07-02-2006, 08:29 AM | #11 |
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
The 'hat' technique derives, IIRC, from the tendency from a wooden shield to fall apart when battered hard enough, leaving only the metal boss to which the handgrip was attatched - techniques were developed to defend yourself with only the boss (since the shield could come apart when it wasn't convenient to replace it) and then, as these things do, it became taught as a technique in its own right. I may be wrong, but that's the way I've heard it.
And I think GURPS lamellar ('scale mail') was known as lorica squamata by the Latins. Lorica Segmenta was the 'banded mail' of longer, horizontal strips. For reference I think they called chainmail lorica hamata, but I can't recall the name of the leather breastplate thing... As for leaving equipment in camp ... you would tend to leave your support gear behind in the care of your camp followers, sick and wounded. The armour and weapons you were issued (or obliged to muster with) are what is known these days as CEFO ... the stuff you need with you to be able to fight. So yes, that is a lot of weight to be lugging about - just be thankfull they're not D&D weapons that weigh twice as they should do. |
07-02-2006, 10:43 AM | #12 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central Europe
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Dan has written several Pyramid articles for 3e on realistic armour weights and DRs. Search the archives for "chainmail" and "scale and lamellar" or check here http://www.sjgames.com/pyramid/login...e.html?id=2565 for the lamellar article if you don't have a subscription.
|
07-02-2006, 01:14 PM | #13 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Quote:
|
|
07-03-2006, 12:56 AM | #14 | |
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Quote:
|
|
07-03-2006, 02:55 AM | #15 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Could be just misremembering details. Cavalry units do move about the same speed as infantry units on a strategic scale. However, I believe GURPS 3e also winds up with somewhat low ST scores for large creatures.
|
07-03-2006, 07:10 AM | #16 | |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Cowtown, Canada
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Quote:
|
|
07-03-2006, 12:52 PM | #17 | |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Berkeley, CA
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Quote:
|
|
07-03-2006, 04:47 PM | #18 | |
Join Date: Jul 2006
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Quote:
Other, more lightly equipped types of cavalry were used for manouver and for pursuit, picket and scouting there were always horse archers and the like. |
|
07-03-2006, 08:04 PM | #19 |
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Of course cataphracts were faster than infantry units. Even after infantry had dropped their shields and weapons and ran away the cataphracts could still catch up and dispatch them. People are confusing what was actually meant by "heavy cavalry". It had little to do with the gear worn by the soldier and horse and a lot to do with how they were employed. Any unit that focused on "shock" tactics were considered "heavy" regardless of what gear they were using.
|
07-03-2006, 08:53 PM | #20 |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Charlotte, North Caroline, United States of America, Earth?
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Dan, I could give you a kiss for that one.
A summerian with a thrusting spear, large shield and a bunch of buddies standing beside him is a heavy infantryman. He's just got crappier gear(damn that TL1-2!). But cataphracts do seem to be scarcely faster than infantry in most cases. I don't think 2/5 or 3/6 are bad representations of the cataphracts' movement. Notably, Cataphracts would also be supported by lighter cavalrymen(lighter in the sense of lacking barding, and possibly weaing ligher armor), who operate as Cursores("runners") and serve to chase down fleeing infantrymen as the cataphracts would be harder pressed to chase'em down. |
Tags |
cabaret chicks on ice, low-tech |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|