Super Edge Protection Part 2: Newfangled high-tech armor

In my last two posts, we discussed the Super Edge Protection system I designed, where armor is given an Edge Protection (EP) value in addition to its DR. This allows people to be hurt without their armor being penetrated, which was before a physical impossibility. Similar to the problems I outlined in the foreword, high-tech armor in GURPS is extremely binary - either a few points of damage get through an armored vest when its wearer is shot, or nothing gets through at all.

It's true that high tech flexible armors have higher DR values, so it's possible to suffer blunt trauma if riddled with submachinegun fire while wearing a kevlar vest, unlike the low-tech armor, where any significant amount of blunt trauma is a physical impossibility. However, in GURPS, a character can receive three high-damage rounds of 9x19mm Parabellum to the sternum and suffer only 3 points of damage - and a character in trauma plates can be shot repeatedly in the chest over and over and never suffer any ill effects, at least not until the trauma plates break (if you're using the optional degradation rules, that is) and they're shot 'for real'. But shouldn't someone who receives a powerful shot to the solar plexus feel some ill effects? Surely, all that energy from the bullet can't simply "go away".

So, could high-tech armor benefit from the SEP approach?

SEP was designed to remedy a deficiency in low-tech armor, not the high-tech stuff we use today, and because of this SEP doesn't immediately transfer well to high-tech armor. This is for a simple reason; the DR values of the low-tech armor are too low, allowing a spear to penetrate well made chainmail or plate armor often in the hands of a strong user, which is physically absurd when one thinks about it. A metal weapon cannot easily penetrate metal armor without serious positional advantages. However, the DR values for modern, high-tech armor given in the GURPS sourcebooks are spot-on accurate, and calibrated to be almost exact with regards to the item's defensive abilities versus small arms fire, so 'adding on' EP to the end of the scale wouldn't make sense.

For instance, an M16 does 5d6, and a regular SAPI (2000 era) combined with an Assault Vest, both from High Tech, gives DR 35 (12 for the vest + 23 for the plates). Thus, it is completely proof against 5.56mm fire, which can do 30 damage maximum. Barring any critical hits, the vest will resist the first shot, and probably several shots after that. However, it won't resist 12.7mm fire (6d6x2)! This is perfectly in line with the real world, so taking a multiplier of the armor's DR would make the vest far too strong and let it shrug off threats that it realistically can't handle.

So, we're going to have to go back to something more similar to the original GamesDiner approach, where we take a certain fraction of the armor's DR and replace it with EP. But before we do that, let's pose a question: How much blunt trauma will an average user really suffer in a modern ballistic vest? This is something that is a field of emerging research, and I am continually shocked by how many of my fellow civilians do not understand how serious of a problem blunt trauma through armor still is, even in a modern context.

BABT and You

Source (p435)

The process of suffering blunt trauma through modern ballistic armor has been termed BABT, which stands for Behind Armor Blunt Trauma. It is a very new field of study, by definition not having existed until ballistic armor came into wide usage, and so we don't have a huge amount of data on it yet. However, the basic facts are known and have been shown in both studies and in real field service and experience.

The easiest way to understand this is to think of a piece of armor as a soccer net. A ball (the projectile) is kicked into the net, and the ropes, weaved together in a latticework, catch and spread out the energy of the ball. What would have snapped a single line is caught and stopped by many spreading the energy out between them. None of the energy of the shot has simply "gone away", it has simply been spread out. It's possible for a well made net to spread things out so much that a person standing behind the goal wouldn't take any injury even if the soccer ball were to contact his body, but it's no guarantee - after all, soccer balls come in at varying amounts of force.

Source

Most modern vests - whether rigid or soft - are required to display some resistance to blunt trauma. Yet there are many times even well made vests are hit by a square shot and their wearer has suffered injury, sometimes even death. Occasionally a shot into soft armor will be 'stopped' but still penetrate into the wearer, like on the image to the right, which would require surgical removal of the bullet and vest. Rigid armor cannot have this happen, but is still only somewhat better on the blunt trauma front. A 2006 study reported that at close range, an average 7.62mmR bullet versus a trauma plate presents a 50% chance of serious rib fracture and internal bleeding - the image at the start of this section illustrates x-rays of their human substitute as he is hit.

I'm not kidding when I say that sometimes being shot in a modern vest, even a rigid vest, can be the equivalent of getting smashed in the gut with a mace.

Source

Of course, it's possible to get lucky and get off with some minor bruising. And there seem to be far more bruises than rib-smashing impacts with regards to pistol rounds versus pistol vests, for example. A study on police officers who were shot primarily with pistols shows that serious injury only occurred in about 15% of cases. Yet we must consider it a very real possibility, and we also must consider that many shots in an average police gunfight are at an angle or wildly off-center, so many of the results in that study will have been glancing hits to start. Even those officers that were not seriously hurt were often knocked down or spun around.

In addition to all of that, military forces on the ground have for a long time known that being shot is not a pleasant experience. One soldier reported that being shot in his side SAPI was as painful as being stabbed. Other soldiers have been recorded falling in momentary pain and shock after being shot, only to immediately get back up. While it's true soldiers have reported rounds bouncing off their vests without anything more than discomfort, it's fairly clear that it's a roll of the dice as to how bad, and how painful, a given impact will be, and whether you'll be able to stay standing at the end of it.

It's for these reasons I think that ballistic armor in GURPS, whether rigid or soft, should never leave you with the ability to simply "laugh off" bullets. Ballistic armor gives you a much better chance of survival, and often means you can get right back up again, but being shot often makes one fall down and scream in agony even the same.

Usage

So, how do we adapt the SEP system in such a way that blunt trauma through ballistic armor is simulated, even if only roughly? Fortunately, a rough implementation is very easy to put into practice:

-Flexible ballistic armor has 2/3rds of its DR converted into EP (round up). This would render a DR 12 vest into DR 4, EP 8. This means a major wound is possible if higher than average damage is rolled, but not on the average roll.

-Rigid ballistic armor, like a trauma plate, has 1/3rd of its DR converted into EP (again, rounding up). This would render a DR 35 trauma plate into DR 23, EP 12.

-When dealing with combined forms of armor, such as a trauma plate inside of an assault vest, add the EP values together and compare the remaining damage to the EP after the shot contends with each layer's DR separately. This is to make sure that different layers of armor actually work together properly to help stop shots, as otherwise each layer would break in sequence instead of working together to absorb force.

Example: Fred the Infantryman is shot for 30 damage in the vitals, close to maximum damage! He is wearing an assault vest (DR 4, EP 8 and a SAPI plate (DR 15, EP 8). The shot first contends with the trauma plate, which subtracts 15 points of damage, leaving 15 left over. Then the shot contests with the vest, which subtracts 4 points of damage, leaving 11 left over. The remaining 11 is compared to the total EP value (8+8, for EP 16). Since the damage is less than the combined EP from all layers of his armor, the shot does not penetrate, and the 11 points of damage are converted to crushing. Fred is saved from a killing shot.

To show why doing it the 'regular' way won't work, consider: If the layers are treated separately with regards to EP, the SAPI plate absorbs 15 points of damage, and then compares the remaining 15 with its EP of 8, which means the trauma plate breaks. The remaining 15 points of damage are then compared to the assault vest's DR 4, EP 8. The remaining 11 points of damage breaks through the vest as well, killing poor Fred. This is at odds with reality, as even the original SAPI, working in concert with a ballistic vest, can easily stop a 30-damage shot.

-When dealing with alternate DR values for different attack sources, apply the same rule to them. For instance, an assault vest would have DR 4 against a knife attack or a swung mace in regular High-Tech rules, so under this rule that would become DR 1, EP 3, allowing an 'average' knife attack to be shrugged off, but little else.

-Stab vests and other melee resistant armor should use the regular SEP system, treating themselves as cloth armor, unless the GM wants to avoid extra complexity. This is because DR 5 is too low to represent how an average stab vest functions - a GURPS character can break that by rolling max damage, when many real stab vests are capable of handling things off the end of the scale. If the GM desires to avoid excess complexity, simply treat them as flexible armor, as found here.

This system has the very nice effect of neatly simulating how armor behaves when struck by a threat too intense for it. In regular GURPS, a DR 12 pistol vest knocks off 12 damage even from rifle rounds, when in real life, a pistol vest confronted by a rifle round stops very little, if any at all, of the incoming round's velocity before it breaks. Here, it would only knock off 4 points of damage, with the majority of the vest's potential going to waste - this means a pistol vest will not help you survive against rifles!

This approach still has the same problem as the original low-tech SEP system, as it's still a bit too easy to kill someone through armor. Sadly, without changes to the injury rules, it's difficult to give an armor wearer a major wound that means he will fall to the ground for a moment without risking killing him with several shots. This means a story like that of Paul Ray Smith is very hard to duplicate - for a man to take 13 rifle rounds to the chest and back would require all of them to roll low damage, which is possible but unlikely.

Still, I think this system makes gunfights more interesting when armored soldiers cannot simply shrug off being hit. I am still working on these rules, and welcome any feedback or commentary on how to simulate BABT easily in GURPS. Keep on firing!

Super Edge Protection, Part 1: Adding to the GURPS DR system

 

"I could not begin to describe the crowd of those who were hit and wounded...

 ...as to those wearing an armor, they were exempted from wounds but not from bruises..."

 -Galbert of Bruges on the seige of Bruges (1127-1128)

In my last post, we covered my rationale for creating higher-definition rules for simulating armored combat in GURPS. To sum up, here are the problems I covered in that post with the way GURPS normally handles armor:

• 'Death by peritonitis' - Armor only lets a few points of damage through at a time. It never fails catastrophically.
• Armor is much weaker than it was historically, and it's far too easy to get a penetration in general.
• There is no way to hurt or stun people through their armor without 'penetrating' it, mechanically.
• There is no advantage given to penetrating armor in any given position or circumstance, including when thrusting instead of striking, or when the target is prone.

There are two interesting systems that have already been created to partially solve these issues: The original Games Diner Edge Protection house rule, and Blunt Trauma and Edged Weapons from Low Tech (p102). Both of these systems have the same idea at their core: Splitting the DR system into two things, Damage Reduction (DR) and Edge Protection (EP). DR subtracts damage normally from incoming damage, and if the remainder does not exceed the Edge Protection, it is converted into crushing damage. Thus, the target still takes damage even on a non-penetration, but it has no wounding modifier - the armor protected him by converting the excess energy into blunt trauma. This keeps deadly attacks away from the vitals as well.

The original Games Diner post suggests taking part of the existing DR for 'mundane' armor and replacing some of it with EP. I don't like this, as it doesn't solve point #1, #2 or #4. Blunt Trauma and Edged Weapons instead 'adds on' EP to the end of the existing armor - or, as they phrase it, see if the damage could penetrate twice the armor's DR, and if it can't, the damage is converted to crushing. However, this is only versus cutting damage. I felt that this was too limited, but it had whinged dangerously close to something workable.

So, I started modifying this system of "EP based on a multiplier of your existing DR" into something of my own, which I call Super Edge Protection. The objectives of this system are:

• Make armor tougher and better able to resist weapons.
• Despite the added toughness, characters in armor should be able to be hurt and battered about. You still should feel like you want to make defense rolls.
• Simulate catastrophic failures in a simple manner, meaning that armor that fails should fail spectacularly.
• Make some damage types do better against armor than others, and also take position into account when penetration is considered.
• Be simple, add only minimal complexity (no more than existing rules in the GURPS books) and easy to slap on to any existing game. 

While I haven't solved all of the issues I raised above (see Limitations, below), I feel the system can add a great deal to any armored fight, allowing for fighters to crack each other about the helmets and give each other concussions as they throw, arm lock and stab each other in the armpit.

Usage

Almost all armor has an Edge Protection value, which is derived from a multiple of its DR. The EP multiplier changes depending on the type of armor and the damage type received; for instance, plate armor has 3x its DR as EP versus cutting, but 2x its DR as EP versus impaling. (See Armor Types, below.) DR subtracts normally from damage. If basic damage taken to an armored location exceeds the DR for the armor, but not the EP for that damage type, all the remaining damage is converted to crushing. If the damage is already crushing, EP has no effect.

If the incoming damage exceeds the combined DR+EP for that damage type, the armor is penetrated, and the EP doesn't apply.

Example: Bob the Knight is wearing heavy plate (2x versus imp, 3x vs cut) plate armor on his torso, and he is struck by a swung greatsword, being wielded by a supremely strong orc. The orc does 20 points of cutting damage, which is reduced to 11 points of damage after subtracting the DR. The armor's EP versus cutting is triple its DR (9 x 3 = 27 EP). Since this is is more than the remaining damage of 11, the damage is converted to crushing. Bob gets knocked back one yard and has to make a check for Knockdown and Stunning, and likely now has a huge dent in his armor, but he is alive - his armor saved his life.

Another example: Bill the Squire is wearing Fine Mail (DR 4, 1x versus imp, 2x vs cut). Bill is struck by a strong spear thrust that deals 10 points of impaling damage to his vitals. Since this is more than the chainmail's DR+EP of 8 (1x versus imp, so EP 4), the armor breaks, and the EP doesn't apply - 6 points of impaling damage gets through to poor Bill's vitals!

All crushing damage taken through this mechanic functions as damage dealt from a crushing weapon - in other words, if you're using New Hit Locations (MA137) and are struck in the vitals for one point of crushing damage past EP, you must make an unmodified HT roll for knockdown and stunning (HT-5 if damage exceeded HP/2). This means a strike to a sensitive location through armor can pay dividends, even if it did not penetrate. Try going for your opponent's vitals, skull or face!

This approach significantly toughens armor from the GURPS norm. It will be difficult to finish an opponent by simply striking him, even for a strong character. It's recommended to use this rule along with Harsh Realism - Armor Gaps (LT p101), or finishing opponents will be difficult.

Note that this multiplier is taken after any armor divisors or any other factors affecting DR - an attack with an AD of 2 would halve the DR, thus halving the EP along with it. This includes when targeting chinks in armor - weak points in armor are also poor at spreading incoming force out.

Armor Types

Source

Under this system, each armor type has a different multiplier for its EP value against impaling damage and cutting damage. They are separated into broad categories as follows:

Fibrous armor such as padded cloth, layered cloth, paper and straw armor gain 1x their DR as EP versus impaling damage, but gains no EP versus cutting damage. These armors are surprisingly good against arrows and stabbing weapons, but don't hold up well against swordsmen... (But see Cloth Armor Divisors, below.)

Leather armor of any type gains 1x its DR as EP versus cutting, but no EP versus impaling damage. Leather holds up well against a cut, but can be split apart by a point. 

Mail, scale, brigandine, segmented plate and any other non-homogenous metal armor gain 1x their DR as EP versus impaling and 2x their DR as EP versus cutting. It's virtually impossible to cut through these armor types - you're more likely to drive mail into the bones of its wearer than you are to cut through it! Thrusts, especially from a Defensive or Reversed Grip (or perhaps even both) may have an easier time of it, but it won't necessarily be easy...

Plate armor, whether bronze or iron or steel, provides 2x its DR as EP versus impaling, and 3x versus cutting. The best one will ever do swinging or even thrusting at a man in homogenous plate of any type is batter him around, unless one has serious hardware...

Rule Switches 

The following rules are all optional (or at least, even more optional than the SEP system itself), but can add even more depth and complexity to armored swordfighting:

Fixed Penetration - One of the reasons for armor having the ability to convert excess damage into blunt trauma is the armor's ability to recoil along with the wearer. By allowing energy to go into movement and into the wearer, the armor can avoid catastrophic failure much easier. This advantage is denied to a fighter who is unfortunate enough to find himself prone, or pinned against an object (not merely grappled, as that still allows them to move). In any such situation where a character is completely immobile and braced against an object, such as the ground, or a wall, both DR and EP are halved. This is cumulative with striking a chink, for a quarter of the DR, and thus EP! This gives huge dividends for wrestling or battered armored targets down to the ground before attempting to penetrate their armor.

Bulletproofing - While it is hard to get numbers that approximate the reality of low-tech armor performance against piercing projectiles such as bullets without adding more complexity, Low-Tech armor should be able to resist guns better than its DR value indicates - plate armor was very good against the handgonne and early muskets. Simply treat any armor's EP value against piercing as the same as its value versus impaling.

Cloth Armor Divisors - As shown in the test linked in the source image above, fibrous armor performs well against thrusted impaling weapons when the edges of the weapon are blunt. Attacks from thrusted edgeless weapons behave normally, but if the thrusted weapon has sharp edges (such as a non-Estoc sword), they gain an armor divisor of 2 against cloth armor. While the results of arrow attacks on such armors are still in question, at the GM's option, this may apply to impaling arrows as well - although there is some question about whether hunting broadheads would have gotten through the armor better. A bodkin point, however, would definitely have trouble against this type of armor.

Extra Knockback - In a cinematic game, armored targets getting knocked great distances might very well be an entertaining consequence, and may very well be in line with tales of legendary knights sending each other flying. Treat all crushing damage taken through the EP system as having double knockback!

  Benefits

"... among those was a fiery young fighter named Benkin, expert and swift in shooting arrows... ... And when he was aiming at the besiegers, his drawing on the bow was identified by everyone because he would either cause grave injury to the (unarmored) or put flight those who were (armored), whom his shots stupefied and stunned, even if they did not wound."
-The Murder of Charles the Good by Galbert of Bruges (1127)

While this system isn't perfect, all of the problems that I raised are tackled in at least some basic manner, and I feel this system ties up a lot of things quite neatly.

When armor breaks in this system, it breaks with great force - a character whose armor is penetrated will not be taking one point of impaling damage, but rather several, or perhaps even several dozen. If a character on a horse hits an armored enemy in the neck with an axe while at a full gallop and does 16 points of damage to his be-chainmailled neck, the enemy's head will go flying - anything less and the man will simply have his throat crushed. There is a steady progression of results on an armored target: No damage, blunt trauma, and catastrophic failure.
 

Armor is much tougher, and a man in a plate harness a terrifying threat, able to shrug off blows that would kill someone without armor. Yet at the same time, the same man can be laid low by a blow to his solar plexus or helmet and then finished with a stab to the visor. As well, armor is much better against cutting than impaling in this system, as one might expect - when leaping upon an armored foe, one would seek to drive his point into the enemy's chest and not his edge in the hopes of penetrating his mail.

Since crushing weapons tend to have higher basic damage in GURPS, they also have an inherent advantage in armored combat in this system, just like in history. EP does not affect crushing damage, so a mace would be an excellent tool to bring along to deal with armored targets and break their limbs through their armor.

Limitations

There are a few limitations to this system that I'm still struggling with. Given the need for these rules to remain streamlined and able to bolt onto any game with a minimum of effort, though, perhaps that's not surprising.

Perhaps most conspicuous is the failure to fully solve problem #3. While it is far more possible to damage people through their armor without penetrating it, the basic fact of having to penetrate your opponent's DR to hurt them is still there. If a sword pommeling to the side of the head or the neck - as shows up in fighting manuals of the period - fails to do more than 6 damage to a DR 6 helmet, nothing happens. I'm still considering means to fix this, but that's a topic for another ruleset.

Thanks to the naturally optimistic nature of GURPS damage, hopefully this will not be too much of an issue for the average adventurer (although it will be of issue for, say, a hobbit). However, the high damage in GURPS compared to what characters have for HP means that a character can only suffer a Major Wound four times before risking a death check, and only two before having to make an HT roll to stay conscious each round. This means that it is perhaps too easy to beat someone to death past their armor, especially if you have strong characters swinging at one another. Then again, depending on what type of game you're trying to run, perhaps this isn't so much a problem - this suits a Viking saga quite well.

Conclusion

Overall, I feel this system brings a lot to the table in terms of making armored combat in GURPS more interesting, promoting the combat paradigm of battering or grappling an opponent to the ground before finishing him, either through a gap or through brute force or simply through battering him so much that he dies, as many historical duels often went. Of course, arm locks aren't too effective versus armored adversaries in GURPS, but that's a topic for another post...

In part 3, we'll discuss applying the Super Edge Protection system to High-Tech armor, which deserves different treatment. Until then, may your sword shatter many be-mailled arm joints!

Super Edge Protection: Foreword

A brief foreword: In my efforts to develop and create a series of rules to better allow GURPS characters to have interesting armored swordfights, I have run into much opposition from others about the basic facts of how the system functions with regards to armor. Thus, before posting any rule that complains about how GURPS' DR systems are lacking and how I propose to change and fix them as optional rules, I felt that I should provide some background for my frustrations with the system and explain my rationale for my house rules.This post contains no rules - it should instead be considered a primer for the next part, which will contain the actual rules that I justify the need for here.

GURPS Damage Reduction is great. With the way DR normally works in GURPS, the 'bite' of most injuries is far reduced, allowing an armored character to keep his feet in the face of unlucky defense rolls. Armor is a huge force multiplier even in the most basic of GURPS games, even before Low-Tech came along to add one of the most fun-to-play-with armor systems I've seen in a tabletop RPG. However, even with Low-Tech's improvements on the system, there are still a few issues with it that make it really difficult to have a really interesting, engaging swordfight where armor is involved.

First and foremost, since DR is just a flat subtraction of damage, the result of someone being hit in armor is usually fairly predictable, barring any critical hits: Either the armor holds and the user takes no damage, the armor fails and lets some tiny amount of damage through. Usually, assuming a DR 6 plate and people with spears or swords and ST 10, this means that each party is doing 1d6+1 imp, giving them a 1-in-6 chance of doing a single point of damage past the armor. (This grows more likely as ST increases, of course.)

This means that between two combatants with their bodies covered head-to-toe in plates, fighting becomes a senseless whack-a-thon, with each party trying desperately to get a few points of damage past his adversary's armor. This can be partially fixed with the usage of Harsh Realism - Armor Gaps from Low-Tech (which I would highly recommend), but those gaps are extremely difficult to target, so oftentimes it will indeed come down to who can get enough attacks through the armor first. If you are playing a strong person, or the NPC you're fighting is a strong person, he may try to ignore gaps and simply hit you hard enough to 'crack' the armor, over and over again.

Now, let's stop and think about this for a minute in terms of the real world: If you are wearing a metal plate on your chest, and someone stabs you with a spear with his body weight behind it, is it really likely that the plate will fail and crumple inwards, but only the tippy-tip of the spear will penetrate for two points of injury? (1 point of base damage x 2 for imp) Armor usually fails in a much more 'cleanly' binary fashion - either the armor holds and little if any damage is sustained, or the armor experiences catastrophic failure and blows inwards, stopping very little, if any, of the energy of the attack. Taking a single point of basic damage through armor is a bit ridiculous. There are very few times where something will penetrate a metal plate, but won't have enough energy to penetrate the flesh underneath more than an inch. 'Death by peritonitis' is really quite unlikely.

You could say that the one-or-two-or-three damage penetrations that are occurring are really more like blunt trauma or non-penetrations, but with the way GURPS handles things mechanically, that doesn't make any sense. If there is poison on the spear when it does a single point of damage past your four-thousand-dollar plate cuirass, it's now in your bloodstream. You're vulnerable to infection. If you're using the Bleeding rules, you're now bleeding. By all aspects, mechanically, the enemy got through your armor.

We also have a second problem with creating an interesting armored swordfight in GURPS: The fact that when someone is struck in armor in GURPS, they take no blunt trauma. Armor is usually very good at preventing you from dying, but it can't simply make energy 'go away' - if you are struck by a polehammer to your midriff, all the energy in the blow hasn't gone away. It's simply been spread out across your body. Some of it turns into recoil, some of it goes into the armor, and some of it goes into a wide swathe of your bodily tissues. GURPS has almost no way of simulating this. No matter how or where or when you get hit, if the opponent doesn't roll enough damage to get past your DR, you take no damage.

"But wait!" You might say. "We have a blunt trauma rule already - it's in Campaigns!" Well, yes, we do. That rule allows you to do a single point of blunt trauma for every 5 points of damage that is blocked by the armor. Unfortunately, this rule is completely insufficient - it comes up in low-tech games so infrequently that it may as well not exist. Why? Well, the simple fact is - most low tech armors don't have DR over 5. All those flexible leather jerkins and cloth armors are functionally indifferent from rigid armor, since their flexible nature coming up in actual play is a physical impossibility (aside from the layering rules, at least). Heavy mail has a DR of 5, so if you roll 5 points of damage on the button, you get to do a single point of crushing damage to the target. Whoopee!

On top of that, the blunt trauma rule only applies to flexible armor, so it is a complete nonissue for plate armor, as in our example. Perhaps you see why I feel this rule is insufficient.

Finally, we have a pretty simple third problem: Thrusts have no advantage over cuts. In GURPS, thrusts do universally less damage thanks to not using leverage, which also means that they get through armor poorer than swings. This means that your best option for getting through armor is to swing your sword, not thrust it. This doesn't make any sense, because as the Poem of the Pell states:

And to thrust is better than to strike;
The striker is deluded many ways,
The sword may not through steel and bones bite,
The entrails are covered in steel and bones,
But with a thrust, anon your foe is forlorn;
Two inches pierced harm more
Than cut of edge, though it wounds sore.

Or, in plain English: Thrusts are way better at getting through armor than strikes, because they concentrate energy down onto a single point rather than spreading it out over an edge. GURPS also doesn't recognize any conditions where it is easier to penetrate armor, such as when a target is laying on his back, where he cannot recoil.

How do we fix all of this? These are the problems as I understand them:

• 'Death by peritonitis' - Armor only lets a few points of damage through at a time. It never fails catastrophically.
• Armor is much weaker than it was historically, and it's far too easy to get a penetration in general.
• There is no way to hurt or stun people through their armor without 'penetrating' it, mechanically.
• There is no advantage given to penetrating armor in any given position or circumstance, including when doing impaling instead of cutting, or when the target is prone.

While I haven't fully solved any of the problems that led me to create this post, I feel like the 'Super Edge Protection' system that I've come up with does do a good job at meeting these objectives and making armored swordfights more fun. The rules in question will be in my next post.