Armor damage. Who uses it?

[garhkal]

Brought out of the thread on mandalorian armor.. Who here actually USES the rule in the books where armor gets lightly/heavily/severely damaged when the character (PC or NPC) wearing it takes a wound/incap/mortally wounded??
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[Raven Redstar]

I've also run it where a character who takes a blast from a heavy damage weapon and totally soaks it still ends up with some minor damage that needed to be repaired. It comes down to what's appropriate for the story. If a character takes a point blank burst from a repeating blaster, there's a good chance that there's going to be some degree of damage. Quick rule of thumb is if the attack does 2D or more damage than the soak roll, then the armor takes damage even if the character wearing it does not.
_________________
RR
________________________________________________________________

[denderan marajain]

My group use it. For us it is an important thing to create "reality"

[garhkal]

Another reason to use this rule is it helps prevent (or lessen) the chance of doing the stormtrooper two step where PCs kill a squad of troopers, then puts on their armor to infiltrate an enemy camp.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[nuclearwookiee]

I use it based on the notion that, if a character has been damaged, then the armor interposed between the character and the source of that damage should necessarily also be damaged. But I have never liked the idea that - because damage to armor is dependent on the character being injured and a character being injured is dependent (at least in part) on the character's own Strength attribute - the durability of armor changes with the person who wears it. It would make more sense to treat armor as a barrier - apply damage to the armor and then determine the damage, if any, that carries through to the wearer.

[jmanski]

I've thought that too, especially since hitting the armor isn't guaranteed, even if it covers that area.

It would be a little more work to do it that way, but it might work out better in the long run.
_________________
Blasted rules. Why can't they just be perfect?

[garhkal]

[nuclearwookiee]

[garhkal]

In which case, wearing power armor (ave 2d energy protection) gives someone facing down a heavy pistol a good chance of taking only 2-3d of damage.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

[Dromdarr_Alark]

This made me wonder if this rule would apply to a droid that has armor built into it (one of my PCs does).

If it does, then should the rule apply to natural resistance for certain organics like Barabel, for instance?
_________________
"I still wouldn't have a roll for it - but that's just how I roll."

[DougRed4]

Our Barabel is already Wookiee-like in his ability to completely laugh-off/ignore just about all incoming damage, so I'd hate to see anything that would improve that!
_________________
Currently Running: Villains & Vigilantes (a 32-year-old campaign with multiple groups) and D6 Star Wars; mostly on hiatus are Adventures in Middle-earth and Delta Green

[garhkal]

Exactly. If you apply it to armor, you would naturally also have to extend it to natural body armor, such as is on barbels etc.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!