Powered by Invision Power Board


Pages: (2) 1 [2]  ( Go to first unread post ) Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> Some random questions, For example, unlimited weaves at 1st lvl
Axel
Posted: Mar 13 2004, 02:23 AM
Quote Post


Freelance HTML coder (hint Aleshandre)
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 218
Member No.: 54
Joined: 22-January 04



In strictly historical terms it would be almost as expensive having the damn stuff refitted as having it made in the first place. And that's assuming you only need small modifications. If you stole it off a dead Trolloc, it'd be cheaper having it made personally for you instead.
You've also got to remember that knights and squires went through years of training in full plate. Even foot-soldiers typically wore mail and occasionally metal breast plates. If you don't have the neccessary training full plate would probably be more harm than good.
Chain mail does not suffer from either of these problems to the same degree as full plate, but it still suffers them. Although if you're reasonably the same size as the orignial owner mail shouldn't require much, if any, refitting; I'm not saying it would fit like it was supposed to, but it wouldn't be unbearable. Its also designed primarily to protect the torso, so you needn't worry overmuch about it getting in the way, but it will be cumbersome and prevent you from making any quick actions. The weight is also a noticeable factor, unless you're character is exceptionally strong.
Lower down the list we get to leather armor. Not as heavy as mail it also fails to protect to the same degree. However these nasty leather pads will still protect their wearer from harm to a certain extent. This is also a light armor, so the rules will allow you to wear it anyway.
The last is padded armor. This is just several layers of clothing designed to slow incomming blows. Anyone who capable of getting 3 or 4 layers of clothes on at once can get this stuff.


--------------------
Honorary Paladin of the Lawful Naughty
If I seem to hate the d20 system, its only because I hate the system. Actually I just hate 3e, its biased me against the system. I rather like WoT.
PMEmail PosterUsers WebsiteAOL
Top
NorthSaber
Posted: Mar 13 2004, 02:43 AM
Quote Post


Learned Master
***

Group: Members
Posts: 18
Member No.: 107
Joined: 1-March 04



I think what you're describing is going fairly far into DM-specific preference. If a group of adventurers find a bunch of treasure, including a few sets of armor, I think it's very rare for the DM to specify the size and shape of each and every piece of equipment. For example, a DM could say that the Ter'angreal helmet they found is too small for anyone in the group. Sure, it's within the DM's power to do so, but not many bother with such details.

I guess there are two ways of looking at this issue (and other such issues): reasonable realism and going by the book.

What you're describing is reasonable realism. If a DM can maintain this level of realism in his campaigns, the players are in for a treat. The world will be more immersive and the storyline more enjoyable, but some players may object to various house-rules and ad-hoc DM rulings that are not covered in the rules.

When going by the book, many such minor details will be overlooked unless specified in the rules. DMs and players who prefer this style believe that whatever was written in the rules was the way the game was intended to be played. The rules are also important because they are the only objective source of guidelines for playing the game, and shared expectations are important to have.

Although I wish there were more DMs who go with reasonable realism, the fact is that there aren't that many. That's why I always lean towards going by the book, and in this case I must maintain that in most cases found armor shouldn't give undue trouble. If I were the player, I might get the impression that a DM that insists that the armor doesn't fit and I have to pay a fortune to get it refitted simply doesn't want a channeler to wear armor and arbitrarily is making my life harder.

Obviously this may not be the case, but whenever the DM chooses to "wing" rulings not straight from the book, the question of objectivity will be present.


--------------------
.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.
Q: "How many Zen masters does it take to change a light bulb?"
A: "A tree in the golden forest."
- Kalle Mikkola
PMEmail Poster
Top
alohahaha
Posted: Mar 13 2004, 04:09 AM
Quote Post


Learned Master
***

Group: Members
Posts: 48
Member No.: 92
Joined: 13-February 04



While you may be true about the difference in GMs, whether they're a book-banger or wing-it, there's a lot more to it than simply that. In my games, I basically forbade armor in my games with the players because I didn't want any arguments about it. They have the Defense rating, and I think that that will be good enough. And if it isn't, I'll just increase their Defense rating later, no big deal. But what you're talking about is twinkery, pure and simple. Sure, that MAY happen, but I don't think in any GMs game. While GMs try to make a game that's fun for players, there also needs a balance. That's why all these people are coming up with reasons why it shouldn't work. Yeah, if your wilder got a full plate armor that fit and a shield to add 10 to his defense, of course he'll take it. But your wilder would also take the Chodan Kal 10 rating sa'angreal statuettes if given the chance too. Besides, with WoT, with all the homebrew character classes and game systems, and since there's only 2 books printed about the RPG, rules were made to be broken. In fact, I'd be completely surprised if there's a GM who plays WoT totally by the rules. Which, as I said, is kinda tough, since there's only been 2 books written about it, and one of them is an adventure.

This post has been edited by alohahaha on Mar 13 2004, 06:15 AM


--------------------
I may be in the gutter
But I'm looking to the stars!
Shatter your rose-colored glasses
But never stop dreaming.
I may have my feet down to earth
But my head is always in the clouds.
I won't promise you the sun and the moon
But I can tell you fantasies of far greater things
While providing you with simple pleasures.
PMEmail PosterUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
NorthSaber
Posted: Mar 13 2004, 04:53 AM
Quote Post


Learned Master
***

Group: Members
Posts: 18
Member No.: 107
Joined: 1-March 04



Agreed; the lack of rules - and more importantly, exact rules - does lead to house-rules, and so it is to be expected that the DM will make calls such as this. Still, from a role-playing point of view, even if I don't know the benefits or disadvantages of wearing full plate or carrying a large shield, I'll figure out that I'm safer with a half-inch of wood and metal between me and the trolloc axe. Although having the numbers to back this assumption up are nice, from a RP standpoint they're not necessary.

But this whole armor/Defense argument is heading towards arguing about logic, and d20 systems are not really based on logic. Personally, I don't like the Defense feature, but then again I'm also against a level-based systems, and I don't agree with the hit point system either. I'm willing to look past these minor shortcomings because d20 games allow for quick, easy, fun games.

The original question was whether there is anything in the rules that prohibit a channeler from using armor, and the answer has been clear: no. Many of the same limitations that most have listed for armor would be equally true for armsmen, and whether the DM wishes to make using armor difficult is a campaign choice.

So we can close the book on that one, thanks to everyone for their comments! smile.gif


--------------------
.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.
Q: "How many Zen masters does it take to change a light bulb?"
A: "A tree in the golden forest."
- Kalle Mikkola
PMEmail Poster
Top
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Topic OptionsPages: (2) 1 [2]  Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll