The skeletons are shambling down the hill to the dwarf mine (extreme range). How long does it take to put on armor for my group of dwarfs before the skeletons engate them? [shambling requires that skeletons/zombies can't go more than 1 move per turn.]

Obviously a shield can be slung in a manoueuvororuer', but how long to don chainmail, chain shirt and the like? What should I go with for stats if my dwarf leader can only get part of his plate mail on?

{thanks again for feedback for this scenario encounter}

jh

6 manoeuvres are needed to get from extreme to close and vice versa. Seeing as they can only take 1 each turn they take 6 turns. This is enough time to put on armor. More Precise:

I would let players equip their chain mail in 1 turn if they do spend their action and manoeuvres on it. If they move that turn they get -1 soak/defense because it doesen't fit well, the straps arent pulled or anything like that.

If a player wants to wear his plate mail he does need someone else to help him put it on. This takes both players 3 turns (because its a complex task to put it on correctly which means that you can still move in it later). If the player doesn't finish putting on the plate mail he is partly protected (maybe half soak/defense rounded down) but against intelligent enemys (not shambling corpses) he is not protected at all. Who would hit someone on the bodypart that is heavily protected if you could just slash them somewhere else?

Hope this helps.

Good idea on chainmail. I think here's how I'd come up with it (using a lead from d20):

Table: Donning Armor Armor Type Don Don Hastily Remove

If the character has some help, cut this time in half. A single character doing nothing else can help one or two adjacent characters. Two characters can’t help each other don armor at the same time.

The wearer must have help to don this armor. Without help, it can be donned only hastily.

ARMOR Full || Hastily || Remove

Shield (any) 1 maneuver || n/a ||1 maneuver

Padded, leather, hide, studded leather,

or chain shirt, chainmail 1 minute || 5 rounds || 1 minute ¹

Breastplate & chain, scale mail, Brigandine 4 minutes ¹ || 1 minute || 1 minute ¹

Half-plate or full plate 4 minutes ² || 4 minutes ¹ || 1d4+1 minutes ¹

Don Hastily
This column tells how long it takes to put the armor on in a hurry. The armor check penalty and armor bonus for hastily donned armor are each 1 point worse than normal.

..

I am sorry, but as a dwarf I can't understand your post. Putting armour on? Is that some kind of joke? Why would I have put it off in the first place? *armour off... tststs... mumble... grumble...*

The classic problem of dwarfs. Water loves armor but it gets rather clingy.

Dwarves after thousands of years, must have advanced the art of donning their armour to such a state that they can do it in minutes. Since if you look at the shape of a dwarf it be awkward putting some stuff on, Getting help to don your armour, would be so undwarven they do not have the time to mess around like that, they have a hold to defend. So they must have crafted into the armour a workaround.

If you wished to take a specialization to don armour which skill would you put it under? or would you make a new basic/advanced skill. Coordination?

I'd use coordination for light armor and athletics for heavy armor.

Coming from D&D (As I have) it can be tempting to look for a table or set of rules to detail exactly what steps and durations are involved in a given activity.

Nothing wrong with that, and lots of people enjoy that level of detail.

However, running systems like WFRP -it's pretty clear they're deliberately avoiding that level of detail.

This can feel like a shortcoming, but here's what I've realized: When something like this happens - take a step back and consider the larger picture of the encounter. Ask yourself this question:

"What situation are you trying to create?"

Sounds like you want the drama of a group watching their enemies approach while they rush to put on their armor.

Right?

So, you can do that with a table that lists the time to equip for each armor, in maneuvers. And then you can set the distance of the enemy and track how fast they can cover the distance. And then each player with different armor can refer to the table and figure out how long it will take them and if they can take fatigue or aid each other to go faster.

You could do that.

Here's what I would do, though:

I'd say:

"The enemy is on the hill and they surge down towards you from extreme range. Anyone not in armor who wants to gear up before they arrive can do the following:

Equipping shields takes a single maneuver as always.

Donning a suit of armor will require a Perform a Stunt action using Agility - The difficulty is equal to half the total soak value you are trying to equip, rounding up. You can reduce this by 1 by spending 1 Action and 1 Maneuver on the task and rolling on a later turn.

I'm giving everyone a single misfortune die to this roll, because you're watching your enemy surge toward you as you do this. You may spend fortune points and aid each other as normal.

Go."

Is it historically accurate? No. Is it completely reusable for other situations? Probably not.

But it accomplishes the drama I want "Will we get our armor on in time?" and above all-

It's FAST. My players keep their heads in the moment and we roll into combat with the excitement of an uncertain outcome.

If things go terribly wrong, you can hipshoot your way out of that, too.

Say I've got a player with Plate Mail and Agility of 2. They're staring down the barrel of having no armor at all.

2 Blue vs 3 Purple and a black?

They plead for mercy - as a GM, I'd offer them the option to put on part of their armor for less difficulty. Any success will give them their defense 1, but maybe they only get soak 2. Whatever seems like a good compromise, but get them rolling or running into combat sans armor, pronto.

"No time to think! This isn't a chess match, boy! Grab a sword and start swinging!! "

But that's me.

I'm a sicko.

You are right afterall. It shouldn't be a simulation but just fun and as closely to realism as needed not as possible.

This is not meant ironically.

And I don't mean to slag on people who are searching for more accuracy - or genuinely like the additional detail. Some folks really love that. That's great. I cheer for those folks, too. There are some games where I do exactly that.

My point is just to illustrate that sometimes you can step back and ask yourself if the detail is adding to the fun. Sometimes it totally does. But I've noticed - coming from high detail games - that habitually reaching for more detail can create some questionable rules.

There is value in looking at what you're getting in exchange for all the effort.

• Do your new rules...
  • create something you can re-use over an over again?
  • support a large number of outcomes fairly?
  • engage your players?
  • keep your game flowing?
  • get used in session after session?
  • feel central to your overall adventure?

Then - GREAT. Awesome! Well, done! and post 'em on the house rules board or on RPG Geek and let the world see what works for your group.

• But if your rules....
  • ​Slow down the game
  • confuse your players
  • require significant player effort but allow limited outcomes
  • were created to skew the scenario to a GM-desired outcome ; or
  • get used in a marginal part of the adventure.

Then I'd suggest coming up with a shorthanded version of "Roll vs this difficulty" and give rewards for creative player responses.

Make the call, or heck - ask what your players think seems fair - and get over the bump in the adventure and get to the stuff that you all enjoy.

Detail and abstraction are both perfectly valid ways to game - but if you find yourself reaching for more detail out of habit - I just want to remind folks that the abstraction option is always out there.

Have fun.

[...] Just too long to quote.

The post above is how I think every new rule should be handled. Let's be honest wfrp3 will never be a tactical or realistic simulation but the system supports making decision as you go. If you find yourself doing this very often because the same thing is occuring all the time just make up a simple rule. I do share the opinion of murph that too many rules can slow down your game, limit the fun or just frustrate the people at the table.

I agree somewhat with Murph. If it is a time-sensitive situation, I'd have them make a Perform a Stunt and/or Coordination/Athletics check.

Off the top of my head:

Skill check with a difficulty equal to the armor's soak.

I'd say armor takes a number of maneuvers to equip equal to the total of (soak x2) + (defense). This makes the heavier armors more difficult to put on.

The PAS roll or skill check reduces the number of maneuvers by 1 per success, to a minimum of 1 maneuver.

Anyone rushing to put on metal armor will greatly fatigue themselves trying to put it on quickly, unless they are very lucky with the roll.