Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?

[Wordmaker]

You guys ever tried carrying folded-up chainmail? That stuff is heavy. It's designed to spread weight evenly over the body, so as heavy and uncomfortable as it is to wear, it's so much worse to try and carry in a bag.

[Lavecki121]

Heh; related but not I just found body armor diguised as a briefcase or padfolio. It was developed for teachers and business persons for defense against office shootings

EDIT: though I did find some stuff that is armor and does help against things, i also found the part that Mr. Death was talking about on 202 of YS that states that armor needs to completely protect against its same scale item; while a reinforced kevlar vest would be armor 2 a regular kevlar vest would only be armor 1 because it can still crack a rib if you get hit. Also kevlar doesnt protect well against stabs.

A skill rating of 4 in resources is what would be needed to get anything lower than $1,000 easily though you could probably make that roll if you had something lower but its not guaranteed.

[Mr. Death]

You guys ever tried carrying folded-up chainmail? That stuff is heavy. It's designed to spread weight evenly over the body, so as heavy and uncomfortable as it is to wear, it's so much worse to try and carry in a bag.

Yes, actually. As mentioned, my brother is part of the SCA and another medieval battling type group, and once or twice I've helped them move equipment. It was very heavy, and very tiring just carrying it once across the length of a football field. And, as mentioned, my brother gave up on wearing chainmail after about half a day at Ren Faire because it was too uncomfortable, and that was just him walking around.

Additionally, chainmail isn't just chainmail. It's also leather or cotton padding to protect you from the chainmail itself (recall that Murph's special chainmail vest is a doubled up kevlar vest). The kind of stuff that can reliably turn aside or stop cuts from something like a ghoul in a fight is going to be thick, heavy, and bulky--meaning it's uncomfortable to wear, uncomfortable to carry around, and is going to take some time to put on and secure properly.

Carrying a sword or an axe in a dufflebag means that when something attacks, you put down the bag, reach in, and yank out the weapon ready to fight. It's maybe a supplemental action.

Carrying chainmail in a dufflebag means that when something attacks, you're better off just swinging the bag and using it as a weapon than trying to put it down, reach in, unfold the chainmail, get it over your shoulders and arms, and buckling it on. At the very, very least it's a full round action, during which you're wide open to declarations like, "Arms Pinned In The Sleaves" or "Can't See Because It's Over My Head" and you're a recumbent waterfowl.

[Mr. Death]

EDIT: though I did find some stuff that is armor and does help against things, i also found the part that Mr. Death was talking about on 202 of YS that states that armor needs to completely protect against its same scale item; while a reinforced kevlar vest would be armor 2 a regular kevlar vest would only be armor 1 because it can still crack a rib if you get hit. Also kevlar doesnt protect well against stabs.

A skill rating of 4 in resources is what would be needed to get anything lower than $1,000 easily though you could probably make that roll if you had something lower but its not guaranteed.

Yeah, I could see someone with a 1 or 2 in resources getting something like that if they took the time to make maneuvers like "Saving Up Cash" or "Pooling Christmas Money," but armor also needs to be maintained--a kevlar vest might stop a bunch of bullets, and chainmail might stop sword slashes, but they receive wear and tear just like anything else. Kevlar's only cloth, remember, and mail can be dented and broken. So even if you can pool together a high resources roll to get it, that doesn't necessarily mean you have the resources to replace it when it breaks, or the Craftsmanship rating to properly maintain it and repair it.

[Lavecki121]

This is true. Also pertaining to the weapons thing:

YS 156
The Weapons stunts seem a little
m ore potent o r more generally
app lic ab le than the Fists stu nts.
Is there a reason for that?

Well, Weapons as a skill has a built in
limited circumstance — no weapon, no
ability to use the skill. That’s not the
case with Fists, which gets to be always
available. So that played into it.

[Wordmaker]

Carrying chainmail in a dufflebag means that when something attacks, you're better off just swinging the bag and using it as a weapon than trying to put it down, reach in, unfold the chainmail, get it over your shoulders and arms, and buckling it on. At the very, very least it's a full round action, during which you're wide open to declarations like, "Arms Pinned In The Sleaves" or "Can't See Because It's Over My Head" and you're a recumbent waterfowl.

Yup, agreed! Armor just is not a spur of the moment thing. I figure the best way to handle a fight is just like the real world. Work on not getting hit! 

[Cadd]

My motto in combat is shamelessly stolen from something as geeky as a tooltip for a skill in an MMO:

Sometimes, survival comes down to not being hit.
Actually, most times.

[Tedronai]

Body armor that protects against bullets and knives isn't the same body armor that'll protect against percussive/blunt force.

You're right.  But, in terms of DFrpg mechanics, body armour that 'protects against bullets' (ie. body armour with a rating effectively negating the weapons rating of a typical firearm) is body armour that renders that gun only as harmful as a typical punch or kick delivered with comparable skill.

It kind of is, though. Weapon:3 and Armor:3 cancel one another out entirely, so it's as if he hadn't used a weapon at all. It completely negates the level of stress or consequence that would've resulted without the armor (potentially turning a Moderate consequence into none), indicating that a bullet that would have done serious damage is now doing no real damage at all.

Having readily-available body armor that can simply shrug off the effects of a shotgun or an automatic rifle just doesn't match with reality--ballistic armor primarily prevents penetration, not the full force of the bullet. Even a bullet proof vest that does its job and doesn't let a single bullet through is going to leave you with, at the least, some pretty nasty bruises.

Addressed above.


By my recollection, this is spelled out reasonably clearly in the rules.  I suggest you re-examine them.

[Mr. Death]

You're right.  But, in terms of DFrpg mechanics, body armour that 'protects against bullets' (ie. body armour with a rating effectively negating the weapons rating of a typical firearm) is body armour that renders that gun only as harmful as a typical punch or kick delivered with comparable skill.

Well, no. It's body armor that renders the gun less harmful. Getting shot is still going to hurt more than being punched with comparable skill because even with the body armor, the bullets are still traveling past the speed of sound.

Body armor to protect against bullets just makes them not penetrate and not kill--they don't negate the force or make them only as dangerous as a punch. It makes it the difference between being hit with a pointy object moving the speed of sound and a wider, blunt object moving the speed of sound--one of them is going to plow through you and rip up your internal organs, and one is going to knock you on your ass and hurt like hell.

By my recollection, this is spelled out reasonably clearly in the rules.  I suggest you re-examine them.

Funny, then, that what Lavecki found before:

EDIT: though I did find some stuff that is armor and does help against things, i also found the part that Mr. Death was talking about on 202 of YS that states that armor needs to completely protect against its same scale item; while a reinforced kevlar vest would be armor 2 a regular kevlar vest would only be armor 1 because it can still crack a rib if you get hit. Also kevlar doesnt protect well against stabs.

says that a regular Kevlar vest--made to protect against handgun bullets--is going to be a smaller armor rating than those handguns' weapon rating. And how Sanctaphrax pointed out the rules state that armor is going to be a step behind weapons in potency and availability.

[Tedronai]

Well, no. It's body armor that renders the gun less harmful. Getting shot is still going to hurt more than being punched with comparable skill because even with the body armor, the bullets are still traveling past the speed of sound.

Body armor to protect against bullets just makes them not penetrate and not kill--they don't negate the force or make them only as dangerous as a punch. It makes it the difference between being hit with a pointy object moving the speed of sound and a wider, blunt object moving the speed of sound--one of them is going to plow through you and rip up your internal organs, and one is going to knock you on your ass and hurt like hell.

Armour of minimally sufficient quality to negate the weapon rating of a firearm is qutie plainly and obviously armour that renders that firearm no more dangerous than a typical unarmed strike (punch, kick, etc) delivered with comparable skill.


All in all, nice job ignoring my parenthetical note.

[Mr. Death]

Armour of minimally sufficient quality to negate the weapon rating of a firearm is qutie plainly and obviously armour that renders that firearm no more dangerous than a typical unarmed strike (punch, kick, etc) delivered with comparable skill.

I think we're misunderstanding one another. By "protects against bullets" I mean designed with bullets in mind, as opposed to against knives or blunt attacks. That doesn't mean it's completely effective--it just means that if it's effective against anything, it's against bullets.

You're coming at "designed to protect against bullets" from the mechanics perspective. "Designed to protect against bullets," in reality just means "you can survive a direct hit instead of having holes put in you" when it comes to body armor. They're built on the basis that cracked ribs is better than a punctured lung.

Body armor isn't designed with the idea of completely negating the destructive power of the bullet, because that's near impossible with modern weapons. It's designed with the idea of stopping the bullet from penetrating by spreading the impact across a wider area. The point being, you're still getting hit with the full force of the bullet, which is a hell of a lot harder than a punch. There's a reason why when someone's shot with a bullet proof vest they still get knocked down and, in some cases, out. You would need something seriously heavy duty--on the order of, say, Iron Man--to completely deflect or negate the force of modern firearms.

[Tedronai]

I think we're misunderstanding one another. By "protects against bullets" I mean designed with bullets in mind, as opposed to against knives or blunt attacks. That doesn't mean it's completely effective--it just means that if it's effective against anything, it's against bullets.

There's a reason I provided an explicit definition to that effect.
And why I commented on you ignoring it.

Body armor isn't designed with the idea of completely negating the destructive power of the bullet, because that's near impossible with modern weapons. It's designed with the idea of stopping the bullet from penetrating by spreading the impact across a wider area. The point being, you're still getting hit with the full force of the bullet, which is a hell of a lot harder than a punch. There's a reason why when someone's shot with a bullet proof vest they still get knocked down and, in some cases, out. You would need something seriously heavy duty--on the order of, say, Iron Man--to completely deflect or negate the force of modern firearms.

The relatively negligible mass of most bullets actually means that they DON'T pack all that much energy.  Certainly, they pack quite a bit less than movies would have you believe.
People get 'knocked down' by bullets (short of particularly large caliburs, at which point there are far more impressive effects to be concerned about...like gaping holes) not because the force of the bullet actually knocks them off their feet, but because the sudden, unexpected force coupled with immense pain distracts them to the point where they fall on their butts.
Similarly, people getting 'knocked out' by gunshots (other than shots to the head) are getting knocked out by sudden extreme pain, not the sort of mechanisms that cause a punch to the head to knock someone out (brain rattling around until it shuts itself off, or is rendered nonfunctional, temporarily).

Armour that would COMPLETELY negate the energy of a bullet would, in game terms, need to be sufficient to absorb not only the weapon rating, but also the surplus accuracy of the attack.  This really isn't what is being discussed here.

[Mr. Death]

I'm not talking about people getting knocked down and out by bullets penetrating them. I'm talking about when they're wearing the vests, the vests work, but the shock and pain of still being shot makes them fall over. Because vests stop the bullet from penetrating, but not the force of the bullet.

And you're right, what we're arguing is the armor ratings of available types of armor, yes? As the book says, your usually available armor is going to be a step below the weapon rating of whatever the equivalent weapon is. A standard issue bullet proof vest is going to be Armor:1 because while it'll stop a bullet, it's not going to completely prevent injury. Armor:2 is going to be much larger and more expensive, and therefore is going to be that much more difficult to buy or wear around.

[Tedronai]

A standard issue bullet proof vest is going to be Armor:1 because while it'll stop a bullet, it's not going to completely prevent injury.

This is the wrong way to look at it.  Armour 2 against a weapon 2 pistol will not 'completely prevent injury'.
Lightweight 'bullet-proof vests' likely ARE armour 1, and will negate most of the danger from small calibur pistols that strike the vest and they will significantly reduce the danger from larger rounds.

[toturi]

An Armor 2 is going to protect against a Weapon 2 as much as wearing no Armor is going to protect against some mundane guy swing his fist at you.