Shisou:

I do.  You want armor badly enough to make reasons for it to work, even when it shouldn't.  That, to me, only proves that it's definitely still possible for Lionhead to do it, but doesn't convince me that it's what they should do.

I say out with the old, in with the new.  Forget armor.  Guns can pierce it, it looks out of place,  it's impractically heavy, and the lack of an Armor stat removes any real need for it besides cosmetics.  It just seems like if they're going to include armor, it'd take some really deliberate reaching to get there, and that'll probably make things awkward in-game.

Also, I'm a big fan of hyperbole.  Its strengthening of your argument outweighs its cheesiness.

Than who's to say Lionhead won't add an armor stat?  Also, not ALL guns can pierce ALL armor.  If made correctly, tempered the right way, and with the correct metal, armor can easily defect a musket ball. 

There were actual accounts of this happening during the crusades when Ottoman's had muskets and fired at Varangian Guards in Istanbul.  Some died, some shrugged off a musket blast and went on fighting.  However, in Fable 2 there were things like the Turret Rifle/Pistol and the Clockwork Rifle/Pistol (my favorite), which is capable of firing multiple shots.  So that puts a big hole in the armor idea (quite literally). 

Still though, even if "out with the old, in with the new" is the best way to go, if some certain Albion king thought that way.  Pieces of the old world would still have to remain in some way, whether its in a great dungeon accessible only by the mighty, or behind a Demon Door.  Even some smiths would still have to know SOME way of making armor, and if you asked them to make it, for a high price, they couldn't help but oblige.

Getting rid of armor ENTIRELY just isn't practical OR probable.