Armor durring testing. What do you think?

[spoons]

I'd like to hear what people think about folks wearing armor they own while testing for weapon ratings. Should we encourage people to wear armor they own while doing tests (thus encouraging people to get armor), or should we discourage people from wearing armor durring testing out of a sense of a level playing field?

I can see plenty of arguments on both sides, but I'm curious what all of you fine folks who read this forum think.

[Ematai]

I'm all for wearing armour during tests & having it count.

[Elik]

I remember when we were hammering out this rankings we wanted everyone to have a level playing field. But I agree, if we allow armor to be worn during testing, more people will be encouraged to get some.

I'm all for allowing it

[Ematai]

I think at the time that we were working it out, it worked best since we had a lot of new players and not everyone had their own equipment. But now that there are people getting into the game, attending events, making their own things, I think testing with armour can be introduced.

[Brevin Azura]

So will everyone involved in the test be wearing armor or just the person testing? For example, I'm testing for something and I own chest armor. Does that mean the people that I will test against will have the same type of armor as me? Or will it be if I own some and they don't, I get an advantage?

[Ematai]

Its only the person who is testing is wearing armour. The ones they're fighting aren't wearing armour, even if they are. At least thats how I'd do it.

[Saboface]

Armor During Testing:

I suppose it'd ultimately come down to what you want out of a testing enviornment. I can see allowing armor encourageing people to get armor, but I can also see people NOT testing UNTIL they get armor.

In terms of balance, allowing or disallowing armor can be thought of in terms of "how tough do I want my ranking system to be?"

Like, maybe allowing armor on the tester, but not the people he is fighting makes it easier on the tester, but if a system that's nice to the tester is what you want, there's nothing wrong with that. If you want a testing system that is, perhaps, a little tougher to rise up through, then not allowing armor is the way to go.

...you know what I think would be interesting? Have your testing system be purely about weapons. No armor or other shenanigans gets involved on the part of the tester. So, for example, when you're testing for Adept Red, all you have is a red and that's it.

However, have one of the weapon choices is "armed as you like" (but please, come up with a cooler name for it then that), and you can become an "adept" or a "master" of that. Within THAT category, you get to bust out your armor and whatever other cool stuff you want. That gives each player an even playing field when testing for ranks within different weapons, but also gives people with armor (or people who like to, say, roll sword and board + rock or javelin or whatever) a chance to use stategies and accessories that they have worked hard on in a meaningful way within the testing environment as well.

[Brevin Azura]

I've been thinking about this and I think I have to side with Sabo on this one. I don't think that the testee (person testing) should get to wear armor unless the others in the test have equivalent armor. Otherwise I think it could make it too easy for the testee complete the test.

[A Cardinal Sin]

Honestly, I think armor just further complicates things by giving the wearer an added advantage. For example, let's say Person A is testing up in red and has to face two other people. Person A has armor and thus has the advantage. Person B, on the other hand, who is testing afterward against the same people has no armor, and therefore has more difficulty in winning.

Do you see the problem there? The introduction of armor does the exact opposite of leveling the playing field.

[Brevin Azura]

While I understand your point, using the red test as an example probably isn't the best choice, since a two handed swing negates the armor anyway. Armor definitely gives an advantage in single blue, florentine and sword & board though.

[A Cardinal Sin]

Aye. I probably should have thought about the actual mechanics of my example, but it was the first thing that came to mind. Still, you see my point. I'm against armor in testing.