Big Armour Fight

[Lloyd Dupont]

Reading about heavy armour fights....
Apart from the ambush, or slow them and shoot them hard and fast and a lot, I am talking heavy armoured melee....

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/heres-how-fight-wearing-15th-century-armor-180955204/
https://www.scienceabc.com/social-science/warriors-wore-full-body-armor-killed-battles-ancient-times.html

I think I might give bypass defence stunt on normal attack for (some special?) dagger (like the gunners stileto on the second page)...

And I also think I want to introduce some bypass armor (value) to some weapon (like musket), like they do in Mythras... The little ball doesn't really do much more than a big ass sword... but can punch through an armour better though.... And should maybe only work at short range or decay or something....
(Not that muskets matter much right now.. I might start to use them at a much later stage)

Edited October 15, 2019 by Lloyd Dupont

[RosenMcStern]

The core rules in RD100 already work well for heavily armoured fighters, both in gothic and Renaissance armour. The suggestions you made seem either pointless or counter-productive to me. Weapon-armour interactions work perfectly and provide different outcomes depending on the type of weapon, rather than relying on a generic "ignore" effect. Note also that the concept of Coverage gives you more realistic outcomes in this case, because it differentiates between armour types: chain mail, which is a very popular armour type, offers little protection but it is very easy to clad a fighter completely in it (see Simon's comment in the other thread). Doing the same with plate increases the cost and cumbersomeness of armour dramatically, and very few cultures were able to do this.

Muskets: plate cuirasses DID stop bullets. In fact, all Renaissance breastplates came with a dent which the artisan did by firing a bullet at short distance to prove the plate could take hits without being pierced. There is still a chance of piercing a plate, of course, but it is connected to the Impale effect which muskets have, and it is not easy to take down someone so protected. Do not forget that cuirasses were still in use in the 19^th Century (and later) to protect charging cavalry from bullets, so giving muskets an anti-armour effect translates to making some armour pieces ineffective in stopping exactly the type of attack they were designed to stop. Cuirasses are ineffective against swords, which can easily target the back of the cuirassier by manoeuvring in melee, not against muskets which cannot strike from your angle of choice. Note that RD100 represents this in a very simple way with the +2 to armour coverage for ranged attacks.

The difference you remark between bullet and sword is represented in RD100 not by making armour ineffective, but by applying the three damage effects, Slash, Impale and Crush. A sword is devastating against an unarmoured opponent, as it can easily sever limbs or cut you in two by applying the slash effect. However, this means that armour is doubly effective against swords as the extra damage applies after armour. Spears and bullets, on the other hand, while doing potentially less damage apply their effect before armour, and thus are much more effective against armour. A mere mail shirt will block the average slashing attack completely, while piercing attacks with weapons with the same base damage will go through.

In addition to this, you can use the version of the Choose Location that comes with the Conspiracy Theory to represent aiming at weak spots in armour. A good stunt could allow you to gain a -3 to Coverage with your weapon of choice. Of course, the gap needs to be there to strike through it, otherwise you have to use one of the techniques below to open a gap where there is none.

Stilettos: RD100 is probably the system that better represents their usefulness in combat without introducing super-complicate rules. If you have one in your left hand, you are almost certain to end the round with at least one attack available when your opponent has 0 readiness, which means you roll at full skill and he defends at -30%. And if you manage to drop his SR to 0 with a Stun with your main weapon, then you can ignore armour with a non-critical roll with Coup de Grace. Terribly deadly, and it corresponds to actual combat techniques used against heavily armoured opponents: stun with a mace, then finish with a smaller pointy weapon through a gap in the armour. Hammers can do both parts of the sequence if you prefer to have one weapon only, and in fact they were known as armour-killers on Renaissance era battlefields.

Half-swording/ Rather than just "bypass armour", the half-swording techniques shown in page 1 should give more opportunities to use Coup de Grace, as the technique aims at creating a gap that is normally not there in the armour. I cannot remember whether I put this kind of stunt as a suggestion in a sidebar, but you can make up your own stunt in any case.

There are a lot of other interactions that already implement most of the techniques used in armoured combat. It is just that not all rules that influence armour effects have been labelled as "anti-armour". But they are there, do not worry. We have studied and tested the subject intensively.

[Lloyd Dupont]

I will have to check the conspiracy theory... 

Mmm.. it seems to me that we are not that much of a disagreement... if I rephrase it... we could even be totally agreeing  let's see....

1. the D8 damage bonus for impale attack is good enough no need for by pass armour bonus, mm.. something to think about (since I was thinking bypass armour 4 top anyway, it's even better)

2. you said what about a stunt give -3 coverage roll.. well I said I was just thinking about such stunt, but make it usable only with short range weapon (mostly specific daggers)
But I was also thinking to help those weapon when coverage is 0.... for example the gothic armor has 0 coverage on many location, but there are still many joint that can be used....

3. you said to combo stun and coup de grace, it is even better than coverage roll modifier, there is just no armour! Yeah I guess I have to work that angle... ^^ one of my player can't use it though, with his strength 0 of 10 and main weapon is a sword... I guess wrestling it is

 

Point 1 and 3 would be better use of the rules that my initial thinking, thanks hey!

Point 2 is a bit of a difference (maybe?) which is, after some consideration, weapon that have the best coverage modifier should be the small ones, like narrow and pointy daggers.

 

On another topic, coup de grace makes me think.. it implies (like other realism issue) that magical armour is not a totally impervious thing. We had an "argument" my player and I, (nothing serious, more like a debate really) I created a swarm of (magically summoned and venomous) spiders,  while small and easy to kill they were fast, numerous, and climb on player and bite them with poison ignoring armour. And they were like.. Protection (spell) should help! And I was like... protection is not an impervious bubble.. one can breath through it.. and... be "coup de grace", ho well , something to think about for next time

[RosenMcStern]

17 hours ago, Lloyd Dupont said:

3. you said to combo stun and coup de grace, it is even better than coverage roll modifier, there is just no armour! Yeah I guess I have to work that angle... ^^ one of my player can't use it though, with his strength 0 of 10 and main weapon is a sword... I guess wrestling it is

And this is mythe main point: historically, 1H swords sucked against heavily armoured opponents. All re-enactors will tell you that axes, and even more maces, are the 1H weapons of choice to subdue someone wearing armour. Check Lindybeige, Matt Easton or Skallagrim on youtube. Historical research seem to confirm this, as the heaviest forms of these weapons evolved together with armour.

So the point is: should the game provide a way to facilitate unrealistic, unhistorical use of a weapon outside of its range of effectiveness because he or she wants to use only a single weapon in all situations? I think not. If your player's character has no Might, then he should not use a sword against heavy armour: he should carry an axe or a mace for this kind of situation. Given that Revolution D100 allows players not to stick to a "main weapon" for all situations, I think the correct solution is encouraging use of a plurality of weapons. Historical fighters certainly did train with many weapons, not just one.

 

Quote

2. you said what about a stunt give -3 coverage roll.. well I said I was just thinking about such stunt, but make it usable only with short range weapon (mostly specific daggers)
But I was also thinking to help those weapon when coverage is 0.... for example the gothic armor has 0 coverage on many location, but there are still many joint that can be used....

Point 2 is a bit of a difference (maybe?) which is, after some consideration, weapon that have the best coverage modifier should be the small ones, like narrow and pointy daggers.

When you use Coup de Grace to hit a gap that is not contemplated in the coverage values, small weapons are already at an advantage because you can use the effect only after stunning your opponent, which means that you will probably have few SR left yourself. A dagger might be the only weapon that can strike without a Penalty in that situation.

If a gap exists and you can strike it, then weapons of any length should be able to exploit it, provided the blow bypasses parries. The rules are modeled around Pete Nash's statement that he can reliably hit an area 5-10cm wide on his opponent's body. And he does not fight with daggers according to the pictures I have seen him post

Quote

On another topic, coup de grace makes me think.. it implies (like other realism issue) that magical armour is not a totally impervious thing. We had an "argument" my player and I, (nothing serious, more like a debate really) I created a swarm of (magically summoned and venomous) spiders,  while small and easy to kill they were fast, numerous, and climb on player and bite them with poison ignoring armour. And they were like.. Protection (spell) should help! And I was like... protection is not an impervious bubble.. one can breath through it.. and... be "coup de grace", ho well , something to think about for next time

This subject was tackled on the Glorantha Digest and RQ-Rules digest back in the 90s IIRC. Protection and Shield are not an impenetrable force field, but they can be regarded as something that makes existing armour (including skin) harder. Think of rhino hide: it is tough as hell, but there are weak spots over articulations, where the skin must fold.

[Lloyd Dupont]

I was not planning to "help" 1H sword, only Guns and Daggers, without increasing the overall damage done to the target...  

 

 

Rhino hide.. good image!
I was thinking it either boost the armor (and has the armor coverage weakness) or it's an egg like forcefield, so up close (with short weapon) won't help...
I guess it's up to me... but hurt my suspension of disbelief less this way...  Although.. my players seems to like the Rhino hide version more.. mm...

Edited October 17, 2019 by Lloyd Dupont