[LT] Knight field plate harness, three-quarter plate and leg coverage
 

A lot of plate harnesses made for mounted warriors had fairly limited coverage over areas that would be hidden by the horse or saddle. The groin and more-or-less half of the thighs, the inner part.

When fighting on foot, these areas would be vulnerable.

How would I represent that in game terms?

I know how to subtract 5% weight for Abdomen coverage without Groin coverage, sure.

But how much does armour for just the outer upper thighs weigh compared to total coverage armour for the thighs (45%)? I've been using half weight and cost, making it equivalent to Front and Rear coverage, but I don't know if that's right.

And when fighting on foot, are the outer thighs hit on 1-3 on a 1d or 1-4? Or something else?

Also, what's the Cover DR of a Riding Saddle? Horned Saddle? And a War Saddle? Attacks that would have hit the groin would have to get through the hard cantle, so I expect it's substantial, but I could see anything from DR 4-6 being plausible for a war saddle, with DR 2-8 being possible.

Re: [LT] Knight field plate harness, three-quarter plate and leg coverage
 

The upcoming loadouts book covers most of this.

Re: [LT] Knight field plate harness, three-quarter plate and leg coverage
 

Happy news indeed.

Any guess at an ETA? Suggestions for the rules to use until it arrives?

And, oh! Did I miss the playtest?

Re: [LT] Knight field plate harness, three-quarter plate and leg coverage
 

The back of the thighs aren't a target except from behind or from the rare time that a hooked weapon goes between the legs and is pulled back. I have never seen a suit that exposed thigh from the point of view of an enemy to the front. Armourers knew their work. Right now, I would just treat "fitted for riding" as a +0% modifier to leg armour with no special effects.

Re: [LT] Knight field plate harness, three-quarter plate and leg coverage
 

The insides of the thighs were frequently exposed by armour until plate articulation got rather good. You could get away with it because they're partly protected simply by human anatomy (giving a further -3 to hit). Human anatomy protects that area of course because the high-value femoral artery is sitting there (giving a damage bonus/massive bleeding, depending on rules used). That location is roughly 1/6 coverage of the leg according to chance to hit, so I'd treat armour with a gap there as having 5/6ths coverage of the legs.

Martial Arts, page 138, for references.

Backs of the thighs not being covered means you can be targeted from behind. It's a gap, it's less material, it should weigh less and cost less than full coverage. If you're in a game tracking partial coverage (which Icelander is) then you can't handwave it. If you're in a game NOT tracking partial coverage it's a special effect that does not leave you exposed from behind when standing, because you're not tracking that :)

Re: [LT] Knight field plate harness, three-quarter plate and leg coverage
 

Can you show three authentic examples of full harness where some inner thigh is exposed from the front? Keep in mind that a lot of examples are missing faulds or tassets which covered the joint of the greaves and the body defense. Its not a practical target from the front, and I suspect not from the rear. One thing that the chinks rule can represent is attacking lightly protected targets which aren't sensible points to strike at.

Armour for a horseman didn't leave out the inner thigh because of problems with articulation, it left it out because its hard and painful to ride with a layer of steel between rider and saddle.

Edit: Have a look at attachment no. 3 in this thread. The back of the knees are protected by the fan of the knee cops, when they end there is a bit of plate, and above that the maille skirt would start, so the main openings are "knee gaps" and "groin". That is classic 15th century armour for a horseman. Some armour from after 1500 would just protect Thigh Front and Knee Front though ...

Re: [LT] Knight field plate harness, three-quarter plate and leg coverage
 

Your specific example is not what I am talking about. This is standard leg armour, including a gap for the back of the knee, but it is not armour with the inner thighs uncovered by plate. I'm talking about something like this.

Note, however, that even far heavier and more complete examples than the above might also require me to know the cost and weight of plate that doesn't protect the inside of the thighs and the odds of striking just the maille skirt and not plate. Even if the inner thighs aren't unprotected, there is a huge difference between them being protected by maille and a layer of plate or just maille.

And when considering whether something is exposed enough to strike at, we need to remember that footwork and mobility are the assumed standard practice in GURPS combat. Legs will move around, with either one of them leading, so the inner thighs will be exposed at some points if the armoured character is fighting on foot.

Re: [LT] Knight field plate harness, three-quarter plate and leg coverage
 

The Loadouts book has a specific rule for targeting the inner thigh.

Re: [LT] Knight field plate harness, three-quarter plate and leg coverage
 

AHA! I knew there was one. Looked in the wrong book.

EDIT: DOH! Confused Loadouts with Instant Armour. Of course I looked in the wrong book; I don't have that book ;)

Re: [LT] Knight field plate harness, three-quarter plate and leg coverage
 

I didn't say horsemen skip it because of articulation differences. I said nobody got it until armor technology advanced enough that armoring the inner thigh without binding up movement was feasable.

Horsemen still get dismounted and still have to get off voluntarily as well; in fact, the opposition is going to be trying VERY HARD to dismount them. And once you're off, you have exposed areas that can be targeted. The inside of the thigh isn't any more miraculously untargetable than the armpit is (which is also targetable in GURPS) despite both areas being naturally warded by posture and instinct. Warded is not the same as invulnerable.

It was a target; people might not bother most of the time because it's awkward - but it was and is a target. I've been kicked on the inside of the thigh, and it wasn't fun - it would be rather much less fun with a pointy riding soleret on the other guys foot, or even just a boot.