> Why does a harvester need armor? couldn't you save money/space by not
> having armor?

The rules in VE2nd separate armor (DR) and structure (HP). This 
is no perfect representation of reality, where the chassis of a
vehicle contributes to DR and the hull gives some HP. It gets 
especially difficult with modern cars, which have lots of "one
shot DR" protection for the occupants by directing collision 
damage directly into structural HPs. 

The Vehicles rules also give some 'free DR' to components like 
power plants (DR 5) or radios (DR 2). This aids playability 
(who needs dozens of sets of component armor?), but using this
rule for an entire vehicle sounds like breaking the spirit of 
the rules. Ask yourself -- can you really get a structural 
component with lots of HP but not a single point of DR?

One could armor ONLY those structural components, i.e. use 
open frame armor, but that would expose the operator and the
cargo to rain or wind. 

Onno
_______________________________________________
GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]>
http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l

Reply via email to