Historical armour in RPGs

[ERYFKRAD]

Gothic had some great sets.

 

[Cryomancer]

Gothic had some great sets.

2

My unique critique in Gothic 1/2/3 in therms of historically accuracy is the scarcity of polearms and the fact that spears use the same moveset of swords on G3.


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

As for using skyrim as a argument, see the old games armor. Like Daggerfall

Daggerfall steel armor

And Morrowind Steel Armor

Morrowind steel armor

Compare with skyrim

skyrim steel armor

As you can see, previous elder scrolls games had much better armor. I an picking the steel armor because nobody expect realism with daedric armor. Mechanic wise, armor on previous ES games was better too. On Skyrim, armor just absorbs % damage, doesn't matter if is a giant hitting you with a ginormous club or a kitchen knife strike. On Morrowind, VS heavy armor, a heavy warhammer OUTdps a shortsword, but against unarmored targets, the short sword outdps the warhammer due better speed.

 

[ManaJunkie]

Great stuff in this game.

 

[d1nolore]

Age of Decadence was pretty awesome with the Roman styles, horsehair helmets, Wolf heads, shields, weapons, and armour were very thematic.

 

[Excommunicator]

I'm more than happy for devs to go wild and design things however they want, but the sad reality is this

Craftsmen from the middle ages had far better artistic sense than the average artist working in RPGs

 

[Zariusz]

Age of Decadence was pretty awesome with the Roman styles, horsehair helmets, Wolf heads, shields, weapons, and armour were very thematic.

Yeah AoD was awesome (maybe except that heavy armour Legio something), though i still think that late roman and byzantine armour would fit better in that setting of fallen pseudo Rome. BTW is AoD modded? I cant find any mods to it.

 

[DraQ]

I once proposed WYSIWYG armor model for 3D RPGs (which would make chainmail bikinis work about as well as you could expect them to) so you can guess my answer.

It doesn't have to be strictly historical, but it needs to be functional, which tends to be best achieved by understanding the historical armor and patterning game armor after it.
Some departures driven by different cultures, use of weird materials and existence of magic are allowable, but the armour should make sense first and foremost and any magic should generally be applied on top of that.

 

[mondblut]

As for using skyrim as a argument, see the old games armor. Like Daggerfall

Daggerfall steel armor

And Morrowind Steel Armor

Morrowind steel armor

Compare with skyrim

skyrim steel armor

As you can see, previous elder scrolls games had much better armor. I an picking the steel armor because nobody expect realism with daedric armor.

That's easy. "Steel armor" is shit tier armor in TES, an equivalent of, I dunno, a ring mail from D&D. Hardly more expensive than a pile of dried shit, too. Of course it should look the part.

Morrowind designers failed flat at that by making it look like super expensive full plate. Things that you buy from the profits made from selling the kitchenware that you have stolen in tutorial house, then discard upon reaching level 3 do not look like that, period.

Skyrim's presention that looks like rags with some metal plates fastened to it is a much better reflection of its level of quality.

 

[Van-d-all]

The only games with reasonably good historical armor are Darklands, Battle Brothers and Kingdom Come, plus some armors in Witcher 3. The rest, even if modeled after historically accurate pieces, are gravely misused in terms of age spread (XII - XVI in single game), regional style (Milanese plate along Mongolian lamellar armor), availability (everyone rocks a fucking plate armor), general use (armors without padding, horse armor on foot) and stats (Bilbo's chainmail essentially).

 

[JarlFrank]

I like armor that is in some way plausible and fits the setting.

Historically inspired is cool, and there are tons of historical styles that look awesome but haven't been used in RPGs much/at all. Late ancient Persian cataphracts with their scale armor and lamellar greaves and bracers look fucking badass. Those viking helmets with the face guard are awesome. Renaissance full plate armor or 17th century cuirassier breastplates are dope. And it is a crime that the Mycenean Dendra panoply (aka lobster cuirass) has never been implemented in a game, it's so cool it even looks like a fantasy armor.

Spoiler

Also, some impractical armors can easily be made plausible by having them be a cultural thing or a sign of rank. Some Roman officers wore cool iron face masks which had more of a psychological function (looks scary) than pure protection. Roman officers wore muscle cuirass plate armor, which was shaped in the form of a sculpted torso, because it looks fancy and cool, not for any practical reason. It also stands out, which is important for an officer so your own men know you're the boss guy. In the same vein, boobplate for female characters can be made plausible: it's impractical, yes, but nobody cares because it's more of a rank signifier and a prestige object than a purely practical suit of armor. Even chainmail bikinis and half-naked barbarians can be explained plausibly as a cultural thing: the Celts had warriors who fought naked - no, not just bare-chested, entirely naked, with their dong swinging to and fro as they charge at you - because they believed armor was for cowards, and the gods would protect them better than any layer of clothing and armor.

Of course, that all requires armor (and weapons, too) to have a purpose in the game world beyond "this gives +X defense when you equip it". Armor as a cultural and/or rank thing. Morrowind did this quite well: the fancy Ordinator armor with its impractical but cool full-face helmet is worn only by ordinators, a symbol of their office. If you wore any piece of Ordinator armor and talked to an Ordinator, he'd attack you for it, because you're not allowed to wear this armor as a non-Ordinator. That's cool. When you join the Imperial Legion, you have to wear an Imperial Legion chest armor piece or other legion members won't talk to you ("Where's your uniform, legionary?"). And some factions had clear preferences in which armor they wore: if you meet a guard wearing bonemold armor, he probably belongs to house Redoran. That makes armor more than just a piece of equipment with defensive stats. Morrowind's armor was a part of the worldbuilding, people of certain factions preferred certain armor, some armor was an insignium of rank, etc etc. Characters weren't just equipped with different armor parts willy nilly. The world designers actually put some thought into which NPCs would wear which kind of armor. Morrowind's armor is also not as obviously tiered as Oblivion's and Skyrim's. Each armor group has some redundant pieces that are roughly equal in their protection value. Netch leather vs nordic fur vs chitin armor for example: the difference isn't that major, but the different armors exist because they have a cultural reason for existing.

I'm also a big fan of Morrowind and KCD style layered armor/clothing systems. It's much cooler than the simple system of having full armor suits count as single items, because it allows you to mix and match (which was done very regularly in history, especially among irregular troops who supplied their own armor rather than being issued standard uniforms by the army). You can put a plate cuirass over chainmail, for example, and you have a lot more loot to hunt down if armor is split into parts, which makes exploration more rewarding. Hunting down a full daedric armor set in Morrowind is great because it's such a rare armor (most pieces exist only once or twice in the entire gameworld). Partial armor is more realistic in many aspects, and allows for the recreation of many historical armor styles. Roman legions at most points in history would only wear one greave, for example (on the forward-facing leg), for weight reduction and equipment cost reduction.

I don't need armor to be fully historical, but I like it to be believable and look interesting. Morrowind did a great job there, its designs stayed mostly believable, it used specific materials of the gameworld (glass, ebony, chitin, netch leather), and it had cultural significance. It had style and identity. Meanwhile WoW style cartoony HUEG PAULDRONS armor design just looks boring and lacks identity. It also looks ridiculous and impractical most of the time.

I'd like to see more of the less popular historical armor styles in RPGs: give us some scale mail and lamellar armor instead of only chainmail and plate all the time! I'd also like to see the return of the glorious chainmail bikini because it's sexy AND it can make sense within the context of the setting (a badass warrioress wearing a chainmail bikini on purpose as something that doesn't offer much protection, because she trusts in her own ability and the protection of the gods and doesn't need any better armor; half-naked barbarians work just as well for the same reasons).

Finally, a nice mix of historical armors and fantasy armors that look cool and that I'd like to see more of in RPGs:

Spoiler

EDIT: Oh, yeah, also mythology had much, much cooler armor designs than any fantasy RPG:

Agamemnon equipped with a Cypriote cuirass made of overlapped scales on which, divided in the different zones of the armour, there are ten rows of black enameled, twelve of gold and 20 of tin; furthermore a bronze belt decorated with silver motif; neck guard with snakes in "rainbow" color; beautiful greaves reinforced with silver ankle protections, sword with gold nails and silver scabbard, can also be assumed.
The large shield and the elaborated helmets with crests, tubes, and horse plume are fully described in the pages dedicated to the Iliad shields and the Iliad helmets.

 

[DraQ]

The only games with reasonably good historical armor are Darklands, Battle Brothers and Kingdom Come, plus some armors in Witcher 3. The rest, even if modeled after historically accurate pieces, are gravely misused in terms of age spread (XII - XVI in single game), regional style (Milanese plate along Mongolian lamellar armor), availability (everyone rocks a fucking plate armor), general use (armors without padding, horse armor on foot) and stats (Bilbo's chainmail essentially).

...furthermore the addition of dragons, giants, elves, hobbits and plethora of other races not to mention fireball slinging wizards is also historically inaccurate.
Derp.

The only good points (and they are very good points indeed) are general use and availability ones.
Ok, stats as well if you count all the plate cut effortlessly by swords and LoTR mithril shirt (in the movie!).

 

[Lilura]

Not sure how realistic it is, but one of the coolest things I saw in respect to armor was in the Game of Thrones. A savage, who thinks armor slows him down too much, duels a heavily armored man. The armored man catches the savage's sword blow (the blade) inbetween his inner upper arm (bicep region) and the side of his chest. Then, the savage is locked and the armored man finishes him. Again, not sure how possible it is but it was cool.

 

[Junmarko]

Don't mind the occasional modernised variant of the Roman style too, as long as it's done respectfully.

But the classic style is best.

 

[JarlFrank]

The only games with reasonably good historical armor are Darklands, Battle Brothers and Kingdom Come, plus some armors in Witcher 3. The rest, even if modeled after historically accurate pieces, are gravely misused in terms of age spread (XII - XVI in single game), regional style (Milanese plate along Mongolian lamellar armor), availability (everyone rocks a fucking plate armor), general use (armors without padding, horse armor on foot) and stats (Bilbo's chainmail essentially).

...furthermore the addition of dragons, giants, elves, hobbits and plethora of other races not to mention fireball slinging wizards is also historically inaccurate.
Derp.

The only good points (and they are very good points indeed) are general use and availability ones.
Ok, stats as well if you count all the plate cut effortlessly by swords and LoTR mithril shirt (in the movie!).

A good point here is the issue of cultural armor variances. As I mentioned in my previous post, Morrowind did this quite well by having members of certain factions or regions have different armor preferences, like Redoran usually wearing bonemold.

Usually technology and culture determine which armor styles are more common and which are less. Ideally, armor availability and pricing would be based on the technological and economic situation in the region. Plate armor, for example, requires a lot of expertise to create but fewer man-hours than chainmail, which is easy to create and maintain but takes a long time because you have to link all the chains together one by one manually. In an area with a high population density, where labor is cheap, chainmail would be relatively affordable. In a region with low population density, where labor is expensive and blacksmiths are trained experts but there aren't many of them, none would bother producing chainmail because plate takes less hours to complete and also offers better protection. Due to that, chainmail would be more expensive than in regions where labor is cheaper.

When several different styles of armor co-exist next to each other, you always have to ask the question: why? If armor type X is objectively better than armor type Y, why is Y still around? There can be many reasons, like cultural conservatism (this is the traditional armor of the region, our blacksmiths have forged armor in this style for centuries and we will not stop now), availability of materials (if something like mithril exists in your world, and it's a rare material, only few people will be able to afford it since it's so rare), capabilities of local blacksmiths (plate armor has become the new thing everyone is making, but our local blacksmiths haven't figured out how to make it yet so they continue making older styles of armor), ceremonial/status symbol armor (sure, this style of armor might be objectively inferior, but it's worn by highly ranked generals because of how cool it looks), locally produced armor vs imported armor (Germans and Celts mostly producing chainmail, but if you can get your hands on a Roman lamellar cuirass you're the talk of the town because it's cool exotic armor made by a more powerful neighbor), production costs of the armor (common adventurers who aren't super rich will wear more affordable armor types, while the local nobility is equipped with state of the art BodyProtector2000 models), etc etc.

Different armor types shouldn't exist just because. There should be a plausible reason for why they're there. The top-tier armor shouldn't just be more expensive because it has a higher armor value. There should be a reason why it's more expensive and why it has a higher armor value, and why most people wear lower-tier armor. If the production process for a high tier armor is the same as for a low tier armor, everyone should wear the high tier armor and nobody should produce the low tier armor anymore. More expensive materials, higher expertise required for manufacturing, and longer manufacturing process (=more invested work hours) are all valid reasons for different tiers of armor existing alongside.

Not sure how realistic it is, but one of the coolest things I saw in respect to armor was in the Game of Thrones. A savage, who thinks armor slows him down too much, duels a heavily armored man. The armored man catches the savage's sword blow (the blade) inbetween his inner upper arm (bicep region) and the side of his chest. Then, the savage is locked and the armored man finishes him. Again, not sure how possible it is but it was cool.

Pretty realistic. When you're wearing full plate armor and someone whacks a sword at you, you can just catch it because the sword won't penetrate, and it's not a massive weapon either that will hurt you with its force of impact. A fully armored man doesn't even have to put any effort into dodging or parrying an attack from an unarmored man with a sword. He just has to take one step forward and punch the guy in the face with his mailed fist.

 

[Lilura]

Pretty realistic. When you're wearing full plate armor and someone whacks a sword at you, you can just catch it because the sword won't penetrate, and it's not a massive weapon either that will hurt you with its force of impact. A fully armored man doesn't even have to put any effort into dodging or parrying an attack from an unarmored man with a sword. He just has to take one step forward and punch the guy in the face with his mailed fist.

I agree with that. My only doubt was the speed of the swordblow. The show made it look seamless and logical, but I just wondered how hard it would be to catch a blade like that.

 

[turkishronin]

Reject Modernity

Return to Tradition

 

[a Goat]

 

[hexer]

I always digged the unusual makeshift Roman gladiator armor / helm.
Partially because as a kid I found Mad Max 3's Master Blaster disturbing.
And partially because there's this killing machine that can't be bothered with full armor in order to fight you.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

And partially because there's this killing machine that can't be bothered with full armor in order to fight you.

Most gladiator fights weren't to the death. The design you've posted is not effective on the field of battle.

 

[hexer]

Thanks for the video, will check it out tonight!

 

[JarlFrank]

Most gladiator fights weren't to the death.

This is something that bothers me in a lot of RPGs. Whenever there's an arena, fights will go to the death, even in games with otherwise believable and well-constructed settings.
The RPGs with arenas where fights are always to the death that come to my mind right now:
Underrail, Age of Decadence, TES4 Oblivion. There are probably more that I just don't remember right now.

And in all three of these games, the final fight is against the local arena champion, whom you kill and replace. Then there are no more new fights for you.

And yet, in all three of these games, the arena is a very popular pastime for many citizens. In Underrail, arena fights are even shown on TV. But when you consider how often the player can attend those arena fights (usually, you can go on to the next fight right after beating the last one), that means fights are staged very regularly. But that also means that lots and lots and lots of fighters die in the arena. At some point, the arena will run out of fighters and needs to recruit replacements. But when death is almost a certainty, there shouldn't be too many people willing to join up. And in post-apoc settings like Underrail and Age of Decadence, population isn't exactly an easily replenishable resource. Especially in Underrail, people shouldn't be that expendable. In addition to getting manpower problems, the model of "every fight ends with the death of one of the fighters" is actually terrible for business: ancient Roman gladiators even had fanclubs, just like modern sportsmen. People would flock into the arena just to see their favorite gladiator fight. I'd wager that matches between two fan favorites were the biggest audience magnets. And then there were some special and rare types of gladiators, too, like women gladiators and midget gladiators. If every fight ends in the death of one fighter, you're not going to be able to stage a lot of midget fights... once your only midget gladiator is dead, that's it. Midgets aren't exactly plentiful. Same with women fighters, some fierce Celtic woman that got enslaved is good gladiator material, but some Hellenic housewife? No. How do you replace these special gladiators when they die?

It's completely unrealistic and unsustainable. An arena where fights always end in the death of one fighter couldn't keep its business up for more than a year before it runs out of people, especially in a post-apocalyptic setting. And the audience won't celebrate the death of the arena champion at the hands of the newcomer, they'll be pissed that their favorite gladiator is gone and they won't be able to watch him fight anymore. There'd be a much lower audience for arena fights than there was in ancient Rome, because people will go "What's the point of watching arena fights when my favorite fighter will die a couple of weeks later, anyway? Whenever I get a new favorite, he soon dies due to bad luck! Lame!"

Arena fights should end non-lethally most of the time. Just have them end at around 10% of HP if you don't want to implement non-lethal rules. Or do it like D&D where characters only die once they hit -10 HP, and arena fights end once one fighter is unconscious. Or do it like Mount and Blade and give the combatants weapons that deal blunt damage, which end in a knockout instead of a death when you deal the final blow.

 

[Serus]

Historical armor or armor with some fantastic elements but still making sense for men.
For women (thanks to JarlFrank):

Spoiler

 

[TheImplodingVoice]

I like the armour system in KDC a lot. But nothing beats some nice jrpg small pieces of female armour and nice tiddies.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Greedfall is ok in this department

 

[RNGsus]

Most gladiator fights weren't to the death.

This is something that bothers me in a lot of RPGs. Whenever there's an arena, fights will go to the death, even in games with otherwise believable and well-constructed settings.

Gladiators, often not, but the majority of ring fights weren't between gladiators. If you fell into debt, even a friendless patrician could be sold to the pits by his creditors in bad times. That's on top of all the leftover captives from foreign wars. There had to be blood at the arena, this was an all day or week thing and the governor of the games had to deliver. I like horse racing more than the arena. RPGs should offer something like that, to break up the monotony of combat. The kungfu arena with its politics from Jade Empire, except its horse racing.