Be social
Thanks for taking the time to post a new comment or a reply to one! First scan these quick notes, if you please:
General
* Currently, previewing a post is optional; you're welcome to preview or post immediately.
* You should see plain text input by default; click "enable rich text" for fancy formatting tools. (Some people love that and some don't. Be aware that formatting tool performance may vary by browser.)
* With apologies to all, "captcha" questions may face unregistered posters. Otherwise, the spam flow will dwarf the Nile.
Registration and login
* Registration is available! Sign up here. Chief benefits at present include the ability to edit your own comments, bookmark favorite content, and manage subscriptions (newsletter, threads, etc.).
* If you'd prefer to post as an unregistered visitor, that's welcome too. Just leave "Your name" as the default "Esteemed Visitor", or type in some other name. (But if you happen to type in a name used by a registered user – say, "tbone" – you'll get an error telling you so when you hit "post comment". And while your post text should still be there, waiting for a revised user name, there's a chance it could disappear.)
* If you're a registered user but haven't logged in and want to post a quick comment as Esteemed Visitor, that's fine; see above.
* If you're a registered user but haven't logged in, and enter your user name under "Your name" when posting, you'll get an error saying that's the name of a registered user. That's a good thing; it means strangers can't make posts under your user name! But as above, there's a chance of losing your post text. It's best to log in first here, and then start your posting.
Final
All the above is standard stuff for community web sites, but reminders are good; I hate post-related glitches, and hate to see people run into them on this site. On this or any site, it's a good practice to do a quick "Select All" and "Copy" on your post text before hitting "Preview comment" or "Post comment" – just in case.
For more on the whole topic of interaction with the site, please see User Interaction (opens in new window).
Patron advantage
How's everything?
Enjoying your Games Diner meal? Is the wait staff attentive? Is the chef bathed? (Then it must be a Sunday.) You do know that a little eggshell in the French toast adds calcium, right?
If the cramps haven't set in yet, I hope you'll say Hi to the chef or check out the many ways you can contribute to the Diner.
Now eat. Eat up! You're as thin as a rail.
Build a site!
Cast Seek Spell
THE TAKEOUT MENU
For collaborators, contributors, or the curious. Notice of site updates; project announcements; calls for playtesting; etc.
On the three numbered
On the three numbered items:
(1) Sounds fine. Though, like you, I don't know what the "right" numbers should be for any given armor. (Which is fine with me; just put some number in place, and should data ever come up to suggest a change, then change away!)
(2) I'll stick to my guns on this one: If an attack expends some energy breaking chainmail, then what penetrates has less energy remaining. I think it becomes trickier when you envision hand-held stabs, as there's the matter of the attacker continuing or even renewing his "push" once the blade pierces armor. But for simplicity, just to mentally play with what's going on, imagine a thrown spear. If the spear barely has enough energy to break and actually penetrate chainmail, then what just manages to penetrate will logically cause little piercing of flesh.
That said, the above doesn't mean that EP needs to absorb lots of energy; just set EP low vs the damage type in question, and the bit of edged damage converted to crushing will be low. Or, just go ahead and use "all or nothing", per your preference; while I think it's a small drop in simulation realism, it's a nice simplification, and in most cases won't yield results very different from the base rule.
(3) Same questions here. Again, all I can do is guess.
===
As for those three possible types of armor:
Yes, that sounds reasonable. In fact – and I may have mentioned this somewhere on the site – in the many discussions of flexible armor and/or EP here or elsewhere online, I've been surprised that people never mention one of the things that the current flexible armor rules do offer, that EP doesn't: A damage divisor. That's essentially what the current flexible armor rule offers.
I think a damage divisor as an armor effect is in theory a fine thing! I don't think the current flex armor rules handle it well, for reasons outlined in the article. But the general idea could be reworked into something sound.
Awesomely detailed armor rules could offer three types of protection, with an attack needing to penetrate them in order:
1) Full absorption of impact (DR). At this point, the armor is not broken or deformed at all. (Same as the first armor quality you suggest.)
2) Dispersal and partial absorption of impact (handled as Damage Reduction). At this point, the armor is deformed somewhat. (Matches the 3rd armor quality you suggest?)
3) Prevention of penetration only, but not impact (EP). At this point, the armor is not broken but is seriously deformed, providing no appreciable padding or spreading of the impact. (Same as the 2nd armor quality you suggest.)
Mix up those three, and armors would get pretty darned realistic, IMO. In fact, while I think EP is perfect for extreme cases like thin impenetrable magic/tech armor, real armor might hew closer to DR + Dam Reduction than to DR + EP. For simplicity, EP could even be replaced entirely with Dam Resist, per my earlier comment.
Using all three of the above armor qualities might play too fussily. Using only two is pretty simple and yields better results than the current flex armor rules, IMO.