07-06-2006, 03:33 PM | #41 |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Ok, while we are at it. I'm building an alternate world where copper and tin are rather common but iron is not (obviously this world operates under somewhat different laws of physics than ours... :) ) Could you make chain mail (and I know some people don't like that term, but hey...) from bronze? Scale mail? Lamellar? Longswords?
__________________
“When you arise in the morning think of what a privilege it is to be alive, to think, to enjoy, to love ...” Marcus Aurelius |
07-06-2006, 05:11 PM | #42 |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Charlotte, North Caroline, United States of America, Earth?
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
I think so. Quality copper alloys have good machine properties. Anyway, here's some stuff I was doing, for snits and giggles on the bus today, four different gear set-ups.
All of these Setups assume a ST 11, HT 11 man. I guess HT 11 doesn't matter, though. Anyway, here we go: A. Pot Helm, Cloth gambeson(Torso, Arms and groin), leather leggings and boots. Total weight: 18lbs B. Pot Helm, Hard Leather jack(Torso, Groin and Arms), Leather leggings, and boots. Total weight: 22lbs, 24 with hard leather leggings, rather than just leather. C. Mail Hauberk(Torso, Groin), Cloth or Hard Leather Sleeves, Pothelm and boots. 37lbs(32 if you reduce the armor weights to a more realistic level). D. Mail Suit(Arms, Torso, Groin, Legs), Pothelm and coif, boots. Total weight 57lbs(48) With an Axe or spear and large knife, we have 5lbs of weapons to add to this. A shield will range from 2-50(50 for an iron, large shield). Man A, has a move of 5 without shield, 4 with a shield Man B, has a move of 4, with or without a shield. A large shield would make him move 3. Man C, has a move of 4, 3 with a meduim or large shield.* Man D, has a move of 3, with or without a shield. ** *using the more accurate weights, C has a move of 4 with anything other than a large shield. **D has a move of 4 without shield when using accurate weights for mail armor. These gear set-ups strike me as reasonable. The weapons arrayed against such a man would be: Axe: 1d+3 cut Small Mace: 1d+3 cr Sword 1d+2 cut, 1d+1 imp Knife 1d-1 cut, 1d-1 imp Spear 1d+1 imp, 1d+2 imp in two hands. Self bow 1d imp Composite Bow 1d+2 Crossbow 1d+3 or 2d(ST 13, takes 6 seconds to cock) Thrown axe 1d+3 cut Thrown Spear 1d+2 Sling 1d+1 As you can see, average damage appears to be in the 5-6 range for melee weapons, and 4 with most missile weapons. Mail offers excellent protection to everything but maces. It's of note that Persian, Byzantine and Muslim cavalry, facing heavy cavalry would often use large, powerful maces. Armoured hungarian troops even refused to fight Byzantine cavalry armed with maces on atleast one occassion. A man seeking a little more protection would likely wear a heavier cloth gambeson under his mail hauberk. In the byzantine empire, a coat of plates(Dan, am I unreasonable in suggesting a similar profile to Lorica Segmentata?) would be worn over the torso. Khazars, Persians(or Khurasan), or Armenian cavalry also could be reasonably encountered with such armor. By the later 11th century, I think great helms may have been coming into style. Byzantine, Khazars and others who made use of barding, probably favored partial scale or mail barding. In the case of byzantines, there were contemporary Arab accounts reporting the byzantines rode "horses with no legs", implying large heavy mail/scale skirts. These cavalry men would be unable to gallop, and instead simply walked into their enemies, using their horse's weight and their hand weapons to drive infantry before them. |
07-06-2006, 05:19 PM | #43 | |
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Quote:
Last edited by DanHoward; 07-06-2006 at 05:28 PM. |
|
07-06-2006, 05:30 PM | #44 | |
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Quote:
|
|
07-06-2006, 05:36 PM | #45 | |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Stuttgart, Germany
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Quote:
Dan Howard will probably comment on the mail thing, so I'll just refer you to some of his articles: http://www.sjgames.com/pyramid/login...e.html?id=2565 http://www.sjgames.com/pyramid/login...e.html?id=2418 The articles are all for 3e, so not that relevant. According to Dan, Bronze should be 20% heavier for equal protection, and only cost 80% of equivalent mail/lamellar prices. (Don't multiply the weight of the padded cloth which should be assumed to be worn under the Mail and part of the weight of such.) Even though Dan has numbers for other realistic armor prices which are 2x to 3x Basic prices, I would actually disagree that the Bronze Mail/Lamellar should be less expensive to produce than iron/steel, especially considering how it seems to be more difficult to do bronze wire, unfortunately, since I don't have the data to back up my opinion, that's all it is. |
|
07-06-2006, 05:38 PM | #46 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Edmond, OK
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Quote:
|
|
07-06-2006, 05:50 PM | #47 | |
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Quote:
|
|
07-06-2006, 05:55 PM | #48 | |
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Quote:
|
|
07-06-2006, 06:23 PM | #49 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Quote:
__________________
Rupert Boleyn "A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history." |
|
07-06-2006, 06:42 PM | #50 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Edmond, OK
|
Re: Armoury of Antiquity: Questions regarding archaic arms and armor
Quote:
|
|
Tags |
cabaret chicks on ice, low-tech |
|
|