06-26-2019, 09:30 AM | #11 |
Icelandic - Approach With Caution
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Reykjavķk, Iceland
|
Re: [Low-tech] Charioteer loadouts and overloaded land vehicles
Do modern tank crew wear helmets and body armor?
|
06-26-2019, 10:28 AM | #12 | |
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Pisa, Tuscany, Italy
|
Re: [Low-tech] Charioteer loadouts and overloaded land vehicles
Quote:
I'm not sure about the functionality of an ankle-lenght dutiwa for a dismounted charioteer, but this length is the same of a lot of Tibetan lamellar armors which were worn by warriors on foot. Last edited by Rasna; 06-26-2019 at 10:41 AM. |
|
06-26-2019, 07:33 PM | #13 |
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
|
Re: [Low-tech] Charioteer loadouts and overloaded land vehicles
Most of the examples I've seen are knee length. The underlayers reach lower but the metal plates usually stop at the knee. They were worn by both infantry and cavalry; IMO the longest ones were meant for cavalry.
__________________
Compact Castles gives the gamer an instant portfolio of genuine, real-world castle floorplans to use in any historical, low-tech, or fantasy game setting. Last edited by DanHoward; 06-26-2019 at 07:45 PM. |
06-27-2019, 12:31 PM | #14 |
Join Date: Jul 2008
|
Re: [Low-tech] Charioteer loadouts and overloaded land vehicles
I wouldn't be surprised if they don't wear body armor, but I don't know. I think they don't actually wear combat helmets, or at least some don't. They wear helmets designed to protect against banging your head on the many metal fixtures in the mobile metal box they fight inside.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident. |
06-29-2019, 07:18 AM | #15 |
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Pisa, Tuscany, Italy
|
Re: [Low-tech] Charioteer loadouts and overloaded land vehicles
Yep. In GURPS terms, rigid armor covering the thighs or relatively heavy flexible armor covering past the thighs (ex. a Heavy Mail hauberk) means -1 DX for action involving legs. Ankle-lenght scale or lamellar armor seems to be usually a good choice for charioteers and cavalrymen and - depending on situation - mostly a bad choice for infantry, especially when mobility is required. Nevertheless, a lot of lamellar Tibetan infantry armors cover up to the knee or almost the entire leg and totally lack of shoulder guards or armored sleeves. Maybe the freedom of movement of arms was regarded by them as being tactically more relevant than leg mobility.
Last edited by Rasna; 06-29-2019 at 07:26 AM. |
06-30-2019, 05:48 AM | #16 |
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
|
Re: [Low-tech] Charioteer loadouts and overloaded land vehicles
I don't think there is any evidence for ankle-length armoured skirts. The longest ones stop just past the knees.
__________________
Compact Castles gives the gamer an instant portfolio of genuine, real-world castle floorplans to use in any historical, low-tech, or fantasy game setting. |
06-30-2019, 07:42 AM | #17 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 100 hurricane swamp
|
Re: [Low-tech] Charioteer loadouts and overloaded land vehicles
Having tried out ankle length armored skirts... there are reasons for this. They are heavier, cumbersome, and tend to restrict movement, even if made to to give ample movement room. You also tend to get them under foot if they are actual ankle length.
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|