Houserule - Limiting armor by Strength instread of Body., Making Strength a little more important for non-melee characters. Options

[HappyDaze]

I'm considering a houserule that replaces the Body-based limit on how much armor can be worn before Agility/Reaction penalties with a nearly identical rule that is instead based on Strength. This will help to address the imbalance against Strength I've seen in too many characters. Body will certainly remain useful, but now non-melee characters have at least some reason to improve Strength. Has anyone tried this or something similar?

[BlueMax]

I have not tried anything like this change. However, it makes sense to me. Please let me know how it goes.

[ornot]

I have toyed with means of making strength a more important stat. Involving it in armour encumbrance was one of them, but I never got round to testing it. The trouble is that it would irk players with current PCs, and I was mid campaign when I was considered it.

I was thinking that body and strength would stack for purposes of determining encumbrance. A Bod 4, Strength 4 character can wear 8 armour without penalty. That may be too harsh though, and (str+bod)*1.5 might be a better cap (in my previous example that would mean 12 points of armour without penalty, enough for an armour suit).

[InfinityzeN]

Actually, since it is Body *2 right now, Strength + Body would not be any harsher. I also nail any PC who goes about with everything including the kitchen sink with a penalty (unless he has a crazy high strength).

I'm thinking about it and if any Dev is reading this, Strength + Body would make at least a good optional rule for this.

[Browncoatone]

I think that Body x 2 was chosen because Body covers the aspects of endurance and stamina whereas Strength is more just the application of brute force.

Though, if you wanted to get really nasty you could penalize the character's strength in melee combat if the armor exceeded the PC's Strength x 2 with the excuse that characters sporting armor too heavy for them are slower and less able to properly apply their strength. Say maybe -1 die strength for every point of armor above the Strength x 2 limit?

[Muspellsheimr]

I think that Body x 2 was chosen because Body covers the aspects of endurance and stamina whereas Strength is more just the application of brute force.

Exactly. Body does make more sense. If any change, it should be from Body x 2 to Body + Strength.

[knasser]

I'm considering a houserule that replaces the Body-based limit on how much armor can be worn before Agility/Reaction penalties with a nearly identical rule that is instead based on Strength. This will help to address the imbalance against Strength I've seen in too many characters. Body will certainly remain useful, but now non-melee characters have at least some reason to improve Strength. Has anyone tried this or something similar?

I've not tried it but I can see no problem with it and it will add to the importance of Strength. If I were to do this though I would probably use ornot's approach of using Body + Strength however, just to provide a bit more balance. If it's just Strength, some elf samurai are going to cry. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[HappyDaze]

I don't really have to worry about irking players with existing characters since I'm starting a new game. As for making some characters cry, I'm OK with that if they wanted to be cheesy and have a 'dump stat' - I have no problems making them suffer for a low stat, and right now low Strength doesn't have that effect on a level comparable with any other stat.

I think that Body x 2 was chosen because Body covers the aspects of endurance and stamina whereas Strength is more just the application of brute force.

Then I'm widening the definition of Strength to include aspects of sustained muscular action. Body still has high value as a measure of health, and is still very useful.

Though, if you wanted to get really nasty you could penalize the character's strength in melee combat

Wrong direction. This just penalizes Strength for those that care about melee combat, and right now those are just about the only ones that care about Strength at all. My intention is to widen the appeal of Strength and have it matter on something that every character will take note of in play.

[Raizer]

I've not tried it but I can see no problem with it and it will add to the importance of Strength. If I were to do this though I would probably use ornot's approach of using Body + Strength however, just to provide a bit more balance. If it's just Strength, some elf samurai are going to cry. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Ive done something similiar. Here are the house rules in my campaign:

Armor (Encumbrance)
• A Character may only have a combined (Ballistic and Impact) Armor Value equal to 2 times their Strength and Body. For every 2 full points (or fraction thereof) that the combined armor value has over that number, they suffer a -1 modifier to Agility and Reaction.
• One may purchase custom fit armor at quadruple the cost. Custom Fit means the combined Armor value allowance is equal to 3 times Strength and Body.

Armor (Form Fit)
• Form Fit armor uses its full values instead of half due to the changes in the encumbrance rules and is considered custom.
• Note: When combining Form Fit with non-custom armor use the following encumbrance values:
o Form Fit Shirt: 2
o Form Fit Half Body Suit: 3
o Form Fit Full Body Suit: 5

Now, the one thing I'm surprised i dont hear many complains about from GM's is the extremely heavy impact that Form Fit has on Armor values.

[Doc Byte]

Body + Strength is a houserule I've heard a few times. If I'd use houserules, this one would be one of them.

[InfinityzeN]

No elf sammy is going to cry. Remember that it is easier to get Strength high compared to Body. There is only only piece of ware that increases body (and only by 1 point), while there are several that increase Strength (you can get 4 cheap, 5 a little more expensive).

By making it Strength + Body, you increase the importance of Strength, but also keep a sudden "Armor Boost" craze from happening. And Elf or Human can manage a 8 (9) Body without Surge (Supra, Exceptional Body, Genetic Optimization: Body), while they can manage a 8 (12) Strength. Both costly in Karma/BP and Nuyen.

Results: Body * 2 = 18 armor max, Strength + Body = 21 armor max, Strength * 2 = 24 armor max

If you wanna go cheaper, your looking at a 6(7) Body and a #(9) Strength at reasonable cost.

Results: Body * 2 = 14 armor max, Strength + Body = 16 armor max, Strength * 2 = 18 armor max

It actually gets worse with Dwarves, Orks and Trolls (in that order).

----------------------

FFBA is a completely different kettle of worms. It is also rather important to the lower body (or body+strength if using house rules) crowd to actually get a decent level of armor.

[HappyDaze]

Remember that it is easier to get Strength high compared to Body.

Sure, but they'll still want to have Body too. The problem with the current RAW is that it's generally OK to tank Strength and just take Body. With this houserule, both have value and you only have so many resources to spread around.

[InfinityzeN]

Sure, but they'll still want to have Body too. The problem with the current RAW is that it's generally OK to tank Strength and just take Body. With this houserule, both have value and you only have so many resources to spread around.

We are both in favor of the rule. I was just making a point that Strength + Body is better then Strength * 2.

[HappyDaze]

I like a modified version of Raizer's suggestion:

2 x (Body + Strength) = Armor Encumberance Limit (AEL). Armor has an Encumberance Value (EV) of its Ballistic + Impact values. Every 2 points (or fraction of) that EV exceeds AEL causes a -1 penalty to Agility and Reaction. I would work custom fitting to be a direct reduction (-2 should be good) of an armor's EV rather than reworking a multiplier into the formula.

I'll still be reworking Form-Fitting Armor...

[Browncoatone]

We are both in favor of the rule. I was just making a point that Strength + Body is better then Strength * 2.

I wasn't clear with my post. I didn't mean to suggest that the rule be changed from Body x 2 to Strength x 2, only to suggest that maybe the rule should be that you take a penalty of 1 die per point of armor in excess of either Body x 2 or Strength x 2.

But the more that I think on it, why should melee combat be the only skill hampered by being wieghed down? Why not every skill that requires unfettered movement? All the athletics, all the melee and unarmed combat skills, and all the firearms too- I might get some flames for this one but if you've ever actually shot a firearm and then tried to do it again with an extra five pounds on your elbow you'll get my meaning.

[InfinityzeN]

I apply armor penalties to all Agility actions. And yes I know perfectly well the difference between firing a weapon in light cloths, with a bunch of gear, and with body armor & a bunch of gear.

[hermit]

As for realism, taking strength + agility instead of 2*body is a much better rule, if you ask me. Both factor into how well you can act despite serverely restrictive clothing. What the general ruggedness and immune system strength of someone has to do with that, I never understood (other than this rule seems tailored specifically to make trolls as uber as they are). Plus, with that change, even non-trolls and -orcs can still hope to be able to use the armoured jacket without having ridiculously maxed stats.

[TBRMInsanity]

I'm kinda against these rules for the armour in SR for a couple of reasons. Even today, most combat body armour (while weighing as mush as 20lbs) is relatively light weight. I do notice that you get fatigues quicker while wearing armour but it doesn't limit how well you fire a weapon or drive a vehicle (not like wearing a rucksack with 60+ lbs of kit). There are new forms of personal body armour being created today that are even lighter then modern armour that will weigh even less (some speculations say that they will be able to get effective armour down to 5lbs in weight). The heavier forms of armour in SR incorporate passive exoskeletons that redistribute the weight off the wearer.

I would be more in favour of general encumbrance rules and a modifier to a fatigue test (to note that you get fatigues easier then with no armour).

[InfinityzeN]

*SPUTTER* 20lbs?! WTF are you talking about? The complete Interceptor armor weighs in at 33.11lbs, with the IOTV pushing 35lbs, with another 3~3.5lbs for the MICH. Your looking at mid/high 30lb range now.

Then you got to add: Weapon, Ammo, IFAK, Camelbak. That would be just about the lightest load, pushing 64+lbs with a BCL of ammo.

And that is not even counting things like... oh... your knife or two, more ammo then 7 mags, anything you add to your weapon, your combat boots, Shin/Knee Pads, Elbow Pads, Gloves, Grenades, if you have a heavier weapon (M203, M249), lugging extra ammo for the M248/M240, Inter-Squad Radio, NODS, possible pistol & ammo, possible shotgun & ammo, etc etc etc. I'm not even counting a buttpack or anything in the Camelbak.

Even if we ignore everything but the armor, we're talking about double your highest number (shin guards, knee pads, elbow pads, combat gloves, goggles/ballistic glasses included) or more.

[TBRMInsanity]

*SPUTTER* 20lbs?! WTF are you talking about? The complete Interceptor armor weighs in at 33.11lbs, with the IOTV pushing 35lbs, with another 3~3.5lbs for the MICH. Your looking at mid/high 30lb range now.

Then you got to add: Weapon, Ammo, IFAK, Camelbak. That would be just about the lightest load, pushing 64+lbs with a BCL of ammo.

And that is not even counting things like... oh... your knife or two, more ammo then 7 mags, anything you add to your weapon, your combat boots, Shin/Knee Pads, Elbow Pads, Gloves, Grenades, if you have a heavier weapon (M203, M249), lugging extra ammo for the M248/M240, Inter-Squad Radio, NODS, possible pistol & ammo, possible shotgun & ammo, etc etc etc. I'm not even counting a buttpack or anything in the Camelbak.

Even if we ignore everything but the armor, we're talking about double your highest number (shin guards, knee pads, elbow pads, combat gloves, goggles/ballistic glasses included) or more.

I'm going off the standard issue Canadian Forces body armour with ceramic plates (both front and back). I agree with you the older style metal plates put the vest at over 30lbs but the ceramic plates are around 5lbs each and cut a lot of the weight out.

[wind_in_the_ston...]

I think that Body x 2 was chosen because Body covers the aspects of endurance and stamina whereas Strength is more just the application of brute force.

That makes sense, but then why do swimming and running go off Strength?

[Shinobi Killfist]

do you effectively force a high logic on all physically oriented characters. Sure strenght becomes a dump stat for some, but that is usually because they have other stat requirements to make up for it.

[TBRMInsanity]

That makes sense, but then why do swimming and running go off Strength?

Because both swimming and running are a constant application of brute force. That would be my guess.

[wind_in_the_ston...]

Because both swimming and running are a constant application of brute force. That would be my guess.

Kinda like wearing armor? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif)

[Muspellsheimr]

Not really. Swimming & running both involve active application of strength. Lifting weights is also active application of strength. Armor, however, is closer to backpacking - although the weight should be even better distributed, as it is covering a larger area & not protruding as much from the body. In other words, armor, while somewhat dependent on strength, has a much greater demand on your endurance - aka Body.