But a Falchion isn't . . .

[saffonax]

So, creating first character (Elf Ranger) and find listed in the weapon skills options that slightly unusual medieval one handed sword that gets wider toward the 'business end', with a blade on one edge 'like a machete'.

But when I equip it the designers have made it a two handed sword !

Er, no, it's a one hand blade and for a reason, it's not really designed well for parrying so best to have a shield.

[DasaKamov]

At this point I'll just say "let's just agree to respectfully disagree", but I'll make one more contribution to this conversation and point out that, in pretty much every way aside from "magic", D&D (and other RPGs) are very much grounded in reality and common sense.

For example, aside from magic, everyone follows the laws of physics. Gravity works. You cannot create or destroy matter. People to eat, drink and sleep in order to survive. People (and monster-people) form social groups and communities with their own traditions and laws. Those communities sometimes war with other communities. Those communities sometimes live in peace and prosperity with other communities. People live, people die. People love, people hate. All that exists identically to the real world.

When the big things make sense and are believable, it makes it much easier to accept that sometimes falchions are two-handed weapons, even if they're designed to be paired with shields in our world. ;)

[InEffect]

And star knives exist to stab oneself in the arm I guess? And biker bear provides armor because why? It's not based in psysics, anatomy or logic at all.

[InEffect]

That I actually have no problems with.

[Tuidjy]

The Egyptian crossed leather gear in the murals may be functionally similar to the Japanese sarashi. It has some use as protection, but is mostly used to attenuate the effects of injury, i.e. keep you together and prevent you from bleeding out. The Japanese wore it under armor, like the Europeans wore padding. How and why the Egyptians used it, I'm not sure. I doubt anyone is sure.

The Egyptian armor in the video is leather scale armor, aesthetically different, but functionally similar to Japanese nerigawa gusoku, which I mentioned earlier. Variations were also used by Steppe horse warriors all over Asia and Eastern Europe. It's real, and quite common historically.

Neither has anything to do with the AC 2 leather armor from AD&D - the supple, stealthy, nonrestrictive one. But the guy who was pushing it has removed his posts, so I guess he has learned better, and I see no need to harp about it anymore.

Origineel geplaatst door Gorwe:

Let's just have Witch Elves running around!

https://warhammerfantasy.fandom.com/wiki/Witch_Elves

Origineel geplaatst door InEffect:

That I actually have no problems with.

That helmet seem to be designed to provide leverage for either controlling the user or for breaking her neck. It may do it without the need for an enemy to bother. The inertia momentum of that atrocity must be significant.

Ceremonial attire is a real thing. It was even sometimes worn in battle, but usually it was because:
- the user wasn't meant to engage the enemy, but issue signals, and needed to be recognizable
- the ceremonial parts were designed to be easily removable - even to fall off at the lightest blow
- the one wearing the ceremonial gear was caught with his metaphorical (or literal) pants down

[InEffect]

I mean they are not human, don't behave human and evidently are not exactly concerned with their own safety either, so it's fine to me.
"Witch Elves give no thought to their own defence, and seek only to hack foes apart in a blood-drenched orgy of slaughter." makes sense to me. At least they acknowledge thing does nothing to protect them

[Shazbot!]

Origineel geplaatst door InEffect:

leather is not and was not armor

No idea what are you smoking, but try cutting bare flesh and then try cutting hardened leather, it's not, and never was about completely preventing damage from hits, but to mitigate smaller glancing blows/scratches/whatever which result in pain(lol who cares, we operate only in hitpoints amirite), loss of concentration and then death. Also by your logic metal armor shoudln't give "armor" at all, because getting hit by big iron stick (mace/warhammer/morning star) is just as bad even when wearing plate armor.

[InEffect]

Origineel geplaatst door Shazbot!:

No idea what are you smoking, but try cutting bare flesh and then try cutting hardened leather, it's not, and never was about completely preventing damage from hits, but to mitigate smaller glancing blows/scratches/whatever which result in pain(lol who cares, we operate only in hitpoints amirite), loss of concentration and then death.

leather hard enough to resist sword cuts would be heavy AF. Biker gear is actually worse than cloth in terms of cuts. Fabric at least can bunch up and catch the blade. Leather? Not a chance.

Origineel geplaatst door Shazbot!:

Also by your logic metal armor shoudln't give "armor" at all, because getting hit by big iron stick (mace/warhammer/morning star) is just as bad even when wearing plate armor.

That's not how plate works. It's not skin-tight. There is a good chance the dent won't even reach the body. And even if it does a few bruises and cracked bones sure beats taking full impact with your body. Plate being vulnerable to blunt force is just another myth. I mean sure blunt impact will be much more noticeable than someone trying to cut you, but it won't turn your armor into pumpkin. Plate IS the best armor against everything. That's why it was used and paid obscene amounts of money for. It's a medieval equivalent of a personal tank.

[Tuidjy]

Guy, stop talking about soft tanned leather and hard boiled leather in the same breath.

They are completely different.

TANNED LEATHER has multiple functions in armor - to provide structural integrity as straps which hold the assembly together, as backing on which to attach metal bars or rings (not studs) or as covering which either protects the metal from the elements, or conceals that the user is armored.

What soft leather does not do is provide significant protection on its own. You know AD&D AC 1 padded armor? That's sort of what soft leather is - minimal protection that may make a pointy stick slide off, or prevent scrapping and tearing from falling off your horse. Frankly, the 1 AC is pushing it, but it's low enough. If it were up to me, it would be just clothing.

BOILED LEATHER is a poor man's steel plate. It is weaker, bulkier, heavier by protection offered, etc. It is harder to maintain, harder to modify, harder to combine in a strong assembly without compromising its integrity.

What it has going for it is that it is a lot easier to come by. Crucible steel is better, but the crucible steel you do not have protects you less than the hardened leather that you do have. Hard leather scale armor was very popular among nomads who had plenty of hides, few forges and no crucible furnaces. Or among Japanese ashigaru, as their masters did not have enough quality metal. Leather scale mail is absolutely historical. Breastplates also existed, but they're less widespread.

Neither of the above matches the AD&D AC 2 armor type. As for real life studded leather, i.e. biker gear, it perfectly matches the description of the AC 3 studded leather armor, but offers no protection to speak of, and definitely none beyond what simple leather clothing offers.

TLDR: Soft (tanned) leather and studded leather - clothing that offers next to no protection. Hard (boiled) leather - real, but a poor substitute for steel plates or scales.

[thorsson64]

Enjoy is hardly the name for it.

[Shazbot!]

Origineel geplaatst door InEffect:

leather hard enough to resist sword cuts would be heavy AF.

Straight up swort cuts? Nope. Scratches and other minor injuries? Yes. Greasing leather might be also good idea, have fun cutting it.

Origineel geplaatst door InEffect:

Plate being vulnerable to blunt force is just another myth.

Yeah nope, not even modern helmets are good enough to withstand full force blow from any heavy blunt weapon, speaking from experience btw.

[saffonax]

Origineel geplaatst door DasaKamov:

"But you can't claim that the originators...researched medieval weapons and armour."
Great, because no one's trying to make that claim.

Read the thread; somebody did !

This started out as just and aside by me of 'how come a falchion is a two handed weapon rather than one handed ?'
Then someone claimed the writers had research medieval weapons and armour
Now we have over 40 comments . . .
And the person who made that claim has deleted his comment

[InEffect]

Origineel geplaatst door Shazbot!:

Straight up swort cuts? Nope. Scratches and other minor injuries? Yes. Greasing leather might be also good idea, have fun cutting it.

'Death by a thousand cuts' is not really a thing in historical combat. With bad edge alignment just medieval clothing(that was thicker and multi-layered usually) will likely be good enough. And best protection greased leather would give is a sudden arousal distracting your enemies, if that's their jam.

Origineel geplaatst door Shazbot!:

Yeah nope, not even modern helmets are good enough to withstand full force blow from any heavy blunt weapon, speaking from experience btw.

that's because we have a spine. That's the thing that gives, not the helmet. Also we are talking pate armor, so not just the helmets. Helmet needs to be robust enough to protect against forces that wouldn't break your spine or knock you out cold. That's it. It's the same as saying body armor is pointless cause you could just get shot in the head. And if you are arguing that some sort of polearm with a hammer is better than a sword on a battlefield with a lot of armor involved then duh. There is a reason swords were mainly used as a sidearm and civilian weapons. They are easy to carry. That's it.

[Shazbot!]

Origineel geplaatst door InEffect:

'Death by a thousand cuts' is not really a thing in historical combat.

By thousand cuts? Nope. By one relatively small cut that made a soldier drop his weapon(pain is a thing btw)? By blood loss from relatively small cuts? Hell yes. It's pretty easy to get minor injuries in chatic mess of a battlefield, you know. Nice arguments though, you successfully strawmanned 2 posts in a row.

Origineel geplaatst door InEffect:

that's because we have a spine.

Yeah no, even if we discard helmets, sufficiently heavy blows can dislocate joints and damage bones (that's pretty painful btw).

Origineel geplaatst door InEffect:

body armor

why yes i love getting my ribs fractured how could you tell

[InEffect]

Pain is not really a thing when overflowing with adrenaline. Stopping power of a weapon is important for that reason. The injury has to be debilitating enough or there is a good chance it will be ignored in the moment. And it's not a debate of leather vs fighting naked. It's leather vs proper armor. And leather sucks at being armor. Even thick and heavy leather sucks because it's heavier and less protective than metal. And the dislocated joint is very much preferable to said joint being turned into a pulp.

There is a reason why 'light armor' was used by poor and 'heavy armor' by rich. It's because it's better by all accounts. What you do is trying to find any reason why cheap car is better than a high-end one other than the fact it's cheap.

[Shazbot!]

Origineel geplaatst door InEffect:

Pain is not really a thing when overflowing with adrenaline.

Can't be on adrenaline 24/7, plus withdrawal will kill you.

Origineel geplaatst door InEffect:

And it's not a debate of leather vs fighting naked. It's leather vs proper armor.

Origineel geplaatst door InEffect:

leather is not and was not armor

Origineel geplaatst door InEffect:

And leather sucks at being armor.

Come the fuck on.
Anyways, i'm here not to argue about actual usefulness of armor, but to say that AC system is mildly shit, because it's all or nothing with no inbetween. Like, even if leather armor won't protect you from longsword hits, it will surely protect from dog/wolf bite if he won't knock you down and go for the throat.

Origineel geplaatst door InEffect:

There is a reason why 'light armor' was used by poor and 'heavy armor' by rich.

Because rich didn't actually fight? There is literally nothing that would help you if some very angry peasant "overflowing with adrenaline" with some shitty iron knife went for you throat.