Trollslayers arenlt allowed to wear armour.

Clothing is in the armour section but in the description it says "Clothing isn't per se armour" and then goes on to say it was put there because it provides 1 point of soak.

So does the TrollSlayer wander around buttnaked or can he wear clothing or robes for either 1 pt of defense or 1 pt of soak?

Thanks

If people want to "cheat" the rules, they always will find a way.

In short, I don't think the "law" (rules) prohibits a TrollSlayer from wearing cloth "armor".

But it severely breaks with the whole roleplaying aspect of a TrollSlayer, and also the background written about them.

So if you're a player, don't do it, play trollSlayer, and stop being a munchkin ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munchkin_(role-playing_games )).

If you're a GM, hurt your players if they try to do this stuff, have him meet 3 other trollslayers, and beat the crap out of him for making fun of their ancestral heritage.

I have no problem in my games with troll slayer wearing some travelling clothes or robes to protect them from the weather hazards, if the game system says it confers 1 of soak or 1 of defence it is ok for me. Any way, combats are very lethal in this game.

I believe I allowed the slayer in my previous group to have cloth "armour", especially if the weather was bad. There's no sense in walking around in a loincloth when there is snow outdoors. But I agree with Spivo, slayers generally doesn't even wear cloth and in general the slayer in my group wanted to use a loincloth only, even in bad weather and that doesn't count as cloth armour.

Robes I probably would not allow, or at heavily discourage, as I believe they are more Wizardly/Priestly robes and would look silly on a slayer. Why would he wear them?

TrollSlayer has toughness as primary characteristic also dwarfs start with 3 toughtness witch means that without spending any point you start the game with 4 toughness, Trollslayer has 3 wounds as an advancement option.

So you start the game with 4 To, 1soak ,1 def, 14wounds, you are allowed to raise your wound threshhold to 17 and most players will raise their Toughtness to 5 at character creation.

Giantslayer has also 3 wounds as advancement option and he get +1 soak for cobleting the trollslayer carrer. Slayers are stong enough.

I say do what Stivo said if he wants to weak armor then fine let him do it but other slayers will treat him with disrespect or people wont recognize that he is a slayer.

Thank you people for conforming my thoughts that Troll Slayers can wear clothing without breaking the rules.

Re: the other points raised.

1) I have played a TrollSlayer iunder an alternaterules set. He indeed did wear just leather breeks and peircings. He also had a merit that meant he was immune to the effects of normal temperature variations. So yes, he happily washed in half frozen streams in the middle of winter. Warhammer 3rd Ed doesnlt have such merits and the game master would be perfectly entitled to make anyone running around in a loin cloth make hourly resilence cks in bad weather to avoid hypothermia.. If your wear clothing you get 1 pt of soak. That's the rules. Calling someone names because they are playing the game by the rules is pretenious. GMs punishing them for following the rules is petty.

2) I included the mention of Robes for the sake of completeness for a rules questions. Not because I was suggestion that a Slayer would actually wear robes.

3) While I donlt claim to be an expert in Warhammer fantasy background nothing I've read would indicate that Slayers would mock or attack another Slayer for wearing robes. And I've not seen much indication that most Slayers would really give a **** whether people recognise them as Slayers. They are Slayers and that's the end of the story. As a rule they generally avoid the company of other non-Slayer Dwarfs and why would they care about what Humans think? And Slayers don't generally operate in packs.

4) A Trollslayer who has completed his 1st Career can be Toughness 6, Shield +1 Slayer bonus +2 Clothing +1 for 10 soak. Wounds about 16. A big monster can do 16-19 pts of damage with a good hit. So your Monster can drop a tricked out Slayer in 2-3 good hits. It does makes him highly resistant to been taken out by minions I don't know about you guys but if I'm playing a slayer I donlt want him dying to Minions. I want a Big guy to be required to take him down.

Since you mention about the background.

Some editions ago, Slayers where allowed to wear armour. Even in the fantasy battles board game, the slayer king wore a Heavy Armour

Yepesnopes said:

On the artwork of the V1 edition of WFRP, the very cool slayer character had a sleeveless mail shirt.

This said, the bonuses given to Slayers exist to mitigate the fact that they can't wear armour. If they could, they would be near invincible !

StephenE said:

I do count shields as a piece of armour and would probably discourage it heavely if a slayer in my group wanted to use one. Never been a problem in my group though, the slayer fights with either a great axe or two hand axes.
While I would allow slayers to use cloth armour, I'd probably encourage then to use it as little as possible (i.e. only when the weather requires it).

And if you take your example as above, the slayer would still have 8 soak left after removing shield and cloth armour. The slayer might also have the "shrug it off" action card to increase soak against heavier attacks and I believe (not sure) there's a tactic talent that can increase soak. 8 soak is a lot, most minions do about 8-10 damage, so that's 1-2 damage on the slayer. 10 is just overkill. For comparison, a human with normal toughness (3), dressed in a full plate has 8 soak.

Alos, there's nothing wrong with dying to minions, I seem to recall (if it's from a RDP play session or somewhere from else) a slayer who barred the exit to a goblin cave, so that his friends could escape. Eventually the slayer died, but managed to keep the goblins inside the cave long enough so that his friends could escape. That's as good a slayer death as beeing killed by a troll or giant.

StephenE said:

First of all, play the way you want, usually you get the most fun out of it.

But to comment what you wrote...

1) While tend to agree, dwarves are not humans first of they have higher toughness, and also the lore tends to show that dwarves are more hardened to living in cold climate.

When I was 12 I visited Greenland in the winter with my dad, and the thing that stuck in my mind was that the inuits didn't wear freaking gloves, and rarely a hat. They wore gloves when driving snowscooter/sleds, but not while generally working. You can work up a tolerance to cold.

Nothing stops your dwarf from wearing a wolfskin to cover his body, and then drop it in the face of combat, to glorious show of his tattoos to his enemy, but also to show his ancestors that he is worthy.

Players finding loop-holes to rules is pety, GM punishing them for it may also be so.

Finally, your point in 4) shows me, that you care very little about covering against cold, but that you are looking for a loop-hole to having armor, without it being armor...

2) Robes are there to allow wizards a way to look wizardly and still get a little protection.

3) I'd say, that someone who dyes their hair orange, and shaves the sides of, and forms it in spikes... they want the world to know they are slayers!

Becoming a slayer is an oath, done in a special Dwarven hold, in which you join a cult of slayers. Considering how judgemental dwarves are, and how quick they are to bear a grudge, I'd say it's highly likely they wont take kindly to slayers who "willy-nilly" their oath.

Packs? Ever seen Warhammer Fantasy Battle?

4) Being a slayer isn't about surviving, it's about dying. Not suicide, but a rank 6 slayer is a failed slayer. Gotrek is the worst slayer of all times, because he's failed to die yet.

If a monster cuts you open, you showed the world that you faced the monster, and died trying to bring it down!

Play it how you like, but it doesn't seem to me that you understand what being a slayer is about, but rather that you find them cool, and want the good without taking the bad.

If you find amulets, rings whatever, that adds to protection, wear that, but show your damned chest while you fight, show the tattoos, show your ancestors you don't need armour.

I would let a slayer use a shield as this is more a 'fighting style' thing than an actual armor. Not common but possible.

I would say that slayer could wear clothing of some description - ie: leather breeches or kilt and a rough woolen shirt or vest. These would not count as armor. If the weather was particularly cold or they were on watch at night they may throw a blanket around their shoulders, but again this would not count at armor and may even restrict movement adding a misfortune to the attack die roll, and negating a misfortune to dodge, parry and block.

I would therefore say that shields are in (fighting style - sword / axe and board), but any simple clothing worn cannot be counted as armor (whether a plain loin cloth and blanket arrangement or kilt and shirt, whatever your fashion faerie decides to wear as long as it is basic, rough, mouldy, stinky, unwashed, torn, stained, patched, etc).

It depends on what you want your slayer to look like in your minds eye. Essentially it is just an image with only a shield bearing any mechanical benefit - although I would suggest a player taking more sword and board style card than slayer cards initially.

Just my thoughts,

Alp

Yepesnopes said:

Yepesnopes said:

They wheren't allowed to wear armour. In 1ed and 2ed and even now they dont wear armour coz this is not ok with their fluff and even in WFB they dont wear it. You mention about Ungrim Ironfist the Slayer King from Karak-Kadrin but its something different, you cant count him as pure Slayer. He had to take two vow to serve his city as a king and protect people (thats why he wear armour) and another vow as Slayer to seek most dengerous creatures to fight to achieve an honorable death in combat. Thats the only reason he wear armour.

Other Slayers never would put on armour or shield coz they dont want to take another scar on their honor, remember they are still dwarfs.

Xen said:

Can you please copy paste the exact part of the 1st and 2nd editions of the game where it states that they cannot wear armour? Because I have totally missed it apparently.

And by the way, here you have the copy paste of the Troll Slayer typical trappings appearing in WFRPG 2nd edition.

Trappings: Great Weapon, Light Armour (Leather Jerkin) , One Bottle of Poor Craftsmenship Spirits

Cheers,

Trolls can't wear armor but does that mean they can't wear trousers or pants made of cloth? I do believe slayers wear some sort of clothing naturally, although their chest may be bare.

However I believe it would be better to treat the clothing a slayer wears as a robe givin +0 soak and +1 defense. No soak, no real armor, but still a benefit from wearing something.

I would not allow them to wear anything that gives them soak, but like a wizard they can benefit from robes (trousers) and a buckler giving defence.

The troll slayer career card says that slayers shun armor, but the core book says that "cloth isn't armor per se" and robes would fall into the same category. By that logic troll slayers would be able to either have +1 soak or +1 defense from whatever they wear, being a combination of clothing and heavy armbands/bracelets etc.

People in the setting don't get to see the statistics that the equipment has. When they talk about "armour," they mean leather, mail, etc. No one in the setting is going to look at a Troll Slayer and complain that the shirt and trousers he wears has 1 soak.

All the talk of Troll Slayers who wear clothing and get the 1 soak being munchkins is a bit much.

Doc, the Weasel said:

Agreed

It´s like a normal wintherday here in Sweden, and yes I think it´s nice to go winther bathing ones in a while or skiing down a hill just in my boxershorts. So why couldn´t the trollslayers do that?

If it were my game... You can wear any thing you like in order to meet social conventions, or in an attempt to "blend" in with the populace (why a Trollslayer would even want to would need to be explained, though) So go ahead and wear a shirt, but none of it counts towards your combat stats.

i kinda agree with Tarthonis here. I have a player who is a dragon slayer by now and he has never worn "cloth" for defence/soak. as a dwarf slayer he has a natural soak of 1 anyways and by convention he would never wear clothing to be protected from ANYTHING. even if its cold outside, he is a slayer, he won't be cold ;-)

he only once wore a kind of robe to disguise himself because the group had been pursued by witchhunters and they needed to get into a town to buy supplies.

it would have never come to my mind as a GM, to allow a character who litterally fights to die a glorious death, to wear a full set of cloth.

I have ruled that there is a difference between "clothes" and "cloth armor". Cloth armor is essentially heavy woolens or padded armor. Normal everyday clothes don't typically have enough material to provide any soak. Extremely loose flowing clothes (swashbuckler pantaloons and frilly shirt) *might* get a +1 defense like robes do.

Using this interpretation, a Slayer could wear normal clothes without coming into conflict with the "no armor" restriction.