» Sat May 28, 2011 9:38 pm
There should be no penalty.
While it may weigh more, there's nothing to indicate (either in-game or in the real world) that this armor would be less articulated (i.e. more restrictive with regards to movement) than lighter armor.
In fact, the whole designation for light, medium, and heavy is nonsensical. Plate armor is less encumbering than chain mail because of its rigidity; it distributes the mass well. Plate armor is also articulated; a fully armored knight can kneel on one knee just as well as if not in armor. These people aren't idiots, they aren't going to make armor that doesn't allow for range of motion in combat. I would imagine this would extrapolate into a fantasy setting as well.
Also, as far as I'm concerned, the skills should govern the protection granted. Therefore, the best light and best heavy (if those designations are used) should offer the same base AR. If your light armor skill svcks but your heavy armor skill is high then the light armor won't do you much good even though it is a high-end material (say, glass). The skill is supposed to govern the character's adeptness at fighting in the armor and learning how move in it. A master of heavy armor should be almost as flexible in articulated, jointed heavy armor as a character wearing light armor. Mostly, I'm thinking of TESIII's system where the best heavy armor was about 20 to 30 AR points better than the best light armor.
I like the idea of armor being classified in terms of protection vs. a specific kind of damage. For example, in the real world chain mail is good at protecting against slashing blades. However, a thrusting blade can pierce the mail, and chainmail offers no protection against the crushing forces of impact. Steel plate, on the other hand, is good at deflecting thrusting, slashing, and brunt impact.
Naturally, the conclusion is that plate is superior to mail. So, yes, trade-offs are necessary to give a player incentive to diversify their armor choices. Weight could be one factor, though I personally think that equipped armor's encumbrance should be reduced because they are equipped on the body. Some games use an attribute that translates into a numeric point meter. For example, say you have 50 Endurance. Armor pieces have an Endurance rating representing how much endurance they "cost" to equip. For example, say Cuirass A costs 20 endurance while Cuirass B costs 10 endurance to equip. If you've played Hellgate: London, you'll know what I'm talking about.
But, that's just my take on it. Whatever method Bethesda uses, as long as it is balanced, it will probably plenty sufficient.