>>98117210
Armour being passive is not a flaw, it's a feature; you do not want to add yet another step to "dealing damage" procedure.

"Interesting" to whom?

>>98117229
I was thinking more "an ability you activate on your turn" rather than "Another step in the damage taking process". Like the two examples I mentioned.
>>98117251
I guess I am using the term interesting to describe it having some unque properties rather than just adding to a pool of damage negation/reduction amongst other things like cover.

>>98117210
Day Z had the best armor system I've seen in a game. It took the damage you would've taken in the spot you were hit, unless the conditions for penetration were right. Fallout 4 for some unfathomably retarded reason did this for power armor but then made it only mitigate damage regardless of the repair state of the armor making it superficial. God Bethesda is so fucking dumb.

>>98117377
I forgot what board this was because I'm retarded.

>>98117407
lol, I was a little confused what board this was because of your comment too.

>>98117407
It's become an easy mistake to make. We're analog /v/ these days.

>>98117291
>I was thinking more "an ability you activate on your turn"
Generally, you want player actions to be advancing the game state, not slowing it down. Moreover, an enemy that dies sooner has less opportunity to deal future damage, so you'd have to seriously juice the armor action in order for it to be worth taking over an action that kills enemies faster. If it is that advantageous, you're now incentivizing players to slow down combat, which generally isn't where you want to be.

>>98117291
>>98117210
If it's an ability, then that design space makes far more sense to be reserved for blocking with a shield or parrying with a weapon.
The relafive benefit of armour over a shield is precisely that it is passively effective and doesn't require you to do anything extra.

File: wfrp-1st-cover.jpg (295 KB, 900x1209)

295 KB JPG

>>98117210
Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay

>>98118258
>Generally, you want player actions to be advancing the game state, not slowing it down
Is that why people love crowd control so much?

>>98118388
>Hit locations
>Passive damage reduction
Please explain why you think the way you do

>>98118258
>Generally, you want player actions to be advancing the game state
well, something like I mentioned, being able to trade protectiveness for a boast in initiative for a turn seems like a tool to advancing the game state. I really do like the idea that you can "spend" your armor's AC/DR on a turn to get some kind of benifit.

spend AC and you can trap an opponents weapon in your steel covered arm when you attack, spend ac to attempt to knock someone over with your extra weight from the metal, spend ac to increase your saving throws as you angel it to better intercept unconventional threats like fire.

Like you have learned how to fight differently in armor, like how a lot of knights specifcally practiced grappling because they are more unlikely to get cut so they can do it more proactively, and it is one of the few ways to get at the weak points of other armored fighters.

>>98118388
In what way? I remember it had armor location and material which is pretty cool, makes you think of your armor as on you in specific ways rather than just a blanket buff to defence.

>>98117210
>Like, maybe you can go into a defensive stance that further increases your defense by covering up any weak spots, but makes your attacks weaker, or conversely you could get a bonus to initiative by attacking more directly where someone unarmored would need to deal with avoiding/deflecting a weapon first, decreasing your defense but increasing your initiative.
GURPS has extensive rules for this.
>All-Out Attack (+4 to attack, +2 to damage, or use two attacks, but lose your defenses)
>Committed Attack (+2 to attack or +1 to damage, but −2 to a defense)
>Attack (default, no modifiers)
>Defensive Attack (+1 to a defense, but −2 to damage)
>All-Out Defense (+2 to a defense or use two defenses against a single attack, but lose your attack)
>All-Out Defense: Deliberate Cover (use your shield to completely block specific hit locations from being attacked, but lose your attack)
But these are combat maneuvers. They have nothing to do with armor.

>>98119103
>But these are combat maneuvers. They have nothing to do with armor.
well they do tangentially, in that you can gamble with a higher defence by using more aggressive attacks. I think that indirectly makes armor more active.

>>98117291
>"an ability you activate on your turn"

but why

Armor is passive. You wear it, and then it's harder to hurt you even if you just stand still.

>>98117210
I prefer the armor just negates and reduces damage over trying to add too many extra rolls and checks. Stuff like arrows and low level magic might be tanked by a shield or armor but might make them weaker to some spells.

>>98118258
thats a problem with the foundational rot in RPGs

too much existing in a vacume not affecting anything else

if i can use my armor to tip an enemies attack into a crit fail allowing a vulnerable strike the hot diggity now we are talking
and it makes sense
you have a lot more oppertunities for attacks when armored. not just "being reckless" but understandign that sometimes your enemy jsut cant hurt you. no need to flinch the forearm away when a sword is incapable of biting through it.

if i have to make decisions about what ima do with my defense then it becomes a lot more interesting.

if there are no decisions then i may as well have a single statistical calculation called "fight win" and then roll once like a skill check

File: cesede-age-of-bronze-tier-3.jpg (333 KB, 1600x1131)

333 KB JPG

>>98117210
>Like, maybe you can go into a defensive stance
Feels like what you are looking for is a system which makes *defence* more interesting, rather than armour.
Let me tell you about the way Mythras works and see if it clicks:
>You get a few combat action each rounds (typically 3)
>Both attacking OR defending are actions
>Damages are localised. Armour is localised damage reduction
>Shield can help you parry, but it can instead be used passively, to ward against attacks on specific body parts
This creates a very interesting dynamic where, if you have a large armour you can afford to act much more offensively because you don't have much risks if you don't actively parry. But on the other hand, having a large armour means you probably won't have the initiative, which means when you *do* need to actively parry, you will be able to attack less often.

>>98118392
crowd control is, paradoxically, meant to speed gameplay up rather than slow it down
a 5v5 fight can end up indecisive if both sides are fast enough to disengage from it, or a war of attrition if neither side is
so things like stuns and slows are not meant to be delaying tools, its meant to seperate a priority target from the rest of the group and allow you to jump them even when theres numerical parity

competitive video games also found ways to implement damage reduction in ways that speed up rather than slow down the game, a necessity due to stuff like MOBAS being spectator sports where grindy gameplay means less ad revenue
tanky characters are not actually meant to soak damage, and its actually a bad sign to be taking a ton of damage as one
the armor is a means to an end, which is usually controlling space

so to pivot this back to TTRPGs, totally passive armor can still be used to facilitate active gameplay but it requires changing everything around the armor
as an example, if one character had extremely powerful attacks and AOEs, a lack of ranged weapons, and the ability to engage but not disengage
then this character would NEED armor to survive long enough to utilize all their abilities but potent enough that you would risk charging into battle without an escape plan

this kind of game design is also obviously game-y and doesnt address the passivity of armor itself, it just turns armor into a stat that encourages dynamic gameplay

>>98117210
For my game i did a simple thing where damage dice are d6s and you roll them. The TN is decided by the Armour and the Pierce of the weapon. Its a bit convoluted, but it was the most reasonable way to simulate armour and weapons and make each important.

For example if you are wearing the heaviest armour available, thats 7 armour. If i attack you with a longsword thats 8 damage and 0 pierce. If i use a heavy attack thats +1 dmg/+1 pierce
So i roll 9d6 each against a TN of 6. I would get only 1 or 2 damage on average.

If i use a warhammer (5 damage, 3 pierce) with heavy attack
I roll 6d6 against tn 3. I have 4 dmg on average.

Compared to a light armour (3 Armour)

A warhammer with a heavy attack deals 6 damage always (reduces armour to 0)
And a longsword deals around 8 damage (TN 2)

It sounds complex but it is actually simple and makes different weapone useful against different enemies.

>>98119222
I get where you're coming from; when I played American Football, it was eye-opening how much more aggressive I was compared to Rugby. It helped me understand some of those stories and accounts of medieval battles. But it's really still 'my player' deciding I could get away with Power Attacking or Bullrushing because i could ignore several little -1hp wounds from various cuts, bruises and bumps. If you get me.

>>98119755
I use a baby first RPG version of this where all attacks hit unless actively defended. If so they automatically fail. You only roll once to try and go under or equal your armor level as the defender. But your armor level is also your initiative so the more attack proof you are the latter you can act.

To illustrate, a light armored skirmisher will act at initiative 1 but will have 1 out of 6 chance to evade damage if he was attacking instead of defending. A heavy armored + shield carrying warrior will act at initiative 4 but have a 4 out of 6 chance to negates the damages.

It's really gamey in the sense that it totally ignores skill proficiency in a fight, plus weapon type and their range. But accounting for that is pilling up modifiers on modifiers so that's where I drew the line.

I still differentiate between professional warriors and plebs by allowing heavier armor at character creation and stating that looted armor (so like a craftsman pick up a medium or heavy armor on a corpse after the first fight) are loose fit and only provide half the armor value while still putting you at full armor value initiative level. Players can still minimize this later on by buying or being gifted a proper armor but at this point they invested time and/or money in it so it's fair enough.

>>98119755
>>98120043
You know what, reading your system again I think I'll now account for weapon type by having piercing weapons such as spear give +1 initiative, slashing weapons such as sword give +1 damage and crushing weapons such as warhammer give -1 to the target's armor level.

Warrior class can pick up their weapon of choice at creation and the rest roll at random.

>>98117210
This is the coat of arms of house Montmorency.

Initially there was only 1 eagle per quarter until Matthieu II of Montmorency, marshal of France defeated Otton IV and then decided to take 12 eagles signs from Otton's defeated army and put them on his own coat of arms.

The house Montmorency also joined the crusades.

>>98117210
In Trespasser you use your armor as a reaction to absorb some of the damage form an attack. You have distinct armor pieces and each can be used once in a fight (after which they’re damaged and need to be repaired during a moments rest) with heavier armor pieces having a larger die for reducing damage. Magic armor pieces have reactive effects that go off when they’re used to armor block.

>>98117210
I like how Gurps does it. Armor is damage reduction, but it's way more complicated with the rate of armor absorption changing by the damage info.

>>98120271
TL;DR, a bunch of types of damage, and they all are scaled with Xd6. normal damage just subtracts from armor, with a lot of customization to create the exact armor you want to make. this is more a armor and penetration is interesting to set up than to use, though gurps being gurps you can definitely make active armor and defenses.

>>98119103
>>98119914
Yah, it makes the game fundamentally more complex, but by being able to curate how you attack by getting a bonus to one thing by subtracting from another, that essentially turns armor into another resource to manipulate.

Lower defense to increase hit chance, damage, initiative, etc so wearing armor makes you more willing to make those trades without being as horribly exposed. Though like you said those things could also still apply to non armored individuals as well, just they would be more vulnerable while doing so.

Though maybe particularly with armor or heavy shielding you could specifically lower hit chance, damage, or initiative to bulk up defense from both melee and ranged in a way an unarmored person just cant (though they probably could increase their defense to melee, but unless you are going more unrealistic consistently cutting arrows and bullets from the sky, the ranged defense increase probably wouldn't apply to the unarmored). Meaning you could wade through arrow-fire in a way unique to an armored combatant.

File: images (6).jpg (10 KB, 206x244)

10 KB JPG

>>98121862
related, but not exactly about armor. I always liked the idea of a game with something like a death spiral, but instead of you getting worse at shit as you get hurt, you get more vulnerable to shit. So instead of attacking worse if you get a cut to the clavicle, you are more suspectable to getting hit again as your defenses aren't as on point. That way instead of missing more and more as a combat goes on, things hit home more and more. things becoming deadlier rather than more pathetic. You start off deflecting blows left and right, but eventually things tend to find gaps and get pass your sloppier defenses even though you continue to be dangerous and deadly like a cornered animal high on adrenaline.

I think it would have a nice sense of elevating tension.

>>98119723
>crowd control is, paradoxically, meant to speed gameplay up rather than slow it down
I knew someone would say something like this. Didn't even read the rest of your post. 9/10 times the wizard casting fog cloud or some shit could have just cast a fireball and made the fight half as long.

>>98122046
Most Tunnel Goons games do that by making the your opponent HD the Target Number and each successful blow reduces their HD by 1. So the more you hack them the more hackable they become.

But trully you could pick up your system of choice and houserule that every successful attack reduce armor by 1, be it for the fight or until repair.

>>98122062
Yeah it's because Fog Cloud is an evasion tool not a fighting one.

>>98122046
It wasn't medieval, but there was a game called Millennium's End that had a fairly comprehensive gunplay and damage modelling system. It's been several years now so I might have some things muddled or outright wrong, but there were no HP, instead (to use another D&Dism) you had to make a save vs damage inflicted, modified for location and type (it differed between blunt, piercing, hydrostatic shock for bullets, etc) and in any case you took an appropriately sized penalty to your entire sheet (skills AND further 'saves'), possibly increasing due to blood loss. It could get quite convoluted, and ironically made sure we avoided combat where possible (or at the very least stacked it ludicrously in our favour) because it could get a little convoluted and bookkeeping heavy, quite apart from the lethality.

>>98122845
>Make combat so boring your players stop being murder hobos.
Now that's META af.

>>98122770
>Tunnel Goons
real shit never heard of it, interesting. though the little gnome character looks familiar.
>But truly you could pick up your system of choice and houserule
true, just wonder if any given system might be offbalanced by something that doesn't take it into consideration so things might feel wrong mathematically. It would probably be pretty straight forward in death spiral games though that assume depreciating efficacy, just replace the roll debuff after getting significantly damaged with a defense debuff.
>>98122845
>in any case you took an appropriately sized penalty to your entire sheet (skills AND further 'saves')
yah, having your aptitude consistently impacted often feels a bit annoying to me, although I can understand the kind of appeal it could have. id generally prefer being shot by a laser making me more susceptible to future laser shots rather than it fucking up my ability to actively try to solve the situation in some way. It still provides rising threat levels but does not directly limit my ability to solve that threat. Like hotwiring a door to shut behind me as I leave, or getting one last good a shot in on that last goofentrooper.

>>98117210
>Like, maybe you can go into a defensive stance that further increases your defense by covering up any weak spots, but makes your attacks weaker
Nothing to do with armor, but Digimon Digital Adventures has this as a core feature, along with 2e having a slew of new Qualities (Powers you can buy with points you get at chargen/ via advancement for your digimon) that unlock new stances with new effects that are more complex. I'm sure plenty of other games have a similar system to what you describe as well.

The other issues you describe are really a D&Dism. Though, 5.5 has the Armorer Artificer with a few different modes with different extra abilities you get access to based on what mode it's in.


The issue with making armor systems more complicated is that you're adding more mechanical complexity for very little gain. Armor, generally, IS best as a passive mechanic. I think if you want armor to do more though, a real avenue in fantasy would be to have enchantments be a thing in the system you want to use, and have armor have charge-based abilities that can give you temporary buffs or throw out some sort of shockwave attack or like grow spikes when you get attacked to retaliate by acting out of turn or something. Going the "historical accuracy" path is gonna be boring as shit.

Now sci-fi, that's where armor gets crazy. Power Armor like the MJOLNIR from Halo is customizable, and you can have all sorts of nifty gadgets and features.

>>98123020
>The other issues you describe are really a D&Dism
idk, Armor just being a static plus is pretty common broadly. Thats also the case in WED star wars and call of cthulu.

>>98122949
'Boring' is harsh, but ... you're right about the outcome. Coupled with chargen being just as detailed and, well.
>>98122992
The intended setting was Temu Tom Clancy (working for a PMC doing murky shit, though hopefully more A-Team than Blackrock) and to be fair I think a 9mm hole is going to distract me somewhat, though skill values for a character could get quite high even out the gate. "Technothriller" was the term used, Cyberpunk or Shadowrun without the cyber or magic wouldn't be a million miles away as a mental shorthand.
The author loved his guns and paramilitary stuff though, a lot of the additional books were actually quite interesting reads from that perspective.

If it's ever in a trove or a bargain bin, I'd encourage a read at least, it wasn't much like anything I've encountered before or since.

>>98122775
when you look at smokes and other LOS-blocking tools in most competitive games, delaying is usually only a niche use
tactical shooters with any kind of smoke grenade, the purpose is to block LOS from certain angles so that you can safely engage a target without getting jumped yourself
a situation where you speed up, rather than slow down, encounters by allowing one side to be able to advance into a contested area when otherwise the defenders would have too much of an advantage

it would be like if fog was used to block archers on a battlement allowing you to run up and engage targets close to the wall without worrying about getting killed by a rain of arrows

>>98124406
Now i'm fuming.

>>98124397
>and to be fair I think a 9mm hole is going to distract me somewhat
If I was going to make a crunchier system, I would actually make the first instance of significant damage like this usually not distract you all that much due to shock. I have seen enough body camera videos that show adequately motivated enough individuals function perfectly fine for a bit after getting shot (if the shot isn't instantly lethal of course) but then denigrate quickly after like 20 seconds.

With damage scaling going something like:
>light to moderate damage
>light to moderate damage and stun
>Signifigant damage no stun
>signifigant damage and stun.

>>98117210
What worldbuilding elf magic system cafe?

>>98119717
Why is he holding a shield in his right hand. Also its the left shoulder which is supposed to have the heavier armor, and the right side being more lightly armored. The drawing is stupid

>>98133880
Plus, the 3rd one is holding the axe as if he was right-handed but he also has his sword on his right side as if he was left-handed