Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="JohnSnow" data-source="post: 8986249" data-attributes="member: 32164">That's an interesting question. I don't have a ton of experience fighting in heavy armor, but I've fought against people wearing it.&nbsp;Armor actually does a pretty good job of warding off most injuries, so D&amp;D's better armor means a hit is pretty close to a miss is actually surprisingly &quot;realistic,&quot; if not always easy to narrate. I find this is one of the things I learned doing historical combat that made me actually appreciate D&amp;D combat's &quot;fuzzy logic.&quot;Heavy plate armor really is a lot like being a tank - very little is going through it on a single shot, so your best bet at damaging someone wearing it is to aim for the gaps. Which means that with that big spadone, you're taking big swings with it until you can knock your opponent down or catch a joint - usually with a thrust. Mail's not as sturdy, but still holds up pretty well to cuts, as long as you're wearing any kind of padding underneath. Most damage would end up being, again, slipping through gaps in the armor, rather than cutting through or puncturing the armor itself, although the latter is much more doable than the former.But the heavier armor you wear, the faster your stamina dwindles in combat. This is true regardless of &quot;stats&quot; - it's just a matter of degree. A heavily armored combatant tends not to dodge as much (as there's honestly no need), but combat slowly tires them out anyway.As far as &quot;smaller &amp; thinner,&quot; one of the deadliest weapons against a suit of armor is a small sturdy dagger, like a rondel - but only once you get in close. In open combat, plate armor means finding yourself a poleaxe or something similar....or getting very creative with a sword.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="JohnSnow, post: 8986249, member: 32164"] That's an interesting question. I don't have a ton of experience fighting in heavy armor, but I've fought [I]against[/I] people wearing it. Armor actually does a pretty good job of warding off most injuries, so D&D's better armor means a hit is pretty close to a miss is actually surprisingly "realistic," if not always easy to narrate. I find this is one of the things I learned doing historical combat that made me actually appreciate D&D combat's "fuzzy logic." Heavy plate armor really is a lot like being a tank - very little is going through it on a single shot, so your best bet at damaging someone wearing it is to aim for the gaps. Which means that with that big spadone, you're taking big swings with it until you can knock your opponent down or catch a joint - usually with a thrust. Mail's not as sturdy, but still holds up pretty well to cuts, as long as you're wearing any kind of padding underneath. Most damage would end up being, again, slipping through gaps in the armor, rather than cutting through or puncturing the armor itself, although the latter is much more doable than the former. But the heavier armor you wear, the faster your stamina dwindles in combat. This is true regardless of "stats" - it's just a matter of degree. A heavily armored combatant tends not to dodge as much (as there's honestly no need), but combat slowly tires them out anyway. As far as "smaller & thinner," one of the deadliest weapons against a suit of armor is a small sturdy dagger, like a rondel - but only once you get in close. In open combat, plate armor means finding yourself a poleaxe or something similar....or getting very creative with a sword. [/QUOTE]

Verification