soft but it's hardened) should grant one.

Again, having no penality means being effective, but if we want to emphasize this aspect I'd use no more than 1 point of bonus.

 

If you have solid bases to think hide armors would protect better than chain mails from crushing weapons than we should either use +2 penalty vs. blunt for chain mail or -1 bonus for hide armors, but I'd opt for the latter as you're suggesting.

 

Splint mails were good yes, they may get -1 bonus as you say.

 

I'm not sure regarding plate mails (which I consider half plate armors) being very effective against blunt weapons. Actually I know maces were very effective against them.

 

 

- The best weapon against plate mails was... piercing one. Daggers and spears allowed to pierce trought plate, maybe you know a weapon called misericordia? It's heavy stilleto which was used to kill knights who were suffering thanks to damages from crushed plates which were pushing their internal organs.

You even use its Italian name!

 

Yeah, I mentioned myself before that daggers and especially stilettos were very effective against almost any type of armor, but not in a one-on-one duel imo (unless we're talking about a highly trained/skilled assassin ). This actually brings up a strange idea I had few time ago, granting daggers a base +1 to hit rolls (like I did with xbows).

 

Regarding spears and halberds being good against heavy armors you're right (and they deal more damage than blunt weapons) but I'm not sure they should be better than crushing weapons.

 

 

Dexterity Penalties

As you should realize, with the dex penalties, the only thing better in the full plate armor, is the hidden AC bonuses.

You should instead realize that:

- comparing a mithral armor to another made of iron is like comparing apples with pears

- the dragon's AC is also determined by the thickness of his skin, and it may also have more layers of scales. An armor made of such scales isn't necessarily as thick as the beast's carapace

 

Then you're using a character with incredibly high dexterity in your comparison, and such characters are obviously "disadvantaged" in an encumbering heavy armor. Do you think a duelist-like warrior could jump here and there and fight acrobatically in a full plate?!?

 

Make the comparison between plate and full plate with a roleplaying character like Anomen, Keldorn, Korgan, or Minsc (not your 18 in every stat semi-god) and you'll notice that full plate is not slightly better, but hugely better!!!

 

 

Alternative Solutions

1) My fancy-cool-oh-yeah-boogie armor revision which will not work on BG2 but suits well non-magical total conversions. Armors are increasing damage resistance, you're lowering your AC thanks to Dexterity, wizardry and protection gear (belts, helmets, bracers, shields).

2) Make armours work like in 3rd edition. For example, max dexterity score with full plate mail is 10. If your character's dexterity is bigger than that, you're lowering it to this point (a lot of .eff and a lot of problems with items which are increasing dexterity).

Both of them sucks. We know that, right?

Yeah we do, and 2) is not even doable. My current solution is the closest thing to 2) I could implement with this engine and rules.

 

 

Mod-added items

No offense but if I had to take into account every single custom item made by players/modders, or not even made yet, my work would be litterally impossible.

We know that Demi, but still there are some mods which needs your attention. I think that: SCS, RR, BG1TuTu, BGT and BG1 NPC Project could be those. That's your decision, still. You're the boss here

I'm sure you know I take SCS and RR into account as much as I can. If there are things I need to take into account from mods as important as TuTu or BG1 NPC Project I'm surely open to work on that.

 

That being said, I'm actually open to take into account as many mods as possible (and Mike's patching components greatly help to handle that), I'm just saying I can't take into account everything.

[yarpen]

Uhm, wrote something...

 

Slashing weapons

Slashing weapons should be usually dealing the most amount of damage to enemies, especially non-armoured. You can easily slice trough non-armoured enemy, behead him and even random hit has great probability of cutting thorugh important veins or lethal organs. But slashing weapons are loosing their advantage when you're meeting more armoured enemies - chainmail provides proper defence against them, and heavy armours such a scale or plate ones are best at protecting against slashing weapons.

 

In summary:

- greatest amount of damage especially against non-armoured

- non-effective against heavy-armoured characters

 

Piercing weapons

In piecing weapons it's lethal value is usually centered in small point which makes it harder to masacrre enemies as when using slashing weapons. But the fact that you can focus all of your strenght on small point allows you to go trough even hardest defense. As I mentioned earlier, misericorde was great to finish off incapacited plate-bearing knights, spears were used against most heavy armoured cavailers.

 

In summary:

- small outcome damage; very low minimum damage

- best against heavy armours (don't get penalties as blunt/slashing weapons)

 

Bludgeoning weapons

You know that by most of weapons specialists axe is known as bludgeoning weapon? If you don't sharpen it? Mhm, whatever. So bludgeoning weapons aren't dealing the biggest damage (exception of Flail which was effective as damn hell, just check information about Hus's Czech Revolution and Tabor - most elite european knights couldn't fight against [sorry for that] group of peasants who just loved to smash skulls using flails) but when it hits, it's for sure. This group of weapons should've got very high "minimum damage" outcome so instead of 1d6, it should be something 4-6 damage. What about effectivness against some types of armour - it's usually very good but: flexible armors such as studded leather or chainmail grants near-to-nothing protection against hammers and maces, when heavy ones are the only which makes it quite a decent one.

 

In summary:

- high minimum damage value

- low outcome damage

- best against non-flexxible armors

[Demivrgvs]

Uhm, wrote something...

Nice post.

 

Slashing weapons

Slashing weapons should be usually dealing the most amount of damage to enemies, especially non-armoured. You can easily slice trough non-armoured enemy, behead him and even random hit has great probability of cutting thorugh important veins or lethal organs. But slashing weapons are loosing their advantage when you're meeting more armoured enemies - chainmail provides proper defence against them, and heavy armours such a scale or plate ones are best at protecting against slashing weapons.

 

In summary:

- greatest amount of damage especially against non-armoured

- non-effective against heavy-armoured characters

I think that is more or less well covered, isn't it?

 

Piercing weapons

In piecing weapons it's lethal value is usually centered in small point which makes it harder to masacrre enemies as when using slashing weapons. But the fact that you can focus all of your strenght on small point allows you to go trough even hardest defense. As I mentioned earlier, misericorde was great to finish off incapacited plate-bearing knights, spears were used against most heavy armoured cavailers.

 

In summary:

- small outcome damage; very low minimum damage

- best against heavy armours (don't get penalties as blunt/slashing weapons)

In this case:

- damage outputs seem fine as even two handed weapons like spear and halberd deal as much damage as most one handed slashing ones, and all of them use 1dx damage rolls

- this is instead something to discuss.

 

Crushing weapons are by far the best ones against armored opponents in vanilla, but if I think how effective medieval polearms were against armors (e.g. halberds and voulges) you are probably right about them.

 

This would require noticeable changes in the table I suggested.

 

Bludgeoning weapons

You know that by most of weapons specialists axe is known as bludgeoning weapon? If you don't sharpen it? Mhm, whatever. So bludgeoning weapons aren't dealing the biggest damage (exception of Flail which was effective as damn hell, just check information about Hus's Czech Revolution and Tabor - most elite european knights couldn't fight against [sorry for that] group of peasants who just loved to smash skulls using flails) but when it hits, it's for sure. This group of weapons should've got very high "minimum damage" outcome so instead of 1d6, it should be something 4-6 damage. What about effectivness against some types of armour - it's usually very good but: flexible armors such as studded leather or chainmail grants near-to-nothing protection against hammers and maces, when heavy ones are the only which makes it quite a decent one.

 

In summary:

- high minimum damage value

- low outcome damage

- best against non-flexxible armors

- most vanilla's weapons of this type use a 1dX +1 value which doubles the minimum damage

- I think this is a point where we should intervene as morningstars and maces deal as much damage as "equivalent" slashing weapons. My suggested solution for flail is still 2d4, hammer are probably fine as per vanilla/AD&D, while club may instead become 2d2 if we think it's better.

- thus it should rock against leather armor, chain mail, and...?

[yarpen]

I think that is more or less well covered, isn't it?

Yup, with exception of Axe. What do you think about this weapon? It currently deals exactly the same amount of damage as Long sword which sucks. There'd be a cool feature if long sword got bonuses from Dexterity instead of Strenght but it's as far as I know impossible to do.

 

Damage outputs seem fine as even two handed weapons like spear and halberd deal as much damage as most one handed slashing ones, and all of them use 1dx damage rolls

Yeah, but I think that Halberd should deal the same amount of piercing damage as Spear (and even then have higher attack speed factor value because of "useless-in-this-moment" blade) but as you can see now feature of changing weapon's damage can be quite usefull because when you're fighting against unarmored enemies you can slash them and when there are some platemail tough guys, you're changing into piercing mode. Cool.

 

Crushing weapons are by far the best ones against armored opponents in vanilla, but if I think how effective medieval polearms were against armors (e.g. halberds and voulges) you are probably right about them.

Crushing weapons should be "quite good" against every type of armour (with exception of leather/chainmail), they are in this group of "something between".

 

I think this is a point where we should intervene as morningstars and maces deal as much damage as "equivalent" slashing weapons. My suggested solution for flail is still 2d4, hammer are probably fine as per vanilla/AD&D, while club may instead become 2d2 if we think it's better.

My opinion for bludgeoning damage

Mace: 1D6 +1

Morningstar: 1D6 +(1D2 piercing damage)

Hammer: 1D4+1

Flail: 2D3 +(1 piercing)

Club: 1D4 (don't like the idea of 2D2, it looks ridicolous!)

Staff: 1D6

 

Still I cannot see how staff deals more damage than hammer.

 

It's nice that you liked my post

[yarpen]

After few minutes of thinking about this problem, my version of table.

 

Armor Slashing Piercing Blunt Missle

Leather 0 +1 -1 +1

Studded -1 0 +1 0

Hide -1 0 -2 0

 

Chainmail -1 -1 +2 -1

Splintmail -1 +2 -1 -1

 

Platemail -2 +1 -2 0

Full plate -2 0 -2 0