Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
GauntZero

Agility Bonus Limit on Armour

Recommended Posts

I think it would be best and simplest to just Cap the Agility Score instead of capping Agility Bonus and giving a penalty on Agility Tests Separatly.

 

So, for example, feudal armor could limit the Agility Score to 20. This means a maximum agility bonus of 2 and makes saltos in feudal armor very difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thinking about.  Say you got full plate which has agility cap of 2.  Makes sense that any attempt at stealth is treated as if your agility is 20 as all the clanking of metal would make a lot of noise.  Though for rolls that require you to sit down and do just basic hand movements aka driving.  I feel that the cap should not effect them in that sense.  What do you guys think about that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's actually more realistic to restrict it across the board. Speaking from personal experience, it's hard to even sit down wearing full plate, let alone do anything that requires precise, small movements - I definitely would not want to drive a car this way ^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly! I mean, cutting the bonus is just half the deal.

It would restrict you in your movement in general due to both its weight and its restricting character.

It also makes a difference if you wear a body suit or a guard flak, it is not only restricting to wear a full plate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Movement being cut I am fine.  Still would love to see felling be a threat to toughness only.  Agility in terms of defense shouldn't really be hit by felling weapons as your avoiding the damage.  What should happen is agility cap should be more severe.  Sure make special rules for power armor if you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, in real life knights in renaissance plate armour could actually perform somersaults and other feats of acrobatics, as the armours were "tailor made" and had a very good fit. 

 

We're not talking about Henry VIII here, who needed a crane to mount his horse, but fit and strong warriors with high-quality armour. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, but a cap of 20 in Agility? That's way out of line.

 

Edit: That would also result in a crippled Adept with Agility 23 equal to a trained assassin with Agility 65.

Edited by Darth Smeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think you are avoiding the damage (in case of nimble), because your armour already got pierced.

 

I consider it as elegant movement to avoid being hit in a vulnerable spot. Like getting only hit a little at a non-critical position.

 

If a weapon has felling, it has some bad side effect that turns a light hit into a more severe one.

The exact effect can depend on the weapon (a kind of poison, small detonation, razor-sharp blades ...).

 

So, for me, it is ok to also apply felling to nimble.

 

 

As about the capping being too hard, why not say, that it imposes a one-time penalty of -10 on Agility, if above the cap. Not capping the bonus, but -10 on the value (which also decreases the bonus, but only by 1).

You may not forget, that there might be an additional penalty for heavy armour indirectly because of the amount you may carry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See here is how I see things.  You got a agility cap which cuts down your defense.  Now if you apply felling to it you got to wonder why in the hell would you bother with the nimble talent at all?

 

Say we have a warrior with agility 80 and toughness 80.  Just bare with me and say the player is a newbie that bought nimble for this experiment.

 

Say the options is enforcer armor with agility cap of 6.  That means all agility is cut to 60.  Movement is down to 6, rolls are 60, and init is 6.  Toughness suffers nothing as it shouldn't so it is still at 80.

 

Now we have a weapon with felling 2 (assuming felling works the say way as it did before).  Your method GauntZero would cut agility by 2 more for a defense of 4 plus armor.  Toughness is cut down to 6 plus armor.  Now my method the agility is not cut so it is 6 plus armor while toughness is cut by 2 for total defense of 6 plus armor.  I guess what I am saying is that with your method you are applying double penalty to the nimble talent and if that is the case I have to ask why bother with the talent at all?  Clearly it is weak and should be avoided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My proposal was to give -10 on Agility once you are over the cap.

So, the penalty would be max. -10, not more.

As for nimble - with this talent, special armour like body suits should be prefered to heavy weighing armour.

Realistic so far...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, the type of character who'd take nimble isn't one who's likely to prance around in heavy armour in the first place, but rather the lithe, lightning quick and, well, nimble assassin kind of guy who works best wearing unobstructive armour. So I'm really fine with felling also applying to nimble, as it is a talent that's already really strong as it is, as it pretty much allows you to skip leveling toughness and still retain a fairly high amount of protection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See here is how I see things.  You got a agility cap which cuts down your defense.  Now if you apply felling to it you got to wonder why in the hell would you bother with the nimble talent at all?

 

Say we have a warrior with agility 80 and toughness 80.  Just bare with me and say the player is a newbie that bought nimble for this experiment.

 

Say the options is enforcer armor with agility cap of 6.  That means all agility is cut to 60.  Movement is down to 6, rolls are 60, and init is 6.  Toughness suffers nothing as it shouldn't so it is still at 80.

 

Now we have a weapon with felling 2 (assuming felling works the say way as it did before).  Your method GauntZero would cut agility by 2 more for a defense of 4 plus armor.  Toughness is cut down to 6 plus armor.  Now my method the agility is not cut so it is 6 plus armor while toughness is cut by 2 for total defense of 6 plus armor.  I guess what I am saying is that with your method you are applying double penalty to the nimble talent and if that is the case I have to ask why bother with the talent at all?  Clearly it is weak and should be avoided.

 

Nimble is a talent that shouldn't have been implemented in the first place. It is just wrong to associate agility with damage soaking. It is not intuitive and discussions are just going to get harder because of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

See here is how I see things.  You got a agility cap which cuts down your defense.  Now if you apply felling to it you got to wonder why in the hell would you bother with the nimble talent at all?

 

Say we have a warrior with agility 80 and toughness 80.  Just bare with me and say the player is a newbie that bought nimble for this experiment.

 

Say the options is enforcer armor with agility cap of 6.  That means all agility is cut to 60.  Movement is down to 6, rolls are 60, and init is 6.  Toughness suffers nothing as it shouldn't so it is still at 80.

 

Now we have a weapon with felling 2 (assuming felling works the say way as it did before).  Your method GauntZero would cut agility by 2 more for a defense of 4 plus armor.  Toughness is cut down to 6 plus armor.  Now my method the agility is not cut so it is 6 plus armor while toughness is cut by 2 for total defense of 6 plus armor.  I guess what I am saying is that with your method you are applying double penalty to the nimble talent and if that is the case I have to ask why bother with the talent at all?  Clearly it is weak and should be avoided.

 

Nimble is a talent that shouldn't have been implemented in the first place. It is just wrong to associate agility with damage soaking. It is not intuitive and discussions are just going to get harder because of it.

 

 

This I can agree with.  Maybe nimble can reduce the action point cost of avoiding attacks instead of just being a poor man's toughness?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't that like adding more evasion actions, which is already a talent. The idea is to allow agility to be a constant defence without adding an extra roll or stacking on top of toughness.

...

Low damage rolls represent glancing blows rather than solid impacts, the sort that can be redirected by reflex and, uh, "Agility". Obviously, the analogy doesn't work in all cases, but perhaps the ability to remove damage dice lower than their AB at the cost of not getting their TB to Defence? An attack reduced to no dice "fails". If it needs justifying, their movement causes more damage on solid blows. Makes it more dichotomous than flat TB (either no damage or high damage), but hey, differentiation, and it doesn't build "Defence".

Brainstorming makes me feel dumb. :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...