Re: Armour Fiddling

From: David Dunham <david_at_Op7q32qguDzbB2ei8J0TxdKSSj4seCAruPb7kBb_rN8q7Sz8W1f6BeGF_vjhR8xzel857pfmo>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 19:06:09 -0700


>But what is the other option? That a Seshnegi knight of
>given experience/hero points is actually weaker than a starting
>Heortling warrior, and his armour merely compensates for that
>weakness? That makes no sense to me, and that's where the suspension
>of disbelief comes in.

Isn't this what you get in games like GURPS? The Seshnegi had to spend his character creation points on armor, while the Heortling could spend them on skills.

The same could be true in RQ, where you could spend money on training or on equipment.

Do you need to suspend your belief when playing with those rules?

BTW, I don't recall an Icelandic saga where armor plays a role (there was one with a shirt no weapon could bite, and nobody got tired swimming while wearing it -- but that's obviously an item with a rating). Weapons are in fact mentioned, but as modifiers -- when a character is loaned a named sword, or has to fight with a borrowed sword, or an improvised weapon. The narrative implies a bonus in the first case, a penalty in the latter two.


David Dunham
Glorantha/HQ/RQ page:

Received on Mon 23 Jul 2007 - 19:07:59 EEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri 04 Jan 2008 - 23:00:23 EET