Gripes? I don't allow gripes!

Assuming I suggested the same exact system for Light Armor, an aspiring rogue would only need to develop the skill to 5. This would then make LA the same as Book II with 1 point in the skill. If one never found a book or spoke to a trainer, then it would cost a whole 7 skill points, or 4 more than Book II. Anything beyond that is only stuff that "adds value" to developing the skill, but doesn't make it useless if you don't. As I've mentioned before, I don't really have a problem with the Heavy and Light armor skills as they are in Book II. All this conjecture is to just spice the skill up for those who think that all skills must provide value-addedness as incentive to develop them.

That said, I'd probably be a bit more forgiving with the LA skill... since it's "lighter," it is eaiser to become acclimated to, but should still be as difficult to master. Something like...

0 points = -30% AR
1 Points = -15% AR
2 Points = -10% AR
3 Points = -5% AR
4 Points = No AR Penalty
5 Points = +1% Durability
6 Points = +1% Durability
7 Points = +1% Durability
8 Points = +1% Durability
9 Points = +1% Durability
10 Points = +1% Durability, +1% Dodge
....
20 Points = +1% Durability, +1% Dodge -5% weight on equipped pieces
....
30 Points = +1% Durability, +1% Dodge, -5% weight on equipped pieces
....
40 Points = +1% Durability, +1% Dodge, -5% weight on equipped pieces
....
50 Points= +1% Durability, +1% Dodge, -10% Weight on equipped pieces

I know some people will cry about only offering a 5% dodge over 50 points, but 5% is nothing to sneeze at. I upped the weight reduction for Light Armor, since once again it would be easier to acclimate to. LA's all about avoiding damage, and carrying more loot!

IJBall: I know you want it on the "Every 5 Points" system for bonuses but without seeing how the monsters and Damage Reduction skill are balanced, I (personally) can't agree to providing that much bonus early on. If BW cranks up the monsters and makes them more powerful then sure. Considering the fact that in Book II you can still build a character that the endgame enemies only have a 1% chance of hitting... After all, we're talking about adding value to the armor skills, not making them indispensable.

As far as coding, other than the feat I just threw out there for grins on HA, I don't think it would be particularly difficult to program - BW's already figuring in the durability and Move Silently bonuses. If anything it would just be more difficult to bug-test.

I did think about coming up with something drastically different in regards to how LA would be handled as opposed to HA, but I'd have to think about it a bit longer. In the end they're both just types of armor, so making them too different from each other might cause confusion or break them.

I would consider getting rid of the distinction at the skill level between heavy and light armor.

The principles of light and heavy armor are similar. Both come in parts, fit together and face similar issues as far as wearing an putting on, and suffer similar damage from combat.

Benefits like reduced armor and noise should be pooled together into one skill. Just plain armor. I would also add a benefit to that is that the apparent weight of equipped armor is reduced.

To those who don't know how to properly put on armor, it might feel 20% heavier, and to the very skilled 20% lighter than pack weight as they have learned tricks to better balance and secure the armor.

Then each type of armor (leather, studded, chain, half-plate, plate, full plate) would have a noise rating inherent in the armor, like durability is inherent in the material type.


And then there could be two (or perhaps more) different style skill for how you want to use the armor you have. Like there different attack modes.

One style might be the fortress style. You learn how to use strong points in the armor and the materials durability to absorb damage. This would let you pull more of the armor rating out of the armor then the base AR, as well as damage reduction by letting the armor take a portion of damage.



Where X is a random number from 1 to 40,
Y Skill in Fotress style defense.
And Z is average durability of equipped armor. (Probably weighted % of body that any piece is covering)

Dm is damage roll of the monster, and Di is the recieved damage

Or what was in my head 0-4% reduction for every three levels of skill while wearing the best armor in game.
The constant on the bottom would probably need to be balanced.

Further balance could come from adding bonuses for endurance, strength and concentration.


The other style is what I would call the monkey style. Involves angling and stepping to avoid attacks or using protected body parts to deflect incoming attacks.

Increase in skill would add some aspect of dodge (as many people don't use it on it's own) and increase armor rating. The dodge aspect would suffer moderate penalty for a lot of weight and the AR a slight penalty. Additional bonuses derived from dexterity, concentration and speed.

Bonuses are proportional to the weight and skill

AR bonus = 2X - 1/10 Y + 1/5 Speed + 1/10 DEX
Dodge Bonus = 3X/2 - 1/5Y + 1/5 Speed + 1/10 DEX
or (2x-10) - 1/5y + 1/5 Speed + 1/10 DEX

Where X is monkey style skill, and Y is appearant weight of equipped armor.


The default if just armor is known could be old style, were you get small bonuses for all the physical stats, and AR and DR in proportion to the old bonus system using a hidden light/heavy armor categorization.

Of course it would all have to be balanced but this is just a rough stretch. I think it could introduce real differences between armors and open up more distinct methods of game play.

If you dropped dodge on its own and modified the shield skill to compliment each of the different styles in it's own way in addition to the standard missile blocking, you would see 10 possible unique development strategies from combinations of 4 defensive skills. And there would be fewer walls apparent to the player. Penalties, yes, if you try to absorb damage with hemp it will only work 10% as well as divine ore, and if you want to dodge something wearing full plate... well good luck.


Old style, old style with shield, Monkey, Monkey with shield, and Fortress with Sheild. and probably less used fortress without shield. Also would be the choice for non old-style styles would be weather to improve the technical aspect of armor. (noise, durability, fit/ appear antweight)

That's just the kind of thing I had in mind. We can quibble about details, but probably BW isn't going to use our exact formula suggestions anyway, even if we managed to agree. The levels where durability gain is all you get aren't too exciting, but again, these are just implementation details.

For people worried about having to spend too many skill points on armor, I don't think that's a major issue. The proposed -20% for a single point is really not that huge a deal, assuming you apply it to the total AR from all armor rather than each individual piece.

This is a lot like my previous suggestion.

Armor Rating as it stands is very D&D. Your dexterity contributes to your armor, and the pieces of armor you wear—the bigger and heavier the better—make you somehow harder to hit.

I propose we join armor value and armor skill to give a chance for a hit to be reduced in damage, maybe even "glancing off."

Then dexterity and speed/agility plus any dodge skill could work together to give you a chance to avoid a strike altogether.

Obviously, heavy armor would hamper any attempts to dodge or move silently, and light armor would offer little protection against any good hits.

I think it's too late to implement such a system for the Eschalon series. But BW may want to keep this kind of system in mind for future games/series - implementing things the way you suggest (Armor leading to more tangible Damage Reductions than it currently does in Eschalon but not affecting the ToHit score, where as the ToHit score is only modified by Attributes like DEX and SPEED (and CON?), is an interesting idea that should have a place in future games.

as for armor difference, they did it fine in Fallout.
As i remember, there were 2 values, one for damage peak and another for damage reduction.

that represents the very idea of, example, plate armor.

most of blows just glances off.
there are few methods of hurting a guy in plate armor:

1.not very strong but precise thrust with sword or dagger in face, armpit, groin...(enemy has to be caught off gard, held in a grip or toppled to ground)
2.a powerful crushing blow, preferably with a pole weapon

another thing is fatigue factor.
like wearing ANY armour should increase thirst and hunger faster.
it could be done like this, totally not discriminating between armor types:

zone 1: hands, feet, belt -> 1 x weight x 0,1%
zone 2: legs, head -> 2 x weight x 0,2%
zone 3: torso, shield -> 3 x weight x 0,3%

SUM that up, for increasing fatigue, (for metal armours thirst factor could be doubled)

it seems odd, BUT in reality there is little difference between them.
another, historical example (to add confusion ):
english jack, is a 15-20 layers of linien body armor, favored by bowmen, was extremely arrow-proof, generally very damage resistant, warm and cheap.
but...it was usually very heavy and cumbersome.
metal plate armor, was really not that heavy, and if custom made - offered full unrestricted mobility.
in reality a bowman might have killed a knight, if the arrow wouldn`t glance off curves of the armor, but the knight would certainly kill the bowman, literally by jumping around and stabbing him with his sword.
so..light..heavy...no real difference between categories, just between each and every piece.


EDIT:
and another great TROIKA idea - armor SIZES.
BOOK 2 example -> Dunmore... how is it possible, that all armor found/stolen/bought there fits on a MAN ?
dwarves don`t use armor, or what?

Don't Over Think this too much..Armour, any armour can only be worn certain ways. Once you learn to do up the straps on one set of plate armour you have got all plate armour (relatively speeking) figured out

We all realize that it's more a matter of game balance than realism, but...

Chain mail happens to weigh quite a bit more than plate mail made of the same material (23 lbs. for a shirt vs. 15 lbs. for a cuirass), and that any real armor is made of layers of protection, which must always include cloth padding and probably some leather. Trying to give a wearer of plate mail a weakness to bludgeoning weapons that someone wearing only a leather vest and chaps wouldn't suffer is a little silly.

As for skill qualifications, I never like it when a character in a game can't do something that I, who has never even seen a monster or worn (non-modern) armor, could do reasonably well, like put on a helmet and benefit from it at least somewhat. It's also just awkward to say that your medieval hero-type cannot possibly wear this leather belt without becoming significantly more vulnerable to attacks, because he can only manage belts that have significantly heavy metal bits attached.

Another idea I like is how some game systems allow for a lower weight/encumbrance of items when worn, as opposed to when they're being carried in one's giant backpack.

What do you all say if we drop the requirements for wearing whatever kind of armor, but add hindrances that don't go away regardless of how much you've trained to wear metal links with padding underneath? For example: noise, shininess, body heat (a benefit in the northlands), and complication of such things as spell casting. So if you're going to be doing any magic, or maybe hiding or heavy fighting in the jungle, dress light or suffer the consequences!

The issue of heavy and light armors, to me, isn't a realism issue but a game balance issue. It's also a role playing thing. In reality, nobody kept a full suit of plate armor on while they strolled across hundreds of miles of wilderness (particularly not desert), but in a game, too much realism can be a bigger problem than too little sometimes. I like, in general, Bernie's fixes as they don't seem difficult to achieve, they maintain the role-playing aspects of the different armor types, and they keep it relatively simple.

I tried to keep my suggestions within the scope of the game, fair, and with enough reasoning to work if you really need to explain it somehow.


While I didn't suggest this specific weakness, I could easily come up with (what I consider) a reasonable explanation. The weakness of platemail to bludgeoning makes perfect sense because of the rigidity of the armor. Here's a real world experiment: picture your bed as padded/leather armor. Picture a car outside as platemail. Now throw a heavy rock at your bed. It bounces off, yes? There's no visible damage to the bed. Now, throw a heavy rock at the car. Sure, it bounces off, but not before leaving a big ol' dent. Now which one of those would you rather be wearing? Sure, the leather might not be as rigid, and you might suffer some broken bones, but if you're wearing a giant tin can that gets dented, you stand to be in some lasting trouble. Since this doesn't translate as well into game terms, making plate more vulnerable to blungeoning damage is a decent, explainable tradeoff.

Of course, I always try to weigh in reality checks when coming up with game suggestions.... it's a game, after all. If I want realism... well there's plenty of that to go around.

I like this idea

i would like to see something like that aplied to shields, for now i don´t see the reason to use it.

The only unsolved mistery would be: How in eschalon´s world ,i can get a skill to 50 ???

P.S. I like the way you explain the different levels , reminds me,of good old elder scrolls.

I know thread bumping again. Why do we even have an armor skill outside of shield? In reality no amount of skill in wearing armor does anything to reduce your chance of getting hit or lesson the damage. Only training in using a shield makes any difference. Perhaps get rid of the HA LA skills and add a new skill of parry. Because in reality using a shield or parrying with a weapon are really the only two skills that work in melee battle. I left dodge out of this equation for armored persons. You could also add a chance for the weapon used to parry to break based on the type of weapon it is going up against. Having points in armor skill to help move silent is a waste as you can just spend those points in move silent instead.

I think a lot of people pining for the removal or consolidation of skills are missing the point of their existence: player choice. The idea here is that the skills need balancing to make them viable as seperate choices, not to remove them.

Not only that, but using armor more often DOES give you an edge over someone not using armor, hence the addition of armor points to your armor would cover you being able to use the armor more effectively. Contrary to some beliefs, you need to learn to use armor, it doesnt just offer protection because you wear it. (well it does, but not as much as say the warrior who has worn it all his life and he knows where he doesnt want to be hit)

Ah, but unless you make the skill required to get certain armor, the skills for HA and LA are still relatively useless currently. I know we are not talking about reality and we are talking game mechanics. IMO However, that said short of durability and silence the skills are meaningless, and it is much cheaper to simply bump dex/MS or spend a couple coins on repair than it is to bump up these skills. As you are going to end up running into the same issues you noticed in your alpha testing Bernie. That is the only reason I bring this up.

That being said about the skils. I do like your ideas of the different damage modifiers based on weapon type vs armor type. That is more reality. As a crossbow bold can go thru a set of plate like butter where a long sword is vertually useless if you don't hit a weak point/seam.