Test Armour Type Coverage Armour Item Base value Base * coverage Total Armour value Chest 0.5 Heavy Leather Vest 8 4 4 Boots 0.1 Heavy Leather Boots 6 0.6 2.5 Gloves 0.1 Heavy Cloth Gloves 4 0.4 Bracers 0.1 Wood-slat Bracers 6 0.6 Greaves 0.1 Stiff Leather Greaves 5 0.5 Shoulder 0.1 Traveler's Cloak 4 0.4 Total Coverage 1 Type Coverage Armour Item Base value Base *Cov Total Armour value Chest 0.7 Heavy Leather Vest 8 5.6 5.6 Boots 0.2 Heavy Leather Boots 6 1.2 4.2 Gloves 0.1 Heavy Cloth Gloves 4 0.4 Bracers 0.2 Wood-slat Bracers 6 1.2 Shoulder 0.1 Traveler's Cloak 4 0.4 Shield 0.5 0 0 Greaves 0.2 Stiff Leather Greaves 5 1 Total 2
On 3/16/06, Andrew Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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