forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

Middle-ages are normally defined as the period between the 5th and 15th century (in the context of Europe). Tolkien most likely imagined M-E as something akin to the earlier part - timing similar to the arthurian legends (I assume). Full plate armor is a thing that belongs to 14th century and onward.

I do not recall any instance of T describing plate armor but he describes full mail chain quite often (including Aragorn's coronation armor). However there is a catch - splint armor and chain armor are AFAIK heavier and more cumbersome than plate armor, so no, no plate armors in M-E, but yes, quite a lot of heavy armors As was pointed numerous times the heroes on LOTR often chose different armor for travelling and for battle. If you look for contemporal comparison, infantry tends to use heavier and bulkier plate carriers than SF (CIRAS vs. LBT 6094)

Angelalex242 wrote:The D&D thing only applies to 3 classes:

Paladin, Cleric, Fighter.

Everyone else wants lighter armor. Transported into TOR, those 3 classes would want to wear mail hauberks and a helm for 5d+4 protection.

But...Tolkien doesn't really have medieval knights, does he? TOR was never designed to have the Knights of the Round Table tromping through in magnificent gleaming plate armor.

Well, I might add Cavaliers to that list as they, as described, are much like Paladins in that they are also based on the popular images of medievel knights.

Ya know, you're right.

Mail Hauberk isn't Plate.

If there was a 'Round Table' culture, one of their rewards might be 'Plate Armor'

You have access to classical Plate Armor. It offers 6d protection for a weight of 16. It's weight 12 if you're mounted. (There's a reason Knights like horses.) It may also have 'damage reduction.' (Subtract 4 from any end loss received.)

Or even 'subtract favored heart from weight while mounted' (like a dwarf, except the Round Table culture is likely to have medium heart instead of low heart...) It may even need 'encumbrance is halved while mounted'.

Then you can have these guys tromping around with a Longsword/Great Shield/Helm/Plate Armor without them getting too tired. After all, they're Knight Errants. They like going on Quests in their mighty plate armor and loaded down with enough armor to sink a battleship.

Angelalex242 wrote:But...Tolkien doesn't really have medieval knights, does he? TOR was never designed to have the Knights of the Round Table tromping through in magnificent gleaming plate armor.

There was a company of knights of Dol Amroth led by Prince Imrahil in Return of the King.

Tolkien wrote:And last and proudest, Imrahil, Prince of Dol Amroth, kinsman of the Lord, with gilden banners bearing his token of the Ship and the Silver Swan, and a company of knights in full harness riding grey horses...

I pray to Eru that plate armor never gets added to TOR, but I'd love to see knights of Dol Amroth...

Plate Armor may be a convention of Peter Jackson (at least at Helm's Deep) I'm not sure that it's what Tolkien envisioned.

The more I think about the battle of Celduin we played, the more I am convinced that the armour rules are close to perfect as they are. They could be done a bit more complex to gain some "realism" but I find it unnecessary.

Yepesnopes wrote:The more I think about the battle of Celduin we played, the more I am convinced that the armour rules are close to perfect as they are. They could be done a bit more complex to gain some "realism" but I find it unnecessary.

I think Jon would like to have that post stickied in the houserules forum

Yepesnopes wrote:The more I think about the battle of Celduin we played, the more I am convinced that the armour rules are close to perfect as they are. They could be done a bit more complex to gain some "realism" but I find it unnecessary.

Agreed. My characters made it through both that massive battle and the others in "Tales from Wilderland" just fine, and not one of them temporarily looked like Tony Stark.

Corvo wrote:

Yepesnopes wrote:The more I think about the battle of Celduin we played, the more I am convinced that the armour rules are close to perfect as they are. They could be done a bit more complex to gain some "realism" but I find it unnecessary.

I think Jon would like to have that post stickied in the houserules forum

It's taken about as long as the game was play tested (3 or so years) for you guys to realise you're wrong about armour. AND THAT'S OK because we love you.

I'm joking - no one is "wrong" here, different strokes for different folks. Cases can be made in all kinds of directions for all kinds of rules. The joy of being a games designer is that you have to choose one direction. Rather Francesco than me.

To be a little more serious, some quotes I find enlightening about the types of armour Tolkien imagined in Middle-earth:

"There are names among us that are worth more than a thousand mail-clad knights apiece."

"So might a child threaten a mail clad knight with a bow of string and green willow!"

When characters in Middle-earth want to sum up the most well equipped, dangerous fighting person they can think of, they call them a mail-clad knight.

I must track down some actual evidence for this usage, but I've always used "harness" to mean any kind of "suit", in the loosest sense, of armour. I would use it to describe a Norman knight's maille for example. But I could be wrong...