Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="scott2978" data-source="post: 6167426" data-attributes="member: 6667922">RrOne of the problems I always have with armor and weapons in D&D is my knowledge of real medieval armor and weapons. Banded armor is not real. Sure, there have been armors that consisted of mainly horizontal plates (roman lorica segmenta) but there is no historical evidence of banded mail. Splinted armor was real, consisting of vertical strips of iron or steel riveted to a leather backing, but it was normally only used for arm and leg armor. It was a transitional period armor that bridged the gap between mail and plate during the 12th - 14th century. Everyone has heard of chainmail (known simply as "mail" in medieval times) which was interlocked rings of iron that were riveted closed (with either wedges or pins depending on the time period) interlocked with alternating rows of solid rings punched from sheets. But this mail armor never "went away" or got fully replaced by some newer armor. When the coat of plates began to be worn in the 11th century, it was worn over the existing mail hauberk. A coat of plates is a bunch of overlapping iron or steel plates riveted to a leather or fabric shell that initially covered only the chest, but evolved into an armor that covered the body from neck to thigh with overlapping plates of varying size and shape. The coat of plates evolved to include a breastplate instead of multiple chest plates, but all these were worn on top of a mail hauberk. Even the fantastic harnesses of the early renaissance were worn with patches of mail sewn to a fabric arming coat worn under the plate armor so as to provide protection for the vulnerable joints. The breastplate as a category of armor is very misleading. Many different types of armor had a breastplate as one of the pieces. Late medieval coats of plates, like the statue of St.George in the Prague cathedral had them, up until the early renaissance when the full plate harness that people typically think of today when you say "knight in shining armor" became possible. Then it was normally worn together with another plate covering the back (yes, a breastplate only covers the front!). Brigandine was a late medieval development and was essentially a coat of plates using many small overlapping steel plates on the inside, riveted to a leather or fabric outer covering on the outside. The main difference being the size of the plates, the arrangement of the rivets holding them on (usually row upon row of small groups of 3 rivets for each plate) and the more current fashion-oriented style of the fit compared to the older coat of plates. I never understood "half plate" as an armor type either. Nobody ever went to battle intentionally wearing only half of their harness. A full plate harness consists of hundreds of interlocking, overlapping, articulated plates. All of which depend on the fit of the others. Wearing half of a plate harness is impractical. The closest thing to this might be the transitional late medieval 14th century harness consisting of a covered breastplate and full plate arms and legs. While we're discussing that, the full plate legs developed rather early, and were the first part of the body to enjoy full plate armor. Plate arms developed more slowly, but were common long before the breastplate. There is much much more to consider about armor, not the least of which is the rather ridiculous "maximum dexterity bonus" that varies greatly from one type of armor to another, even within the general types of light medium and heavy. Maybe some day I'll make a full topic on the forums. Cheers,Scott</blockquote>

Verification