Frostmarrow
First Post
So, pardon a stupid question, can you swim in it? I don't suggest that you can swim across the English Channel but can you, say, swim back to the dingy you just fell off of?
Plate Armor - It isn't really that heavy!
- Thread starter Anabstercorian
- Start date
Imperialus
Explorer
no. Just because the plate is ballanced well over your body doesn't change the fact that it still weighs somewhere in the neighborhood of 65 lbs*. You arn't bouyant if you wear a suit of plate.
*65 lbs is the weight of a suit of Maximilian armour that is sitting in the Wallace collection right now.
*65 lbs is the weight of a suit of Maximilian armour that is sitting in the Wallace collection right now.
Kriegspiel
First Post
Originally posted by Psionicist:
He just never spent a Feat on "Armor Proficiency (Heavy)"
He just never spent a Feat on "Armor Proficiency (Heavy)"
SableWyvern
Hero
I make no claims of expert knowledge, so I'm happy to be corrected here, but my understanding is that not only would a knight not sleep in his armour, they normally travelled with only a minimum on, and would put the rest on only just before battle was joined.
On a similar tangent, war horses were normally not ridden en-route either.
On a similar tangent, war horses were normally not ridden en-route either.
Darklone
Registered User
Platemails
Well ... some experiences while fighting, riding, climbing and other stuff in platemail with padded, wooden and steel weapons.
- Agreed with all those guys who talked about a platemail being lighter and more comfortable than a chainmail. For standard movements. Jumping, rolling, diving and cartwheeling... Well, it's possible. But I still prefer my good old leather armour for it.
- Don't think platemail will slow your fighting down. It does but not remarkably. Don't think that guy with a bastard sword can't do some serious fencing against your rapier and beat you in matters of speed. (AND reach)
- Don't believe fairytales about lying on your back like a beetle. I've seen more flickups from guys in full platemail and heavy chain than I have fingers left.
- Platemail, no matter how well it fits you, is awfully if you have to walk or climb. You can fight nearly without encumbrance. Our heavy troopers were the first to bash someone but not if they had to walk a mile to get there.
Sleeping in mail ... yeah some idiots did it. Took them several days to recover!
- about the swimming... Some friends actually tried it (in a 2m deep pool with several others inside. DON'T TRY THIS, it was hard enough to get him out of it again and clean the plate). I think the swimming rules in D&D are quite fine. DON'T DO IT! He managed to stay on the surface for about 4 seconds. Movement beyong that: no. And he was fighting hard and a very capable swimmer.
Well ... some experiences while fighting, riding, climbing and other stuff in platemail with padded, wooden and steel weapons.
- Agreed with all those guys who talked about a platemail being lighter and more comfortable than a chainmail. For standard movements. Jumping, rolling, diving and cartwheeling... Well, it's possible. But I still prefer my good old leather armour for it.
- Don't think platemail will slow your fighting down. It does but not remarkably. Don't think that guy with a bastard sword can't do some serious fencing against your rapier and beat you in matters of speed. (AND reach)
- Don't believe fairytales about lying on your back like a beetle. I've seen more flickups from guys in full platemail and heavy chain than I have fingers left.
- Platemail, no matter how well it fits you, is awfully if you have to walk or climb. You can fight nearly without encumbrance. Our heavy troopers were the first to bash someone but not if they had to walk a mile to get there.
Sleeping in mail ... yeah some idiots did it. Took them several days to recover!- about the swimming... Some friends actually tried it (in a 2m deep pool with several others inside. DON'T TRY THIS, it was hard enough to get him out of it again and clean the plate). I think the swimming rules in D&D are quite fine. DON'T DO IT! He managed to stay on the surface for about 4 seconds. Movement beyong that: no. And he was fighting hard and a very capable swimmer.
sword-dancer
Explorer
Imperialus
Explorer
very true Wyvern. In fact a well equiped knight with a significant amount of money invested in warfare would typically have a small baggage train following him around consisting of no less than 4 horses. There was his warhorse naturally which was actually the single most expencive peice of equipment he owned, oftentimes costing twice as much as his armour depending on the stock it was bred from, a regular rideing horse for himeself, a rideing horse for his squire and a pack horse oftentimes hauling a cart containing his armour, his squires armour, his barding, most his weapons includeing spares, some form of shelter, food, and some equipment to make minor repairs. Knights were expected to be largely self sufficant. If traveling as part of a large force they could sometimes rely on smiths in the employ of their lord to help them out with a peice of fautly or damaged equipment but for the most part they were expected to take care of themselves. Part of this was simply because they knew their own armour better than anyone else, and since it was very rare for two suits to be identical, and many armies had a myeriad of differet styles a blacksmith who is experianced in dealing with Gothic armour in a German army could well do some damage to a suit of Millanise armour a nobelman had gotten imported from Italy.
Since the strength comment was broached again I figure I'll comment on it. It is important to realize that a knight typically was not that big or strong even when compared to his contempories. In fact the pesant levies were oftentimes bigger and stronger simply because they had grown up working on farms doing heavy manual labour. I'm not saying that knights were out of shape or weaklings but the idea of an olympic weightlifter encased in steel is a myth. As a matter of fact, Henry the VIII was known far and wide as a gient, and he was 6'3" and weighed about 190 lbs, no gient by today's standards that's for sure.
This is because of the weapons used. There is no way, no matter how strong you are that you are going to punch through a 18 gauge brestplate or pauldon with a sword. In fact you are more likely to chip or shatter your blade if you hit with sufficant force. Remember most european blades were made from a very high carbon steel, which allowed for a fantastic edge, even better than moderen stainless steel but were very brittle. When two knights started beating on each other they would usually try and use the tip of their blade to find an opening in the armour and stab through it. That doesn't require so much strength as it does dextarity and experiance. It takes a lot of practice to learn how to wear armour well, and different suits need to be worn in different ways. I remember the first few times I did I was in pain by the end of the day. I expect your discomfort was caused more by inexeperiance than any physical shortcomeings.
You should check out that first site that Aaron posted and explore around the whole site. I've used it before and it has some facinateing tidbits on the fighting styles used by european soldiers.
Since the strength comment was broached again I figure I'll comment on it. It is important to realize that a knight typically was not that big or strong even when compared to his contempories. In fact the pesant levies were oftentimes bigger and stronger simply because they had grown up working on farms doing heavy manual labour. I'm not saying that knights were out of shape or weaklings but the idea of an olympic weightlifter encased in steel is a myth. As a matter of fact, Henry the VIII was known far and wide as a gient, and he was 6'3" and weighed about 190 lbs, no gient by today's standards that's for sure.
This is because of the weapons used. There is no way, no matter how strong you are that you are going to punch through a 18 gauge brestplate or pauldon with a sword. In fact you are more likely to chip or shatter your blade if you hit with sufficant force. Remember most european blades were made from a very high carbon steel, which allowed for a fantastic edge, even better than moderen stainless steel but were very brittle. When two knights started beating on each other they would usually try and use the tip of their blade to find an opening in the armour and stab through it. That doesn't require so much strength as it does dextarity and experiance. It takes a lot of practice to learn how to wear armour well, and different suits need to be worn in different ways. I remember the first few times I did I was in pain by the end of the day. I expect your discomfort was caused more by inexeperiance than any physical shortcomeings.
You should check out that first site that Aaron posted and explore around the whole site. I've used it before and it has some facinateing tidbits on the fighting styles used by european soldiers.
Last edited:
sword-dancer
Explorer
Tonguez said:
The most people wearing full plate have begun training of arms at children 7 years IIRC
It was worn by nobility and knights. IMCs Full Plte is a sign of Knighthood and/or nobility your average soldier couldn´t be outfitted with it.
No in Germany Rhineland there were many weaponsmiths who crafted them "en masse" the average knight/junker etc couldn`t afford a special tailored armor.
The swiis took the armor of the austrian/burgundian knights to arm themselves, leaving legprotedtion and mybe armprotection away
S'mon said:
A sheaf arrow will bounce off platemail, but a medieval longbow (ca 100lb draw weight, not your typical modern 35 lb draw weight graphite bow) or heavy x-bow firing an arrow with an armour-piercing head will easily penetrate plate at short range. And I've seen this demonstrated on TV also.
The Plate armour was developed and crafted to withstand the Longbow,
In a battle 700 full ar,oured knight with full armoured horses(plate) attack english longbowmen, with no or only a few losses.
A tshort range it may go through in an perfect angle.
Heavy x_bow no chance baby, but the heavy crossbow wasn´t a battlefield weapon, that was the light crossbow
Imperialus
Explorer
I'll back you up on your second point Sword Dancer. Later suits of plate armour, and even later cavelier brestplates and the like had what was known as proof marks on them. Where a crossbow, or later on a pistol was shot at the suit from a pre decided distance to prove that the suit was proof against whatever weapon was en vouge at the time. There were some Italian armourers in the heavally industrialized Paple states who would offer so called "seige armour" which was proof against muskets. Of course the brestplate was usually somewhere in the neighborhood of 12 gauge steel and the suits often weighed as much as 80 lbs. Cirtanly wouldn't be my first choice when it came to protection, that's for sure.
I hate to keep sending you to Valetine Armouries but I know the site like the back of my hand so here is another link. http://www.varmouries.com/eng_03.html . This is an english civil war style (17th century), brestplate. You can see the proof mark quite clearly on it.
I hate to keep sending you to Valetine Armouries but I know the site like the back of my hand so here is another link. http://www.varmouries.com/eng_03.html . This is an english civil war style (17th century), brestplate. You can see the proof mark quite clearly on it.
sword-dancer
Explorer
Imperialus
Thanks for remembering of the tests.
This siege armour was AFAIK(which is very little) not battle armour but to secure the goldchicks from heavy crossbows, Hakenbüchsen(Arquebute?) and such things.
BTW haow much is 80 ibs(full armourß) in kilo
Thanks for remembering of the tests.
This siege armour was AFAIK(which is very little) not battle armour but to secure the goldchicks from heavy crossbows, Hakenbüchsen(Arquebute?) and such things.
BTW haow much is 80 ibs(full armourß) in kilo
Similar Threads
