Eliminate AC 1

[President]

So, we've played with the new armor system for awhile now, and overall I think it was a great thing for Darkon. That said, I have heard many people complain about the number of hits plate takes and about 5oz leather counting as armor (because really, it is clothing not armor).

I'd like people to discuss removing AC 1 completely and moving all the other armor classes down one class (So studded/ring/hide become AC 1, chain/scale/brig become AC 2 and plate/banded become AC 3).

Of course, this would require some serious rule work which I am not going to do if people don't think this is a good idea. For those that are currently using leather armor, we could 1) grandfather it in or 2) people could add studs/rings/metal plates to make it the new AC 1.

When I wear my plate legs, it really almost feels like I am cheating when I take 4 hits to a leg and am still fighting. I imagine it may feel even more so to people wearing full plate. Heck, even my chain seems a little cheaty at this point.

Thoughts?

Edit: This should be considered a thought from Tim the player, not the president. Sorry, forgot what account I was on

[Lord Cailen Sendor]

Pat the player thinks that plate should be able to take 2 hits from a great sword before the next shot effects - also grandfathering should not be done and is a bad mechanic that leads to new players grieving down the road because of unequal armors just cause a play has been playing longer. Remember when a great sword on the 2nd hit damaged the limb ... now wearing plate it would be the same 2nd hit affects the area - plate looks good, and should be able to take a shot or 2 because how much of a royal pain in the ass it is to wear

so a mage with skin spell could take more shots from a great sword then a guy wearing full plate from one opponent in one area this would be a bad change and affect the equality between caster armors and real armor wearers

as the Dag guys say when they discuss giving their armor more hits "If I wanted that then I would go play Darkon"

[Thrush Svartehjertet]

I hate 5oz leather being armor. I don't know what the "right" solution is...

Thrush
berserk

[Lord Valfryn]

I love the 3 point armor system, the 2 point weapon becomes REAL strong. I would adjust red damage to 1 point (pierces thru ar1 , maybe 2) black damage swords need to be 6 ft min. Done...

[Thrush Svartehjertet]

Love it.


Thrush
berserk

[fingers630]

so plate would take 3 dagger shots? some sketchies might be pissed when "backstab + red" is shrugged off

[Amazing_Iltztafein]

I think this would cause a lot of confusion, and mess up a current balance we have.

If you eliminate it and make it a three point system:
Druids are now better on battle days than thieves and assassins, guaranteed. They have free armor that is equivalent and they have much larger shields..
Monks are also way better than the above, as they have greater armor and black weapons.

Right now there are no classes that ONLY get AC1, other than as an ability. If you remove it, then you are messing up a delicate balance between the low-armored classes.

[Sir Aethilgar]

I think this would cause a lot of confusion, and mess up a current balance we have.

If you eliminate it and make it a three point system:
Druids are now better on battle days than thieves and assassins, guaranteed. They have free armor that is equivalent and they have much larger shields..
Monks are also way better than the above, as they have greater armor and black weapons.

Right now there are no classes that ONLY get AC1, other than as an ability. If you remove it, then you are messing up a delicate balance between the low-armored classes.

Agreed.

Besides, there are several other proposal/discussion threads looking to add padded to AC1. Pulling this 'light armor' from the field would remove those proposals, as well.

[Lord Valfryn]

druids won't have better armor because bark skin would do exactly * unless you're wearing five oz and upgrading to 10oz.
- seems fine to me

"leather skin" for monks can be exactly that as druids : wearing five oz leathers upgraded to 10oz by ability (maybe furs/skins if that slides into the game) until they get the upgrade in which they gain the 1 pt armor.
- seems fine and balanced still

Backstab can be it's own damage code again, and do 3 points of damage = AR 0- Death, AR 1- Death AR2- Mortal, AR-3 - Armor destroyed.
- seems balanced and equivalent.

Is there no one else?

[Thrush Svartehjertet]

Dude... go read the argument on quillions... THIS type of reasoning and circular arguing is why I stopped going to Senate for all but emergency items around 2002.

Thrush
berserk

[Amazing_Iltztafein]

druids won't have better armor because bark skin would do exactly * unless you're wearing five oz and upgrading to 10oz.
- seems fine to me

"leather skin" for monks can be exactly that as druids : wearing five oz leathers upgraded to 10oz by ability (maybe furs/skins if that slides into the game) until they get the upgrade in which they gain the 1 pt armor.
- seems fine and balanced still

Backstab can be it's own damage code again, and do 3 points of damage = AR 0- Death, AR 1- Death AR2- Mortal, AR-3 - Armor destroyed.
- seems balanced and equivalent.

Is there no one else?

But there is no AC1, so there is no reason to own five oz leather, unless it's being grandfathered, in which case barkskin would do nothing at all, because AC1 includes hide under this.

This isn't circular reasoning, as Thrush says, I'm talking about how we'd have to change several classes as well as the armor classes. That's a large overhaul. Or we'd throw off the balance, in which case that messes up a lot.

Do whatever you want. I think this is a pointless change. I like the current armor rules. I liked the old ones, too. I don't see anything being overpowered, but that's just me I guess.

[Thrush Svartehjertet]

If this goes to proposal it will be well thought out, but it wont pass. It'll make Darkon too much like other games... like not having quillions.


Thrush
sarcasmbot5000

[Sir Aethilgar]

5oz leather armor has been in the game since 1986 and has always taken 1 point of damage with the exception of yellows to the head. While I have never worn 5oz leather as armor, I don't see anything wrong with leaving it in place.

I will say that grandfathering isn't a road we should ever consider going down. If we are going to make a rule or rule change; it should be across the board and apply to everybody.

Is the true problem that our recent armor change; going to a weapon damage based system from an armor absorption based system, made heavy armors and helms too durable?

Oh, and we should add quillons; in the shape of foam horns, to all hide-based helmets... just because.

[Inox]

Heavy armors are less durable in terms of cleaving weapons, more durable vs. one-handed swinging.

[Thrush Svartehjertet]

I hate you.

Thrush
berserk