Revised Armors

[Ardanis]

Did you use a sharpened axe, when testing it against different surfaces?

[yarpen]

Yup. ^^ And I've did it using circular saw so it wasn't bad.

[Jarno Mikkola]

But technically the circular saw, alike all saws are curring tools, a principle that relies on sharp points that all shear(remove) small or large chips. So, they remove the cut-ed material, where a true slashing tool pushes it aside while traveling across the surface that's being cut/opened.

[Shaitan]

A sharp axe swung towards the neck will cut through just like a sword. It's a discussion of the Pope's beard.

[Jarno Mikkola]

A sharp axe swung towards the neck will cut through just like a sword. It's a discussion of the Pope's beard.

What's this 'sharp axe', you probably mean a shapened battle axe, which is weapon that has sharper larger/longer blade than the tool used to chop wood. And if you read this, the double-bitted axes is largelly fictional weapon. It's probably so because the second blade is extreamly hard make so that the weapon can be balanced, and the hardness is kept in check(so you can swing with it the second time without having it already broken).

And you can also decapate a human with a rope that has no edge at all, but...

 

Erhm, yarpen probably talks about a grinding machine... not a saw.

[yarpen]

But technically the circular saw, alike all saws are curring tools, a principle that relies on sharp points that all shear(remove) small or large chips.

I was using circular saw only to sharpen axe.

 

A sharp axe swung towards the neck will cut through just like a sword. It's a discussion of the Pope's beard.

Well, it's gonna look like it. But it works more like ripping this head off.

[Ardanis]

I think you hadn't sharpened your axes enough, then. Or you're confusing them with slicing weapons like sabre, which is not slashing.

 

A slashing weapon is to wedge itself in as deep as possible, whereas slicing in fact, well, slices things off - like bread with a knife.

[yarpen]

Well, I'm not sure if even best axe could cut trough plate and go straight to flesh. It could decompose platemail to moment when it doesn't grant any protection anymore and then just slash. Slash very deeply and hard. But well, we're talking about magical axes and stuff, so I'm not so sure anymore.

[Ardanis]

Well, I'm not sure if even best axe could cut trough plate and go straight to flesh.

Ever heard about bulat or damascus steel?

PS And knowing that axe is a primary weapon of dwarves, known to be the best smiths, it would be natural for them to know smithing techniques similar to damascus.

[Dakk]

While reading Ardanis thread about Weapon Changes, and your post

afaik piercing dmg is always better than slashing dmg

I thought you were probably mostly right but decided to check here also. One thing struck me though, your table in the first post (proposed changes) was never updated to reflect changes discussed - and somewhat agreed on - in the thread? Maybe another table if nothing else; "proposed changes - for discussion"

In all seriousness I think there are changes to FPM, hide and splint that could be mulled over, and it'd probably help to have them in a table so it's easy to see the relative values.

[Demivrgvs]

While reading Ardanis thread about Weapon Changes, and your post

afaik piercing dmg is always better than slashing dmg

I thought you were probably mostly right but decided to check here also. One thing struck me though, your table in the first post (proposed changes) was never updated to reflect changes discussed - and somewhat agreed on - in the thread? Maybe another table if nothing else; "proposed changes - for discussion"

In all seriousness I think there are changes to FPM, hide and splint that could be mulled over, and it'd probably help to have them in a table so it's easy to see the relative values.

I thought I did, but after reading everything again I have to admit the discussion actually leads to much more changes I seem to have left out.

 

The obvious changes are:

* hide armor gets -1 bonus vs bludgeoning

* splint armor gets -1 bonus vs bludgeoning

 

The not so obvious but probably right changes are:

* leather armor gets -1 bonus vs bludgeoning

* hide armor gets -1 bonus instead of -2 vs slashing

* hide armor doesn't get -1 bonus vs piercing/missile

* studded leather gets +1 penalty vs bludgeoning

* splint armor gets -1 bonus instead of -2 vs slashing

 

I don't know instead which changes should be made to full plates, they seem fine as they are. I'll update the first post as soon as we agree on the above mentioned list.

 

P.S Regarding halberds though the whole "piercing is always better than slashing" thing remains true. Otoh, making morningstars deal crushing et piercing dmg as per 3E table could be interesting as with the proposed table piercing weapons are going to be better than crushing ones vs leather, hide and splint armors.

[Dakk]

I like all the changes.

One question though, with the combined changes to Splint it would have -1 in all areas (e.g one better AC overall), is that a problem?

 

with the proposed table piercing weapons are going to be better than crushing ones vs leather, hide and splint armors.

Cool!

 

EDIT: Not remembering the DEX-penalty and so forth for the Full Plate ("FPA"), I'd consider restoring the -4 vs. Slashing on it.

[Demivrgvs]

I like all the changes.

One question though, with the combined changes to Splint it would have -1 in all areas (e.g one better AC overall), is that a problem?

Mmm...let's see:

* removing the -1 from slashing would make it worse than chain mail vs slashing weapons. Chain mail is indeed very effective vs slashing weapons, but I'm not sure about it being better than splint armor, that's why I've made them equal. Not to mention chain mail gets even better with DEX modifiers as it potentially has 1 point bonus to all from it compared to splint armors. I think this should stay.

* removing the -1 from piercing could make sense. Yarpen seemed really convinced about piercing weapons being uber effective against splint armors (he even suggested a +2 penalty).

* increasing its bonus vs crushing weapons to -2 is fine conceptually, but it could be too much imo. It would be a net 4 points bonus compared to chain mail (3 is enough imo), and it would make them surpass plate mails too (though this could make sense, does it? ).

 

P.S I hate that splint armor doesn't have its own avatar animation. You can instantly notice a chain mail and accordingly switch to a blunt weapon to devastate it, but splint armor looks exactly like plate armors within vanilla BG (and like chain mails within IR if I remember correctly), making it a mess considering the former is uber good vs blunt weapons while the latters actually consider crushing blows their worst enemies.

 

Not remembering the DEX-penalty and so forth for the Full Plate ("FPA"), I'd consider restoring the -4 vs. Slashing on it.

Mmm...I do thought about it, but even assuming full plate's additional 1 point penalty from DEX it still has a net 2 points bonus compared to plate mail (which in turn already is 2 points better than splint armor!), and when you don't suffer DEX penalty (e.g. Keldorn and Anomen) the difference is 3 points compared to plate armor and 5 compared to splint armor. Isn't it already fine?

[Dakk]

* removing the -1 from piercing could make sense. Yarpen seemed really convinced about piercing weapons being uber effective against splint armors (he even suggested a +2 penalty).

* increasing its bonus vs crushing weapons to -2 is fine conceptually, but it could be too much imo. It would be a net 4 points bonus compared to chain mails (3 is enough imo), and it would make them surpass plate mails too (though this could make sense, does it?

How about removing -1 vs piercing and going to -2 vs crushing (do we say crushing instead of "bludgeoning" just because it's easier to spell? )..? Then it'd have the same net bonus as chain mail and not surpass plate - while also being the best armour vs crushing. Seems conceptually fine, don't it?

 

Here is as good as any place to state that my preference for this Revision is somewhat of a "middle road" so to speak. That is to say that I like it that armours have a uniqueness to them - different and logical bonuses and penalties to different attacks (so you could tailor after that) - but still not have so great "hidden" bonuses that if you don't know the bonuses you will suffer as a player. I think the current (proposed) table we're working on reaches that goal

 

Mmm...I do thought about it, but even assuming full plate's additional 1 point penalty from DEX it still has a net 2 points bonus compared to plate mail (which in turn already is 2 points better than splint armor!), and when you don't suffer DEX penalty (e.g. Keldorn and Anomen) the difference is 3 points compared to plate armor and 5 compared to splint armor. Isn't it already fine?

Yeah, it probably is. Just want to make sure the lumbering oaf that is a fighter in FPA get's his AC to show for it. And also, Full Plate Armour is pretty cool

 

BTW, what is the (your) recommended component for armour balancing - DEX and speed or DEX only?

 

EDIT:

P.S I hate that splint armor doesn't have its own avatar animation. You can instantly notice a chain mail and accordingly switch to a blunt weapon to devastate it, but splint armor looks exactly like plate armors within vanilla BG (and like chain mails within IR if I remember correctly), making it a mess considering the former is uber good vs blunt weapons while the latters actually consider crushing blows their worst enemies.

Oh.. that is bad actually. Does this change with BG2/BGT/1PP?

[Demivrgvs]

* removing the -1 from piercing could make sense. Yarpen seemed really convinced about piercing weapons being uber effective against splint armors (he even suggested a +2 penalty).

* increasing its bonus vs crushing weapons to -2 is fine conceptually, but it could be too much imo. It would be a net 4 points bonus compared to chain mails (3 is enough imo), and it would make them surpass plate mails too (though this could make sense, does it?

How about removing -1 vs piercing and going to -2 vs crushing (do we say crushing instead of "bludgeoning" just because it's easier to spell? )..? Then it'd have the same net bonus as chain mail and not surpass plate - while also being the best armour vs crushing. Seems conceptually fine, don't it?

Well, I suppose we can do it to stress its "anti blunt" properties and make armor types play slightly more accentuate and different roles.

 

Here is as good as any place to state that my preference for this Revision is somewhat of a "middle road" so to speak. That is to say that I like it that armours have a uniqueness to them - different and logical bonuses and penalties to different attacks (so you could tailor after that) - but still not have so great "hidden" bonuses that if you don't know the bonuses you will suffer as a player. I think the current (proposed) table we're working on reaches that goal

 

BTW, what is the (your) recommended component for armour balancing - DEX and speed or DEX only?

I use and recommend to use both, but the crucial one in terms of balance is DEX. Movement rate penalty is more a "realism factor" for me, but it does affect the combat performance of you characters too, as being able to pursue a faster fleeting creature (a heavy armored warrior may find difficult to catch an unarmored mage who tries to run away), or quickly retreat (e.g. a rogue after a backstab) can be important. Quite a few players are too much annoyed from how speed penalties affect the non-combat part of the game though, and I'm relatively sympathetic to that.

 

Long story short, I think speed penalties are a must, but it's not a big deal if you end up not using them. Otoh IR's heavy armors without DEX penalties are simply overpowered, and most of all they make all lighter armors completely pointless, which is a real shame imo.

 

P.S I hate that splint armor doesn't have its own avatar animation. You can instantly notice a chain mail and accordingly switch to a blunt weapon to devastate it, but splint armor looks exactly like plate armors within vanilla BG (and like chain mails within IR if I remember correctly), making it a mess considering the former is uber good vs blunt weapons while the latters actually consider crushing blows their worst enemies.

Oh.. that is bad actually. Does this change with BG2/BGT/1PP?

No, not even 1PP handles this (which reminds me how much I love how it instead handled chain mails for rogues!).

 

That being said, I jus had a very crazy idea...I could make them use light armor animation. Ashen Scale and Armor of Faith's bams in particular do look like in-game light armored avatars (take a look at them), and the armors' color palettes (which for some reason get extremely messed up if you simply switch the animation from 3A to 2A ) should do the trick and make them still look as medium armor. I'm saying this because splint armor ends up working much like leather and hide armor with low anti-piercing properties and high anti-blunt ones...

 

...but all this kinda went down very quickly when I remembered that Studded Leather instead works much more similarly to Chain Mail, and it surely cannot share its animation.