Giant bone tunic better then elite auropean chain tunic ?

[Hilda]

I'm talking 115/115 here :/

[Glarundis]

i don't think giant set should be worse nor auropian better, perhaps what needs to be done is auropian a bit more common or giant a bit more rare?

from the pure RP perspective, ofc chainmails should give more AR than bones...but...there are many other things into play here

[Demian]

Full bone suit = +35
Archer set/Plate set = +40


Comparing bone suit to chain suit, I understand. Priests are the only full chain users regarding fighters, and although their blesses can compensate the difference and more, we can try and figure if it's supposed to be this way or not.

Comparing to archer set is useless. Plates will always be able to wear 1 more part. I'd trade AR for +5 in all elements any time.


Additionally, a bone set takes nearly 200 bones without fail. A chain set is about 100, a smith can perhaps clarify the exact amount.

Plate set has 1 more part, true. But you can wear a gorget with a bone set and suddenly there is no difference.

And bones are usually easier to get than ores aswell. Giant bones are a lot easier to get than auropian.

[Arden Darkfall]

Plate set has 1 more part, true. But you can wear a gorget with a bone set and suddenly there is no difference.

And bones are usually easier to get than ores aswell. Giant bones are a lot easier to get than auropian.

+35 is with gorget. A bone set (5 parts) plus gorget and shoes.
Plate set has 6 parts, plus additional bone legs and shoes.

Hilda, I'll have to get back to you in 2 months, regarding testing 115/115.

[tehsquish]

Chains were never famous for their AR.

Plate beats bone there.

But mages/bone users getting more base armor than chainmail users doesnt make a lot of sense either.

I agree with this. Seems weird my bone armor is better than chain. I wouldn't mind chain being boosted a bit.

[Athan01]

Chains were never famous for their AR.

Plate beats bone there.

But mages/bone users getting more base armor than chainmail users doesnt make a lot of sense either.

I agree with this. Seems weird my bone armor is better than chain. I wouldn't mind chain being boosted a bit.

Boosting archers and priests - so I say no way to your chain boost. Two classes that do not need boosting. Whereas the general people that wear giant bones are magicusers without armament&intervention or plates.
Ar is only a number afterall was a famous quote flying around for a while

[Neal]

Boosting archers and priests - so I say no way to your chain boost. Two classes that do not need boosting. Whereas the general people that wear giant bones are magicusers without armament&intervention or plates.
Ar is only a number afterall was a famous quote flying around for a while

its not about boosting archer or priest, its about magic user having 60+ armor with 35 resist all. IMO chain, which is made of metal, should give more armor than bone armor.

[Demian]

No need to boost chains. Just need to make sure the bone sets with equivalent attributes to metal armors don't have more AR. (Nerf the bones)

[Athan01]

No need to boost chains. Just need to make sure the bone sets with equivalent attributes to metal armors don't have more AR. (Nerf the bones)

Imo no also as it is a direct nerf to the magicusers that use them.
It has already been explained I think by boris - that due to 5 parts of bone compared to 4 of chains is why they are better.

bones don't need a nerf, perhaps auros need a boost in general? 44 ar on a platesuit isn't spectacular either

[Hilda]

Athan is right, I think the problem is Auro, not chains in general.