Quote:
|
One of my problems was that they have armor but the armor is useless against most of the weapons.. Might as well not wear it at all..
|
The version 1.0 rules were written pre-"modern" body armor, and so they probably should make players wonder whether they're worth wearing at all. The PASGT vest that is the real world equivalent of the "kevlar vest" in the rules isn't ballistically rated for anything beyond fragmentation. It's ability to stop a 9mm round at close range and a decent chance to stop an AK round inside 100 meters is unrealistic.
Quote:
|
I thought of multiplying the armor ratings by 2..
|
I wouldn't necessarily do that, but you could certainly update the armor options in the game to reflect modern hard plate/soft armor combos that will stop rifle rounds, etc (if that works for the timeline of the game you're looking at -- my recollection is that all that stuff is a little anachronistic, at least in widespread use in 1996 -- RBA was in service by then, I think -- but the war may have altered that some).
As for the lethality of the rules, it's been a while since I ran a game of T2K, but my recollection is that it wasn't too bad, but I remember between the chances of NPCs getting a hit in the combat rules and the use of cover, I had occasional trouble with PCs thinking they were a little on the invulnerable side.
You could always do what I did in response to that different problem -- fudge things a bit whenever it helps with the plot line.