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...