Gaming Ballistic - GURPS Content Posts

[ErhnamDJ]

Originally Posted by Kalzazz

The lifting ST for bows is definitely cool and interesting, but, does seem to lead to the notion of extremely well armored archers akin to Fantasy Assault Guns . . . is this a real thing that existed? My vague grasp of history seems to fuzzily indicate that archers were not prone to wearing heavy armor, and that heavy armor users were not prone to archery

You need to look at who became archers and who could afford expensive armors. Those guys on the bottom right there are English longbowmen. Looks like heavy armor to me.

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by ErhnamDJ

You need to look at who became archers and who could afford expensive armors. Those guys on the bottom right there are English longbowmen. Looks like heavy armor to me.

A typical plate cuirass weighs maybe 12 lbs. A leather or cloth corselet that provides the same protection is over 20 lbs. Which is light and which is heavy?

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

A typical plate cuirass weighs maybe 12 lbs. A leather or cloth corselet that provides the same protection is over 20 lbs. Which is light and which is heavy?

Well, those archers look like they're wearing brigandine rather than any of the other options, and from what I can tell the image was made over half a century after the event (it's from a 15th century manuscript), so I don't think there's really a lot to be gleaned from it. Of course, I've always (ever since I found out about the discrepancy, anyway) wondered where the "generic fantasy" armor progression - cloth<leather<mail*<scale*<segmented<plate, in terms of protection, price, and weight - came from.

*Depending on the game/story/whatever, sometimes mail gives better protection, sometimes scale does. Mail typically weighs less, however.

[Kalzazz]

My historical knowledge is as I said is very fuzzy, but somewhere in dim recesses I thought Macedonian pikemen wore armor of '2 talents of bronze', and that while 2 talents was not exactly known it was rather not light, and Macedonian archers did not wear armor

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Of course, I've always (ever since I found out about the discrepancy, anyway) wondered where the "generic fantasy" armor progression - cloth<leather<mail*<scale*<segmented<plate, in terms of protection, price, and weight - came from.

*Depending on the game/story/whatever, sometimes mail gives better protection, sometimes scale does. Mail typically weighs less, however.

Desire to fit interesting gameplay tradeoffs onto the list of armor types seems like a possibility.

Having most kinds of armor have no merit except cheapness does make choosing there a lot less interesting.

Then again, it might have started with placing the armors into a sequence from 'light' to 'heavy' based on the extent to which it is imagined as a suit of clanky metal, and then assigning stats based on that.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Kalzazz

Hey, neat!

The lifting ST for bows is definitely cool and interesting, but, does seem to lead to the notion of extremely well armored archers akin to Fantasy Assault Guns . . . is this a real thing that existed? My vague grasp of history seems to fuzzily indicate that archers were not prone to wearing heavy armor, and that heavy armor users were not prone to archery

Consider noble chariot archers, or Persian noble cavalry. Or samurai!

Wearing (the better sorts of) armor, in most Low Tech periods, corresponds chiefly to being able to own armor, which is usually very expensive and basically puts you in the equivalent of the nobility. At the same time, archery largely corresponds to being from a background where you learn archery (you've probably heard the "to train a bowman, start with his grandfather" thing).

In some places, the nobility practiced archery, so they packed both bows and the best available armor when they went to war. In other places, the nobility didn't, so any archers they might have had had inferior or no armor.

[ErhnamDJ]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

A typical plate cuirass weighs maybe 12 lbs. A leather or cloth corselet that provides the same protection is over 20 lbs. Which is light and which is heavy?

I would consider any torso armor designed to stop threats, rather than incidental damage (like shrapnel) to be heavy armor. A man with a helmet and a shield isn't heavily armored. Give him a hauberk and he is.

It's not all that common for armor to be so heavy as to impede mobility, though, is it? Full body coverage, perhaps layered armor. I wouldn't associate very heavy armor with strongmen, but rather with horsemen.

That the archers are stronger, even much stronger, seems irrelevant when it comes to armor. The weight isn't all that important in the first place.

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Kalzazz

My historical knowledge is as I said is very fuzzy, but somewhere in dim recesses I thought Macedonian pikemen wore armor of '2 talents of bronze', and that while 2 talents was not exactly known it was rather not light, and Macedonian archers did not wear armor

Two talents is roughly 120 lbs. Nobody in Greece or Macedon wore even half of that. My Dendra Panoply is considerably heavier than anything that the Greeks or Macedonians wore and that only weighs 50 lbs.

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Then again, it might have started with placing the armors into a sequence from 'light' to 'heavy' based on the extent to which it is imagined as a suit of clanky metal, and then assigning stats based on that.

This......

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by ErhnamDJ

I would consider any torso armor designed to stop threats, rather than incidental damage (like shrapnel) to be heavy armor.

Then you have light infantry in heavy armor, which seems odd.

I think "heavy armor" is armor worn by heavy infantry, shock troops, and obviously tanks. "Light armor" is the armor worn by light infantry, skirmish troops and infantry vehicles.