So we all know how the combat triangle in gameplay works. Mage beats melee. Range beats magic. Melee beats range. And with the EoC, wearing the wrong armor type corresponding to your attack type gives penalty.
But how far in depth is this combat triangle applied to roleplay? Completely? Partially?
In as far asI have seen, people have been picky choosy about it. I know some people like to say that metal armor jams magic use, and metal armor also conducts magic much like it does in gameplay. But I don't see anyone claiming a melee attack should do less damage because said person is wearing magic armor.
Interestingly, after a check, Battlemage armor is apparently composed primarily of leather and metal, which suggests that leather is not hindering spellcasting as much as some of us thought in the first place.
I will return later to write an even bigger entry on the subject.
I am glad that people are starting to see reason when it comes to this subject. It has been buggering me ever since the community started to virtualy lynch the person that dared to combine metal armaments with anything magic related.
I hope that those days will come to an end preeeetty soon.
I've found that as a rule of thumb, dead animals/animal hides will be more supportive of ranged, minerals/metals/rock will be more supportive of melee, and dead plant life will be more supportive of magic.
Though now looking at things from a more IC perspective, it's apparent that with realism, the combat triangle is just an OOC concept that's nice for organization, with reduced impact on roleplay. Looking at the "ranged"/"melee" interactions we can observe in real life demonstrates that between those two well enough without even having to consider magic. The addition of magic just proves the point further.
This is how I address armor categories in RP with regards to the triangle.
Metal will naturally disrupt magic somehow (usually, in my interpretation, by making it more erratic and therefore more dangerous or hard to handle as a byproduct of its conductive properties). However, metal can be enchanted by talented enough magicians in ways that counter this effect enough to make small quantities not a huge detriment. Metal behaves the obvious ways for melee, and good plate armor is strong against ranged in all cases usually up to (but not always, and sometimes including) strong or enchanted bolts or very powerful bows with well-tipped arrows (see: draw weights up in the 60's of lbs and up, depending on distance and angle and such).
Leather will naturally stunt magic (usually, in my interpretation, because the flesh of mortal creatures of anima has dissappative effects on rune magic). However, leather can be enchanted or used by a talented enough mage in ways that discourage this effect enough to prevent it from causing problems with spellcasting. Leather usually won't be enough to stop a good stab from a sword or a particularly strong arrow or bolt, but it will be useful in blunting or even completely dampening slashing attacks for a strike or two and cushioning more mild crushing attacks. It may also help nullify the effects of enchanted bolt tips.
Cloth may or may not have any special effects at all. It's possible that the use of compostable materials, like cotton or silk, facilitate the weaving of magic, but by my conjecture it seems much more likely that cloth in general is both more comfortable (for those who don't need to wear armor) and much more receptive to magical enchantments and buffs than metal or leather. So, the particular effectiveness of a cloth garment could vary radically depending on the exact enchantment on it, if there is one at all. It could be enchanted with anything between a powerful blow-stunting resistance that softens anything short of a direct stab to a completely offensive boost that helps the mage power up his spells stronger and faster.
Cloth may or may not have any special effects at all. It's possible that the use of compostable materials, like cotton or silk, facilitate the weaving of magic, but by my conjecture it seems much more likely that cloth in general is both more comfortable (for those who don't need to wear armor) and much more receptive to magical enchantments and buffs than metal or leather. So, the particular effectiveness of a cloth garment could vary radically depending on the exact enchantment on it, if there is one at all. It could be enchanted with anything between a powerful blow-stunting resistance that softens anything short of a direct stab to a completely offensive boost that helps the mage power up his spells stronger and faster.
Cloth actually makes for fairly interesting armour, if you look at the designs of it.
The video to the left of this is a test of a Gambeson against arrows. Gambesons were typically worn under plate armour, acting as padding to prevent chafing. Though hot and itchy, they were effective in stopping arrows. They were also worn on their own, in cases where the knight was in a hurry, training, or just casual protection for a stroll.
Comparatively, we also have the Greek Cloth armour, the Linothorax. Linothorax is flax-linen, layed up to 8 to 18 layers with glue in between. As demonstrated, it stops arrows fairly well, enough that even if you bleed, you will live. The cost to make a Linothorax cuirass over a traditional bronze one was a deciding factor in it's use as Bronze became more difficult to find in Greece.
Both designs show qualities of hybrid armour. Not metal, and therefore do not conduct Magic extremely well. Not a single layer, so it isn't easy to slice or shoot through. Overall, they're not great at any one thing. Just an all-around light, cheap armour.