All equipped armor's giving full value, not adjusting min. Strength.

[LazerGonzo]

According to the SWADE core rules (p. 65), worn armor stacks, but the lower if the two is halved, rounded down and the minimum strength of the heavier armor goes up by one die type.

Currently, testing in a fresh table with no rulesets/extensions other than SWADE loaded. Futuristic light body armor at +4 should stack with Kevlar riding jacket +2, with the jacket only giving 1 point of armor. In the attached image, you can see that both items currently give the full armor value.

Additionally, the heavier armor's minimum strength should rise to a d6, inflicting penalties if the wielder has less strength. At present, this does not seem to be taken into account.

Not sure if this is intended or if there is a workaround. Either way, an assist on how to best manage would be greatly appreciated.

[Moon Wizard]

I'm going to assume that particular rule was not implemented by @Ikael; but I don't know the ruleset code or the system very well, so I'd have to wait for @Ikael to respond.

You can probably manually modify the pieces to make the totals work right.

Regards,
JPG

[Jiminimonka]

According to the SWADE core rules (p. 65), worn armor stacks, but the lower if the two is halved, rounded down and the minimum strength of the heavier armor goes up by one die type.

Currently, testing in a fresh table with no rulesets/extensions other than SWADE loaded. Futuristic light body armor at +4 should stack with Kevlar riding jacket +2, with the jacket only giving 1 point of armor. In the attached image, you can see that both items currently give the full armor value.

Additionally, the heavier armor's minimum strength should rise to a d6, inflicting penalties if the wielder has less strength. At present, this does not seem to be taken into account.

Not sure if this is intended or if there is a workaround. Either way, an assist on how to best manage would be greatly appreciated.

You have to edit Armour manually.

armor.png

[LazerGonzo]

You have to edit Armour manually.

armor.png

I figured, but I suppose I should have been more clear on the assist I was looking for: what's the best way to go about this? Adjust on the armor/toughness box with a penalty? Individual armor pieces in the inventory? Effects for the minimum str adjustment if it comes into play?

Again, could have been more clear on the initial ask. That's what I get for tired posting. :\

Feel free to ignore this bit. Minor vent from an end-user GM who spends way more time prepping games than he probably should:

Maybe I'm still being a bit cranky, but it can be a bit frustrating to have a bunch of great automation in place, then hit against a core element of the ruleset that's been in place for 2.5 years but not automated. Similarly with elements like NPC control/sight/vision or unclear documentation. Not a developer, not a tech whiz, and not privy to behind-the-scenes going on. I recognize that I'm out of my element in terms of what makes for reasonable expectations, so really this is feedback from an invested user. I like so much of what FGU can do, but when the product is frustrating to use, those are the reasons why.

End of the day, this is my VTT of choice for a great many reasons, so I want to see it thrive.

Okay, lil vent sesh over. Apologies if it came across as overly critical.

[Jiminimonka]

I figured, but I suppose I should have been more clear on the assist I was looking for: what's the best way to go about this? Adjust on the armor/toughness box with a penalty? Individual armor pieces in the inventory? Effects for the minimum str adjustment if it comes into play?

Again, could have been more clear on the initial ask. That's what I get for tired posting. :\

Feel free to ignore this bit. Minor vent from an end-user GM who spends way more time prepping games than he probably should:

Maybe I'm still being a bit cranky, but it can be a bit frustrating to have a bunch of great automation in place, then hit against a core element of the ruleset that's been in place for 2.5 years but not automated. Similarly with elements like NPC control/sight/vision or unclear documentation. Not a developer, not a tech whiz, and not privy to behind-the-scenes going on. I recognize that I'm out of my element in terms of what makes for reasonable expectations, so really this is feedback from an invested user. I like so much of what FGU can do, but when the product is frustrating to use, those are the reasons why.

End of the day, this is my VTT of choice for a great many reasons, so I want to see it thrive.

Okay, lil vent sesh over. Apologies if it came across as overly critical.

Most likely automation would cause other issues, like "which suit do you halve the protection from" etc. so the user has to do some work. Let the PLAYERS sort out their armour and for NPCs you just give them whatever value you want (since they are not players and you make them suit your needs as GM, they don't need to follow PC creation rules).

What do you mean by NPC control/sight/vision?

[LazerGonzo]

Most likely automation would cause other issues, like "which suit do you halve the protection from" etc. so the user has to do some work. Let the PLAYERS sort out their armour and for NPCs you just give them whatever value you want (since they are not players and you make them suit your needs as GM, they don't need to follow PC creation rules).

I'm not sure (again, not a developer), but the logic of the rules is present for it:

1. Worn armor is distinguished from other kinds, so there are categories (worn, natural, arcane, etc.).
2. Worn armor stacks with one other layer, assumed to mean another layer of worn armor.
3. The lesser armor adds half it's value rounded down.
4. The heavier armor's minimum strength requirement goes up one step.

So if there are multiple layers of armor equipped, is there no way to handle this four-step process automatically? Based on the above logic, a piece of armor should fall into a category, then if any of those are equipped in the "worn armor" category, simply run down the list from highest value to lowest, adding half of the second highest's rounded down, add none of the third or below's (if present). Each of the values we are talking about here should have a data field, right? Would it not be a matter of adjusting each data field based on whether or not the item is toggled as equipped?

I ask genuinely because I don't know how programming works. It's pretty much magic as far as I am concerned.

On the flip side, I'm not saying it should be automated, necessarily. However, one might be forgiven for thinking that with the level of automation present elsewhere in the software, it would be here, too, though. I suppose another way of framing it would be to say it's very unclear what is and is not automated in some cases, leading to outcomes which don't match expectations.

What do you mean by NPC control/sight/vision?

Probably another topic, but last time our table tested, NPCs could not be controlled by players as allies and did not share their vision or control even when they were added as a PC ally. Only work-around right now is to create them as an entirely new character and give control of them directly to the player. Alternatively, it requires turning on party movement and vision, which undoes the game play effect of not only having your own or your allies field of vision.

[Jiminimonka]

I'm on a train so will be brief. I didn't programme the SWADE ruleset but I know it does a lot more automation than most of the others and if Ikael didn't automate armour its for a reason.

For me too much automation takes away from the game. If you sat around a table playing Savage Worlds you would be doing all the armour on a piece of paper.

The allies token is a bug I think. Ikael has been away dealing with life and this bug has occurred due to updates to CoreRPG.

[kronovan]

I ask genuinely because I don't know how programming works. It's pretty much magic as far as I am concerned.

On the flip side, I'm not saying it should be automated, necessarily. However, one might be forgiven for thinking that with the level of automation present elsewhere in the software, it would be here, too, though. I suppose another way of framing it would be to say it's very unclear what is and is not automated in some cases, leading to outcomes which don't match expectations.

I personally like players setting their own stacking armor values via Armor modifiers for the lesser armor, if only because they then get a better awareness of how armor stacking actually works. For setting negative modifiers on derived stats such as Toughness, I find players easily learn how to Right-click to do it and get quick with it in not time at all.

Probably another topic, but last time our table tested, NPCs could not be controlled by players as allies and did not share their vision or control even when they were added as a PC ally. Only work-around right now is to create them as an entirely new character and give control of them directly to the player. Alternatively, it requires turning on party movement and vision, which undoes the game play effect of not only having your own or your allies field of vision.

If you're willing to take the time, or have a player that is, creating an ally as a PC and toggling them from Wild Card to Extra is your best bet. Some SW settings like Beast & Barbarians, Iron Dynasty and Thrilling tales which have henchmen and sidekicks which lie somewhere between Extras and WC's, require they be handled that way. If like certain Extra NPCs you'll be using the same type of ally more than once, you can use the new Archetype feature to create a common template.

[twistedtechmike]

Have you considered creating a new piece of armor to reflect the tandem? Then you equip the single piece, which has the effect you want already mapped. This is likely how I would go about it.

[Lonewolf]

I'm on a train so will be brief. I didn't programme the SWADE ruleset but I know it does a lot more automation than most of the others and if Ikael didn't automate armour its for a reason.

Well lets work it out for fun

People here are making an assumption that Layer A always stacks with Layer B. With The lesser armor adding half its value. Yet paragraph before that proves this wrong.

Any justification for this with a conditional assumption. Means no automation possible. The alternative is for everyone would have to agree that in every situation the assumption that Layer A always stacks with Layer B is true.
To get passed that we need a variable to decide which calcualtion to use. Then you need.....

Oh bugger it. End user problem