Backpack gives 30kg of "extra" and a full action to remove items. Combat Vest says it holds 15kg comfortably and is a free action to remove items.

My question is for the Combat Vest, all it does is hold 15kg of the character's current carrying capacity items or should it be like the Backpack with an "extra" 15kg of items?

RAW would that be that it is not "extra".

Thoughts?

~ alemander

Correct, by RAW it is not extra, and yet it does give that sweet bonus.

Correct, by RAW it is not extra, and yet it does give that sweet bonus.

Nice catch. I think it's fitting that a Backpack effectively increases carrying capacity since it would spread the weight fairly evenly across the shoulders. Backpacked items are also kept out of a character's way, making the backpack passive storage space. Fumbling around to get something out of a backpack would reasonably require a Full Action.

On the other hand, a Combat Vest could be represented by bandoliers, a utility belt, a leg sheathe, or something. Since items stashed in a Combat Vest are haphazardly strewn about on high-activity body locations, those items easier to grab in a pinch. However, the items' locations on the body make combat vests active storage space, and should be limited by a character's normal capacity.

A backpack is basically adding to the mass of a character, while a Combat Vest is only that character finding a handsfree way of holding something. Sort of like carrying a backpack of groceries (fairly stationary on the back) vs. wrapping plastic grocery bags around the wrist (the bag swings every which way upon walking).

TL;DR : I'm just trying to say that it's less taxing for a person to have a backpack, resulting in a true increase in carrying capacity. Combat vests don't merit extra capacity.

Speaking of these two items, does anyone else finds it wierd that by RAW you can not equip both?

Personally i don't see why you can't wear nifty tricked out vest and a backpack at the same time.

Speaking of these two items, does anyone else finds it wierd that by RAW you can not equip both?

Personally i don't see why you can't wear nifty tricked out vest and a backpack at the same time.

My view is that if players can mix gear, they will try to. Carrying capacity should be a choice players opt into, not a one-and-done shopping trip. Like, if a player loads a vest with the maximum amount of ammo it can hold, then does the same with a backpack. It kind of skews the game to allow both storage items. Would a character be able to equip both? Probably, since it's just a few straps around the body and some pouches. Should a character be able to equip both? Maybe not. I'm open to other interpretations though.

The way we play this:

> lower carrying capacities by 1 step in the table

> weight that is carried in backpacks and similar, only counts half (so a full 30kg would become 15kg)

We had a player insist that the exact wording (for reference, "Only one backpack or combat vest can be worn at a time.") meant that he could wear a combat vest and a backpack, but only one of each. We let him get away with this and... well, I'm pretty sure they meant one or the other, but not both.

On the other hand, I can see an argument for making the combat vest's capacity as "bonus".

I sent a question in a while ago and got this response. The answer may change for the official errata, so take this with a grain of salt:

Me : [backpacks] are stated to give 30kg of "extra" weight while [Combat Vests] simply state they can hold 15kg. Are Backpacks meant to increase a character's carrying capacity? Do Combat Vests not increase capacity? This topic came up on the forums and the general consensus was "yes" to both questions.
Tim Huckelbery: Yes to both indeed. Backpacks let you carry more, while combat vests are more an aid in grabbing gear/weapons in a hurry; the weight is listed so players don't load every item they have into one