[LT] Relative DR of Plate Components
 

I was wondering about something. If there has been a thread on this already, a link would be appreciated.

What is a good rule of thumb for the relative DR values for the components of historical field plate harnesses? I understand the thickness of armor tended to vary from the extremities to the chest and head, but don't know enough to say what a typical ratio might be. Or, for that matter, how the ratios might vary between different styles of armor.

For example, if the breastplate is DR 7, what are likely values for the arms, back, etc?

Re: [LT] Relative DR of Plate Components
 

I imagine that someone will come back to you with some very detailed variances; but ultimately this is what the 'targeting chinks in armor' rule is for.

Armor is thinner in <position X>, targeting <position X> to make use of that thinner armor in the form of better penetration is done at -10.

Making it more complicated then that, at least in my mind, would seem an exercise in tedium- so my rule of thumb is 'use the rules as written, but DO have my enemies remember that they can target chinks if the first blow gets absorbed for no damage'

Re: [LT] Relative DR of Plate Components
 

What I mean is, what are likely DR values for different parts of the body, using the Low-Tech rules? Like, “If the breastplate has DR x, then the DR of the arms would range from y to z.” Or, “The gauntlets would likely have 2/3 the DR of the breastplate, but not if it is Gothic.” Stuff like that. The chinks rules are a different issue.

Re: [LT] Relative DR of Plate Components
 

The head and chest was usually covered in the heaviest plate. Followed by the back, abdomen, shoulders and upper arms. The lightest plate was on the legs, hands, and feet.

Re: [LT] Relative DR of Plate Components
 

So a suit of armor might be

DR 9 head, chest
DR 6 back, abdomen, arms (Im not sure where shoulders fit)
DR 3 hands, legs, feet

?

Re: [LT] Relative DR of Plate Components
 

They are on the locations table. Partial shoulder armor protects on a 6 on 1d.

Re: [LT] Relative DR of Plate Components
 

Thanks. I'm still wondering about how to quantify it, though.

Here is a more specific question. If I stat out a suit with a DR 7 breastplate and bascinet, DR 4 gauntlets, sollerets, and legs, and the other parts all DR 6 or 5, would it be reasonable to treat it as a typical harness for NPCs to wear? Or would it be unusual for the DR values to vary that much from chest to legs/hands?

Re: [LT] Relative DR of Plate Components
 

Where? When? For whom? It would be very unusual for Plains Indians c. 1790, not so much for some European Calvary c. 1600. For the Skull Legions of the Dread Citadel c. The Year of The Death Snail? Who is to say?

Re: [LT] Relative DR of Plate Components
 

Considering that the question is about full suits of plate, I think we can safely limit ourselves to times and places where they were used.

I started thinking about this while writing up sample armors for a Banestorm game, so I don’t have a specific historical setting in mind. To reiterate, I’m looking for general rules of thumb about DR ratios between components of historical field plate harnesses.

If there was a tremendous range in fashions, with (for instance) suits of almost uniform DR and suits with both DR x gauntlets and DR 3x breastplates both being common, then, well, the rule of thumb would be that anything in that range is fine. Trying to pin it down further would be pointless for gaming purposes.

But if a certain ratio was most common - like DR 7 chests to DR 4 hands - and different schemes were the norm in only a few eras/countries, then that would be good to know. And I have a suspicion that the range of cost-effective strategies for constructing full suits of plate is limited. I just don’t know where the limits are.

Re: [LT] Relative DR of Plate Components
 

I'll be quite shocked if Loadouts: Low-Tech Armor doesn't have at least one example of renaissance harness.