Someone knows if there are options (talents and actions) specific for a characeter who wants to use a "light" armor or no armor?

Any ideas? I was looking for something like an effective Wardancer without armor. There should be options for some characters to have benefits from not wearing armors (like a troll slayer).

As a GM I throw in punishments for heavy armour, lots of games dont get just how difficult it is to act in armour. for example

anything heavier then chainmail gives a purple die to stealth,subterfuge,observation,coordination and any thing else I deam appropriate chain mail gives a black die and so does elven plate if your an elf. As for not wearing armour, your character dill look more aproachable and will never have to deal with penalties to steath.

I admit the wardancer is a tad weak in the endurance area, so I would make monsters attack the armoured sharacters first, (Dat elf' real frail, we could cmash em any time, lets stomp da big 'un firs)

You could limit the use of the dodge and advanced dodge card when using armor. That alone will give an advantage to light armor.

Or you could make a roll to allow the usage of the dodge action cards.

It could be a coordination (Agi) roll with a difficulty of the soak value minus one.

Each coordination, stealth and other relevant rolls could also get the penalty of soak value minus one as difficulty.

LukeZZ said:

There really aren't any specific to lightly armored or unarmored.

There are however, several cards that can make you harder to hit, or harder to wound. A character going light in the armor department would benefit from the following:

• Robust Talent (you heal criticals easier)
• Catlike Reflexes talent (adds 2 misfortune dice to a dodge)
• Roll With It talent (+2 soak)
• Untouchable talent (allows you to use Parry vs ranged attacks)
• Improved Dodge action
• Improved Parry action
• Improved Guarded Position action
• Dirty Tricks action (functions sort of like an extra dodge, but for characters with guile and skullduggery)
• Man's Best Friend action and talent (Ratcatchers only, Action: your Pet intervenes to soak a crit; Talent: your Pet gives you +1 Defence)
• Saga of Valaya action (adds an extra misfortune die to all your other active defences)
• The Viper's Dance action (the conservative side gives +1 defence for every recharging reckless Ritual Dance card)
• Shrug It Off action (increases Soak by 2 as a reaction)
• A couple of careers (Troll Slayer, Flagellant) have abiliities that can help.

Of course, any of the things on my list (except the Troll Slayer ability) can be taken by a character in armor as well, so there's no mechanical reason to skip armor (beyond encumbrance).

And of course, there are several Social Actions that can prevent fights from breaking out, or keep someone from attacking you for a short amount of time. I doubt that's really what you were looking for though, sounded like you wanted a list of actions and talents that might help a lightly armoured character survive a fight that had already broken out.

First, I use Agility as a basis for difficulty in combat.

Divide Ag by two, equals Challenge and misfortune for a basic attack.

Ex. Wardancer with 4 Ag would impose 2 Challenge dice to anyone trying to hit him. Add an Improved Dodge and you have 3 Challenge... Pretty good ! And as per the RAW, you can dodge AND parry in the same round (4 Challenge if you have Improved Parry... And if one of the "big uns", the wardancer's armoured friends has Improved Guarded position, then you're up to 5 Challenge...).

Look at the "Roll with it" Talent. Gives Soak 2.

Also, I'd give the Wardancer a minimum of cloth or even leather armour. (I know it dones't follow WFB fluff, but in WFRP, unarmoured combatants just don't last.

r_b_bergstrom said:

Exactly.

LukeZZ said:

In that case, the list I furnished should be reasonably thorough. Hope there's something there that fits your needs.

Hrrm.

I would tend to just punish players in Heavy Armour vs. rewards players in Light. Throw Fatigue their way. Even Stress (you ever tried to be strapped into something for hours on end...or when you have to go 'take care of business' and I'm not talking about combat).

I understand suiting up for war, which is why most armour would have been made, but players always just 'walk around in it, eat it in, use the latrine and adventure in it. Most players accept that you can't easily sleep in armor but it's a lot more than that.

The other option is to start dropping the Quality level of the armour over time. All the buckles that are holding your armour on would start to wear and tear after a while (roll a Challenge dice 1/day - Chaos star means it's lower quality, add in or remove challenge dice depending on how abusive they are trying to be). And yeah, I know that armies march for days to get to a battle, but I question whether they would march in armour and they did bring in armorsmiths with the armies to deal with problems.

Between getting hit in combat and slowly wearing the armor down by constantly wearing it, I think it's fine to it's quality down fairly quickly. Good to poor then poor to non-functional (or just dropping their rating by one each time).

So basically, make a character pay for it in coin, Fatigue and Stress. =)

Punishing characters for wearing armour is neither fair nor realistic. Once you get used to it you can run around in most armour for hours at a time and it doesn't really impede your movement. The biggest disadvantage of armour is already covered by its encumbrance value.

Realistically there really isn't much of an advantage to not wearing armour. It's mostly a matter of whether you can afford both the cost and the encumbrance. A character who doesn't wear heavy armour doesn't have to have a high strength, which means he can focus his attributes somewhere else. So if you are playing an archer then you'll probably be wearing light armour, as you'll be focusing on Agility instead of Strength.

Otherwise though I don't think there's any advantage to not wearing armour if it isn't available, other than the trollslayer action. I haven't looked too carefully at the Wardancer actions - is there any advantage to being lightly armoured with them? Do they trigger off Agility instead of Strength, maybe?

Armor limits your movement, but the heaviest armor of history (about 60 lbs), was not more of a hinderance than modern armor worn by soldiers today.

Some jousting armor had the helmet bolted to the chest piece which made it impossible for the knight to bend his neck, resulting in troubles getting on his horse or getting up from the ground.

But battle armor was well fitted and the knights had the training. Still a slight benefit for light armor is in order simply for balance if you ask me. Things like tumbling and swimming will be harder in armor. But fighting isn't limited a lot with proper training.

But from a balance perspective it still makes sense to give light armor some sort of benefit.

From what I can see (leafing through the ritual dance actions) Wardancers are really not meant to stand toe to toe with the enemy. They just can't take that punishment. They should burn fatigue and use cards that let them increase mobility to absurd levels. They have some actions that let them perform movement and attacks at the same time. Try to always end your rounds at medium range, and always attack targets that are engaged already (which makes it less likely that they will pursue, depending on how the GM plays it of course). I haven't really playtested it, but thats how I would try to play a wardancer in battle.

Yes i will be hard, but it's not impossible that you could keep it up for 2-3 rounds. For the inevitable times when you're going to suffer damage, make sure that you have some active defenses ready and have some defensive talents (Catlike reflexes, Roll with it). Bribe your soldier friend to use Guarded position.

When making a wardancer, splurge on ability scores (and hope your GM is nice enough not to throw too hard stuff at you the first couple of sessions), a str 4 t 4 agi 4 int 2 wp 4 fel 3, stat line will cost you 17 build points, but makes a really strong warrior. Buy both improved parry and dodge as soon as you can.

I do think that Wardancers should have gotten some kind of passive defense as a career ability, the one they have seems quite pointless (but I might be wrong). Something like, Wardancers may not use armor but have a defense score equal to the number of recharging ritual dance cards (max 3) would have made more sense to me. Or ignore/tweak the fluff to let them use up to leather armor, you could argue that they use leather straps and bracers that can be used as protection (to deflect cuts and blows).

It's true that well-fitted armour is really not all that encumbering. I've heard of people who could do cartwheels in plate armour. And if soldiers were expecting a big battle in the morning, they would often sleep in their armour. But even if you can do those things in armour, that doesn't mean it's as easy or comfortable as without armour. I think one misfortune for many actions would be quite acceptable. And at least two misfortune for stuff like climbing and swimming.

I also intend to give some penalty for using a tower shield in melee. I don't think they're intended for melee combat.

In the end, armour is supposed to be a life-saver. If heavily armed characters can't be hurt by normal weapons, that's not unrealistic. Armour is the reason why people in the middle ages started using armour-piercing weapons like warhammers and polearms. (Unfortunately the armour-piercing aspects of such weapons is not represented in WFRP.) The problem is that in a setting that idolises light armour (wardancers, troll-slayers), this doesn't make a lot of sense, and can unbalance the game. Also, monsters don't seem to be wearing a lot of armour either.

By the way, while full-plate can be reasonably comfortable outdoors, has anyone every tried it walking through a living room with furniture and dishes and door frames?

Problem is making things overly hard for heavily armored characters just massively weighs things towards archers as they're so devastating - mysteriously most of the lightly armored characters I've seen.

@ Jericho:

You're unfairly biasing Agi and making it an uber stat. By doing so, an archer/ranged PC can max out their Agi and become not only a death-dealing menace with a bow, but also have a great defense. The sacrifice NOTHING to boost their Agi as much as possible. Agi works for their attacks as well as their defense.

Armor costs money, weighs a lot, and anything heavier than leather marks the PC as someone of means. Thieves and pickpockets will target the PC, since they obviously have wealth, for example. Make sure, as a GM, you know what the player's encumbrance is, and enforce it every time they try to pick up something. Feel free to give misfortune dice for Agi based checks due to their heavy armor. And so on. Also, some circumstances will call for stealth, or not wearing armor (like a fancy party, etc). Need to swim across a river? The mercenary in plate will need to remove his armor if he wants to get across, etc.

Armor > Agi when it comes to defense, as it should be. Agi is already represented for defense in the ability to use Dodge (Agi3)/Improved Dodge(Agi 4).

@dvang: i agree completely

mcv said:

Yeah! I've done it! Even lunched in a restourant!

The only thing that I can't really do in armour is driving.
I've never tried swimming, of course.

Sleeping in full plate armour is quite painful... you can sleep in a sitting position, if you need rest badly and there is no one to help you.

dvang said:

Don't forget that the typical reaction of a small hamlet of 40-60 peasants is going to be to lock the doors and hide the valuables and daughters if a group of 3-4 heavily armed adventurers wander through. Good luck getting anyone to come out and sell you food, or a bed for the night; not to mention that such travelers are also very distinctive and memorable. And if the players roll with it and decide that they like intimidating the peasants, I'm sure they'll change their minds soon enough once they've tangled with a patrol of roadwardens. Of course, that same patrol might decide to be proactive and deal with such obvious vagrants and troublemakers even without any complaints from the villages along their route...

In larger settlements, they can expect to be followed by a detachment of town watch, assuming they are even granted access to begin with. If they show up covered in bandages with armor and weapons to sell, well... they'd best be able to explain where they got their booty.

In short, as long as GMs are mindful of the social repercussions of wearing heavy armor, it is both its own reward and penalty. If a character walks into a bar in gromril armor with a great hammer on his shoulder, people are going to react much like they would if someone walked into a modern bar in full body armor with an assault rifle. Doesn't matter that he's an ironbreaker and is expected to be ready for action 24/7; the bystanders just aren't going to see it that way.

I don't think harassing the characters is going to make players less protective. And let's face it, if you're going to get ambushed by beastmen every time you're on the road, any sane person is going to be armed and armoured.

If you want to change how the PCs behave, think first about how you present the world to them. If it's a dangerous world, they're going to be wearing armour. (And so should most NPCs, for that matter.)

+10 points to the guy who wears armour to restaurants. at least you never have to worry about dates stabbing you with dinner cutlery:)

back to the main topic, i'm with mcv. armour is good. players should wear it if they intend to start fights or if you intend to throw fights at them. anybody fighting without armour never meant to get in a fight or they are foolish or broke.

Note that while I think wearing armour is perfectly sane in the dangerous world of WFRP (except maybe when you're in a walled city, and certainly not in polite company), I also consider the extreme damage reduction due to high Toughness and heavy armour a problem. I'm not sure if it's a big problem (there's also stress, Fear, social skills, etc), but I would like low Toughness characters with slightly lighter armour to be more viable. I just don't think punishing players in-character for perfectly reasonable behaviour is the way to solve it. Fixing the system is better.

But how to fix this? At the moment, the system works very well in all other respects. Combat moves fast, and predictable results are easy to interpret.

One solution I've been thinking of would make Toughness less reliable as damage reduction than armour. Armour simply blocks the usual amount of damage, but for Toughness, you would roll a number of dice equal to your Toughness. Blue dice? White dice? No idea yet. But for each success (or boon?), it blocks 1 damage.

The major downside of that is that you need an extra roll. That's not a fatal problem (Shadowrun does something very similar), but I like WFRP's fast flowing combat.

mcv said:

Just an idea.

Maybe use Toughness only to soak damage from attacker attribute, but not for weapons, damage from spare sucesses, boons, or comets.

Example:

You have Toughness 4, and wear armor that grants you 2 soak. Attacker is a goblin with Strength 3 and his weapon is spiked club DR: 5.

Normally you will dish 6 damage out of 8 goblin can normally deal to you (without any boons, comets, or spare successes), and you will be hit for 2 damage (your Toughness soaks 3 points of goblins strength, and 1 point of his weapon, and your armor soaks 2 more points).

But if you use Toughness to soak only the damage from goblins Strength, then you dish only 5 out of total 8 damage (3 of 3 from goblin Strength, because your Toughness is high enough to soak it all, and 2 of 5 from goblin weapon, because your armor only soaks 2 damage from goblins club, you do not use the 1 remaining point of Toughness - it already soaked all the Strength).

This will make Toughness less important, when fighting weak monsters, more important when fighting strong monsters, and armors more important, especially when high damage weapons are in play.

Just be carefull, some monsters have no armor (or weak armor), and rely only on their high toughness, and some weaker mobs can become dangerous suddenly.

Or use half the Toughness to soak the damage dealt with weapons or spells (like T: 1-2 soak 1, T: 3-4 soak 2, T: 5-6 soak 3, and so on), and full Toughness when fighting with fists.

I like it! It's easy and quick, and makes some sort of sense.

"Okay, you hit! Your Strength is lower than the target's? So only your weapon damage of 6. His armour is 2, so he takes 4 damage."

Or:

"Your Strength is 2 higher than his Toughness. Plus damage damage, that makes..."

Yeah, I can see this being just as fast as the official system.