The Dresden Files > DFRPG

Answering some stuff about Crafting and Armor...

<< < (3/4) > >>

void:
The game rules did seem to be anti-stacking in general, though, so I think some of that message got through. I don't have time to go digging through right now, but I remember reading at least one sidebar saying "we take the biggest bonus". That never felt like an inconsistency to me.

(Of course, my main complaint about armor was looking for enhancement of an existing material, not stacking distinct sources, and that's been indirectly answered. :D )

iago:
I'm gonna echo something here that I sent to our internal list, because maybe we can get some traction by discussing it out in the open:

Wouldn't an always-on block mean something that goes poof when it's overcome, but would renew on the following exchange?

So it'd be like, three guys mob you, the first one rolls Great over your always on Good block, poof, you have no block against the next two attacks... but then your exchange comes around and it's back up again, at Good?

For me, "always on" means something that reasserts its existence regularly, but not something that cheats and gives you the effect of multiple actions at once.  You can't set up two blocks in an exchange, therefore an "always on" block item would be something that could get temporarily breached and not reasserted until your next exchange rolls around.

In my mind, this would mimic a force shield that could get breached, but after a short recharge period, reassert itself.

iago:

--- Quote from: LCDarkwood on April 10, 2010, 08:16:47 AM ---Armor and Stacking Continued: The Numbers and Stuff

In Fate, a difference of one shift (or one step on the ladder) is bigger than you probably think. It can mean the difference between just taking stress and taking a consequence. It can be the difference between being able to take a consequence and being taken out. It can mean the difference between succeeding and needing to invoke an aspect to succeed. These thin lines manifest in actual play all the time.

So, you have to understand, stacking one armor benefit on top of another has a much bigger impact than it might seem from the numbers. Moving from Armor:2 to Armor:3 is a big step in weight class.

Let me do a quick example. Let's say you have Armor:2, and my Weapon and skill are such that I can inflict stress on you if I roll at least a 0 on the dice.

Without the influence of aspects, I have a 61.7% chance of doing that.

Now you upgrade to Armor:3. That means that now I need to roll at least a +1 on the dice to damage you.

Without the influence of aspects, I have a 38.3% chance of doing that.

That is a huge jump, which has a big cascade of effects on how things turn out. There's a 23% greater chance I'm going to have to spend a fate point to affect you now, every time I roll against you. And we're assuming your defense total stays the same here for simplicity - but in real play, it doesn't, because you roll every round and spend fate points of your own, further exacerbating the effects of this simple probability gap.

So, when I tell you that any stacking changes things significantly, I'm not exaggerating.

--- End quote ---

I also want to dig into this a little. I don't think the idea here is wrong, but I do think the example needs some more depth and detail.

Armor:2 vs. someone who rolls a 0 on the dice and still gets to inflict a point of stress implies that the person in question is using a Weapon:3.  If it was Weapon:2, the blow would "connect", but no stress would be inflicted.  So first off we're assuming a small advantage in armament for our hypothetical attacker.

Say, though, that it's Weapon:4 (gods help ya). Attacker rolls zero, that matches the defense roll, so the blow connects, 2 stress inflicted. If the defender's armor goes up to Armor:3, that blow still connects, 1 stress inflicted.  But if the defender's skill goes up by 1 (or he's just a little luckier on that defense roll) and the attack doesn't drop by 1 stress -- it misses. No connection, no stress.

So in this way defensive skill roll is valued more than armor ratings.  Armor is there to help you out when you screw up and don't get out of the way.  "If he got his hands on me, I was dead." That's a guiding principle to the way the various moving parts around stress infliction are balanced against each other. (It's why blocks are fragile but armor isn't, when it comes to spellcasting for example, too, since a block is a potentially higher defense roll.)

Similarly, it's why it's easier to get a Weapon:X bonus of some sort (which only applies when the blow connects) than an increase to your ability to hit the target.

LCDarkwood:

--- Quote from: iago on April 11, 2010, 04:02:29 PM ---Armor:2 vs. someone who rolls a 0 on the dice and still gets to inflict a point of stress implies that the person in question is using a Weapon:3.

--- End quote ---

Or someone who's wearing Armor:2, has a Fair (+2) defense roll, and gets attacked by someone with Superb (+5) skill.

void:
This reminds me of when I was a ADSL technician. There's a conceptual snag here in that "always on" will for some people imply always on. That'd mean every time someone goes to attack, this is there.
We might consider "always available". It's there for you to call on, but it isn't automatically already on.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page