Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Staffan" data-source="post: 7567033" data-attributes="member: 907">There are quite a few games that make some nod toward simulating the advantages and disadvantages of various weapons versus different sorts of armor. Probably the most ambitious one, at least among mainstream{1} RPGs, is Rolemaster. There, armors are classified into 20 different armor types depending on material (cloth, soft leather, rigid leather, mail, plate) and coverage (so armor type 17 is a breastplate and 20 is full plate). In addition to that each weapon{2} had an attack table where you cross-referenced your attack roll (on a d100+bonuses) against the opponent's armor type, to get a result giving both a general damage result and (hopefully) letting you roll on a critical table where the real damage was dealt (often with effects like bleeding, stun, broken stuff, and so on). In general, wearing lots of armor made you more susceptible to taking small amounts of concussion hits but made crits much less likely - moreso for some weapons than others.But few games go that far. Many use the classical division into bludgeoning, slashing, and piercing weapons and have armor protect differently from each. A disadvantage of doing it this way is that it often treats a dagger the same as a pick. Another common thing is to give weapons (and sometimes armor) different traits - for example, a halberd might have Pierce 2 which means it ignores 2 points of armor (whatever that means in a given system). Such traits often go beyond just how the weapons deal with armor.{1} Insofar as any RPG that isn't D&amp;D can be considered mainstream.{2} Well, at least a lot of weapons did, but the game was expanded with weapons that basically said &quot;As a shortsword but +10 versus cloth/leather and -10 versus metal&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Staffan, post: 7567033, member: 907"] There are quite a few games that make some nod toward simulating the advantages and disadvantages of various weapons versus different sorts of armor. Probably the most ambitious one, at least among mainstream{1} RPGs, is Rolemaster. There, armors are classified into 20 different armor types depending on material (cloth, soft leather, rigid leather, mail, plate) and coverage (so armor type 17 is a breastplate and 20 is full plate). In addition to that each weapon{2} had an attack table where you cross-referenced your attack roll (on a d100+bonuses) against the opponent's armor type, to get a result giving both a general damage result and (hopefully) letting you roll on a critical table where the real damage was dealt (often with effects like bleeding, stun, broken stuff, and so on). In general, wearing lots of armor made you more susceptible to taking small amounts of concussion hits but made crits much less likely - moreso for some weapons than others. But few games go that far. Many use the classical division into bludgeoning, slashing, and piercing weapons and have armor protect differently from each. A disadvantage of doing it this way is that it often treats a dagger the same as a pick. Another common thing is to give weapons (and sometimes armor) different traits - for example, a halberd might have Pierce 2 which means it ignores 2 points of armor (whatever that means in a given system). Such traits often go beyond just how the weapons deal with armor. {1} Insofar as any RPG that isn't D&D can be considered mainstream. {2} Well, at least a lot of weapons did, but the game was expanded with weapons that basically said "As a shortsword but +10 versus cloth/leather and -10 versus metal". [/QUOTE]

Verification