Vehicle armour and the armour spell Options

[hermit]

In short: how do they stack? the description says the armour spell "generates a barrier that adds to both ballistic and impact armour". Does this imply the spell counts as soft armour, or does it add hardened armour on top of a vehicle?

[psykotisk_overle...]

Since it adds its rating to the existing armor the type of armor generated will be the same as the type that is already affecting the target. Thus, a veichle with armor 4 targeted by a force 5 armor spell will function as a veichle with armor 9.

[Austere Emancipa...]

The way I would rule it is that it's soft armor regardless of what it's cast on. In past threads it has been established that it's not a good idea to think about it too hard -- you might run into trouble with characters buying normal clothing with Gel Packs (at negligible cost, providing B1/I1 hardened armor) and then casting Armor-6 on top of that.

[Fortune]

I agree with Austere Emancipator on this.

[Edward]

Full magician.
Cash A
VCR
Force 6 sustaining focus (armour)
Vehicle armour +6 to command vehicle.

I rather think not. Although a glowing field around your vehicle really dose scream shoot me.

But Seriously
I would rule that it reduces the power of the weapon by the spells force (halved for AV and APDS) before considering the vehicle armour.

In other words it is soft armour.

I would also rule that no mater what other armour your wearing the armour provided by an armour spell is not hardened. If you want it to be hardened learn the hardened armour spell witch has +1 drain level and only adds half force to hardened armour. (or something like that).

Edward

[hermit]

Thanks for the replies, guys!

Sounds reasonable. I was wondering since my group's mage knows that spell (being a physad, he doesn't have too many spells to begin with), and after encountering a chimera and losing an irretrievable drone (Branscan), I was wondering if that way, a drone (or, for thatb matter, any vehicle) could get an added layer of protection.

Soft armour makes sense, as does calculating it before the vehicle armour comes into effect. that's nasty enough:

[psykotisk_overle...]

"The armor spell is compatible with all armor types and adds its rating to the rating of the physical armor being worn"
This implies that the armor provided by the spell is the same as the armor the target is currently wearing. "always soft armor" is a house rule.

It is however a reasonable house rule, since this spell would be very powerfull when cast on veichles otherwise.
When cast on anything but veichles it doesn't matter.

[Austere Emancipa...]

[Spetulhu]

Are you even allowed to cast that spell on a vehicle?

And if it's allowed, is it at higher difficulty and risk? It would take a larger field to protect a car than a person, for example. Why should it be as easy as protecting yourself?

[psykotisk_overle...]

In order to affect a veichle it would have to be of a force at least equal to
(Object resistance+body+(half armor))divided by two.


Sorry, yes it does makes a difference for things that are not veichles to, thanks for pointing that out. Edit2: but your example is invalid, as gel-packs can't be added to a secure long coat. But i still see your point. (loves to nitpick)


edit: in effect this means that a veichle with loads of armor could only be affected by a really powerfull armor spell. So the only possible magical increase in protection would be a friggin huge one, when the opposite would be IMO the most reasonable. Oh well, such is game balance (and the lack thereof)

[ShadowGhost]

You can only cast this on Characters (or living things):

[ShadowGhost]

[toturi]

Nothing canon to suggest that it is hard or soft. It simply produces a magical field of a certain Armour Rating. By the book, it should stack on top of the Hardened Armour. However, whether it can be cast at a vehicle, it is open to debate.

[Tarantula]

[psykotisk_overle...]

You can't add any mods to securetech clothing.

Edit: so, there's nothing saying that you can cast it on veichles, but if you could it would add to the veichle armor right? And casting it on someone wearing hardened armor would improve their hardened armor, it is not another layer of soft armor.

[Tarantula]

You're right.

Canonly, it adds directly to the armor rating, if its hardened, it adds hardened, vehicle it adds vehicles, etc.

[Mortax]

True, but by cannon rules the avg. person weighs 150 kilos.
(Bod 3*50kg). Some rules don't make sense or are game unbalancing. I'd say make it soft armor, as not doing so make it too easy to munchkin.

Just my MHO, I could be wrong. :-)

[Austere Emancipa...]

[psykotisk_overle...]

According to canon the average human weighs 70kg, (SR3), I don't know where you pulled that body*50kg from but that's just sick, makes humans range from 50kg to 300kg, with those being in best shape and fitness also bieng the most obese ones. Just sick!


Now, if you're casting on veichles I can see how this is munchkinizing, as you're vastly improving the spells efficiency. (But I guess on second thought that casting it on Veichles probably isn't possible in the first place)

However, casting on any armored or unarmored person I fail to see the problem with letting it be hardened armor for those wearing hardened armor.
Almost all regular armor is legal, completely legal. AFAIK all hardened armor is not only restricted, but is also impossible for civilians to get a permit for. If you're wearing very visible hardened armor and going around with a glowing armor field around you, you deserve a high armor-rating, because you can expect a lot more trouble than anyone else. Not only are you wearing mil-spec gear, you're surrounded by an illegaly high force spell that is visible.

Now, for people wearing normal or no armor, and the armor spell, the benefit isn't to great, but it's still good.
For people wearing hardened and the armor spell, the benefit is great, but they're like a glowing sign saying arrest me.

Limiting this spell when cast on hardened armor would be like limiting the enhance aim (or whatever it's called) when cast on someone using a big gun, because their net benefit of hitting someone with their gun is higher than that of a character with a hold-out.


In short, why houserule "soft armor only" to penalize those willing to put a glowing field around their very obvious and illegal armor?

[Bossemanden]

If we consider the Armour spell to always be soft armour, then another question arises.
Is the armour spell calculated before or after any hardened armour?

An example:

Brick the Thick is wearing a light military armor (hardened) with rating 7/6 and an armour spell force 5 on top of that.

Someone shoots him with 3 rounds from an Ares HV MP-LMG (6S base staging to 9D).

Either the Light Military armor takes the damage down to 2D (with the armour spell not really helping) or the armour spell drops the damage to 3D which is below half power of the hardened armour, thus effectively doing no damage.

Now does Brick the Thick soak 2D or nothing?

[Fortune]

It does state that the glowing field of the Armor spell is cast around the subject, so logically it should count first, lowering the power of the attack before factoring the actual worn armor.

[Austere Emancipa...]

[Fortune]

[Austere Emancipa...]

[Fortune]

I think that's basically what I meant. I guess I just didn't word it well. I meant that the Hardened Armor wouldn't (or shouldn't) be increased by the spell.

[edit] Looking back, I didn't say anything like what I meant. I always factor the total Armor Rating all at once. To do otherwise would be somewhat silly. [/edit]