Armour - Revision history

Martin at 09:24, 2 April 2026

2026-04-02T09:24:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:24, 2 April 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
			[[Category:Rules]]
	Armour is protection from damage, by default this refers to protection from physical damage (reducing current Fatigue) but can also refer to protection from physical damage to Endurance or protection from magical damage.		Armour is protection from damage, by default this refers to protection from physical damage (reducing current Fatigue) but can also refer to protection from physical damage to Endurance or protection from magical damage.

Stephen: /* Discussion */ Moved to Discussion page

2014-02-23T20:09:39Z

Discussion: Moved to Discussion page

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:09, 23 February 2014
Line 37:		Line 37:

	Unless specified otherwise, protection provided by magic is applied as part of the ''Worn'' tier.		Unless specified otherwise, protection provided by magic is applied as part of the ''Worn'' tier.


	~~== Discussion ==~~
	I am not sure where this is going. Much of this is not a standard part of the game (Endurance Armour, Damage Reduction, Spell Armour. Abilities/itmry of this kind are only to be found on adventure. <br>
	~~'''This is what we do not want'''<br>~~
	~~A game where every ability conforms to some universal game syntax and for which there are no exceptions.~~
	~~: because this is dry and sterile and boring and stifles the imagination and reduces the gaming experience to calculation and economics.~~
	~~'''This is what we do want'''<br>~~
	~~: non-standard abilities/itemry which, while cool, are unambiguous and easy to administer to a sensible reader.<br>~~
	~~'''What we need to crush out of players until their screams fade to whimpers'''<br>~~
	: questions like "Where it says <enter text player would like changed> do you mean <ludicrous interpretation that only a flatworm might consider> or do you mean <ludicrous interpretation, which is marginally less ridiculous than the previous one and which is the player's preference>?"<br>

	~~I have four types of damage avoidance:~~
	~~# Protection - works vs physical damage that is not armour defeating (includes Ice Projectiles, Ice Bolt, Diamond Javelins and similar magic).~~
	~~# Endurance Armour - works vs physical damage which is armour defeating but does not affect the special damage of Specific Grievious Injuries. Does not stack with Protection.~~
	~~# Spell Armour - works vs magical damage (but not Ice Projectiles, Ice Bolt, Diamond Javelins, or similar magic)~~
	# Damage Reduction - works vs all damage of any kind unless specifically ruled out (E.g. does not apply vs A Class damage, does not apply vs Lightning damage, etc) but beyond that stacks with Protection or Spell Armour. It does not stack with Endurance Armour, the greatest defense applies.

	I use the idea of tiers that Stephen has set out, although I don't think that anything is added by saying that there is no benefit to an aura on resisting. It is pointlessly exceptional, and in any cause players would simply seek to have its effectiveness doubled to counter the nerf.<br>
	~~[[Jim Arona]]~~


	From what I understand the basics of the game is Armour is protection, and should be the baseline. Within the rules their is no other protection except for specific things, like Natural Armour which does not stack with normal, you take the better of. Armour of Earth prevents 1 point of damage from each attack and that's a little open to interpretation if it works on spells or not. Most people assume it is only physical damage.

	In essence what I'm trying to say is we have a scaling problem, 20 years ago protection was all we needed. GM's made things exciting by effects that reduced armour or spells that ignored it which seemed fair enough, and as a reward for surviving, players received items that helped negate such effects. Time and years later it's a neccesity to have endurance armour and spell armour and gods knows what else to stay alive at high levels. If we look at why we started playing this game, and what we enjoyed about it, it was a simple system that allowed interesting interpretations of the rules and that set it apart from other games. Too many types of damage and thus protection can confuse the issue.

	Endurance hits were always meant to be scary BECAUSE they bypassed armour, and anyone with a lucky blow could do huge damage. By adding endurance armour we're negating a fundamental part of the game and risking taking the whole level of the game to another tier.
	As for spell armour, due to high games and the potential of spells to wreak havoc so quickly players needed a counter to mitigate the effects, so they have fatigue to strike back. Again this is a scale problem that high level players and their GM's have to deal with. Spells either hit so hard its obscene (falling star) or are used to strip fatigue (Dragon Flames). When these are used on both sides and GM's need to make it survivable without making NPC's stupid and players need a survival tactic as well. With spell armour this works for both sides as long as you have some.
	The only feasable options I see from here really are returning to the games roots and scaling down high games in some effect, so players have a chance, or setting up an uncomplicated armour system so the game is not bogged down with questions to do with individual items and situations.
	~~A quick suggestion I haven't thought through:~~
	~~Armour = normal~~
	~~Endurance = 1/3 Armour~~
	~~Spell = 1/2 Normal~~
	~~At low levels every bit will help, and high levels you'll get the spell and endurance protection you want, while still focusing on the base armour of the game.~~
	Ablative like fire armour would work, and would provide the best protection, Damage reduction like Armour of Earth would affect everything, and as a GM and a player one value is all you need to work with.

	~~Joe Parker (Eltan / SSRC) (mostly in reply to Jim's comment)~~

	I have never heard anyone rule that natural armour does not stack with Protection. Some people rule that it also works like Endurance armour, I don't believe anyone has suggested it should work your way. <br>

	20 years ago, we did not have a scaling problem. Instead, we had a Defense problem - characters would prefer not to have Protection so long as they could reduce their opponent's chance to hit them across the board. We only ever saw one kind of fighter, and they danced around the place in next to nothing. Since fortified armour has been placed, the demand for defense has diminished, in fact the trend to be reasonably heavily armoured. Mind you, there are still a few that are lightly armoured. This is a good thing.<br>

	Stephen hasn't come out and said that he believes there is a scaling problem although, at root, I think that is what is behind this. Not only do I not believe scaling to be the problem, I don't think it '''can''' be the problem. I mean, damage and damage mitigation are simply numbers. If there is a problem, it is where a few of the party are so resilient that they cannot be threatened unless it would likely kill those not so tough. <br>

	20 years ago, the game was a different beast. It was, observably, a worse beast. Interesting interpretations of the rules were rarely seen if they were seen at all. It is less of an issue nowadays.<br>

	As for Joe's position on spell armour...At a time when the game did not offer any kind of spell protection, I saw DMs use magic like Rank 20 Necrosis on every single member of the party. On one memorable occasion, I recall seeing one roll sonsecutively two triples and a double all on damage. The party survived because of a stupid rule finesse. The thesis that contends that magical attacks have become more savage because of spell armour is not sustainable. DMs have always been savage. It follows that spell armour is desirable but not essential. Blast magic simply hasn't changed very much over the years. Arguably, it should have.<br>

	Inevitably, returning to the game's roots would be a stultifying move. At root, the game was poorly conceived, administered like a politburo but without the benefit of a central committee. Even were it some golden age, it is lost to us now (thank God) and there is no way in hell high level characters will agree to have their abilities pared down just so lower level characters can play in high level games. Nor should they.<br>
	~~[[Jim Arona]]~~

Velcanthus: /* Discussion */

2014-02-23T13:43:49Z

Discussion

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:43, 23 February 2014
Line 74:		Line 74:

	Joe Parker (Eltan / SSRC) (mostly in reply to Jim's comment)		Joe Parker (Eltan / SSRC) (mostly in reply to Jim's comment)

			I have never heard anyone rule that natural armour does not stack with Protection. Some people rule that it also works like Endurance armour, I don't believe anyone has suggested it should work your way. <br>

			20 years ago, we did not have a scaling problem. Instead, we had a Defense problem - characters would prefer not to have Protection so long as they could reduce their opponent's chance to hit them across the board. We only ever saw one kind of fighter, and they danced around the place in next to nothing. Since fortified armour has been placed, the demand for defense has diminished, in fact the trend to be reasonably heavily armoured. Mind you, there are still a few that are lightly armoured. This is a good thing.<br>

			Stephen hasn't come out and said that he believes there is a scaling problem although, at root, I think that is what is behind this. Not only do I not believe scaling to be the problem, I don't think it '''can''' be the problem. I mean, damage and damage mitigation are simply numbers. If there is a problem, it is where a few of the party are so resilient that they cannot be threatened unless it would likely kill those not so tough. <br>

			20 years ago, the game was a different beast. It was, observably, a worse beast. Interesting interpretations of the rules were rarely seen if they were seen at all. It is less of an issue nowadays.<br>

			As for Joe's position on spell armour...At a time when the game did not offer any kind of spell protection, I saw DMs use magic like Rank 20 Necrosis on every single member of the party. On one memorable occasion, I recall seeing one roll sonsecutively two triples and a double all on damage. The party survived because of a stupid rule finesse. The thesis that contends that magical attacks have become more savage because of spell armour is not sustainable. DMs have always been savage. It follows that spell armour is desirable but not essential. Blast magic simply hasn't changed very much over the years. Arguably, it should have.<br>

			Inevitably, returning to the game's roots would be a stultifying move. At root, the game was poorly conceived, administered like a politburo but without the benefit of a central committee. Even were it some golden age, it is lost to us now (thank God) and there is no way in hell high level characters will agree to have their abilities pared down just so lower level characters can play in high level games. Nor should they.<br>
			[[Jim Arona]]

Nathalanti: /* Discussion */

2014-02-23T11:29:52Z

Discussion

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:29, 23 February 2014
Line 72:		Line 72:
	At low levels every bit will help, and high levels you'll get the spell and endurance protection you want, while still focusing on the base armour of the game.		At low levels every bit will help, and high levels you'll get the spell and endurance protection you want, while still focusing on the base armour of the game.
	Ablative like fire armour would work, and would provide the best protection, Damage reduction like Armour of Earth would affect everything, and as a GM and a player one value is all you need to work with.		Ablative like fire armour would work, and would provide the best protection, Damage reduction like Armour of Earth would affect everything, and as a GM and a player one value is all you need to work with.
	'Joe Parker (Eltan / SSRC)
			Joe Parker (Eltan / SSRC) (mostly in reply to Jim's comment)

Nathalanti: /* Discussion */

2014-02-23T11:27:59Z

Discussion

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:27, 23 February 2014
Line 59:		Line 59:


	From what I understand the basics of the game is Armour is protection, and should be the baseline. Within the rules their is no other protection except for specific things, like Natural Armour which does not stack with normal, you take the better of. Armour of Earth prevents 1 point of damage from each attack and that's a little open to interpretation~~, weather~~ it works on spells or not. Most people assume it is only physical damage.		From what I understand the basics of the game is Armour is protection, and should be the baseline. Within the rules their is no other protection except for specific things, like Natural Armour which does not stack with normal, you take the better of. Armour of Earth prevents 1 point of damage from each attack and that's a little open to interpretation if it works on spells or not. Most people assume it is only physical damage.

	In essence what I'm trying to say is we have a scaling problem, 20 years ago protection was all we needed. GM's made things exciting by effects that reduced armour or spells that ignored it which seemed fair enough, and as a reward for surviving, players received items that helped negate such effects. Time and years later it's a neccesity to have endurance armour and spell armour and gods knows what else to stay alive at high levels. If we look at why we started playing this game, and what we enjoyed about it, it was a simple system that allowed interesting interpretations of the rules and that set it apart from other games. Too many types of damage and thus protection can confuse the issue.		In essence what I'm trying to say is we have a scaling problem, 20 years ago protection was all we needed. GM's made things exciting by effects that reduced armour or spells that ignored it which seemed fair enough, and as a reward for surviving, players received items that helped negate such effects. Time and years later it's a neccesity to have endurance armour and spell armour and gods knows what else to stay alive at high levels. If we look at why we started playing this game, and what we enjoyed about it, it was a simple system that allowed interesting interpretations of the rules and that set it apart from other games. Too many types of damage and thus protection can confuse the issue.
	Endurance hits were always meant to be scary BECAUSE they bypassed armour, and anyone with a lucky blow could do huge damage. By adding endurance armour we're negating a fundamental part of the game and risking taking ~~he who~~ level of the game to another tier.
	As for spell armour, due to high games and the potential of spells to wreak ~~so much~~ havoc so quickly players needed a counter to mitigate the effects so they have fatigue to strike back. Again this is a scale problem, high level players are ~~the reason this is needed, for players~~ and GM's ~~alike~~.		Endurance hits were always meant to be scary BECAUSE they bypassed armour, and anyone with a lucky blow could do huge damage. By adding endurance armour we're negating a fundamental part of the game and risking taking the whole level of the game to another tier.
	The only feasable options I see from here really are returning to the games roots and scaling down high games in some effect, so players have a chance, or setting up an uncomplicated armour system so the game is not bogged down with questions to do with ~~single~~ items.		As for spell armour, due to high games and the potential of spells to wreak havoc so quickly players needed a counter to mitigate the effects, so they have fatigue to strike back. Again this is a scale problem that high level players and their GM's have to deal with. Spells either hit so hard its obscene (falling star) or are used to strip fatigue (Dragon Flames). When these are used on both sides and GM's need to make it survivable without making NPC's stupid and players need a survival tactic as well. With spell armour this works for both sides as long as you have some.
			The only feasable options I see from here really are returning to the games roots and scaling down high games in some effect, so players have a chance, or setting up an uncomplicated armour system so the game is not bogged down with questions to do with individual items and situations.
	A quick suggestion I haven't thought through:		A quick suggestion I haven't thought through:
	Armour = normal		Armour = normal

Nathalanti: /* Discussion */

2014-02-23T10:55:07Z

Discussion

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:55, 23 February 2014
Line 57:		Line 57:
	I use the idea of tiers that Stephen has set out, although I don't think that anything is added by saying that there is no benefit to an aura on resisting. It is pointlessly exceptional, and in any cause players would simply seek to have its effectiveness doubled to counter the nerf.<br>		I use the idea of tiers that Stephen has set out, although I don't think that anything is added by saying that there is no benefit to an aura on resisting. It is pointlessly exceptional, and in any cause players would simply seek to have its effectiveness doubled to counter the nerf.<br>
	[[Jim Arona]]		[[Jim Arona]]


			From what I understand the basics of the game is Armour is protection, and should be the baseline. Within the rules their is no other protection except for specific things, like Natural Armour which does not stack with normal, you take the better of. Armour of Earth prevents 1 point of damage from each attack and that's a little open to interpretation, weather it works on spells or not. Most people assume it is only physical damage.
			In essence what I'm trying to say is we have a scaling problem, 20 years ago protection was all we needed. GM's made things exciting by effects that reduced armour or spells that ignored it which seemed fair enough, and as a reward for surviving, players received items that helped negate such effects. Time and years later it's a neccesity to have endurance armour and spell armour and gods knows what else to stay alive at high levels. If we look at why we started playing this game, and what we enjoyed about it, it was a simple system that allowed interesting interpretations of the rules and that set it apart from other games. Too many types of damage and thus protection can confuse the issue.
			Endurance hits were always meant to be scary BECAUSE they bypassed armour, and anyone with a lucky blow could do huge damage. By adding endurance armour we're negating a fundamental part of the game and risking taking he who level of the game to another tier.
			As for spell armour, due to high games and the potential of spells to wreak so much havoc so quickly players needed a counter to mitigate the effects so they have fatigue to strike back. Again this is a scale problem, high level players are the reason this is needed, for players and GM's alike.
			The only feasable options I see from here really are returning to the games roots and scaling down high games in some effect, so players have a chance, or setting up an uncomplicated armour system so the game is not bogged down with questions to do with single items.
			A quick suggestion I haven't thought through:
			Armour = normal
			Endurance = 1/3 Armour
			Spell = 1/2 Normal
			At low levels every bit will help, and high levels you'll get the spell and endurance protection you want, while still focusing on the base armour of the game.
			Ablative like fire armour would work, and would provide the best protection, Damage reduction like Armour of Earth would affect everything, and as a GM and a player one value is all you need to work with.
			'Joe Parker (Eltan / SSRC)

Velcanthus at 02:18, 21 February 2014

2014-02-21T02:18:42Z

@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 : something that is worn. E.g. clothing, armour, tabards, cloaks, etc.
 ; Natural
-: natural toughness/resistance/immunity. E.g. thick skin, being made of metal, dipped in the Styxx as a baby.
+: natural toughness/resistance/immunity. E.g. thick skin, being made of metal, dipped in the Styx as a baby.
 NB Magic resistance applies to a character and their possessions, reduced damage from resistance applies after the Aura, before Wielded or Worn.
 Unless specified otherwise, protection provided by magic is applied as part of the ''Worn'' tier.

Stephen: Proposed standard terms for defining armour/protection.

2014-02-21T01:13:18Z

Proposed standard terms for defining armour/protection.

New page

Armour is protection from damage, by default this refers to protection from physical damage (reducing current Fatigue) but can also refer to protection from physical damage to Endurance or protection from magical damage.

The following terms are used to describe the types and effects of armour.

Some items and abilities will have different behaviour from these definitions but these standard terms should be used wherever possible and describe the default behaviour with exceptions only where explicitly stated.

=== Categories of Protection ===
Armour is defined in terms of the amount of protection it provides in the following categories:
; Fatigue Protection (FT Prot / FP)
: decreases damage from physical attacks to Fatigue.
: If not otherwise specified this is the kind of protection that armour provides. Also referred to as AP (Armour Protection).
; Endurance Protection (EN Prot / EP)
: decreases damage from physical attacks to Endurance.
: Does not normally stop the Endurance damage of a Specific Grievous result but normally applies against the rolled damage.
; Damage Reduction (DR)
: decreases damage from physical attacks to Fatigue and Endurance. Stacks with FT and EN Protection unless specified otherwise.

==== Qualifiers ====
; Ablative
: the protection is reduced by the damage it blocks.
; Magical
: applies to magical damage instead of physical.
Or more specific qualifiers may be used when the protection only applies to specific types of damage - e.g. vs Magical Fire, vs Undead Draining.

=== Tiers of Protection ===
By default the tiers stack but there is no stacking within a tier (Greatest Effect Applies) unless explicitly specified otherwise.
; Aura
: a field that surrounds the characters, this protection that applies before any others. E.g. Titan Aura or circle of protection.
; Wielded
: the protection is interposed between the character and the attack. E.g. a Shield.
; Worn
: something that is worn. E.g. clothing, armour, tabards, cloaks, etc.
; Natural
: natural toughness/resistance/immunity. E.g. thick skin, being made of metal, dipped in the Styxx as a baby.

NB Magic resistance applies to a character and their possessions, reduced damage from resistance applies after the Aura, before Wielded or Worn.

Unless specified otherwise, protection provided by magic is applied as part of the ''Worn'' tier.