Wow man. Do you teach High School History in California!? You sound like my
old teacher! (He was a cool guy, so dont take it the wrong way)
-----Original Message-----
From: Roop Dirump <
roop@...>
To:
eqbards@onelist.com <
eqbards@onelist.com>
Date: Monday, May 17, 1999 10:19 PM
Subject: Re: [eqbards] Platemail vs Banded vs Leather
>From: "Roop Dirump" <roop@...>
>
>Sorry if I babble here, but I agree totally with the post. Different armor
>types should offer different forms of protection. And historically, new
>armors and weapons were created in an almost medieval arms race, one type
>designed to combat another. Like paper scissors stone. Have heathens with
>swords? Invent some plate armor. Bows killing you're troops? Invent
tower
>shields. All that medieval stuff came about over time, like the stealth
>bomber in reaction to radar technology. No radar, no stealth bomber.
>
>Actually, did you know that the proliferation of blunt weapons came about
as
>a way to combat knights in plate? Imagine a big bell vibrating, and you
get
>the picture. Various blunt weapons were invented with the design and
>purpose of "crushing" men in plate. When plate armor wasn't around, there
>was no need for such heavy and clumsy weapons (though being the first
weapon
>in existance, were around), for a sword was much more efficient and deadly.
>
>Also, the invention of the crossbow came about as another anti-knight
>weapon. There was only one reason anyone needed a bow-type weapon with
such
>ridiculous velocity: to pierce plate. A knight would train his whole life,
>and be taken down by a fellow who had trained with his crossbow for a week.
>Crossbowmen were often despised for this reason, and for the fact they
would
>hide in windows and shadows, never to fight with chivalry as knight's were
>accustomed. The crossbow, unlike the bow, ended up being a very easy
weapon
>to master... an added bonus. (The Mongols, though not using crossbows,
>rained arrows down on knights from above, with enough velocity to pierce
>plate as well.)
>
>Most game systems wouldn't use a system based on this: Plated warriors
>nearly invulnerable unless you hid and shot at them with a crossbow, or
took
>them on with a mace. A mace wielder then ineffective against a faster
>fellow with a stilleto (round one: guy with a heavy mace lying dead). A
>rock-scissors-paper type game would be very interesting, though EQ ain't
it.
>Real medieval weapons were designed to kill an opponent, if properly
>wielded, in one shot (at least as often as possible, though only
>dismembering or incapacitating sufficed as a kill). And imagine mastering
>your crossbow at level 4, hmm. Strict medieval realism might never be in a
>game, though it would be interesting.
>
>But I enjoy EQ's system, don't get me wrong, heheh.
>
>Roop
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Kyle <ksibbald@...>
>To: eqbards@onelist.com <eqbards@onelist.com>
>Date: Monday, May 17, 1999 8:14 PM
>Subject: Re: [eqbards] Platemail vs Banded vs Leather
>
>
>>From: "Kyle" <ksibbald@...>
>>
>> Most gaming systems factor in some real life concepts about what type of
>>damage armor can and cannot protect against. Assuming that there are three
>>types of damage (slash, pierce, and blunt) various armors protect various
>>ways. From what I've seen and heard, most of these are factored in here.
>>
>> Cloth armor isn't really gonna do much since it is easy to puncture, easy
>>to cut through, and offers very little padding to slow the impact of
>>something big and round.
>>
>> Patchwork usually provides a bit more protection against slash and blunt
>>since it is slightly thicker than cloth. Piercing it may not improve
>>against.
>>
>> The various leathers (rawhide and normal) are better against piercing and
>>much better against slashing because of the toughness of it. Some are
often
>>padded decently so it takes the edge off of blunt damage.
>>
>> Studded leather would most likely improve upon slashing since the metal
>>studs would help stop the blade but wouldn't do much for piercing since
the
>>studs cover such a small area. Blunt might actually hurt more if it hits
>one
>>of the studs and drives it into your chest. =)
>>
>> Reinforced is the same thing but now there is more surface area to stop
>>piercing.
>>
>> Ring mail works much better against slash since you naw have a shell of
>>metal around you. Blunt is slightly better since the rings are just linked
>>and allows for force transferrence over a wider area. Not great though
>>seeing as how much it gives into you. Piercing? Well, all those rings with
>>the big holes in them doesn't stop much of a point. You'd basically be
>>reduced to whatever padding is underneath.
>>
>> Chain is the same as ring but usually has tigher links making it a bit
>more
>>difficult to slip a piercer in.
>>
>> Banded, similar to splint and scale in other game systems, improves
>against
>>piercers quite a bit now that most of those holes are filled up. Still
some
>>between the plates though. Slashing prolly isn't much better than chain
but
>>blunt is probably better now that you have plates of metal that won't give
>>as easily.
>>
>> Plate, of course, is usually considered the best. It offers very good
>>protection against slashers since it is often hard to cut metal. Blunt is
>>really good since you have that rigitity of a real big piece of metal.
>>Piercing is better since there are relatively few holes to sneak through
>>unless you want to try and force the point of a dagger or rapier through a
>>quarter inch of steel.
>>
>> Hope this helps.
>>
>> Good Journey,
>>
>> Sineras Silverlyre (Cazic-Thule)
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: David Rubino [mailto:tigger@...]
>>Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 1:16 PM
>>To: eqbards@onelist.com
>>Subject: [eqbards] Platemail vs Banded vs Leather
>>
>>
>>From: David Rubino <tigger@...>
>>
>>
>> Hello all . . .
>>
>> I completed my set of bronze armor, and now I have a few questions about
>>it if anyone can help.
>>
>> AC continues to be a mystery. It seems to be no more than an overall
armor
>>rating, which increases with level and with type of armor, and exists only
>>so that I can compare AC values with jealous people who still have
>>patchwork. Does AC really have a meaning? If so, what does the total AC
>>value mean? What does the AC value of a single piece of armor mean?
>>
>> Now I know from experience that as soon as I went to full banded, my
>>ability to take damage skyrocketed. All of the sudden things which used to
>>destroy me just kept missing me or hitting me for 1 damage. This seems to
>>suggest it has nothing to do with AC value, and everything to do with
armor
>>type. The fact that the banded "only" increased my AC by about 25 from
>>patchwork was irrelevant.
>>
>> Now my bronze "only" increased my AC by about 15, a small amount compared
>>to my overall AC, but again my ability to take damage jumped
significantly.
>>I can again solo everything that is blue.
>>
>> I read somewhere that each different type of armor (Leather, Chain, Plate
>>and its equivalents) can absorb more and different types of damage as the
>>armor gets better. This seems to be true, and seems to make the AC value
>>worthless . . .
>>
>> Besides, full bronze looks really cool.
>>
>> Please comment . . .
>>
>>-Musil
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>Looking to expand your world?
>>http://www.onelist.com
>>ONElist has over 145,000 email communities to choose from!
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>ONElist: the best source for group communications.
>>http://www.onelist.com
>>Join a new list today!
>>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Got an opinion?
>http://www.onelist.com
>Make it count! Sign up for the ONElist Weekly Survey now.