Low-Tech Armor with the Strength of Ten Men

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Realistically such a person would probably just layer armor in ahistorical ways, but GURPS players seem to be less willing to accept DX penalties than real-life people are willing to accept mobility restrictions from armor.

Historically, a lot of fighters with this much armour fought from horseback where mobility isn't such an issue.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

Historically, a lot of fighters with this much armour fought from horseback where mobility isn't such an issue.

I was actually thinking more of my own experience with contemporary light infantry body armor, and not historical horse cavalry.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I'd imagine, given the limits on the hand fabrication of quality armor, and especially with the structural limits of mail thickness that they would layer even with custom made pieces.

Yeah I was thinking more you can't layer entire sets of plate layered over another entire set of plate even if you could in theory carry the weight. (Which is a point about articulation again)

And TBH I wasn't even thinking of mail. I think with mail in terms of thickness you have to layer that, as there's only so thick you make a single layer of mail (or there's only so thick you make the links and join them up) and maintain flexibility

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Yeah I was thinking more you can layer entire sets of plate layered over another entire of set of plate even if you could in theory carry the weight. (Which is a point about articulation again)

And TBH I wasn't even thinking of mail. I think with mail in terms of thickness you have to layer that as there's only so thick you make a single layer of mail (or there's only so thick you make the links and join them up) and maintain flexibility

Yes, that is my point. They can't be wearing an aketon much thicker than historical examples, or mail much thicker than historical examples and still be able to bend effectively. Only plates (with the usual gaps) can be significantly thickened and would need to be the outermost layer, and in order to have them be good quality steel throughout they also would have structural limits on thickness that I suspect are limiting before bulk is a factor. You could do something with duplexing (or ever tri- or quad-plexing) to get around these limits.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Yes, that is my point. They can't be wearing an aketon much thicker than historical examples, or mail much thicker than historical examples and still be able to bend effectively. Only plates (with the usual gaps) can be significantly thickened and would need to be the outermost layer, and in order to have them be good quality steel throughout they also would have structural limits on thickness that I suspect are limiting before bulk is a factor. You could do something with duplexing (or ever tri- or quad-plexing) to get around these limits.

Yeah I think that sounds about right.

[Anthony]

Incidentally, the thickest historical armors are probably not metal, because metal is really dense. The thickest armor given in low-tech is probably either heavy layered leather (35 lb; density likely about 1/8 steel) or straw (20 lb; density depends on packing but might be 1/20 or lower).

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Incidentally, the thickest historical armors are probably not metal, because metal is really dense. The thickest armor given in low-tech is probably either heavy layered leather (35 lb; density likely about 1/8 steel) or straw (20 lb; density depends on packing but might be 1/20 or lower).

Yep, not just thickest but often heaviest as well. Which is why I like the point that sometimes gets made, plate is the lightest (per DR) armour about. Which is counter-intuitive to many who think of fantasy thieves wearing hollywood costume leather armour and knights clanking around in heavy plate and being winched onto horses.

[Celjabba]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

Yep, not just thickest but often heaviest as well. Which is why I like the point that sometimes gets made, plate is the lightest (per DR) armour about. Which is counter-intuitive to many who think of fantasy thieves wearing hollywood costume leather armour and knights clanking around in heavy plate and being winched onto horses.

Well-fitted plate is also usually more comfortable to wear than more bulky armor of the same protection level, and restrain movement less.

(Ill-fitted plate, on the other hand, is painful at best, dangerous at worst.)

On the reverse side, carrying (as luggage) plate armor is a pain : it is bulky, inflexible, and (if carrying several pieces) noisy unless wrapped around. It also require quite a lot of care.
Mail/non-rigid Leather/padded cloth armor, at least, often pack tighter, and are easier to carry when not worn, even if they are heavier.

[Flyndaran]

Nine times of ten, if it's a bizarre almost nonsensical myth about European history, I blame the Victorian "scholars".

Before Gurps discussion, it never occurred to me that cloth would be better protection pound per pound than leather. So I don't claim any high ground of always knowledgeable. (As evidence, I even forgot how to spell knowledgeable.)

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Celjabba

Well-fitted plate is also usually more comfortable to wear than more bulky armor of the same protection level, and restrain movement less.

(Ill-fitted plate, on the other hand, is painful at best, dangerous at worst.)

On the reverse side, carrying (as luggage) plate armor is a pain : it is bulky, inflexible, and noisy unless wrapped around. It also require quite a lot of care.
Mail/non-rigid Leather/padded cloth armor, at least, often pack tighter, and are easier to carry when not worn, even if they are heavier.

True enough, (that what squires and man-servants are for I guess)

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

Nine times of ten, if it's a bizarre almost nonsensical myth about European history, I blame the Victorian "scholars".

Before Gurps discussion, it never occurred to me that cloth would be better protection pound per pound than leather. So I don't claim any high ground of always knowledgeable. (As evidence, I even forgot how to spell knowledgeable.)

Heh, well I used to be a longbow fanboy, utterly convinced they could fly 300 yards and could pin an armoured French knight to an oak tree (horse and all)