Armors and Missile Weapons - some thougts...

[Brettoni]

It occurs to me that when in any armour more encumbrant than a chain mail or splint mail, the use of missile weapons should be heavily penalized.
Do you guys agree it would be logical that there should be some missile penalties when wearing armour?
for example:

no armour: slight Bonus to THACO to thrown weapons and Bows.

leather aromor: slight penalty to THACO and for thrown weapons (darts, knives, axes, etc). no penalties or Bonus for the rest

studded leather: same as leather, but a higher Thaco penalty to thrown weapons.

chain mail: moderate penalties for thrown weapons and slings. light penalty for Bows. crossbows no penalty.

splint mail: same as chain mail but slightly higer penalties

plate mail: very heavy penalties to thrown weapons, making them near impossible to use -also a dammage penalty to thrown. High penalties for Bows and slings. No crossbow penalty.

full plate mail: impossible to use thrown weapons expept for axe at very short range, nearly impossible to use bows and slings. crossbows have a slight Thaco penalty.

Helmets: they would cause additional penalties to the use of missile weapons, because they diminish your visual capacities

Thus a armored fighter with a Helmet would be mostly ineffective with ranged weapons expect with a slow crossbow, which makes sense

I think if there is some MOD or whatnot out there that does this it could be a good idea if possible!!

This would render light armour idespensible for those who prefer missile weapons and bring back some usefullness for those +2 leather armours and all. It would also change combat strategy.

Some magic armors could negate some penalties as a special abitily.

[ August 03, 2006, 21:25: Message edited by: Brettoni ]

[Aldeth the Foppish Idiot]

Actually, in medieval times, maneuverability was a prized assest of most custom made armors. The idea that a knight could not get back up if he was knocked off his horse is more fiction than fact. The mere act of swinging a sword requires a good deal of maneuverability in the arms, and as someone who does has some training in medieval weaponry, your footwork is just as important as what the top half of your body is doing. From experience I can tell you that using a bow in chain mail is no trouble at all. As such, the use of missile weapons shouldn't be effected that much. If you were unable to throw a weapon in full plate mail, you likely wouldn't be able to swing a sword very well either, although I have to admit I've never actually been in plate or full plate armor.

Furthermore, it's not like full plate mail is one continuous piece of metal. There are joints in the armor, and these are covered by leather and chain mail. Some even had smaller plates that would slide down when you raised your arms to cover the weak spots. After protection, maveuverability was the next most important aspect in making armor. Someone who could barely move in armor would not be a very effective warrior.

[T2Bruno]

The whole issue of armor class and THAC0 is really a combined issue. If you have better armor, there is less dodging that needs to be done in order to strike (whether with a melee or missile weapon). So while heavier armor may impede the ability, the extra protection allows more time to aim and the whole thing evens out.

In reality that may be BS, but then again so is magic. However, shooting skill in military troops is not really affected by battle armor. Even snipers wear armor.

[ August 03, 2006, 21:38: Message edited by: T2Bruno ]

[Brettoni]

Aldeth,

OK, perhaps shuffle around bonuses / penalties to make it less restrictive.
But I do think a "regular" plate armor would be less refinded then those +1, +2, etc - +1, +2 armor would therefore reduce penalties greatly.
This would actually add even more strategy:
should my fighter wear a plate mail +1 or a regular plate mail and a ring of protection? It would depend on what you want your fighter to do.

Also, when you look at the only BG2 class specialized in missiles, the Archer, his armor choice is greatly restricted.

[T2Bruno]

Not all tradeoffs in RPGs are realistic. They are simply necessary for game balancing.

[Brettoni]

T2Bruno,

of course MANY things are unrealistic in BG2.
but I think, without changing the spirit of the game in any way, this bonus/penalty system would be good.
I mean thieves get penalties for their skills depending on their armor.
I would even go further to say there should be STR min for armors (as exists for weapons).
Even further would be that lightly armored warriors get Thaco bonuses even in melee (so better Thaco, but worse AC)
When you think about it it makes sense for BG2: kensais can't wear any armor and get high bonuses.

[Harbourboy]

I don't think that using a ranged weapon requires any more maneouvrability than a melee weapon. It would be just as hard to control a flail as a sling in plate armour I would say.

This is probably implicit in that most plate wearers would likely have low dexterity anyway.

[Brettoni]

Harborboy,

I don't know.. In my mind plate armors and full plate armors: the regular kind and not the lighter kinds like Ankeg armors, dragon scales, +1, etc... really hinder the kind of movement you need for a bow or a sling.
The improved plate mails would be specically designed to improve movement - we could imagine an armor sheet with bonus/penalties to ranged weapons: the same way the special chain mails allow to cast spells, some special lightweight plates would give no penalties and so on.
but that's just my opinion.

[kuemper]

Also, when you look at the only BG2 class specialized in missiles, the Archer, his armor choice is greatly restricted.

I thought it was because it was a Ranger kit, not because they use missile weapons. Rangers are suppose to be stealthy or loose their SA.

In PnP RPGs, there are restrictions and/or liabilities when using slings and bows. But if the armor is made properly to fit the wearer, it should have good movement in the shoulders/armpit areas to compensate for weapon movement.

Personally, I don't feel there should be any restrictions reguarding how heavy/light/no armor affects your ability to use a bow/sling/dart. When that happens, the game usually requires the PC/NPC to eat as well.

[Brettoni]

Kuemper,

Normal Rangers can wear any armor.
Archer can't specifically because they are Archers, and need more movement in general to be effective.
Also, you say "armors made to fit": yes I agree, if the armor is specially designed then sure. In that case it would be the equivalent of special + 1 and above armors, Ankeg, etc etc...
When you see the price difference between a normal platemail and a +1 platemail, it makes no sense almost, since all the +1 platemail has is its lighter weight, and that a normal platemail allows you to wear ring of protections and such.
As a matter of fact, this has the ill effect of making normal platemail superior to +1 platemails since +1 prohibits the use of rings that add AC as well as saving throws. Adding a bonus/penalty missile system would add in depth of play simply witout going to the extreme of feeding your char..
You say armor shouldn't affect PC/NPCs; so I ask you why the game has such penalties for thieves?
Anyhow, this is all hopeful thinking on my part.. perhaps in a BG3 game...

[T2Bruno]

There are strength requirement for armor -- along with the encumbered factor.

You've answered your own question -- what you want has already been done with the archer and kensai. The rest of the chumps just have to deal with much slower progression in aim and ability to cause damage -- a penalty of sorts for being able to use missile weapons with armor. You can either train to be effective armored or train to be more affective without armor.

[kuemper]

Normal Rangers can wear any armor.

Yes, and when they wear anything heavier than studded leather, they can no longer go stealthy.

Also, you say "armors made to fit": yes I agree, if the armor is specially designed then sure. In that case it would be the equivalent of special + 1 and above armors, Ankeg, etc etc...

Maybe it's me, but when I buy armor, I sort of figure it gets hammered to fit the specific character's body shape. Changing the shape of the metal/leather doesn't make it 'magical'.

You say armor shouldn't affect PC/NPCs; so I ask you why the game has such penalties for thieves?

Nitpick - I never stated armor shouldn't affect PC/NPCs.

Thieves, otoh, don't just sling bullets; shoot arrows; fling darts. They actually get into tight spaces and contorted positions in order to perform their skills (picking locks, disarming/removing traps, picking pockets).

[Brettoni]

hmmm.... I don't know, I still have to go with my initial thoughts on Armor affecting your skills.
Regarding Archers: they have heavy bonuses to their missile skills and can't wear heavy armor. It just makes sense to me that any chat not wearing heavy armor have some advantage with missile weapons vs. heavy armored - I'm not talking about the kind of bonus Archers get, since they are specialists. It would would be a minimal +1 or +2 Thaco max as a bonus for shooting with no armor, and likewise penalties for heavy armor (maybe up to -5 with platemail). So nothing that crazy like Arcehr Bonuses.

To answer Kuemper, of course the armor you buy is hammered to fit, but that dosen't make it better to shoot in:
we could easily imagine better finished armours offer less penalties with missile weapons. Even perhaps specific Archer Armors, expensive but with no constraints.

Anyhow, thanks all for your input, but I just won't be convinced!!

[Aldeth the Foppish Idiot]

Maybe it's me, but when I buy armor, I sort of figure it gets hammered to fit the specific character's body shape. Changing the shape of the metal/leather doesn't make it 'magical'.

I agree. It's kind of like when you buy a set of golf clubs. You pay a set price, even though once you decide on the purchase they have to tailor them to take into account your swing speed, height, etc. When I buy a set of full plate mail armor from Ribald, I assume that he makes some adjustments depending on whether I'm buying full plate mail for Minsc as opposed to Mazzy.

Again I must state that I think some people are overestimating the effect that metal armor impedes your ability to move. Any armor that significantly impedes your ability to move quickly with full range of motion compromises your ability in combat, and thus, isn't very useful. I've been in full chain mail, with a set that happened to include leather breast plates and arm coverings. The whole thing weighed about 70 lbs. The thing is, it really doesn't affect your movement at all. The biggest difference I noticed to fighting in armor and not in armor is that fighting in armor causes you to fatigue more quickly, because you're carrying around 70 extra lbs.

And yes, I was able to use my bow just fine, although my typical weapon use was two long swords. Actually, I shouldn't say I could use my bow just fine - in fact, I sucked with a bow. But it had nothing to do with the armor. I also sucked when practicing with no armor on at all. I'm just a lousy shot.