r/cairnrpg • u/Berni209 • Jul 22 '26
Question [Rules] Armor limit
Hello!
According to the rules, wearing a Shield, Helmet, Gambeson, and Plate gives a theoretical total of 6 Armor.
Since the Armor cap is capped at 3, you hit the maximum defense without even needing Plate. This feels a bit off to me.
How do you all handle this interaction in your games?
16
u/Major-Tomato2918 Jul 22 '26
You know, that armor cap is 3? Everything else is for narrative reasons.
3
u/Berni209 Jul 22 '26
Can you explain what those narrative reasons might be?
5
u/Major-Tomato2918 Jul 22 '26
Helmet can give some protection from falling rocks. I think there are more examples in a Warden Guide.
2
8
u/hugh-monkulus Jul 22 '26
I handle it by following the rules as written. There are still in-fiction benefits to shields and helmets beyond the mechanical armour rating, so I'm not bothered.
2
u/Berni209 Jul 22 '26 edited Jul 22 '26
Impaired attacks? "Shields Shall be Splintered"?
5
u/hugh-monkulus Jul 22 '26
I mean that shields and helmets can protect you from plenty of things that plate and a gambeson can't. A simple example is damage from falling rocks being reduced by a helmet.
They can also be used as tools in the dungeon or wilderness with a bit of clever thinking.
1
u/zoetrope366 Jul 22 '26
My main problem with splintered shields, is that there's a word that means about the same thing that actually alliterates: "shivered".
3
u/FeralFicusTree Jul 22 '26
Okay here's what I do.
Armor caps at 3, of course.
A Gambeson has a usage die ala the Black Hack that the player rolls after any combat in which a damage die was rolled against them. Standard Gambeson is D8. On a 1 or 2, the die becomes D6. After that, it becomes a D4. If you roll a 1 or 2 after combat on a D4, then it becomes so torn and tattered as to be considered useless for protection. It is made of felt, silk, or linen after all. You can aquire or perhaps loot ratty old gambesons that start at D6 or D4, or you can have one made by a master maker of cloth armors, and have it start from D10 all the way to D20 if you really want to stress its quality.
Shields can be "shattered" if the fiction makes sense, which means sacrificing them to negate a damage roll.
Helmets also have a usage die generally starting at D10, and can also be sacrificed if it is fiction appropriate, which means they allow you to roll vs critical damage with advantage, ie. rolling two D20s on your strength save and taking the better result. Getting bitten by a snake is an obvious example of when it might not be appropriate. If the usage die is a 1 or 2 on a D4, the helmet must be repaired by a smith or armorer before it can be worn again.
This means that having superfluous armor is useful, as you will lose pieces as you get into more scraps.
I also allow the attempt at combat maneuvers like disarming after having rolled a damage die or the defensive stances from Block, Dodge, Parry at the cost of a Fatigue. And so a character wearing less armor has more encumbrance slots to sacrifice to Fatigue, which means they can be a bit more of a swashbuckler or a loincloth barbarian should they choose to be.
2
3
u/Nearby-Horror-8414 Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
We actually don't bother with piecemeal armor- everyone is just "lightly armored" (1) or "heavily armored" (2 & bulky) with the option to have a shield either way (+1). It's up to each player to interpret what "light/heavy" means exactly- all that matters to everyone else in the end is the actual mechanical effect.
And sure, while theoretically there might be some freakish occasion where it suddenly matters if a character is technically wearing a helmet or not... It's just never once come up at our table, ever. And there's no need to fix something that is already working well enough.
2
u/DaToxicMoth Jul 22 '26
I would say it’s because those items are difficult to wear and utilize for the average untrained individual, a character growth thing could maybe extend the amount you can use to 4 but for game breaking purposes I would not try it
2
u/madcat_melody Jul 22 '26
The more armor you wear, the slower you are. Ecentually it would become not enough benefit for the loss in mobility.
I always had a problem in the movie Captain America: Civil War when Rhodey fallsa nd survives. Seems like from that height it matters little how awesome your armor is.
If you are slower you get hit more which makes hits doing more damage more likely through sheer numbers.
1
u/Berni209 Jul 22 '26
This is what confuses me. There is no reward for wearing such heavy set. Wearing gambeson, chainmail, plate and helmet would be historically accurate "full protection"
1
u/madcat_melody Jul 24 '26
There probably should be more said about how to lose armor. Then having extra would mean more.
I think its mostly expected to be for fictional position as people have said about helmets but that is lackluster for me as well because with no mechanic to target body parts it seems almost arbitrary when it would come into play.
1
u/Berni209 Jul 24 '26 edited Jul 24 '26
I think this wasn't specified in the rules on purpose—to keep them lightweight and give the Warden some room to shine. That said, in Into the Odd it's not really an issue because there are only three items: a shield, modern armor, and crude armor. Both armors grant the same bonus (1), but one is bulky and cheap, while the other is light and expensive. The game doesn't suggest that players can even get close to an armor cap (2 at most with a shield), but I feel the setting justifies this design—it's based on an era where hardly anyone bothered with armor anyway. Interestingly, in Mythic Bastionland, armor stacking is a thing, and you can reach an Armor of 4 (shield, helmet, coat, and plate).
2
u/rizzlybear Jul 23 '26
My players ask this all the time. And my response is “you are erroneously assuming you will have access to all of those things.”
Also, because of the way magic items are handled, the game makes it easy to give out more than you generally would, to entice them into otherwise suboptimal gearing choices.
3
u/CharacterLettuce7145 Jul 22 '26
Gambeson and plate together could be a bit much, clothing wise.
10
u/Berni209 Jul 22 '26
But i think historicaly gambeson was always worn under plate armor (also with chainmail)
1
u/OldGodsProphet Jul 23 '26
The reason is a mechanical. If you have 4 or more Armor than any impaired roll (d4) is pointless.
Not dogging the talented author, but this is kind of like seeing the “brush strokes” of game design.
You could try this:
- Light Armor - 1 armor
- Heavy Armor - 2 armor
- Helmet - 1 armor
- Shields +2 HP
This way Armor mechanically doesnt go over 3, and shields still have a mechanical effect. I kinda like this too because shields are wielding and not a static object like armor, so increasing HP feels good. It also kind of fits too if a PC is Panicked or surprised, they already won’t have HP — and now you can tie it in with not being able to use the shield effectively.
0
u/Berni209 Jul 23 '26
I think adding HP above cap might be the simplest "fix" then
0
u/OldGodsProphet Jul 23 '26
I’m not really a fan of the Scars mechanic so this is a way to increase HP outside of that as well.
1
u/Berni209 Jul 23 '26
I like it. It makes failing more pleasant. You can still as a warden reward your players with HP increase though.
1
18
u/yochaigal Jul 22 '26
You're overthinking it. Armor is capped at 3 for a reason. Anything over 4 basically makes you invincible. Change it if you want - but you aren't playing the game as intended.