Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Armor in 4th.

Posted by: 30+coyote Apr 16 2006, 10:30 PM

I know realistically you can layer armor, a vest with an armored coat for example, but how does that work in sr4?

Posted by: jklst14 Apr 16 2006, 10:36 PM

When you layer armor in 4th edition, you use whichever armor value is higher.

So a character in an armored jacket and armored clothes has ballistic/impact of 8/6, just like someone who only has an armored jacket.

-JKL

Posted by: 30+coyote Apr 16 2006, 10:54 PM

So layering is pointless?

Posted by: Konsaki Apr 16 2006, 11:09 PM

Unless you house rule something else...

Posted by: 30+coyote Apr 16 2006, 11:44 PM

No, it just seems illogical.

Posted by: jklst14 Apr 16 2006, 11:59 PM

I like the idea of being able to take off an armored jacket but still have the security of armored clothing underneath. Otherwise, layering is not terribly useful.

However, if you like buying armor modifications, layering armor can help you save some money.

For instance:

Joe Samuari has a chameleon suit, a camo suit and an armored vest. He goes and spends a lot of money to upgrade all three of them to level 6 thermal dampening.

Jane Samuari has the same three armor outfits as Joe. Rather than upgrade all three with thermal dampening, Jane buys a single set of armor clothing underwear. She upgrades that one set with level 6 thermal dampening and then layers it with whatever outer armor she feels like using.

JKL

Posted by: hobgoblin Apr 17 2006, 12:32 AM

hmm, thats a interesting take on layering...

Posted by: Glyph Apr 17 2006, 01:06 AM

Also remember that things like helmets and shields add directly to your armor rating, although they also count when figuring out encumbrance penalties.

Posted by: hobgoblin Apr 17 2006, 01:31 AM

hmm. hard to tell if thats intended, or just a bad case of wording.
still, it makes somewhat sense...

Posted by: Aku Apr 17 2006, 02:38 AM

QUOTE (jklst14)

and as GM, i would rule that said armor for jane is only effective in hiding when she has the hots for joe.

Posted by: GrinderTheTroll Apr 17 2006, 04:51 AM

QUOTE (30+coyote)

No, it just seems illogical.

Problem with prior versions was there where a lot of rules (movement, pool restictions, layerd armor effects) that it was a pain.

As stated early in SR4, the goal is not to mimic reality 100% and the margin of error here is minimal. Simple helps a lot more than it hurts IMO.

Posted by: Ophis Apr 17 2006, 09:18 AM

Armour layering was only ever in 3rd IRC 2nd didn't allow it...
I just hope the do form fitting as a "helmet" typr set up, adding to you ratings rather than as an armour of its own (+2,+2 maybe for top level)

Posted by: captainwhizz Apr 17 2006, 01:49 PM

QUOTE ( SR4 @ p149)

If a character is wearing more than one piece of armour at a time, only the highest value applies.

Posted by: Pyrius Apr 17 2006, 03:21 PM

QUOTE

(SR4 p.149)
Too much armor, however, can slow a character down. If either of a character’s armor ratings exceeds his Body x 2, apply a –1 modifier to Agility and Reaction for every 2 points (or fraction thereof ) that his Body is exceeded. Note that this may affect Initiative as well. If a character is wearing multiple armor items, add their ratings together before comparing to Body.

Posted by: Voran Apr 21 2006, 09:19 AM

QUOTE (Pyrius)

QUOTE

That part only applies to weight tho. The armor effect itself doesn't stack, the impact it has on your A/R does tho.

I miss form fitting body armor.

Posted by: Oracle Apr 21 2006, 09:31 AM

The 'armor higher than body' rule unfortunately does not stop players from building TANK-TROLL monstrosities. On a convention a month ago I played a game with a player whose character was a Troll maxed on body, wearing full body armor, a helmet and a ballistic shield. Altogether he had a ballistic armor rating of I think 15-17 and rolled 30+ damage resistance dice. However he had only a reaction of 1 and no dodge skill. I don't think it is necessary to give further details...well possibly this one is interesting: Of course IT used a composite bow, and the player insisted he could use the bow in combination with the shield.

Posted by: Dissonance Apr 21 2006, 09:35 AM

On the plus side? It looks like the kind of armor that Shadowrunners would wear in a running situation have higher armor ratings across the board.

Posted by: CONAN9845 Apr 21 2006, 10:56 AM

Even though I think that layering armor should have some sort of beneficial effects, I don't have a problem with the RAW.

Also, I don't allow thermal dampening unless it is on all layers.

Posted by: Aaron Apr 21 2006, 12:30 PM

QUOTE (CONAN9845)

Also, I don't allow thermal dampening unless it is on all layers.

I bet you don't sleep with a sheet.

Posted by: Shrike30 Apr 24 2006, 06:26 PM

QUOTE (Voran)

I miss form fitting body armor.

I don't, really. The cheese that was "hey, here's 2 more points of ballistic armor that doesn't count towards layering in any way" was annoying. I'd much rather have my players wearing either full body armor, or figuring out some more interesting combinations (FFBA leggings and arm portions, put together with an armored, plated vest, usually got a 6/4 from me). As it was, it was a way for runners to squeeze in a couple more points of armor with no real disadvantage except for a few extra kilos.

Posted by: James McMurray Apr 24 2006, 06:31 PM

After it's introduction I never saw a runner without FFBA. Why not just increase the prices and armor ratings across the board and save some room on the character sheets?

Posted by: Butterblume Apr 24 2006, 08:28 PM

I didn't use FFBA. But then, i still use regular ammo, so I might be crazy .

Posted by: James McMurray Apr 24 2006, 08:57 PM

Yeah, you're definitely crazy.

Posted by: Voran Apr 25 2006, 12:19 AM

QUOTE (Butterblume)

I didn't use FFBA. But then, i still use regular ammo, so I might be crazy

Regular ammo, you mean EX EX? What's crazy about that?

Posted by: TBRMInsanity Apr 25 2006, 01:30 PM

Layering comes into effect when you play with degrading armor rules (ie bullets make armor less effective over time). Having multiple layers of armor will mean you can sustain more damage to your armor over time.

Posted by: Teulisch Apr 25 2006, 07:43 PM

ffba would still be usefull. as long as you dont get a penalty, its a VERY good idea to have decent armor on beneath your regular clothes. If they want it to work like it did in old editions, they could make it a +2/+1 or something, but i suspect the new rules are moving us away from such sillyness.

Posted by: hobgoblin Apr 25 2006, 07:58 PM

books will tell...

Posted by: juggertroll Apr 27 2006, 11:34 AM

probably, but if layering become gold some players will think this way:

Gm: now my players can layer armors!!

Pc: so my 10 body troll will use 2 full body armors!!!

i like to see better rules for layering then the ones alredy existing

Posted by: Shrike30 Apr 27 2006, 04:59 PM

Layering has traditionally worked in such a way that something that would feasibly fit over or under some other thing (a vest under a long coat, FFBA under an armored jacket, armored clothing under a leather jacket, that kind of thing) were layerable, but random-ass combinations (i'm gonna wear three suits of FFBA, since they don't count towards penalties for layering in SR3!) didn't layer solely because of the simple virtue of being two (or three) items of armor. Sanity wins out in these cases.

Posted by: juggertroll Apr 28 2006, 11:19 AM

Sanity is a very good quality in rpg sometimes

Posted by: DigitalMage Apr 28 2006, 12:49 PM

Slightly off topic, but remember that in 3rd edition FFBA doesn't count when working out penalties due to layering. However the losses to COmbat Pool have absolutely nothing to do with layering (i.e. they apply if even one piece of armour has sufficiently high ratings), therefore by the RAW FFBA woudl still count for determining Combat pool penalties.

I think the above is correct, its been a while.