I think one thing that might be complicating our attempts to arrive at a sum 1 coverage modifier is the inclusion of the shield. What if all worn armour has a sum coverage modifier of 1 and shields (as armour that is carried, but not worn) have their own size/coverage modifier. A small buckler would have a different coverage modifier than a large kite shield or tower shield.
Andrew On 3/16/06, Andrew Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Also, should individual parts of paired armour be individually > > > equipped? For example, bracers and gloves come in twos. It makes no > > > sense to split up greaves or boots, but sometimes gloves or greaves > > > don't come in pairs and don't even -need- to come in pairs. For > > > example, why wear a bracer on your shield arm? > > > > That's true, but I'm not sure whether we should go into such detail. I > > would add one equipment slot for each of these items, and wouldn't > > distinguish between ones and pairs. > > You have a good point. In this case, individually equippable bracers, > or even gloves, would need to be sufficiently powerful to make it > pointful to wear them individually. But since we're not spitting them > up, gloves and the like should probably have a single coverage > modifier. This would make the numbers easier to work out as well. > > > To explain this idea a little more: a inventory is a list of slots. > > For equipping items, each character will have a special inventory that > > holds a list of slots named after the type of equipment that fits into > > this slot. What slots this equipment inventory contains can (easily) > > be changed at runtime, if necessary. I might have to refine the code a > > little that is already in place, but the implementation of armour sets > > based upon this shouldn't pose a big problem. > > > Thanks for the clarification. And many of the equippable items will > have restrictions on them anyway - mostly based on class and > alignment. For example, monks cannot equip metallic armours. As a > compensation, I think they should get an automatic +1 agility at first > level and the ability to train skills and combat feats that increase > their ability to dodge and parry. These rules, of course, are just a > proposal. > > Another armour restriction that might make some sense is too tie one's > move silent ability to the weight of one's armor. For example, if a > thief, ranger, or even fighter has ranks in move silently, equipping > half-plate and full plate armours may disable this ability. > > Andrew > _______________________________________________ Adonthell-devel mailing list Adonthell-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/adonthell-devel