Past versions of the discussion can be found here: http://www.dagorhir.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=4&t=000304
http://www.dagorhir.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=4&t=000516
http://www.dagorhir.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=4&t=000753
http://www.dagorhir.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=7&t=002539

I like this topic and i look forward to arguring it again.

My stance:
i think we should give some advantage to metal armour wearers, this can easily be accomplished with putting a slight limitation on leather armour. i think we should allow single handed greens to pass through leather armour.
in additon i argued in one of the previous topics that perhaps we could add swimming capability to those wearing leather armour, to make the pill easier to swallow and to add a bit of realism and add some interesting new playability twists.

the problem ive run in to before is how one defines leather armor and where the line is draw with composite armours like a combo of maille and leather.

Disclousure: i wear leather cuirasse, tassets, Helmet and bracers.

Frothgar

PS. keep it civil.

--------------------

--------------------

I always belived that Dagorhir was about K.I.S.S. and it would suddenly become far more complecated. A whole new rule sysstem would have to be made up on what is considered leather and what is not. You will have people arguing that it should only be plate, and others sayng that you should also allow metel rings, or metel plates on leather. In the end I don't know if it would really be a good idea.

K.I.S.S. it's a wonderful thing.

--------------------

Knight Errant Mirelle

I don’t want to come to Dagorhir to re-live another man’s history, I’ve come to write my own. - Sir Magnus of Narnia

i think that we can adapt though. it would jusr require leather armoured fighters to be conscious of green hits and the spear and other green users know that they can gank somone in leather more easily.

the issue of composite armour and its definition remaisn the biggest problem in my eye.

Frothgar

--------------------

in readign it back that last comment looked dismissive. i did not intend it that way. maintaining simplicity in the rules is a very important aspect in a game as fast moving as dagorhir.

Frothgar

--------------------

Any armor that could pass both because of the metal *and* the leather (say, washer riveted on armor grade leather) should count as metal, because it has the extra level of protection built in.

Armor only protects what it covers, so it would be reasonable for metal to only protect what it covers. Thus, if someone has a metal/leather hybrid, single greens can't go through the parts that are covered with armor-legal metal.

* * *

That said, I'm not 100% convinced that stabbing tips are crippled in the rules as they are now. I'm planning on building a stabby blue for Gates to see just what I can get done with it in some tight line fighting.

--------------------

--------------------

--------------------

TBH, ring mail is not much better protection than just a buff jacket, and studded leather is not a real type of armor, it was invented by 20th century filmmakers and RPG authors who saw coats of plates and thought that the rivets on the outside were the added protection, not the thick steel plates that they were holding in place. Also, maybe allow 15/16 oz and higher, water/wax hardened leathers to count as heavy armor? Although that might be getting complicated again . . .

Aka, the metal armor category should only apply to real metal armor: chainmail, plate armor, coats of plates, lamellar, lorica, etc, plus maybe the really heavy leathers. As far as composite armors, it could work just like armors that don't cover an entire target area: if you get single greened somewhere that's leather, it counts, if you get hit somewhere that isn't, then it doesn't.

--------------------

Oisín Leathshúileach ua Duibhne
Ard Laech
Fíanna Cú Ruadh

And by "spears" I'm referring to their use one handed in conjunction with a shield, which was the most common and possibly most versatile style of fighting in the European dark ages and for long before that.

In addition, aside from historical (and game-play, in terms of weapon variety on the field -- always a good thing) support, a rules change regarding single green shots on armour is supported by the realism aspect of the sport -- pokey is better than stabby against armour -- less surface area to take up the force of the strike (and yes, I know that realism is not hugely loved in this sport. Whatever. :P).

Anyway, I greatly support this.

--------------------

Something else that has occurred to me, is that if the complexity of determining armour types for single green effects (Leather? Metal? Both?) is too much for the KISS ideal, it would be great, I think, to simply change single green's damage effect to that of a blue weapon with regard to armour damage.

Although I have to say that I really like the idea of giving metal-wearers a bonus.

[ April 09, 2008: Message edited by: Vilhjalmr ]

--------------------

I saw those tests that someone posted recently for leather armor, and a single handed stab went right through. Granted, they weren't the most scientific tests, but it was convincing.

I think that this rule will balance it out so that people buying/making easier leather armor (no offense to anyone; as I said, I wear leather and I made some of my own leather armor) vs. those who went all out and bought or made metal. Chain takes longer to make and a good quality shirt will probably be more expensive than your average leather hauberk, and most all plate is more expensive and harder to work with than leather (I'd assume).

As for being able to tell the difference between purely leather armor and composite armor on the field, treat it kind of like the hidden armor rule. If you can't tell by a casual glance that it is metal that makes the armor legal, then a one handed green goes through. For example, if someone is wearing a closed brigandine where the outside is suede and there are rivets that make it plain that it is armor, but you can't see what the plates are made of (armor grade leather or armor grade metal), then a one handed green goes through.

[ April 09, 2008: Message edited by: Nemo of Calh ]

--------------------

Nemo of Calh
Guard of Rogin
Member in good standing of the Rising Tide
Loyal sword of Taurendor

Ionatan MacMarcas
Knight "Erroneous"
Loyal Sword of Taurendor

quote:

---

Originally posted by Güntar von Keitz:
I'm Güntar von Keitz, and I support this initiative...

---

I'm Kyrax Nine Toes and I support the idea of incentivising metal armor. Real Warriors wear metal!

--------------------

See you at Ragnarok XXIV, June 2009!

Sgt. Kyrax, Guard (Aratari) on detached duty in Northern Aggelgorod

--------------------

The only thing I see is that it may be confusing to the attacker what type of armor some opponents have, but how would this be different than in real life where you would never even know how much damage different types of plate are going to take, you just have to appraise it visually and take a guess.

Balancing issues:
Spears are already at a disadvantage against shields, so this would (IMHO) even it up a bit by giving them an advantage against leather armor.

Stabby-Blues aren't likely to get any uber-advantage. Against a shieldman, the blue edge will still be the most effective weapon. Against a non-shieldman, we can look at the advantage stabby-blues have now vs a non armored combatant. Is it very much more effective to stab someone with a blue/green than to attack them with a blue only approach? I don't think so, but this is anecdotal and from an outside point of view, seeing as I rarely use a sword or other swung weapon.

Of course, all of the arguments for a blue/green stand for a red/green as well, unless there is something I've overlooked?

Full disclosure: I very rarely take a blue or red weapon onto the field, Spear (poky-stick!) plus Dagger (little poky-stick!) is my usual combo. Oh, and sometimes rock, but that's neither here nor there.

--------------------

I have not thought this through so feel free to nuke this idea.

--------------------

quote:

---

For example, if someone is wearing a closed brigandine where the outside is suede and there are rivets that make it plain that it is armor, but you can't see what the plates are made of (armor grade leather or armor grade plates), then a one handed green goes through.

---

I disagree with this. I think if someone is going to make metal coat of plates or brigandine armour they should get the bonus of metal armour. even if it is not obvious. we would just have to trust to people's honor that that will take the appropriate hits depending on the nature of their plates.

Frothgar

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Man in Black:
[...] Maybe a larger green should simply turn into another color as well.[...]

I have not thought this through so feel free to nuke this idea.

---

Gladly

The problem is that this fails hard in the realism category. The reason that a larger swung weapon does more damage is that it has more mass behind it, and thus, more momentum, which yields more damage. Since a longer green doesn't really have that much more mass than a short green (most of them anyways, i'm not really talking about stabby-tips) there isn't (usually) enough mass to make a difference.

Physics isn't my strong suit, so if I'm wrong someone please correct me.

--------------------

Though I would admit that it would require more tactics and forethought and might better the game overall if there were armor that you had to sort of test first. It might be kind of fun to be on a massive field of people and try to stab someone, only to find out you can't and have to recover really fast or die.

I don't know where I stand on this part (I don't have much experience with brigandines), but I figured I'd put out some ideas for debate.

--------------------

Nemo of Calh
Guard of Rogin
Member in good standing of the Rising Tide
Loyal sword of Taurendor

Ionatan MacMarcas
Knight "Erroneous"
Loyal Sword of Taurendor

quote:

---

As for being able to tell the difference between purely leather armor and composite armor on the field, treat it kind of like the hidden armor rule. If you can't tell by a casual glance that it is metal that makes the armor legal, then a one handed green goes through. For example, if someone is wearing a closed brigandine where the outside is suede and there are rivets that make it plain that it is armor, but you can't see what the plates are made of (armor grade leather or armor grade metal), then a one handed green goes through.

---

I very, very strongly disagree with this . . . metal coats of plates (aka brigandine) are a very valid style of armoring that should not be penalized because the metal is internal. Besides, if you know what you're looking for, CoP's are pretty easy to tell, and they rattle around a bit.

--------------------

Oisín Leathshúileach ua Duibhne
Ard Laech
Fíanna Cú Ruadh

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nemo of Calh:
Though I would admit that it would require more tactics and forethought and might better the game overall if there were armor that you had to sort of test first. It might be kind of fun to be on a massive field of people and try to stab someone, only to find out you can't and have to recover really fast or die.

---

Agreed, this is actually why I'm not a big fan of the hidden armor rule. If it's legal armor, there is either going to be some indication that you are wearing it, or else you should get props for designing garb that looks normal, but hides hidden protection.

Does anybody know the original purpose of the hidden armor rule? I assume it was to prevent some sort of cheese, but I can't figure out what it was?

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Genz:
How would this work if you wear a chain shirt under leather armor? I know many people that gear themselves this way. I realize that this would not add a second layer of protection but would the green go through that or...?

---

He has chainmail on doesn't he? Assuming that real life was like Dag rules, you'd be sewing closed a hole in your leather, but that doesn't change the fact that there's chain between the leather and your skin.

[ April 09, 2008: Message edited by: OisínLeathshúileach ]

--------------------

Oisín Leathshúileach ua Duibhne
Ard Laech
Fíanna Cú Ruadh

I think playability of this idea hinges entirely on how clearly one can tell they're dealing with leather armored foes or metal armored foes.

Although my suggestion does not perfectly replicate the true historical "ordering of safety," I think the easiest rule to TRY would be "if the armor is visually made out of ONLY metal (aside from inconsequential and small components of leather... aka: small straps, leather lacing, etc.) it is NOT damaged by single green thrusts. In ALL other cases, a single green thrust pierces the limb."

In essence, only "plate" or "chain mail" would pass this rule (in terms of the majority of armors on the Dag field.

Again, it'd be cool to try it at least once or twice, but this is always one of those darn "significant changes" that really would have to be thoroughly playtested before any sort of final decision would be made.

--------------------

--------------------

Of course, (metal) coats of plates are still plate arnour, so that doesn't really fix that problem.

[ April 09, 2008: Message edited by: Vilhjalmr ]

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Man in Black:
Not to be dismissive of the idea but, there are so many differant typs of armor out there, including some trojan war stuff made out of cloth that stopped a spear better than chain,(History channel). I can see the arguments going forever on this subject. I think KISS would require the rule to count soley for plate armor.

---

I disagree, but this did get me to thinking. Perhaps if this passed, things like bone, wood, or laminated cloth (silk or linnen, require it to the be the actual material, not cotton that looks like it) that were historically used as armor to pass as light armor with leather.

What it comes down to, IMO, is that this is more of a playing field issue than an issue of historicity, because, let's be honest, no armoring system in any game is ever going to realistically and playably represent the actual properties of different types of armor. Partly because it's just too complicated, partly because no one really knows for sure.

I think that any assertion that this debate is going to make us more historically accurate or some such are inherently and totally flawed, and that they should be regarded as secondary at best. What this is really trying to do, I believe, is to reward players who bear the weight and cost of metal armor over the easier alternative of leather.

The one exception to this is, as was noted above, the utter disregard on our field, due to game mechanics, of the widest and longest used weapon in human history: the spear. Sure, we have javelins and two handed spears, but the one handed spear, often in combination with a shield, was far and away the most common (in large part because it was affordable on a large scale) weapon throughout the classical and medieval periods.

[ April 09, 2008: Message edited by: OisínLeathshúileach ]

--------------------

Oisín Leathshúileach ua Duibhne
Ard Laech
Fíanna Cú Ruadh

--------------------

No sense babbling about it when it's simpler to find out if it's a positive/negative thing.

--------------------

--------------------

(Wisby refers to the Viking site where the best examples were found in excavation)

Outside:

Inside:

More often, the outside layer of coats you see today are suede of other thing leather, but and type of sturdy cloth does just as well. These photos are of the same coat, from http://www.eskimo.com/~cwn/brig_craig1.html .

Due to cost and ease of manufacture, was a very common type of armor throughout the middle ages.

--------------------

Oisín Leathshúileach ua Duibhne
Ard Laech
Fíanna Cú Ruadh

--------------------

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vilhjalmr:
Yes. I hate to say this, being a mail wearer myself, but chain armour is really, really bad protection against stabs in reality.

Of course, (metal) coats of plates are still plate arnour, so that doesn't really fix that problem.

[ April 09, 2008: Message edited by: Vilhjalmr ]

---

I hate to burst any bubbles here but chainmail worked fine against the thrust. Why wouldn't it? In the pinnacle days of chainmail the spear was the most common weapon on the field, so why wear the chain if everyone is using something that can pierce it so easily?

There are accounts of knights having to stop in combat during the crusades and have men pull the arrows out of their mail so they could keep fighting.

Also remember the mail you make in your garage with cheap wire from Tractor supply is nothing like the riveted monstrosities that came out of dark age Europe. Mail was even used in early jousting!

--------------------

When we first got the chain, I did some tests with having my brothers hit me with it at medium force, while I was wearing it and padding. No effect by the eppe. actually, the more painful blows in that case were ones by dagorhir weapons!

Recently I did a test with a cardboard box, I picked out a box the right size to "Wear" my chainmail (Zinc coated steel, butted rings) and then proceded to stab and beat the heck out of the box. Results:

Kitchen Knife Stabs: Tiny holes in box where the point went through the gaps between the rings, no other damage.

Eppe' Stabs: Indentations in the box, no peircing or damge to chainmail, steel sword tip scratched and a peice broken off.

Eppe Slash: Crushing damage to box on corners, no effect on flat sides, no damage to chainmail.

I hope that helps, If people need video of tests for this argument, I can try to make some.

--------------------

--------------------

A few things. Firstly, the mail on the field in dag is most likely going to be butted, rather than riveted. That stuff falls apart on its own, even without having a spear rammed through it. (If you've ever worn it, you would know) Even that rare riveted mail does not help much against stabbing. After all, it only takes two or three broken link to get through, and each link is made of wire that is pretty small in diameter. Breaking through that is about as hard as chopping a steel wire in half. Not difficult.

The reason it was worn so much in the past is the same reason flak jackets are worn today: it doesn't cover all of you and can be broken through, but hey, it's life and death out there and anything helps. Not to mention the fact that mail is extremely good at protecting against cuts, which were understandably common on the battle field.

As for the arrows getting caught in mail, yes, apparently the knights looked like pincushions, despite being unharmed. The reason for this was not so much the mail as the combination of mail and the gambeson beneath. And besides, the fact that they had to "pull it out of their mail" shows you that the mail had been punctured. Arrows don't stick in mail unless they have broken through, because there is nothing to stick to. They would simply fall away if utterly repelled by the rings.

Gambesons are an amazing kind of armour that sadly sees no use in Dag. It makes mail armour hugely more protective, especially against blunt trauma, which is, of course, a large problem.

And another interesting thing to note, apparently (I've forgotten where the source was, sorry), since steel refining techniques are hugely better than what they used to be in the dark (and middle) ages, the integrity of the authentic riveted mail that these people would have had would have been only about as strong as the butted mail we make today from steel wire from Home Depot, on account of the steel being much weaker.

Also, I have to ask, since you seem so sure of your information, have you ever actually tested the resistance of riveted mail against stabs, or are you simply making assumptions?

Kedric: I myself have done tests on butted mail with a rondel dagger. The mail was easily broken. I am not surprised that the eppe, a sporting version of a rapier, was unable to do any damage. They are designed not to puncture things, you know? They bend. Spears with bladed, iron points and hardwood hafts do not.

--------------------

As for someone in Dag using that type of armor:

(hope you don't mind if I use that pic Frothgar. I also haven't seen the inside. I assume it is metal?)

[ April 09, 2008: Message edited by: Nemo of Calh ]

[ April 09, 2008: Message edited by: Nemo of Calh ]

--------------------

Nemo of Calh
Guard of Rogin
Member in good standing of the Rising Tide
Loyal sword of Taurendor

Ionatan MacMarcas
Knight "Erroneous"
Loyal Sword of Taurendor

P.S. and I didn't even make a reference to apples, oranges, or both (nod to Hanzo)

Ahem. This idea is about PLAYABILITY. That is, throw a SMALL combat advantage to those wearing metal armor that almost always weighs more than the massive proliferation of leather (usually soft and often layered) AND one that will probably lead to an increased number of blue green weapons and increase the combat effectiveness of spears, which has (also IMIO) always been diminished.

Yes, it does complicate the game in a non-trivial way and will lead to some confusion (especially as it gets implemented); however, I think the real question is whether it would IMPROVE the game as a whole (i.e., pros outweigh the cons). I for one am strongly inclined to think it will.

[ April 09, 2008: Message edited by: Güntar von Keitz ]

--------------------

--------------------

Granted alot of the leather armor that is soft or lighter weight will be light, I know my set of armor is quite hefty and when I am wearing it, after awhile it will begin to way on me.

In the end you can find cheap metel armor that almost weights nothing, and You can find leather armor that is a bear. So giving someone an advantage because they have metel I feel is unfair in alot of ways.

(I am basing this on the weight argument)

--------------------

Knight Errant Mirelle

I don’t want to come to Dagorhir to re-live another man’s history, I’ve come to write my own. - Sir Magnus of Narnia

quote:

---

Originally posted by Güntar von Keitz:
This is not a safey issue IMIO, it is also not a realism issue.

Ahem. This idea is about PLAYABILITY.
[ April 09, 2008: Message edited by: Güntar von Keitz ]

---

Totally agree, I feel this topic keeps getting bogged down in historical accuracy debates, even when its clear the historical "truth" is equivocal (so even though some of the debate has been about centered around this pillar, the pillar itself is wobbly at best).

I think this rule should get genuine praise or criticism based on the merit of "will this rule change make for a more fun / enjoyable / thrilling type of Dagorhir combat for everyone?" I think it is genuinely possible such a rules change could have a positive impact on Dagorhir as a game/sport.

Spears, and even more so the beleaguered blue stabby tip, get a real short shrift in Dag, yet they both add potentially more dynamic and engaging combat styles to both small and large-scale combat... making them a more appealing weapon style thanks to a rules change like this is something I think we really need to consider.

--------------------

Many people who portray Hoplites, Legionnaires, peasants, and a myriad of other historic and/or fantastical characters will (hopefully) move away from swords which, were limited by materials, tactics, and wealth. Instead, they will choose to use spears and/or one handed javelins instead as a more period option to stay in character. They will then proceed to demolish the "heavily" armored personas such as knights who wear leather armor because it is cheaper and easier to make. These people, in retaliation, will then spend the money to buy or the time to make metal armor to win and to stay in character. Then, a crowd of people will see us fighting and comment on how awesome we are and they will join. Each year our numbers will double until we outnumber the US military and we can take over the--ahem! Maybe that won't happen, but I'm sure that the rest will.

And besides all of that, once people stop using leather because it is no longer uber, we leather users will stand out.

--------------------

Nemo of Calh
Guard of Rogin
Member in good standing of the Rising Tide
Loyal sword of Taurendor

Ionatan MacMarcas
Knight "Erroneous"
Loyal Sword of Taurendor

The more I think about this, the more I think about how it would add some real *life* to blue greens and spears and could really improve the game. Making the game more (perhaps even too) complicated, a real concern, is the major concern/con.

[ April 09, 2008: Message edited by: Güntar von Keitz ]

--------------------

--------------------

--------------------

Oisín Leathshúileach ua Duibhne
Ard Laech
Fíanna Cú Ruadh

--------------------

--------------------

Oisín Leathshúileach ua Duibhne
Ard Laech
Fíanna Cú Ruadh

I am Adricus, and I support this motion in its simplest form. I am a hoplite of ancient Athens and as such, am limited in my weaponry. Quite often I have taken the field with a 6ft spear/shield combo in the traditions of my people, only to be reduced in efficacy due to my mighty single-handed spear thrust is magically stopped by a thin (12oz) layer of leather! My brethen of ancient Greece have fallen to single-handed trusts through solid bronze armor, yet somehow this magically leather stops it? Ye gods!

On a more mundane note...leather armor has taken over a large part of the field (I wear it) and 1h spears have been totally nerfed by it. I still play around with them in the smaller games because its a whole heckuvalotta fun, but not with great efficacy. Add to this(not a derailment attempt, I swear!) the fact that many players call 'armor' against a 1h spear anytime brushes across armor, even if it solidly connects with flesh at the end of the stroke. I have no intention of following that whole train, just wanted to mention it in regards to the playability of 1h spears. So, I support the following:

1: Armor with sufficient metal (chain or plate...KISS) to qualify as armor without leather attachments counts as 'metal armor'.

2: Armor that qualifies as armor due to only its leather does not protect from single-handed greens.

Realism note: in true battle you may not know what type of armor your opponent has underneath, thus making it unnecessary for a outward sign of 'metal' to be required.

--------------------

Adricus, The Wandering Member of Drentha

--------------------

--------------------

--------------------

Adricus, The Wandering Member of Drentha

--------------------

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vilhjalmr:
Do you use a punch, or strap? I don't imagine that style would work too well with a strap, but I could be wrong.

---

The phalanx got along fine with a strap shield for centuries

--------------------

[ April 09, 2008: Message edited by: Drinian ]

--------------------

in the future though when you use one of my pictures, use a good one. like this one.

Great posts all around.

id particularly point out GVK's point about how this rule idea is to give a reward to metal users, with the added bonus of giving spears and stabby blues a leg up.

How about some wording? how would this new rule be phrased? i have an old proposal somwhere on my old laptop, ill dig for it and post it later.

Frothgar

--------------------

Anyway, I've never tried to write a rule before, but I would think that the rules under green weapons
4.4.2. One hand green thrusts do not penetrate armor.
4.4.3. To penetrate armor, a green weapon must be thrust with both hands from the beginning of the thrust until it has connected solidly with the target.

would be re-worded to be "One hand green thrusts do not penetrate any metal armor" and "to penetrate metal armor, a green weapon must be thrust with both hands from the beginning of the thrust until it has connected solidly with the target."

Under armor, rule
5.1.9. A one-handed green thrust has no effect on armor, even if previously struck with a blue weapon.

would read "A one-handed green thrust has no effect on metal armor, even if previously struck with a blue weapon."

A new rule under
5.1.11. Armor does not offer protection against red weapons or two-hand green thrusts.

would be "5.1.11.1 Any armor made entirely of leather additionally does not offer protection against one-handed green thrusts."

This, I believe, includes most of the rules regarding greens and armor. I'm no rules lawyer, but hopefully this helps.

[ April 09, 2008: Message edited by: Nemo of Calh ]

--------------------

Nemo of Calh
Guard of Rogin
Member in good standing of the Rising Tide
Loyal sword of Taurendor

Ionatan MacMarcas
Knight "Erroneous"
Loyal Sword of Taurendor

--------------------

Antonis, Commander of Nod

For we who are about to die, will laugh at anything.

5.1.1. All types of armor provide the same level of protection. Yep, might as well toss this one

5.1.9. A one-handed green thrust has no effect on Metal armor, even if previously struck with a blue weapon.

Defining what constitutes 'Metal armor' would also keep the distinction between what gets the bonus and what doesn't.

5.2.1. Metal armor may be made of iron, steel, bronze, brass, copper or titanium. Aluminum and other modern alloys are not allowed, with the exception of titanium.
5.2.1.lol. To qualify as Metal armor, it must meet all requirements of metal without the aid of leather.

I figure this makes it pretty clear that if you're armor passes because of the metal than it gets the benefits of it, if it's passing because of the leather, than it shouldn't get it.

--------------------

Currently, no one with a stabbing tip goes after an armored target, because it has no effect.

Under this rule proposal, people with stabbing tips will only go after parts of armor that appear to be leather.

If they see someone in leather and metal and decide to stab him on a part that looks like leather, two things can happen:

1) He dies, because it *was* leather, or
2) He says 'metal armor!' and the fight continues.

If #2 happens, how's that any different from how things are now?

If he decides *not* to stab the person wearing a leather/metal mix, how's that any different from how things are now?

Worst case scenario, nothing will be made *worse* than it is now.

* * *

Here are the definitions I'd propose:

-Leather armor must be 3/16" thick to count as armor. «already the rule»

-Metal armor is any armor that meets the requirements for metal armor (outlined in section ___).

-If an area is covered both by leather and metal armor, it shall be counted as metal armor.

-and-

-Armor protects only the area it covers. If a fighter is wearing metal and leather armor, the metal armor only protects the area it covers.

Does that KISS?

--------------------

I'm not sure how elbows and knees should be treated. Perhaps leather armor in those areas should always be immune to one-handed stabs?

Edit: I was referring to Nieros's post by the way. This doesn't really make sense with Alric's.

[ April 09, 2008: Message edited by: Nemo of Calh ]

--------------------

Nemo of Calh
Guard of Rogin
Member in good standing of the Rising Tide
Loyal sword of Taurendor

Ionatan MacMarcas
Knight "Erroneous"
Loyal Sword of Taurendor

--------------------

Also, you could cover them with chain if you really cared.

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alric of Drentha:
Elbow and knees that can be targeted by single greens just makes some extra fun for the single green users, in my opinion. If somebody has the accuracy and opportunity to take you out by stabbing your joints, he really deserves it .

Also, you could cover them with chain if you really cared.

---

and historically didn't you aim for joints as the weak point of the armor anyways? I think this adds an inadvertent realism to it.

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alric of Drentha:

* * *

Here are the definitions I'd propose:

-Leather armor must be 3/16" thick to count as armor. «already the rule»

-Metal armor is any armor that meets the requirements for metal armor (outlined in section ___).

-If an area is covered both by leather and metal armor, it shall be counted as metal armor.

-and-

-Armor protects only the area it covers. If a fighter is wearing metal and leather armor, the metal armor only protects the area it covers.

Does that KISS?

---

This is good, but I'm of the "if its leather AND metal... it counts as leather" persuasion. (1) With your proposal, people might learn how to add min. metal to leather armor to gain the metal advantage. (2) In crazy swirl of melee, only things that are blatantly metal will be identified quickly, thus less "stab frustration" (3) In the sake of KISS, metal armor = (almost entirely) exposed, metal armor. This makes life easier for armor checkers, people who build armor will go into their project with known expectations of their level of protection, and keeps additional confusion on the field to an absolute bare minimum.

--------------------

--------------------

Antonis, Commander of Nod

For we who are about to die, will laugh at anything.

I used to wear chain, but now I can't because of my knees and the weight. I am currently working on a leather lamellar shirt. I intend to use thick leather plates. Should I be punished for not being able to wear metal armor, and have daggers go through my armor? I don't feel so. I think that spears already have one advantage in Dag. I can't cut the head off of a spear, whereas in real life, one well timed swing and you're left with a stick.

As long as we're on this train, why not let axes and maces with a certain weight say 24 oz. and less than 48" in length say 25" axe that weighs 30 oz. or a mace of the same specs, they should be allowed to ignore chain, because they can crush the limb underneath and render it useless. there is a reason that all armor is counted equal, because we're not that tap sport that gives each armor its own number of hits allowed.

I'm all for keeping it simple. obviously if this becomes a rule, I will be sad, but I will adapt, cause that's what I do.

Instead of trying to change a rule to make my fighting style more effective, i just adapt to whats around me.

--------------------

I will never back down.

[ April 09, 2008: Message edited by: Mirelle of Narnia ]

--------------------

Knight Errant Mirelle

I don’t want to come to Dagorhir to re-live another man’s history, I’ve come to write my own. - Sir Magnus of Narnia

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mirelle of Narnia:Not really fair to punish the poor, oddly preportioned, or those physicaly unable to wear armor.

---

If I change it like this, you have an argument against allowing armor in general.

In Dagorhir (as opposed to less combat-oriented LARPs) your actual physical ability plays a large role in what you are or are not capable of doing. If we want absolutely everyone to be equal, regardless of personal capabilities, we could all just play a pen-and-paper game.

{says the weakling nerd who couldn't wield a tower-shield effectively to save his life}

[ April 09, 2008: Message edited by: Malpan ]

--------------------

--------------------

Dead Wabbitz: www.geocities.com/dead_wabbitz

"Stunties hide unnerground and pansy-elves hide in the trees. Thas why I prefers yer 'umans. They builds sorta 'ollow rocks wiht 'oles for comin' and goin' fru. They builds 'em on hills where you's have to climb a bit, but at least they's in the open, where a lad can get at 'em. So you can lob a few rocks at the walls, bash frew the holes, and get in there to nick all their gear, wivvout wunderin' if the roof is gonna fall on yer nut or if you's gonna fall off a branch. I like bashin' 'uman places. Only they don't call it bashin'; they calls it a seej."

--------------------

Knight Errant Mirelle

I don’t want to come to Dagorhir to re-live another man’s history, I’ve come to write my own. - Sir Magnus of Narnia

Dagorhir Manual of Arms Rules Change Proposal
Ragnarok XXI War Council (June-July 2006)
“Allowing Single Handed Green Attacks to Pass Through Leather Armour”

Written by: Frothgar of Rogin
Submitted by: Realm Taurendor

Current rules: (only applicable rules listed)
5.1.1. All types of armor provide the same level of protection.
5.1.6. Armor does not offer protection against red weapons, two-hand green thrusts, or
yellow (projectile) weapons except as shown below.
5.1.10. A one-handed green thrust has no effect on armor, even if the armor was
previously struck by a blue weapon.

Proposed rules: (Our proposal would be worded as follows. changes in bold)
5.1.6. Armor does not offer protection against red weapons, two-hand green thrusts, or
yellow (projectile) weapons except as shown below.
5.1.6.1. Additionally leather armour provides no protection from single handed green thrusts.
5.1.10. A one-handed green thrust has no effect on metal (and composite)armor, even if the armor was previously struck by a blue weapon.
5.1.10.1 One handed green thrusts go through leather armour on the first hit.

Reasoning for proposed rules change:

1) The Holy Trinity of Dagorhir-

Safety: leather armour is allowed and checked for safety. Allowing single greens to pierce leather armour may result in an increased number of spears and stabbing tips, weapons with a good safety record.

Playability: Leather armour is an unbalancing factor in the game. Leather armour conveys the same amount of protection from weapons as chain or plate with significantly less weight. Leather armour’s negative effects (rigidity, heat retention) do not balance its low weight. Players wearing leather are given all of the bonuses of wearing armour and suffer few of the negatives.

Realism: It is unlikely that the leather armour worn by fighters in Dagorhir could stop a strong single handed thrust with a stabbing weapon. (perform a test)

2) Diversity- To keep the armour styles of Dagorhir diverse we should make sure one style does not be come the absolute best type of armour. I don’t think that any of us want Dagorhir to become homogenized game where everyone wears similar armour.

3) Play test results-

Practicality:

Armour check- armour checkers would be burdened buy having to determine weather a composite armour has enough metal to count as composite.

Counter argument:

1) Added complexity to the game.
2) Creates a new super armour in studded leather, very light studded leather that counts as metal armour and gets full armour bonuses.
3) To the realism argument- it is unlikely that some other types of armour, not just leather, would not be able to stop a strong single handed thrust.

--------------------

--------------------