Just an experience question.

I prefer the 'primitive' from BC/OW from the surface reading of it… it means that 'Mono' isn't essential, Weight is a very important factor, and that having a Chain vest is not actually that bad! It's really heavy Flak. Also, swords and knives… armour points arn't doubled!

How does it play, though?

It plays very well- I've recently implemented that change and its much easier to keep track of and it keeps primitive weapons and say, claws, viable!

I've quite enjoyed it, so have my players.

Saldre,

Awesome! Sounds good!

I play it in DH as a GM like this:

primitive quality works only against non primitive armour - eg hammer against flak has primitive (7) so can roll maximum 7 on damage roll. Against primitive armour ignore that quality.

Non primitive weapons against primitive armour is halved just like it is in DH, so full plate ap6 is halved against normal ammo to ap3, and then if someone has autogun with man stopper rounds is ignored completely as it should be. Chain, leather, fur or even plate armour offers little or no protection against bullets.

Amaimon said:

Hum… Interesting! I would personally use the primitive armour ratings and masses from Only War, and the Primitive ratings from there too (I.e. A hammer is Primitive(9) and plate is probably AP4.) A chain vest is stil AP3 though… Trying to compare modern weaponry to ancient armour is extra calcs I don't care about, so basically I'm thinking of pulling it all onto the same level (plus, feudal plate weighs 30kg, you can barely carry anything else!)

It's for simplicity more than anything else (plus the added danger un-mono'ed blades then pose! scary, as it should be!)