5 hours ago, kingpin000 said:

Instead of granting soak, why not granting Defense 1 as natural armor? The extra Soak could be handled over 3 Brawn at the begining (it would also represent the extra strength by the tentacles).

Because, Armor shouldn't grant Defense bonuses anyway. Armor absorbs damage. It does not make you harder to hit.

Armor also deflects incoming damage rather than absorbing it. Armor does both. And an increase of brawn combined with the bonus defense would represent both.

12 minutes ago, Ahrimon said:

Armor also deflects incoming damage rather than absorbing it. Armor does both. And an increase of brawn combined with the bonus defense would represent both.

That is still absorbing damage, not preventing a hit. To deflect something, that something still needs to hit. So no, Armor does not do both. It is strictly a damage stopper, not a hit stopper. I've actually worn armor in real life. Armor resticts movement to varying degrees, which actually makes it easier to hit the person wearing it. So, whether the armor is taking a hit dead on, or deflecting it to one side, the person is still being struck, and therefore, the armor is still providing damage reduction, not preventing a person from being hit.

I've worn armor too. Yes, you are still being struck but on a deflection the large majority of the kinetic energy and the projectile is being re-directed away and not absorbed by the material. Thus deflection. Exactly part of what deflection is in Star Wars. The ability to render a hit ineffective.

It seems like you have a big hang-up on definitions of words rather than their narrative mechanical meaning within the game.

Do you get spun up over the deflect talent granting soak? After all, the lightsaber isn't absorbing anything, it's reflecting the blaster bolt away.

9 minutes ago, Ahrimon said:

I've worn armor too. Yes, you are still being struck but on a deflection the large majority of the kinetic energy and the projectile is being re-directed away and not absorbed by the material. Thus deflection. Exactly part of what deflection is in Star Wars. The ability to render a hit ineffective.

It seems like you have a big hang-up on definitions of words rather than their narrative mechanical meaning within the game.

Do you get spun up over the deflect talent granting soak? After all, the lightsaber isn't absorbing anything, it's reflecting the blaster bolt away.

The way Parry and Reflect work in this game is a little odd., but I guess, the idea is that since a combat round coivers around one minute, what's happening is that some shots are getting through while others are being blocked, thus reducing the overall damage that round. It's not how I would have done it, because, ideally, when a lightsaber deflects or parries and attack, that actually should be a Defense bonus, but that's another argument. The same with a shield. However, Armor, is worn and thus covers your body. Thus, when it is struck, you are struck. That is a key difference. For armor to do its job, you have to be hit first. Therefore, it is stopping, or at least lessening, the damage, not preventing a hit. The Armor class defense bonuses form D&D is one of the key reasons why I stopped playing that game. The one saving grace about this system is that the primary bonus armor gives in this game is the Soak bonus. As far as I am concerned, that is the only bonus armor should give. In fact, I would rather have some of these heavier armors giving an even higher soak, and scrap the defense bonus entirely. For heavy combat armor, I would rather see a Soak 4, Defense 0. The better the armor the higher the Soak. That is how I would have done it.

It's cool that armor only giving soak is how you would rather it work, but not how the game is designed. FFG, much like the real world, allows armor to effectively reduce any attack to negligible damage. That is modeled under the defense mechanic. A mechanic that is very broad and includes any situation or effect that could render an attack ineffective against that target.

There's a reason modern military hardware uses hard lines instead of curved surfaces. Straight surfaces increase the probability that an incoming projectile or blast will have the some to almost all of it's kinetic energy reflected away. The small amount of kinetic energy that remains is taken care of by the durability of the armor a.k.a. soak. The only time the full durability (soak) is needed is when 100% of the kinetic energy is transferred to the material (armor).

From our interactions, I seems like you might be a little too hung up on what the term "hit" means. In all of the RPGs that I have played, and I'll admit there are plenty that I haven't, a "hit" is both an attack that connects and is able to apply an effect. That effect is normally damage, but it could be something else, and other properties that the defender has can negate those effects, like soak reducing the damage to 0, or being a robot and immune to stun. A hit allows for other effects outside of damage. For example a hit that does 0 damage due to soak can still trigger effects like knockdown or grapple. A "miss" is everything else, from not connecting to connecting but being unable to deliver an effect.

Side question,
Why do you bold your words? I'm assuming for emphasis on those words in the conversation, but to be honest it makes you come across as very condescending with a "high and mighty" tone to your writing.

6 minutes ago, Ahrimon said:

It's cool that armor only giving soak is how you would rather it work, but not how the game is designed. FFG, much like the real world, allows armor to effectively reduce any attack to negligible damage. That is modeled under the defense mechanic. A mechanic that is very broad and includes any situation or effect that could render an attack ineffective against that target.

There's a reason modern military hardware uses hard lines instead of curved surfaces. Straight surfaces increase the probability that an incoming projectile or blast will have the some to almost all of it's kinetic energy reflected away. The small amount of kinetic energy that remains is taken care of by the durability of the armor a.k.a. soak. The only time the full durability (soak) is needed is when 100% of the kinetic energy is transferred to the material (armor).

From our interactions, I seems like you might be a little too hung up on what the term "hit" means. In all of the RPGs that I have played, and I'll admit there are plenty that I haven't, a "hit" is both an attack that connects and is able to apply an effect. That effect is normally damage, but it could be something else, and other properties that the defender has can negate those effects, like soak reducing the damage to 0, or being a robot and immune to stun. A hit allows for other effects outside of damage. For example a hit that does 0 damage due to soak can still trigger effects like knockdown or grapple. A "miss" is everything else, from not connecting to connecting but being unable to deliver an effect.

Side question,
Why do you bold your words? I'm assuming for emphasis on those words in the conversation, but to be honest it makes you come across as very condescending with a "high and mighty" tone to your writing.

Yes, it is for emphasis.

Now, as to your main statement. I too have played several different games, and in pretty much all of them (save D&D), they all used a strict Damage Reduction system (also known as Stopping Power in my favorite systems) for armor. A "hit" is an attack that successfully strikes the target, whether or not it does damage. In other words, if the attack roll beats the difficulty to hit, then it is a hit, apply damage and deduct the armor's value from it. A hit is a hit whether it does damage or not. Armor should have no effect on that, and doesn't in reality, even with military armors they're still being hit, just stopping the damage from getting through via varying means. That is stopping power, Damage Reduction, Soak, etc. not Defense bonus.

You're still stuck on the literal definition of hit rather than the game definition of hit. We're not going to get anywhere as long as you continue to stick to a definition that the game doesn't use.

I have a feeling that the systems that you love so much don't have static damage numbers and instead use a variable system to model how effective a successful hit is. FFG doesn't. They put the variable effectiveness into the attack roll. You may not like it, but don't argue that the sky is purple just because you want it to work that way.

But I find myself getting sucked back into a "discussion" with you which from experience and observation of your conversations with others is like arguing with a wall. You have your views and won't accept anyone else's. So I'm going to bow out once again and wonder why I let myself get caught again.

2 minutes ago, Ahrimon said:

You're still stuck on the literal definition of hit rather than the game definition of hit. We're not going to get anywhere as long as you continue to stick to a definition that the game doesn't use.

I have a feeling that the systems that you love so much don't have static damage numbers and instead use a variable system to model how effective a successful hit is. FFG doesn't. They put the variable effectiveness into the attack roll. You may not like it, but don't argue that the sky is purple just because you want it to work that way.

But I find myself getting sucked back into a "discussion" with you which from experience and observation of your conversations with others is like arguing with a wall. You have your views and won't accept anyone else's. So I'm going to bow out once again and wonder why I let myself get caught again.

That is because the "literal" definition is the only definition that should be used. And, in every game system I play is the only definition used. So yes, I do focus on the literal definition of a hit. Because that is what a hit is. And the games I ply tend to have the variable in both. In fact, the primary systems I play (the Fuzion system used in Cyberpunk) also has combat through opposed rolls, so the defense is variable as well.

This system is very much not focused on being literal, it's very vague and narrative driven on purpose. Your arguments always hinge on what OTHER systems do, as if that has any bearing on THIS system, which is purposely designed quite different to most others.

9 hours ago, Ahrimon said:

Armor also deflects incoming damage rather than absorbing it. Armor does both. And an increase of brawn combined with the bonus defense would represent both.

Do you know an offical talent or species trait which grants Defense 1?

3 hours ago, kingpin000 said:

Do you know an offical talent or species trait which grants Defense 1?

The only one I am aware of is the talent in the gadgeteer specialization that increases your ranged defense by 1 when you are wearing armor with soak 2 or higher. There's also one in the exile spec I believe that increases your ranged defense.

I don't recall the wording on dodge, side step, or defensive stance (?) to remember if they increase difficulty or add defense, but I don't think that they add defense.

So, talents I have found:

Improved Armor Master, which is the +1 Defense when wearing armour Soak 2 or higher

Defensive Circle, which is a Lightsaber action adding X Defense until start of next turn if successful

Defensive training, gain Defensive quality (so Melee Defense) equal to ranks in talent using Lightsaber, Melee or Brawl.

Moving Target, increase ranged defense by 1 per rank of Moving Target if character has acted in round.

Superior Reflexes, +1 melee defense

15 hours ago, Tom Cruise said:

This system is very much not focused on being literal, it's very vague and narrative driven on purpose. Your arguments always hinge on what OTHER systems do, as if that has any bearing on THIS system, which is purposely designed quite different to most others.

I know that. That's not the point. You can be "narrative" and still have things like Armor work the way it's supposed to; and for the most part it does (given that the primary thing armor does in this system is provide Soak, as it should). My point is that if we did stats for the Krevaaki, they should get a Soak bonus (through Enduring) for their natural armor, not a defense bonus.

11 hours ago, kingpin000 said:

Do you know an offical talent or species trait which grants Defense 1?

No species, but yes on talents, as Ahrimon stated.

7 hours ago, Ahrimon said:

The only one I am aware of is the talent in the gadgeteer specialization that increases your ranged defense by 1 when you are wearing armor with soak 2 or higher. There's also one in the exile spec I believe that increases your ranged defense.

I don't recall the wording on dodge, side step, or defensive stance (?) to remember if they increase difficulty or add defense, but I don't think that they add defense.

The Armorer also has the Improved Armor Master talent, which is the talent you're referring to. It actually increases your overall defense, not just ranged defense. The way I interpret that talent is the character is so well trained in wearing armor that he or she knows how to effectively move in it without restriction, thus being better able to dodge an attack.

2 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

The way I interpret that talent is the character is so well trained in wearing armor that he or she knows how to effectively move in it without restriction, thus being better able to dodge an attack.

But if that was the case, why would they be less skilled at dodging when they were wearing light armor or none at all?

Just now, Vorzakk said:

But if that was the case, why would they be less skilled at dodging when they were wearing light armor or none at all?

Simple. These are characters who spend pretty much all of their time in combat and training for combat wearing armor to the point where they almost feel naked without it.

7 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Simple. These are characters who spend pretty much all of their time in combat and training for combat wearing armor to the point where they almost feel naked without it.

Yeah, that makes total sense. When I don't wear a heavy backpack, I always move so fast I constantly bump into walls, and can barely make it around corners. Sometimes I even leap clear off the ground and straight into the ceiling, because I expect the weight of the backpack to keep me grounded.

11 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

The Armorer also has the Improved Armor Master talent, which is the talent you're referring to. It actually increases your overall defense, not just ranged defense. The way I interpret that talent is the character is so well trained in wearing armor that he or she knows how to effectively move in it without restriction, thus being better able to dodge an attack.

If you have an exoskeleton, its like wearing armor your whole life, right?

11 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Simple. These are characters who spend pretty much all of their time in combat and training for combat wearing armor to the point where they almost feel naked without it.

Also you don't have to dodge as far, just as far as you need to ensure that the blows aren't solid enough to count as hits.

12 hours ago, kingpin000 said:

If you have an exoskeleton, its like wearing armor your whole life, right?

Exactly.

On 7/19/2017 at 7:53 PM, Tramp Graphics said:

That is because the "literal" definition is the only definition that should be used. And, in every game system I play is the only definition used. So yes, I do focus on the literal definition of a hit. Because that is what a hit is. And the games I ply tend to have the variable in both. In fact, the primary systems I play (the Fuzion system used in Cyberpunk) also has combat through opposed rolls, so the defense is variable as well.

Yup that's the problem. Your argue from should.

We all actually use this system, rather then you, who had yet to play it. Your pbp is like a group that is only together to play snowflake characters. Or should i bold it? Apparently each bolded word grants you alternative facts.

When you play an rpg, no one is getting literally hit. Its imagination. The system is not real physics. This might be a surprise to you. So nothing is literal.

These are always to Model an exaggerated fantasy world. How each system chooses to model it, a virtual simulation, which is not at all literal, but tries to abstract each thing into a number or roll. Or a narrative system that tries to minimize the amount of abstractions by generalized a bunch of events or actions into one roll.

One can argue that with fewer abstractions a narrative system can in a way be far more accurate in the way out models reality. Its counter intuitive, but by choosing to limit many of the direct attempts to model, they also limit the contradictions, unrealistic outcomes due to mechanical interactions, and the limits a set mechanical device had on options that cannot reflect the range of options reality offers.

21 minutes ago, TheShard said:

Yup that's the problem. Your argue from should.

We all actually use this system, rather then you, who had yet to play it. Your pbp is like a group that is only together to play snowflake characters. Or should i bold it? Apparently each bolded word grants you alternative facts.

When you play an rpg, no one is getting literally hit. Its imagination. The system is not real physics. This might be a surprise to you. So nothing is literal.

These are always to Model an exaggerated fantasy world. How each system chooses to model it, a virtual simulation, which is not at all literal, but tries to abstract each thing into a number or roll. Or a narrative system that tries to minimize the amount of abstractions by generalized a bunch of events or actions into one roll.

One can argue that with fewer abstractions a narrative system can in a way be far more accurate in the way out models reality. Its counter intuitive, but by choosing to limit many of the direct attempts to model, they also limit the contradictions, unrealistic outcomes due to mechanical interactions, and the limits a set mechanical device had on options that cannot reflect the range of options reality offers.

That all depends upon the RPG doesn't it? In most games I've played, when the character gets hit, he or she is actually getting hit for life-threatening damage. And in some games, like Cyberpunk, a single hit can easily kill a character outright. And, based upon how I've read the rules here, a hit is a hit, and does physical damage to the character. So Having armor work properly isn't that much of a stretch either. And, for the most part, this system does use armor properly by giving it Soak more so than Defense.

Nothing I said above depends on what system you use. It only depends on if your using a system. If your using a system, then it's not literally anything. Its make believe, and they use various mechanics to take the place of actual, literal things.

In this system there is no individual hit, there is no exact movement. You don't move 15 feet or 35 feet, you move a sort distance or a long distance. You don't shoot a blaster once or 8 times, you just shoot. You as a player can narrate it however you want, bit it's not measuring individual things. That's why it works so much better and is so much more fun to pay for me. Its literally, not doing what your ascribing to it, and that's its beauty.

Sure occasionally it contradicts itself, and tries to do both, dual wielding is an example. But even there they try and keep it as not literal as possible.

That's the point here, they avoid at all possible opportunities to try and model individual things, actions literally.

No, the hits aren't individual hits, but they are physical hits to the target none the less. And the damage taken is physical damage to the character. That's pretty standard regardless of the system.

When I originally started reading this thread I was going to make a response. I was forming it in my mind as I read the thread. It had logic, examples, and everything. By the time I actually got to the end of the thread though...just wow. Nevermind, it's just not worth the pain of engaging.