Armours house rules...again

The unique One Ring rules set invites tinkering and secondary creation. Whilst The One Ring works brilliantly as written, we provide this forum for those who want to make their own home-brewed versions of the rules. Note that none of these should be taken as 'official'.
User avatar
Faire
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2014 6:56 am

Re: Armours house rules...again

Post by Faire » Mon Apr 13, 2015 7:03 am

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)

Otaku-sempai
Posts: 3397
Joined: Sun May 12, 2013 2:45 am
Location: Lackawanna, NY

Re: Armours house rules...again

Post by Otaku-sempai » Mon Apr 13, 2015 1:33 pm

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.
"Far, far below the deepest delvings of the Dwarves, the world is gnawed by nameless things. Even Sauron knows them not. They are older than he."

Angelalex242
Posts: 1116
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 7:52 pm
Location: Valinor

Re: Armours house rules...again

Post by Angelalex242 » Mon Apr 13, 2015 2:02 pm

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.

User avatar
Majestic
Posts: 1806
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2014 5:47 pm
Location: Seattle, Washington

Re: Armours house rules...again

Post by Majestic » Mon Apr 13, 2015 6:55 pm

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.
Adventure Summaries for my long-running group (currently playing through The Darkening of Mirkwood/Mirkwood Campaign), and the Tale of Years for a second, lower-level group (in the same campaign).

Glorelendil
Posts: 5160
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:20 pm

Re: Armours house rules...again

Post by Glorelendil » Mon Apr 13, 2015 8:01 pm

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...
The Munchkin Formerly Known as Elfcrusher
Journey Computer | Combat Simulator | Bestiary | Weapon Calculator

Angelalex242
Posts: 1116
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 7:52 pm
Location: Valinor

Re: Armours house rules...again

Post by Angelalex242 » Mon Apr 13, 2015 9:48 pm

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.

User avatar
Yepesnopes
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 4:55 pm

Re: Armours house rules...again

Post by Yepesnopes » Wed Apr 15, 2015 7:59 am

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.

Corvo
Posts: 848
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 12:02 pm

Re: Armours house rules...again

Post by Corvo » Wed Apr 15, 2015 12:43 pm

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 :D

User avatar
Majestic
Posts: 1806
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2014 5:47 pm
Location: Seattle, Washington

Re: Armours house rules...again

Post by Majestic » Thu Apr 16, 2015 6:21 pm

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.
Adventure Summaries for my long-running group (currently playing through The Darkening of Mirkwood/Mirkwood Campaign), and the Tale of Years for a second, lower-level group (in the same campaign).

User avatar
Jon Hodgson
Posts: 1375
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:53 am
Location: Scotland

Re: Armours house rules...again

Post by Jon Hodgson » Fri Apr 17, 2015 3:17 pm

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 :D
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...
Jon Hodgson
Creative Director, Cubicle 7
Like us on Facebook!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests