Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Houserule - Limiting armor by Strength instread of Body.
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
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
QUOTE (Browncoatone @ Mar 19 2009, 11:11 AM) *
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
QUOTE (HappyDaze @ Mar 19 2009, 04:33 PM) *
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. 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.

QUOTE
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.

QUOTE
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
QUOTE (knasser @ Mar 19 2009, 07:46 PM) *
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. 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
QUOTE
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
QUOTE (HappyDaze @ Mar 19 2009, 02:17 PM) *
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
QUOTE
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
QUOTE (InfinityzeN @ Mar 20 2009, 11:08 AM) *
*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_stones
QUOTE (Browncoatone @ Mar 19 2009, 01:11 PM) *
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
QUOTE (wind_in_the_stones @ Mar 20 2009, 09:23 PM) *
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_stones
QUOTE (TBRMInsanity @ Mar 21 2009, 12:35 AM) *
Because both swimming and running are a constant application of brute force. That would be my guess.


Kinda like wearing armor? 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.
TBRMInsanity
I agree with Muspellsheimr. Though like I said above with more lighter materials becoming common in armour today (and it can be assumed that this trend will continue into the future), I think the taxing weight on even the weakest human would be minimal.
Aaron
I kinda like the Body + Strength idea, myself.
Rotbart van Dainig
Especially since it's streamlined with the Lifting rules.
ElFenrir
I also like it. Even if it's more like backpacking, Strength needs some help.

Right now, I use this, along with easier to get recoil(making at least putting a few points in it worthwhile), and I'm considering upping the Lifting a bit(making it perhaps more desireable), and also considering linking Heavy Weapons to the stat as well. It's not perfect, but it at least makes a combat character consider NOT dumping it(since it's even dumped by sams, and under those new rules there is no in game reason for an ork or troll to spend points on strength ever with the stat as is), and even makes non combat characters think twice about walking around with the 1 all the time.
Mx
QUOTE (ElFenrir @ Mar 21 2009, 06:11 PM) *
considering linking Heavy Weapons to the stat as well

Have you noticed the one in Arsenal
QUOTE (Arsenal page 162 under additional ranged combat modifiers)
Carrying Heavy Weapons
Heavy weapons are so large and potentially damaging to the
user that they cannot be carried and fired without the help of a
gyro stabilization unit. Trolls and other unusually large and strong
metahumans may be an exception to this rule. Any character with
a Body of 8 or higher and Strength of 8 or higher can carry and use
a heavy weapon without benefi t of a stabilizer. However, whenever
a character fi res a heavy weapon he is carrying, he must resist Stun
damage equal to half the Power (round down) of the weapon, and
may be knocked down (see p. 151, SR4).
wind_in_the_stones
QUOTE (TBRMInsanity @ Mar 21 2009, 09:10 AM) *
I agree with Muspellsheimr. Though like I said above with more lighter materials becoming common in armour today (and it can be assumed that this trend will continue into the future), I think the taxing weight on even the weakest human would be minimal.


I respectfully disagree - somewhat. With the trend toward lighter materials, armor will only become lighter to a point. At that point, wearers will expect more protective armors. Each usage will have its point of standard weight. Cops will have their standard weight (and therefore protectiveness) of armor, as will soldiers, SWAT, and elite units. So if you need heavier armor, you will wear it. What kind of munitions do you need to stop, in your line of work? You may need the heavy stuff.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (Mäx @ Mar 21 2009, 06:31 PM) *
Have you noticed the one in Arsenal

That rule is optional and best left from the game.
Mx
QUOTE (Rotbart van Dainig @ Mar 22 2009, 12:44 AM) *
That rule is optional and best left from the game.

i know it's optional, but what's so bad about it.
Muspellsheimr
Its poorly written & implemented, maybe - it does include Light Machine Guns, you know.

I use: Assault Cannons (not Heavy Weapons) inflict Stun Damage equal to their Recoil to whoever is firing them. Assault Cannons have Recoil equal to one-half their Base DV (round down).

Strength provides 1 point of Recoil Compensation at 4, 6, 8, 10, etc (cumulative).
HappyDaze
QUOTE
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.

Is Logic forced on characters? No. But characters without a good Logic score can't really bitch when they lose out on some free Knowledge/Language skills, have a smaller dicepool for Memory tests and straight Logic-based rolls, and have decreased capability in the Matrix (we use Att+Skill, Program for cap on hits). Characters with low Strength can likewise not bitch that they can't bear the encumberance of heavy armor, but that hardly forces a high Strength upon them.
TBRMInsanity
QUOTE (wind_in_the_stones @ Mar 21 2009, 02:21 PM) *
I respectfully disagree - somewhat. With the trend toward lighter materials, armor will only become lighter to a point. At that point, wearers will expect more protective armors. Each usage will have its point of standard weight. Cops will have their standard weight (and therefore protectiveness) of armor, as will soldiers, SWAT, and elite units. So if you need heavier armor, you will wear it. What kind of munitions do you need to stop, in your line of work? You may need the heavy stuff.


Sorry I may have stated it wrong. I meant lighter as in same protection using lighter weighing material, not less effective armour to reduce the weight of the armour. As new processing methods improve and as scientists understand more and more about the dynamics of bullet impacts, the lighter and more specialised they can make the armour. There is a really cool video about the new Dragon Skin armour on the Discovery Channel web site (linked through CTV.ca) that describes this.
wind_in_the_stones
No, I know what you meant. What I was saying was that when you can get the same protection with less weight, but you think you need better protection, you'll opt for same weight, better protection. So if a shadowrunner oldtimer wants to go in in milspec armor of 2070, he's going to be thrilled that it weighs the same as a security grade of 15 years ago. (Not sure we have this distinction anymore, but I think you get my point.)
InfinityzeN
Actually Dragon Skin armour is pretty worthless crap. Sorry to say it but it is the truth. It doesn't handle wear or heat well, the ceramic plates coming loose. So people who were wearing them in combat ended up with all the little plates at the bottom, got shot in the chest, and the bullet just goes right on through. Actually happened several times.
TBRMInsanity
QUOTE (InfinityzeN @ Mar 21 2009, 09:51 PM) *
Actually Dragon Skin armour is pretty worthless crap. Sorry to say it but it is the truth. It doesn't handle wear or heat well, the ceramic plates coming loose. So people who were wearing them in combat ended up with all the little plates at the bottom, got shot in the chest, and the bullet just goes right on through. Actually happened several times.


It all depends on the calibre of the rifle shooting you. But you get the same effect with metal armour and high calibre weapons as well. I will admit that you don't want to take more then a couple of shots with ceramic plates as they do break down after each shot. But any shot in the chest no mater what armour your wearing is going to hurt (it just won't kill you).

Side note:
InfinityzeN I would love to hear what tour you did and with which regement. I had the pleasure of working with the Alabama 1st while I was overseas with the R22e.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012