|
Post by karl on Aug 31, 2021 21:09:04 GMT
In pretty much every fantasy or (ancient/medieval) historical game, the armor class of a figure or unit is primarily defined by the material used, typically in the sequence leather & textile, mail and plate, but without regard to how much of the person the armor actually protects.
However, if you read expert opinions about armor, it is actually the other way round: the coverage is the main item making a difference in the protectin a set of armor offers. Material is relevant, but hardened leather or stiffened textile armor is not that much worse than mail.
And the absolutely most important item is a helmet, so having or not having one should make a difference.
I suggest to define armor classes (2-6) in Swordplay, 2D6 Sword & Sorcery etc. by adding up the following points:
Helmet +2 Body protected by leather, textile or flexible metal armor (mail, scale, lamellar etc.) +1 Body protected by metal plate armor +2 Upper arms and upper legs protected by any type of armor +1 lower arms and legs protected by any armor +1
Shields are handled separately in the rules, so are not relevant to this discussion.
Here is a detailed discussion by an historian on the topic But there are many others, also on youtube
Greetings Karl Heinz
|
|
|
Post by Ed the Two Hour Wargames Guy on Aug 31, 2021 23:02:43 GMT
Interesting. Location is always important for armor.
|
|
|
Post by atomicfloozy on Aug 31, 2021 23:40:33 GMT
What? There's armor other than bikini chainmail? Wait till the girls hear about this!
|
|
|
Post by blacksmith on Sept 1, 2021 0:13:14 GMT
To have helmets some effect in WHAT without altering AC levels (2, 4, 6, 8) maybe you could ignore a result of knocked prone in melee when the winner scores the same as loser's AC in the Melee Damage Table if the loser is wearing a helmet and fight another round of melee but without being prone? Cheers,
|
|