Historical armour in RPGs

[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.

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.

Yeah, but in RPGs the arena fights are usually styled as professional gladiator things, with you making a small career of it, fighting progressively more popular opponents until you reach the champion - and each of these matches is lethal.

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

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.

I like that they actually had two versions of this fight. You had Jorah vs. the Doth'raki as mentioned and then you had Bronn vs. Ser Vardis. Jorah wins because of his armor being too fortified to slash through and Bronn wins because he literally runs circles and makes the heavily armored knight tire himself out which makes him an immobile tin can.

If we're talking Game of Thrones though, the Hound had some serious Fashion Souls.

 

[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.

Yeah, but in RPGs the arena fights are usually styled as professional gladiator things, with you making a small career of it, fighting progressively more popular opponents until you reach the champion - and each of these matches is lethal.

Speaking of non lethal arena games in rpgs, I actually enjoyed FFX's football game. I forget what its called, but its the only part of that game I remember. There are plenty of ways rpg devs can do arena games that make sense.

 

[Cryomancer]

Gothic 3 had "non lethal arenas", you can lose by being beaten and they take your money or steeping away from the arena.

Most duels among norseman historically speaking was til first blood, not til death.

One thing that i don't understand is. Why undead rarely uses armor in fantasy settings? I mean, zombies are resistent to blunt attacks. Plate armor impenetrable to slashing from non superhuman soldiers, combine both and you have a unity who is extremely hard to be defeated. I understand that plate armor was expensive IRL but in most fantasy games, where they can use magic to create food, animate tools, etc; plate will not be hard to produce.

 

[vazha]

3 pages worth of discussion and nobody has mentioned Siege of Avalon yet? Pah. Now thats a game that got armors (and plenty more other things, like chardoll) damn right.

 

[DraQ]

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.

(...)

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).

Big no to chainmail bikini and barbarians wearing a lot of leather BDSM gear straps.

This shit would be worse than actually fighting naked. Not only it would chafe like fuck, but anyone entertaining any illusion regarding this kind of stuff providing at least partial protection is welcome to take a stroll through the woods off the beaten path (preferably in summer) - once in sandals, once barefoot. They will quickly discover how good loosely spaced straps are at redirecting and guiding sharp objects that would otherwise glance mostly harmlessly off right into their flesh.

Straps are only worth it for actually carrying stuff, if the benefit outweighs the risk.

It's much easier to justify actual nudity than softporn armour - after all fighting in the nude did happen historically, and it would be more prevalent if it actually worked:

• Perhaps woad or magical tattoos confer some powers only to warriors who otherwise fight naked?
• Perhaps you really win divine favour by demonstrating how much fuck you do not give?
• Perhaps any magic you channel doesn't play well with any sort of clothes apart from small pieces of ritual jewelry? (so you'd only wear something you could quickly cast away)
• Perhaps you wield shapeshifting magic that would end badly (to you or your garb) if used with constraining, not easily discardable attire like suit of armour?
• Perhaps magic can reshape or otherwise affect all matter around caster unselectively? A caster can open a tunnel through a stone wall but will tear anything they wear into shreds in the process or set fire to the enemies but also any piece of clothing touching their body? Lightning and metal anyone?

Note that you can justify a lot of stuff this way: if a character relies on channeling earth magic they might need to fight barefoot.

In any case though this kind of stuff will look a lot more convincing than trying to get people to believe that chainmail lingerie totally makes sense and isn't just a thinly veiled attempt at soft-porn injection.

if you meet a guard wearing bonemold armor, he probably belongs to house Redoran.

Actually all great house guards wore bonemold, but in different styles - Redorans wore Gah-Julan style with cloth cowls and scarves to protect against ash storms in their part of the Vvardenfell, Hlaalu wore Armun-An, etc. There were also some styles not associated with any of the GH (speaking of worldbuilding).

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 doubt this one. Unequal weight distribution between legs would likely fuck them up something fierce during long marches. Asymmetrical arm and body armour? Absolutely yes.

otherwise.

 

[Tigranes]

Draq is right. Chainmail bikinis look retarded and they don't make any sense. Might as well just go for full naked Celtic warriors. If you want hot women in the scene, there's long wagons full of prostitutes that would often accompany military expeditions along with cooks and other hangers-on (in many cases far outnumbering the fighting men). In that case there would actually be a reason to go around bikini style, instead of General Mary-Anne the Brave standing alongside General Richard the Strong with her buttcheeks enjoying the midsummer breeze.

 

[mondblut]

It's much easier to justify actual nudity than softporn armour

Softporn armour needs no justification. We are straight white men and we like it that way.

 

[RNGsus]

Yeah, this isn't [current year] anymore.

 

[turkishronin]

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.

Ben Hur RPG when

 

[oscar]

The 'immobility' of armour has been greatly exagerrated in popular culture to build a "tank vs ninja" false dichtomy. 9/10 lack of armour was a cost issue not a deliberate "oh we can move and bend slightly faster without it" choice.

RPGs tend to fall into an "all or nothing" trap of you either want to be fully suited up in magic-enhanced plate or wearing druidic robe of +5 dexterity wolf-form where even a bronze-studded leather helmet will somehow utterly tank your defence compared to a magical circlet.

 

[JarlFrank]

The 'immobility' of armour has been greatly exagerrated in popular culture to build a "tank vs ninja" false dichtomy. 9/10 lack of armour was a cost issue not a deliberate "oh we can move and bend slightly faster without it" choice.

Yep.

Big no to chainmail bikini and barbarians wearing a lot of leather BDSM gear straps.

This shit would be worse than actually fighting naked. Not only it would chafe like fuck, but anyone entertaining any illusion regarding this kind of stuff providing at least partial protection is welcome to take a stroll through the woods off the beaten path (preferably in summer) - once in sandals, once barefoot. They will quickly discover how good loosely spaced straps are at redirecting and guiding sharp objects that would otherwise glance mostly harmlessly off right into their flesh.

Straps are only worth it for actually carrying stuff, if the benefit outweighs the risk.

Yeah, sure. But if you really want to include chainmail bikinis, you can justify it in a "I don't wear it for protection but for style and to show how badass I am, baby" way. It being even more impractical than full nudity can make it an even bolder statement, or it can be a cultural thing, or it can be considered a piece of jewelry rather than proper armor, and it's enchanted... etc etc. Yeah, it wouldn't be the most logical thing in the setting, but it can be justified if you really want to.

Also, I'm only talking about the traditional classic pulp barbarian outfit: loincloth and boots for the guy, chainmail bikini for the girl. No leather straps or any of that crap. Basically these two:

I'd be willing to accept a cute chainmail bikini because it's
- sexy
- doesn't add that much weight to your body to be massively impractical

But those weird JRPG armors with all the leather straps everywhere? Yeah, no. Those are retarded. Not gonna defend that shit.

Also, fun fact: I once came up with a quest idea that would parody the chainmail bikini. If you're playing a female character, some guy will offer you a role as an Amazon warrioress in that theatre play he wrote. Your costume: a chainmail bikini.
You can actually pick "Amazon warrioress" as one of your character's origins, so if you come from that culture you can tell him that nobody wears shit like this. But he'll still insist you put it on for the role since that's what the audience expects.

It's much easier to justify actual nudity than softporn armour - after all fighting in the nude did happen historically, and it would be more prevalent if it actually worked:

• Perhaps woad or magical tattoos confer some powers only to warriors who otherwise fight naked?
• Perhaps you really win divine favour by demonstrating how much fuck you do not give?
• Perhaps any magic you channel doesn't play well with any sort of clothes apart from small pieces of ritual jewelry? (so you'd only wear something you could quickly cast away)
• Perhaps you wield shapeshifting magic that would end badly (to you or your garb) if used with constraining, not easily discardable attire like suit of armour?
• Perhaps magic can reshape or otherwise affect all matter around caster unselectively? A caster can open a tunnel through a stone wall but will tear anything they wear into shreds in the process or set fire to the enemies but also any piece of clothing touching their body? Lightning and metal anyone?

Note that you can justify a lot of stuff this way: if a character relies on channeling earth magic they might need to fight barefoot.

Overall, your list of ideas is very good at making unarmored (or completely naked) characters viable by providing a good reason for not wearing armor that isn't just the typical retarded "armor reduces your dex hurr durr" based on misconceptions about armor's heaviness. Magical tattoos are a cool idea (especially if they're permanent, you only have a limited amount of skin real estate on your body, so choosing which tattoos to get is a permanent irreversible character choice - they can't be switched around like equipment), maybe their magic is solar-powered and they don't work when you cover them up or something. Clothing and armor interfering with spellcasting, yep, even D&D already did that. Shapeshifting ripping your clothes apart is a thing I'd like to see in settings that allow for shapeshifting, just to cause butthurt in players who just accidentally lost their Epic Spellcasting Robe + 5 because they assumed clothes would just vanish into the ether (??) when you shapeshift into a thing that's several degrees larger than you, and reappear unharmed when you shift back. Sorry bro that's not how it works, say goodbye to your Epic Spellcasting Robe +5 and say hello to tiny little cloth shreds +5.

And, of course, it can always be a cultural thing and tied to roleplaying a certain character. Single player RPGs don't need to be balanced. Not every option and not every character type needs to be equally effective. Maybe the only thing fighting naked and believing the gods protect you does is increase your morale, but when it comes to actual protection, you're vastly outclassed by anyone who's wearing a simple chainmail shirt. That would make "naked barbarian playthrough" a nice challenge for experienced players who'll willingly gimp themselves to roleplay this particular character type. In a system with advantages and disadvantages, Daggerfall style, there could be a "nudist" feat that lowers your character's morale whenever restrictive clothing or armor is worn, and increases it whenever you're naked. It also bestows some additional skill points on you to compensate for the fact that you'll never be able to wear armor effectively, or even enchanted clothing (and such a feat would further add validity to the character, rather than making it a simple LARP of "I am barbarian so I fight bare-chested" without any mechanical necessity for it).

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 doubt this one. Unequal weight distribution between legs would likely fuck them up something fierce during long marches. Asymmetrical arm and body armour? Absolutely yes.

Single greaves are attested in several graves of soldiers as well as contemporary depictions.

It is also mentioned by various mostly reliable authors:

Note that while it is assumed the single greave was given up later on for the sake of increased mobility, it was in use for quite a while and part of the standard government-issued Roman military equipment.

In the context of an RPG where the player assembles his own equipment, the weight difference between the two legs if one leg wears a heavy greave but the other is only clad in a light sandal could incur a small DEX penalty - which would actually make sense in this case, unlike the huge DEX penalty usually added to suits of plate armor. Maybe the devs can even come up with a nice little formula that calculates the DEX penalty based on the actual weight difference between the two legs (so one thick leather boot + one steel greave is less bad than one bare foot + one steel greave, because the difference in weight between the two legs would be greater in the second case).

 

[Mikeal]

The 'immobility' of armour has been greatly exagerrated in popular culture to build a "tank vs ninja" false dichtomy. 9/10 lack of armour was a cost issue not a deliberate "oh we can move and bend slightly faster without it" choice.

RPGs tend to fall into an "all or nothing" trap of you either want to be fully suited up in magic-enhanced plate or wearing druidic robe of +5 dexterity wolf-form where even a bronze-studded leather helmet will somehow utterly tank your defence compared to a magical circlet.

 

[Hassar]

I liked history and mythology growing up so I tend to prefer armor sets and proportions grounded in reality. For me, fantasy has to be grounded in reality or it sinks into some strange place between clownish and a fairy tale - maybe more cartoonish then anything. I don’t mind some fantastic elements but chainmail bikinis and fifty pound shoulder pads or pauldrons bigger than a character’s head are definitely turnoffs.

 

[DJOGamer PT]

It should feel grounded, but some fantasy and creativity should also be throw in.

The common, man-made, non-magical armor and weapons that ordinay soldiers and warriors use, should be historically inspired (key word being inspired not copied).
Details are also important. Higher quality stuff should look fancier and more expensive than regular, and only rich/noble NPC's should have it.

However when we get to the high-end special items, while it should be "grounded" enough for anyone to suspend their disbelief, it must be something clearly unique and fantastical.
The moment you see it you must immedeately recognize it isn't like anything else in the game.

And the fact that 80/90% of the armors/weapons look "realistic", further enchances the artifacts uniqueness.