Skip to main content

The Tiniest Bit of Research Possible: Armor

On the one hand, one doesn't want to fall down the rabbit hole of historical simulationsim. On the other hand, it's nice to not be talking entirely out of one's ass.

from Matthäus Schwarz's Klaidungsbüchlein 
After posting some thoughts/assumptions on plate armor, I was shown this video of a guy in a swimming pool wearing plate armor. He's no porpoise, but perhaps my Kelly Gang comparisons were not as illuminating as I thought.

So, a minimal bit of googling yielded this page from the Metropolitan Museum of Art: Arms and Armor—Common Misconceptions and Frequently Asked Questions.

Here's a choice bit:
When early scholars of armor looked at medieval artworks, they noticed what they thought to be depictions of many different forms of armor: rings, chains, bands of rings, scales, small plates, etc. With poetic license, all early armor was referred to as "mail," distinguished only by its appearance, hence the terms "ring-mail," "chain-mail," "banded mail," "scale-mail," "plate-mail," and so forth. It is today commonly accepted, however, that most of these different depictions are actually various attempts by artists to efficiently show the surface of a type of armor that is difficult to render both in paint or sculpture. Rather than showing each interlinking ring, the small links were stylized by dots, slashes, S-shapes, circles, and the like, which readily lent themselves to misinterpretation.
Obviously, there were a lot of historical variants on armor design, but I'm going to take that as validation for lumping all the mails into one category: Medium/Semi-Rigid.

Regarding mobility, the page makes the point that a suit of field armor (as opposed to tournament armor, which no one would go adventuring in) weighed about 50 lbs., and that this weight was well distributed across the body. This struck a cord with me. My brother is a cop, and he wears 50 pounds of equipment, mostly hanging off his belt. This is not an ideal distribution, and he can run, jump, climb, and, in at least one instance, tackle a guy on a tricycle.
...historical sources tell us of the famous French knight [...] who, in full armor, was able to climb up the underside of a ladder using only his hands. Furthermore, there are several illustrations from the Middle Ages and the Renaissance depicting men-at-arms, squires, or knights, all in full armor, mounting horses without help or instruments such as ladders or cranes. Modern experiments with genuine fifteenth- and sixteenth-century armor as well as with accurate copies have shown that even an untrained man in a properly fitted armor can mount and dismount a horse, sit or lie on the ground, get up again, run, and generally move his limbs freely and without discomfort.
 Fine. I still like the idea of restricting Heavy/Rigid armor to Fighters, but they won't have any restrictions placed upon them while wearing it.

So, question:
Should Heavy/Rigid only be for Fighters (B/X = Human Fighters), or "fighter types?" I have no problems taking plate away from Halflings and Elves, but I feel a little more awkward about striping it from Dwarves. What are your thoughts?


Comments

  1. Taking away heavy armors from halflings makes sense depending on how closely you cleave to "small people that are more sneaky than directly violent."
    As for elves, I could see it going either way, but dwarves definitely belong in heavy armor.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, I think you're right. But that means I have to recompute the XP levels for the demihumans, and that feels like tampering with something sacred.

      Delete
    2. I personally wouldn't recompute XP per level, but I also just sorta make things up.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Reviewing Rules for Play-by-Post Optimization

I’ve played a lot of PbP games: all your favorite flavors of OD&D, AD&D, and their retroclones, Call of Cthulhu, Marvel Superheroes, Traveller, Dungeon World, etc. ad nauseam. In almost every instance, I forgot what ruleset we were using at some point. Which is a good thing. Once chargen is over, you spend a lot more time describing your characters actions and poring over the GM’s descriptions than you spend interacting with rules. When you do roll, it’s usually a combat to-hit roll, which you’ve probably programmed into the online dice-roller as a macro. Pretty much any game will work for PbP. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t points of possible optimization. Point 1: Resolution. Anything that can keep the action moving is a boon to PbP. A game that requires a back-and-forth exchange of information to resolve an action is going to progress very slowly. A good rule of thumb is that it’ll take 2 or 3 days to get a response from any given player. At that pace, an exch

Maze Rats by Post

In my previous post , I reviewed a bunch of my favorite rulesets for optimization for Play-by-Post. It occurred to me almost immediately that I hadn't really thought about Maze Rats enough. In fact, I'd mis-remembered and mischaracterized it. Upon reflection, one of the mechanics I took issue with is actually a big strength. Re-reading the rules, it seems like just a few very simple hacks could make it a highly-optimized PbP game. As follows: Danger Rolls are rolled by the GM. Danger rolls usually fail, so it is in the player’s interest to describe their actions plausibly and mitigate as many risks as they can, in the hopes that they don’t trigger a danger roll. 2d6 + ability bonus ≥ 10 If you have taken enough precautions to have a distinct advantage in an action, but not enough to have eliminated the distinct possibility of danger, the GM will give you a roll with advantage. 3d6 keep 2 + ability bonus ≥ 10 Because each character only has 3 ability scores (S

An Exaltation of Rockets

I've been toying off-and-on with a rockets-and rayguns campaign/ruleset based heavily on the original Buck Rogers strips. I started working it up as a Black Hack, but I've since switched over to Maze Rats, which has become my ruleset of choice for Play-by-Post. I don't have a good name for it. I want something that conveys the baroque majesty of science fiction in the 20s and 30s. "Planetary Romance" is an accurate description of the genre, but needs about 20% more pulp. Pseudo-pulp magazine names seem like a good way to go, but that's such an easy well to dip into that the results can sound pretty generic. Request for feedback #1:  On this particular morning, I'm enamored of "An Exaltation of Rockets," but it may not carry the right resonances. I'd be eager to hear from you what your first impression was when you saw that as the post's title. What sort of imagery did it conjure up? What sort of world does it belong to? The prem