[HoE] Junker/Armor ?

["Steve Crow" <crow_steve@hotmail.com>]

This is mildly long, so bear with me...

Is it just me, or is a Junker's ability to build Armor way abusive?

*****

Okay, a Kevlar Vest costs 750 "dollars," is AV 2 (except against certain 
attacks), and only covers the Guts.

At the request of my players last night (heading off to Junkyard), I sat 
down with Junkman Cometh and tried to work out the cost for a full-body suit 
for a Size 6 person.

Referencing page 68, I came up with the following.  It seems like the "dead 
space" requirement for a full-body suit is going to be 64 slots (half of 128 
slots = Size 6).

The suit must therefore be at least Frame 5 (86 slots) to fit the wearer (as 
per the example).  So we choose a Frame 5 suit of armor.  We've commited 64 
of those slots to the wearer - that leaves us with 22 slots left (86 - 64).

Now each level of armor uses 10% of the _total_ frame size of the suit.  
That's 8.6 slots (10% * 86 slots, Frame 5) per level.  We're trying to 
duplicate the Kevlar Vest, so we go with Armor 2.  That uses 17.2 Slots.  
Subtract that from the 22 slots remaining, and we still have a little extra 
space (4.8 slots) to spare.  Armor doesn't cost g-rays or anything, so we 
just lose the extra space, or figure out something really small to fit in.

(I'm also not worried about getting extra successes and "improving" the 
Armor, so let's ignore that for this example.)

Now, again as per the example, we figure the "size" of the armor.  17.2 
slots of Armor requires a Frame/Size of 3.  So the TN to build the Armor is 
(Size 3 + Power 3 = ) 6.  Given most Junkers go with 5d10 or 5d12 in the 
necessary skill if they can, this isn't hard to achieve.  A Good Stability 
is easy as well.  Construction is 3d20 minutes and you only have to worry 
about 1 card (1 in 26 chance) for Backlash.

Here is where it gets a little tricky.  How do you figure Component costs?  
Do you do so based on the total of Armor Slots _plus_ "dead space" slots (64 
+ 17.2 = 81.2), or just the Armor slots (17.2)?  The Armor entry isn't 
clear.

To be on the safe side, I went both ways.  However, the latter strikes me as 
more reasonable - why do you need chemical components to build/include "dead 
space"??

Both sets of slots:  require base 13 Structural + 9 Structural + 9 Chemical. 
  Total "base" component cost:  (13 + 9) x $2 per Structural = $44.  (9 x 
$7/chemical component) = $63.  Total cost = $107.

Armor slots only:  Base 7 Structural (Size 3) + 2 Structural + 2 Chemical.  
That works out to...$18 + $14 = $32!!!

****

Now, I tend to cheat a bit on costs, as I use an "average" component cost of 
$6.  This makes Junk-stuff a bit more expensive, since most of it is 
Structural, which is below average.  I also double the cost for components, 
typically, since there's like, well, risk of collecting the parts, 
expenditure of chips to improve Stablity and use Flow, etc., etc.

So typically, when I "build" a Junk-device, I'll just add up the total of 
components and multiply by 12.  I've found this to typically generate costs 
close to "book price" non-junk items that do the same thing, so it seems to 
be relatively accurate.

(I also double the cost again if Gun spirits are involved, but that's not 
relevant to this example yet.)

So using my system, the cost for a full-body Size 6 suit of AV2 protection 
works out to:

$372 (using the "count all slots for components" method, 31 components x 
$12), or

Or

$132 (using the "count slots used by armor for components only" method, 11 
slots x $12)


*****

Ummm, does anyone see a problem with this?  You need to pay $750 to buy a 
Kevlar vest which has much less protection, and loses a pt. of armor against 
certain attacks.

The junk-armor above weighs 35# (17.2 slots x 2# a slot, round up).  I'm not 
sure how significant a factor this is, since there aren't a lot of 
encumberance rules.  A Kevlar vest probably weighs less.  Than again, 
encumberance is rarely a factor if you're dead because you spent more 
"money" on less-protective armor.  ;)

Checking the "load" rules (page 85) suggests that basically, all that heavy 
armor is going to do (and 35# isn't _that_ heavy) is going to, tops, reduce 
your pace to 25%.  Not the best thing in the world, sure, but without 
whipping up Strain/encumberance-inducing rules and stuff, not going to be 
very harmful, either.

*****

I'm pretty sure that I've done the calculations above correctly.  The only 
gray area to me is how the whole component-to-slot thing works.  It doesn't 
make much sense to me to factor in the 64 slots of, well...nothing (i.e., 
dead space) to determine component cost/requirements.  But even doing so, 
and allowing a 100% mark-up on component cost, the "price" ($372) is 
well-below that for non-junk armor ($750).

*****

Has anyone noticed this?  Or is there a calculation or three I'm missing?  I 
seem to be following the Armor-building example on page 68 as precisely as I 
could, with the only thing changing being the size/slots of the Armor based 
on it being full-body rather than a vest.  But if I'm in error, feel free to 
point it out.

The only real limiting factor seems to be Junk-armor "weight", but the 
Load-carrying rules don't seem to be that harmful or restrictive to make up 
for the huge advantages of cheap, cost-effective Junk-armor.

Any comments welcome.

---

Steve Crow

"Worm Can Opener Extraordinare"

Check out my website at:  http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/4991/

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com