Ok, this stuff looks pretty complicated. Maybe it isn't, but it's more than I really want to read up on.

Suffice to say:

I should practice evade.
I should practice light armor use.
I should practice aim.
I should practice precise aim.
I should practice opportunity strike.

Am I safe in knowing no more than that - just practice and play?

Or are there now more variables in each combat I should be looking at also?

Thanks.

Doesn't the new "aim" skills really screw up savages who aren't supposed to be wearing armor?

Doesn't the new "aim" skills really screw up savages who aren't supposed to be wearing armor?

Well, if you're not wearing armor, you're not going to deflect much with or without Aim in play. Savages get a number of strong perks for foregoing armor, though.

There's one tweak I'd like to make there, though, which is on the list but probably not a huge deal.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

>Doesn't the new "aim" skills really screw up savages who
>aren't supposed to be wearing armor?
>
>Well, if you're not wearing armor, you're not going to deflect
>much with or without Aim in play. Savages get a number
>of strong perks for foregoing armor, though.
>
>There's one tweak I'd like to make there, though, which is on
>the list but probably not a huge deal.
>
>valguarnera@carrionfields.com

The point wasn't that they couldn't deflect, it's that these new skills seem to work a lot better if someone isn't using armor...making it that much worse not to wear armor for a savage.

They do get bonuses, just not sure it tallies up now since they don't get to use any of the armor skills either.

The point wasn't that they couldn't deflect, it's that these new skills seem to work a lot better if someone isn't using armor...making it that much worse not to wear armor for a savage.

Aim helps in slipping a blow past armor. If you aren't wearing armor, it doesn't matter if your opponent has the skill or not.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

>The point wasn't that they couldn't deflect, it's that
>these new skills seem to work a lot better if someone isn't
>using armor...making it that much worse not to wear armor for
>a savage.
>
>Aim helps in slipping a blow past armor. If you aren't
>wearing armor, it doesn't matter if your opponent has the
>skill or not.


The Opportunity Strike skill represents an unsavory instinct for aiming blows
at an opponent's least protected body parts. This is most helpful against
a foe who is unevenly armored, or wearing a mixture of armor and clothing.


So this has no bonus against a savage with no armor? Or just helps against armor deflection?

If you're not wearing any armor, all of your body parts are the least protected and it doesn't matter where they hit you.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

This to me seems to be a net downgrade to classes that use offense from additional NPC's (necro's, druids, conjurers), being that if evade is at its most successful (10% chance or so) and if there's additional deflection, its not unreasonable to say that classes are even more tanky towards pets.

Will you be looking at that and adjusting to keep things as they are power wise for those classes or do you feel they were in need of some tweaking? Or, is it neither and I'm just misinterpreting things?

How much effect will deflection have in a typical fight? (5%, 10%, 20%, etc?)

>How much effect will deflection have in a typical fight? (5%,
>10%, 20%, etc?)

I'll make a semi-educated wild ass guess of 10%.

I'm not that worried for the pet classes -- a lot of them have a lot more hitroll than most PCs tend to carry, which evens some of this out.

Yeah, I looked at some logs and it seems like this isn't like an extra dodge or anything.

Cool.

This to me seems to be a net downgrade to classes that use offense from additional NPC's (necro's, druids, conjurers), being that if evade is at its most successful (10% chance or so) and if there's additional deflection, its not unreasonable to say that classes are even more tanky towards pets.

The Evade half is fully intentional, and not something I'm worried about. The deflection part is one of many thing we'll keep an eye on. As Nep mentioned, a lot of those pets have quite a bit of hitroll, so the impact of deflection may be somewhat smaller.

How much effect will deflection have in a typical fight? (5%, 10%, 20%, etc?)

Depends on the matchup. 10% is probably close to normal, but either of the other figures are within the range of belief depending on who the attacker is and who the defender is. It's hard to imagine a scenario outside of the 0-20% range, and you'd also only see numbers close to 0% if the defender is wearing lots of clothing/etc.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

I think the forum ate my other post. Hrmph. Three questions about the new AC stuff:

1. How does AC from a gear "special properties" (e.g. shaman robe) figure into this? Is it just the intrinsic AC that counts, or both?

2. What about AC from songs/skills/spells/communes (e.g. armor spell)?

3. The new "magic" damage category for base AC: does it cover stuff like light, black light, wrath/divine, defilement/unholy, poisonous bite, etc.?

1. How does AC from a gear "special properties" (e.g. shaman robe) figure into this? Is it just the intrinsic AC that counts, or both?


Nope. Only the AC vs. a specific attack type counts towards deflection. Generic AC does what it did previously.

2. What about AC from songs/skills/spells/communes (e.g. armor spell)?

The more powerful affects can bolster existing armor AC. If you have one up you'll notice rare deflections credited to them.

3. The new "magic" damage category for base AC: does it cover stuff like light, black light, wrath/divine, defilement/unholy, poisonous bite, etc.?

Anything not covered by a physical damage type or one of the elements. Radiance is a (quasi-)element, the rest fall under magic.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

Another sidenote:

This change seems to be a tone-down for one single class and another set of classes. The first is shifters, who don't wear armor and so can't make use of any sort of deflection. The second group is "all classes that rely on melee to some degree but don't get aim, precision aim or opp. strike". Since I'm not sure which classes get those skills, I can't specify the members of this set. I would suppose that classes like bard, shaman, etc. are included.

Here's my reasoning. The hard-core melee guys (warriors, orcs, etc.) get skills (aim, precision aim, opp. strike) that to a large degree negate the armor bonuses their opponents just received. So for those classes things remain much the same as before. But for someone who can't practice those skills, they just lost some offense. Such classes typically don't rely as heavily on melee, so the nerfage isn't severe, but it still seems like a net downgrade.

The first is shifters, who don't wear armor and so can't make use of any sort of deflection.

Offensive-oriented shifters tend to have crazy high hitrolls and are difficult to tank. Shifters in general are a difficult case for this, though I don't think anything dire has happened to them with it. We'll probably revisit which forms should get Evade-like utilities and the like some time soon.

Since I'm not sure which classes get those skills, I can't specify the members of this set. I would suppose that classes like bard, shaman, etc. are included.

Web page should be updated now, except healers. Small glitch there.

The hard-core melee guys (warriors, orcs, etc.) get skills (aim, precision aim, opp. strike) that to a large degree negate the armor bonuses their opponents just received.

I wouldn't use "negate" there. Not sure where you're getting that.

The heavily melee classes profit more, but they also rely on melee more. Mages get a little extra melee defense (non-zero chance to deflect), and lose some melee offense (against PCs and humanoid NPCs who are wearing armor, at least, they'll get blocked), but that may be a favorable trade for them.

It wasn't entirely obvious from running sample numbers during the testing process if that trade is favorable or not. A lot of variables can come into play there, and I'm not sure how you're drawing conclusions this early.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

>I wouldn't use "negate" there. Not sure where you're getting
>that.

Mostly the way the helpfile for aim is written:

"as they find the gaps in their opponent's armor
and technique. Even a full suit of platemail has a number of vulnerable points
accessible to a well-aimed strike"

To me, this translates to: "people who can aim won't get deflected as often, since they know how to target the vulnerable spots". Also the description of opportunity strike, which sounds as if it would render one's opponent's ability to deflect blows only as good as that person's weakest piece of armor (which may be clothing or treasure, and hence very unlikely to deflect anything).

>A lot of variables can come into play there, and I'm not sure how
>you're drawing conclusions this early.

I'm not drawing steadfast conclusions, just theorizing about how things appear from a cursory reading of the helpfiles. It seemed like the change could be summarized as, "everybody gets a chance to deflect, but melee classes also get some of skills that make their blows less likely to be deflected." Guess that's not the case after all. Some additional questions, though:

* Do all gear slots "matter"? For instance, is there a benefit to wearing AC-ish rings over "treasure" rings? It's hard to imagine deflecting something with a ring.

* Do the "armor use" skills stack? For instance, if you had a really light piece of dragonscale would it benefit from "bone armor use" and "light armor use" both?

* Can I assume that "light armor use" will only help you, i.e. there's no penalty when especially heavy armor is worn?

It seemed like the change could be summarized as, "everybody gets a chance to deflect, but melee classes also get some of skills that make their blows less likely to be deflected." Guess that's not the case after all.

That is the case. It's a bigger leap to say "largely negated by", which isn't accurate.

* Do all gear slots "matter"? For instance, is there a benefit to wearing AC-ish rings over "treasure" rings? It's hard to imagine deflecting something with a ring.

Nearly all slots matter. Most rings don't give AC (those that do tend to hit magic), and slot is checked very, very rarely.

* Do the "armor use" skills stack? For instance, if you had a really light piece of dragonscale would it benefit from "bone armor use" and "light armor use" both?

Neither. Dragonscale is neither light (cloth, leather, fur, hide, etc.) nor bone, and not a material I'd assume any adventurer gets trained with in a guild. The ability to use dragon armor exists, but isn't taught in a guild.

* Can I assume that "light armor use" will only help you, i.e. there's no penalty when especially heavy armor is worn?

That's true for all the Armor Use skills.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

>Neither. Dragonscale is neither light (cloth, leather, fur,
>hide, etc.) nor bone, and not a material I'd assume any
>adventurer gets trained with in a guild. The ability to use
>dragon armor exists, but isn't taught in a guild.

How is dragonbone armor not bone? Are dragons really so rare in CF that your guildmaster hasn't seen enough armor made from dragons to train you to use them? I'm a little disappointed dragonbone isn't bone armor.

nt

There goes all my reading comprehension jabs. It would be nice to get some clarity on whether or not dragonbone = bone and if dragonscale = other.

Anything made from a dragon is considered too exotic for a guild-taught skill.

From the Bone Armor Use helpfile:

Skill at Bone Armor Use represents the familiarity and training needed to
get the most protection out of armor made of bone and related materials.
(Dragon bone is a rarer, denser material not taught about in any known
guild.) Bone armor is often bulky, but some guilds prefer it for reasons
of availability or symbolism. This skill boosts the ability of a piece's
ARMOR CLASS to deflect a blow.

And from the Dragon Armor Use helpfile:
Legends persist of adventurers trained in fighting cloaked in the rarest
of armors crafted from the hides and bones of dragons. It is not known where
the teachers of such rare techniques reside, or if any exist at all.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

Is it a bug if my dragonbone armor deflects stuff? A lot? (more than my metal armor..)

You don't have to have "dragon armor use" in order for your dragonbone armor to deflect stuff. "Dragon armor use" would just make it *even more effective*. From what I gather, the "armor use" skills just give boosts to particular materials of armor. A really high-AC piece of armor made from dragonbone is still a "really high-AC piece of armor", even if you don't have "dragon armor use".

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

Also, secret knowledge that confers tangible in game benefits pisses me off because I must work harder than cheaters to achieve parity. How much harder depends on how many people are sharing and gathering information, but suffice to say, I must work at least twice as hard as the smallest group of OOC information sharing cheaters. This is not a good system.

Guess you would rather have it all handed to you then have anything worth while exploring for. I for one do not share your opinion, I enjoy figuring things like this out on my own. I think the system is fine.

Please spoon me with everything. Just because you think something is just fine doesn't make it true, much the same way that me thinking gravity doesn't effect me doesn't keep me from falling on my face when I try to fly.

What do you expect them to do? Not put in cool changes like this just because you are afraid that some people are sharing information that you don't have? That has to be the stupidest thing I have ever heard. The way I see it you have three choices:

1. Join the cheaters - yes not a good option and one I hope you will not do.

2. Go out and discover the secrets yourself. Someone else has to do it in order for them to share the information with others in the first place. So way can't it be you? (with out the sharing part that is).

3. Come to the forums and complain about how it is sooo unfair for you.

You are not the only one here with no OOC connections. If you do not trust those who run the game (yes it is a game last time I checked) to do their best to find those that cheat then either apply to become an IMM yourself or leave.

Maybe I'm just in a bad mood because I have been at work for 13 hours now (with atleast one more to go) but I'm getting sick of reading your cry baby posts.

that is all...

Let's keep some perspective here.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT "DRAGON ARMOR USE".

It's not like the "secret knowledge" at stake is a lvl51 PWK scroll. This is a skill that will boost the deflection ability of maybe 2-3 pieces of a given character's armor. Nothing huge.

Like I said, too long at work. Just rubbed me the wrong way for some reason. Probably won't happen again for another 3 years!

For what it's worth, my comment was directed at Tac.

.

>Nearly all slots matter. Most rings don't give AC (those that
>do tend to hit magic), and slot is checked very, very rarely.

When you say "slot is checked very rarely", does that mean that most checks ignore "slots" entirely and just look at a target's overall AC (or some other measure), or are you saying that the ring slot in particular gets checked very rarely (relative to other slots)?

>Neither. Dragonscale is neither light (cloth, leather, fur,
>hide, etc.) nor bone...

Ah. I was thinking "light armor use" was based on weight, instead of material. Looking at all the armor use helpfiles as a group, it does make sense that they're all material-based.

When you say "slot is checked very rarely", does that mean that most checks ignore "slots" entirely and just look at a target's overall AC (or some other measure), or are you saying that the ring slot in particular gets checked very rarely (relative to other slots)?

Every blow checks a slot, assuming the target has a humanoid build. Unless a 'stop' occurs, you don't see this, since it would get spammy, and we don't want to get into the mess of "I hit him in the face! That should be QUINTUPLE DAMAGE!" systems, which IMO tend to up-emphasize luck too much.

The ring slots get checked extremely rarely, as in not worth caring about. I couldn't find a ring that counted as armor in a few tries, but theoretically a magicky-ring themed around defense could find its way in.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

>When you say "slot is checked very rarely", does that mean
>that most checks ignore "slots" entirely and just look at a
>target's overall AC (or some other measure), or are you saying
>that the ring slot in particular gets checked very
>rarely (relative to other slots)?


The ring slot in particular gets checked very very rarely, relative to other slots.

* Do all gear slots "matter"? For instance, is there a benefit to wearing AC-ish rings over "treasure" rings? It's hard to imagine deflecting something with a ring.

If you find a worn-on-finger item that's armor (and not from Hell), please use the typo command to let me know about it. There shouldn't be any of these lying around any more.

If it's not armor, it won't deflect.

Kastellyn the Devourer of Magic, Lord of Legends

Will do. Only rings? Purely speaking from a "reality" perspective, it seems strange that something like a "sandy brown cloak" would deflect blows, even if it *is* armor. Mostly because it's made of a "soft" material like cloth. I can imagine there being other cloak-y gear that is technically armor instead of clothing, but probably shouldn't be deflecting anything.

Just musing- not a complaint.

Cloth armor tends to be padded or otherwise especially durable. It tends to run light and give poor protection. Clothing is still clothing.

examine cloak
A sandy-brown desert cloak is clothing worn around the neck, made of cloth, and weighs 2 kg 700 g.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

Okay, so, as my guide for when to pull the typo trigger and when not to...just use common sense, but don't limit myself only to the "ring" slot? I'm not trying to be obtuse here - just trying to get a proper feel for this stuff so that I don't waste anybody's time with bogus typos.

I agree that the changes seem to balance out for offense shifters, however, is there any chance that defense shifters (and maybe a few utility and water forms) will gain a some sort of deflection. The really great AC's that def shifters get always seemed kind of useless before now, Do they get any sort of deflection chance from the new changes. It also seems like a great chance to make the low end defensive forms (especially second tier forms) somewhat more able to tank, something they have been seriously lacking before.

First off, I love this change. Now my questions.

1) I was surprised that only thieves get opportunity strike and that rangers only get aim. I'm curious if there was any thought to linking these aim skills to ranger or thief builds? For example, a hunter ranger could likely have insight into opportunity strike, maybe just with a bow? And a thug thief strikes me as less of finesse type meaning that opportunity strike is maybe not his cup of tea. A similar argument could be made for high dex dagger warriors or rangers even.

2) It seems that all armor has been flagged as to whether it is light, metal etc. But I noticed that the examine command still shows just "armor". Could this be altered to show which armor type?

3) I'm thinking of combat past early levels where there are few misses. By that I mean that first you dodge/parry/shield block. If something gets through those then there is a chance to deflect. That's laid out in the help. But if the chance to miss has not been changed what concrete effect is there? Put another way, if misses are so rare then does not this whole skill set cater to smallish niche?

Not on staff, but here's my take...

>2) It seems that all armor has been flagged as to whether it
>is light, metal etc. But I noticed that the examine command
>still shows just "armor". Could this be altered to show which
>armor type?

It seems that the "armor use" skills are based on armor material. Mystical = energy, Stone = stone/gem, Light = cloth/leather, Bone = bone/flesh?, Metal = metal, etc.

>3) I'm thinking of combat past early levels where there are
>few misses. By that I mean that first you dodge/parry/shield
>block. If something gets through those then there is a chance
>to deflect. That's laid out in the help. But if the chance to
>miss has not been changed what concrete effect is there?

Every melee *hit* also got past dodge/parry/shield block. So every hit *or* miss (under the pre-deflection system) now has a chance to be deflected. At least that's the way I understand it.

For example, there are boots made of leather with excellent ac vs mystical.

Does mystical armor use boost these boots defense vs mystical attacks, or would it instead boots some boots made of energy against all forms of attack?

I highly suspect it's the latter. Otherwise you'd see skills like "magic armor use" and "elemental armor use", corresponding to "magical" and "elemental" attack types respectively.

Plus check out the helpfile for "mystical armor use". Seems like it boosts the effectiveness of gear made from energy, fire, water, etc.

For 2, I think I was unclear.

If you examine a piece of armor it will show as armor, e.g.,

exa sleeves
These sleeves are made of thick leather, studded with bright slivers
of moonstone, and sewn together with silver thread. The moonstones have been polished to a mirror-like finish, and you can easily see your many-faceted reflection in them - a reflection that is swirled and obscured by the colorful patterns of the silvery stone.

Gleaming moonstone-studded leather sleeves is armor worn on the arms, made of leather, and weighs 4 pounds 1 ounces.

What I am asking is if a change can be made, specifically to the last part of the examine bit, e.g.,

Gleaming moonstone-studded leather sleeves is _light_ armor worn on the arms, made of leather, and weighs 4 pounds 1 ounces.

So, since all the armor in the game has an armor type flag, I thought it would be spiffy if the players could see that information...

A piece of armor is "light" if it is one of a few materials. So, since we can already see what material it's made out of, that should tell us whether it's "light" or not. Or metal, or mystical, etc.

Well, I have seen come confusion and if this is such an obvious thing then why not add it to the examine output (and lore? --but I do not have lore with my current char yet)? I guess there are two ways to see this: (i) it's so obvious why bother or (ii) it's so obvious so let's make it explicit. I'm in the latter camp.

Another thing I thought of: Is there any enthusiasm for the idea of making glowing/humming items somehow degrade stealth capacities of thieves/assassin/rangers? I've always thought those classes should get a reward for using light and "silent" armor...

The other stuff looks covered.

I'm thinking of combat past early levels where there are few misses. By that I mean that first you dodge/parry/shield block. If something gets through those then there is a chance to deflect. That's laid out in the help. But if the chance to miss has not been changed what concrete effect is there? Put another way, if misses are so rare then does not this whole skill set cater to smallish niche?

Think of deflection as a fourth defense that happens to not be tied to a single skill. You can't deflect anything you can't parry, dodge, or block, for example.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

First off, my own observation.

I think these changes have made the strong melee classes a BIT more powerful in pk. Let me explain why.

It is because they have become quickly specializable in combat. If damage type of weapons, and armor defending against damage type in combat is actually important (as in having an effect in a pk outcome), then the one wielding the weapon has a huge advantage now.

example:

Giant warrior is fighting (insert class), his (enter dam type) weapons not doing as much damage as he expects. He hits a macro, now he is wearing (different damage type) weapons in less than a round of combat....which do alot more damage.....or don't do as much, so he hits another macro, and is wearing (different damage type) weapons in less than another round.


While for a mage to change defense depending on his foe will be HARD, will require fleeing combat, and having enough time to switch out multiple pieces of eq. Not to mention shifters who would have to flee , revert, switch pieces of eq. Not to mention again that mages have less str to be carrying sets of eq for different defensive purposes.



Which brings me to my main question.


How does this effect shifters? If these new skills, and ac/dex/hit rolls actually matter more than a tiny bit in pk, I sure hope that shifters will get to take part in these new skills. But, the fact that they aren't wearing armor in form makes me think they have taken a defensive hit across the board.


Also, aside from a very few spells like giant str and haste, the shifter can not prep for str or dex loss....at all, unlike every other class.

So, if a maladicting class lowering +hit roll and dex now means more effect against your offenses/defenses, without any way to prep for this fight, it seems that shifters have taken a huge power loss compared to maladictors.

Compared with before...

AC meant nothing. No blows got deflected. So, after defenses fail, magi got hit with pretty much everything and hit with pretty much everything. But hitting with everything doesn't mean much to a mage.

Now, said mage can get some deflection from his armor after something gets past his defenses (even with precise aim). Not a lot, but more than before.

Said mage will now find it considerably harder to hit the warrior (say), but that's not too relevant because said mage never did much against the warrior in melee anyway.

So post change, magi gain in defense (slightly) and lose in offense (slightly), relative to pre-change.

Do the new armor skills mean that it might be better for someone with the light armor skill to use lets say a mediocre leather armor instead of a good steel armor?

Do the new armor skills mean that it might be better for someone with the light armor skill to use lets say a mediocre leather armor instead of a good steel armor?

Depends. Light Armor Use will make up some of the protective gap (or even overcome it). Now, if you're a character who relies on Dodge, you may well enjoy the fact that light armor is, well, light, and that might be more important than maxing out AC.

You'll also have a different profile against different types of attack-- that guy with a lightning sword isn't going to be thrilled at facing someone decked out in leather, but a basic slashing weapon will probably be rougher on you.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

It strikes me as a lot of the armor use skills seem to fit the more "higher strength" sorts (more with metal/stone, maybe bone), while the aim/precise aim/opportunity strike tree is being given to more "dexy" classes. Though if I wanted to think about it, there might be a certain intelligence/wisdom factor in thinking how to use it. (I could see an elf being smarter with his mithril than a giant with massive platemail....or it could all be done %based)

So, long story short...any stat factors we might want to consider for armor use or exploitation?

It strikes me as a lot of the armor use skills seem to fit the more "higher strength" sorts (more with metal/stone, maybe bone), while the aim/precise aim/opportunity strike tree is being given to more "dexy" classes.

That's all accurate. Light Armor Use also cares about Dexterity. The other three only care about Strength. (I thought about Constitution there, but I'm always hesitant because I don't want to discourage people from playing characters who have died a bunch.)

Though if I wanted to think about it, there might be a certain intelligence/wisdom factor in thinking how to use it.

Only for Mystical Armor Use. Nearly all of the characters who get that skill are pretty smart anyway, barring the occasional svirf mage or dopey-race APs.

Aside: I think one of the cooler outcomes from the system is how it encourages a PC to dress. Pure mages only get Mystical Armor Use, so they get a perk for dressing in bizarre items made of energy, etc. These items also tend to be light, which is nice for them. But if you look at their profile, they tend to look best against magical/elemental stuff, and less so against physical attacks. Mages also can't really rely on other defenses much, so this is one of their few ways to make attacks not land.

So what happens? Well, if you go heavy into Mystical gear, you're a mage that defends well against magicky stuff, but you're still not real good in a fistfight, or against some guy with a steel axe. Plus, you tend to look like a mage, and probably very different from a warrior. (And different from a thief, who is probably emphasizing leather/padded where feasible, both for Light Armor Use and to keep their Kasty-Standardized weight down.) From a style standpoint, I love all of that.

Can you ignore this and just wear platemail everything on every character? Sure! We didn't want to handcuff you into only being able to wear certain kinds of gear. You won't get so many perks, though, and neither will that warrior decked head to toe in armor made of lightning or whatever.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

I'd thought of that as well, and am in agreement there. A few random comments/thoughts/concerns, though.

1) This is pretty much EXACTLY the idea behind Gates of the Forge. I assume this will be tweaked, but will there be any idea changes to the legacy, or will it end up being more just a "cumulative" effect?

2) There are a lot of subsets of classes that seem like they would be rather fitting for certain armor use. I don't quite agree with orcs needing bone armor in general, but think it's fitting for Shig-ru, and that stone armor use would be fitting for Mamlauks.

2a) Similarly, it would be kinda cool if Enigma warriors could gain mystical armor use.

3) I know we've got bone, metal, and then light armor includes hide and leather, but I'm curious where, if anywhere, some other materials fall. Wood being the primary one that seems unplaced. I'd rather doubt things like wood or scale to generally be very light. Also, things like gems and crystal...would they be counted stone, or just oddities not added anywhere? I assume these items are still usable, just similar to parrying without having the parry skill.

4) The "brains" idea was an idea for something that would help with your "make int/wis maybe be useful". I still like it

5) Yeah, I think I'm out. General coolness. Should be fun.

Only for Mystical Armor Use. Nearly all of the characters who get that skill are pretty smart anyway, barring the occasional svirf mage or dopey-race APs.

I rolled an AP to look at the levels that you get the armor skills and did not notice the mystical armor use on the skills/spells list. Is it the case that you must be competant at the steel/light armor use before you gain insight or is it an oversight that it has not been added to APs?

Or is it the case that they dont get it?

-----Abernyte

Just rolled a human AP to test, and got:
Level 38: mystical armor use n/a

That's where it's supposed to be.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com

~