Greetings!
Lamellar Armours were very popular, perhaps even a primary armour type throughout Asia, India, and the Middle East for most of the Ancient and Medieval periods. What stats do use for your campaigns?
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
I'll be following this thread with great interest. Does anybody know how lamellar fares against piercing, crushing, and slashing damage in relation to one another?
For 5e, I'd probably use Scale Mail (a type of Medium Armor).
Quote from: Cave Bear;1127359I'll be following this thread with great interest. Does anybody know how lamellar fares against piercing, crushing, and slashing damage in relation to one another?
Greetings!
Indeed, it is a very interesting topic. From what I have read, there seems to also been different *styles* of Lamellar armour. Some, for example, were heavier in design, and more favoured by soldiers serving as infantry warriors or shock troops. Meanwhile, there was yet another type of lighter Lamellar armour, that was specially designed to be not merely lighter, but also maximizing mobility and being cooler, which was favoured by steppe mounted warriors. From the widespread historical popularity of such armours, they seemed to provide solid protection against slashing, crushing, and piercing weapons. Essentially Lamellar armour didn't go out of fashion until the most advanced types of chain and plate armours became available, and the mass use of gunpowder weapons. The heavier chain and plate armours even then, were only embraced by the more settled kingdoms and armies. Steppe tribes, as well as other tribal peoples living in deserts, jungles and marshes, as well as mountains and rough, badlands still preferred the traditional styles of lamellar armour.
Game stat wise, I'm not certain where Lamellar Armours would be at, as far as Armour Class designations.
I keep thinking about different weight and mobility attributes, different levels of protection. Arrgghh.:D
The many tribes and kingdoms also used several different kinds of Scale Mail. Scale Mail was also popular, and widely used, but it was also different from Lamellar Armour. From the prevailing use of armies and warriors, Scale Mail was considered good and valuable, though it doesn't seem to have been as popular as Lamellar Armour.
Chewing.:D
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: SHARK;1127368Scale Mail was also popular, and widely used, but it was also different from Lamellar Armour.
5e doesn't really define things so closely. Of the armors given for the game, Scale Mail is the best fit for lamellar even if it is technically a different style of construction. If you really wanted to, you could adjust the cost and/or weight a bit, but the AC (the most important value) is on a very narrow range, so it is unlikely to differ from Scale Male.
Quote from: HappyDaze;11273705e doesn't really define things so closely. Of the armors given for the game, Scale Mail is the best fit for lamellar even if it is technically a different style of construction. If you really wanted to, you could adjust the cost and/or weight a bit, but the AC (the most important value) is on a very narrow range, so it is unlikely to differ from Scale Male.
Greetings!
I was afraid you would say that, my friend!:D
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
I've been developing some extra granularity in the items in 5e for a Diablo game.
For armor, you can add various extra properties that you can then add and remove from various armors to give them greater differentiation. For example, different pieces of armor might grant some damage reduction (minor amounts) against different types of damage. Maybe a piece of plate mail has damage reduction against slashing and piercing, but none against bludgeoning, for instance.
Maybe another piece of armor lets you grant more of your dexterity bonus (the normal max is +2).
Maybe some armor reduces your movement a bit...
I'd think it would be Splint Mail AC 4 in AD&D.
In Runequest 3 I'd just use the Armor for Lammelar. In GURPS I'd have to dig the stats out of Low Tech. Rolemaster is problematic in that it doesn't really do scale or lammelar but I'd probably treat Lammelar as inferior plate and scale as supperior chain.
In Oriental Adventures Oyori, a full suit, plus shield was AC 3 and is classed in the same range as splint mail so AC 4 sans shield.
So assume that its got the same AC as splint in 5e as well. So AC 17 but about 1/3rd lighter. 18 with shield.
Quote from: David Johansen;1127382Rolemaster is problematic in that it doesn't really do scale or lammelar but I'd probably treat Lammelar as inferior plate and scale as supperior chain.
I'm sure there were MERP supplements (I really want to say Mines of Moria) with rules for lammelar and scale -- probably chain with with modifiers vs certain weapon types.
I'm pretty sure ACKS slots lamellar in where AD&D has splint.
Mythras treats it the same as scale and brigandine, the heaviest form of flexible armour.
Lamellar seems to fit in the same place as splint & banded, which vaguely resemble actual brigandine & coat-of-plates.
Scale armour is vulnerable to upward thrusts getting in under the scales, I would tend to give it a worse AC.
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1127373I've been developing some extra granularity in the items in 5e for a Diablo game.
For armor, you can add various extra properties that you can then add and remove from various armors to give them greater differentiation. For example, different pieces of armor might grant some damage reduction (minor amounts) against different types of damage. Maybe a piece of plate mail has damage reduction against slashing and piercing, but none against bludgeoning, for instance.
Maybe another piece of armor lets you grant more of your dexterity bonus (the normal max is +2).
Maybe some armor reduces your movement a bit...
Greetings!
I love that kind of detail, Macular Chaotic! I know there's strong support for "simplicity"--but I always like the nuanced details. I think such attributes make various kinds of armour and weaponry more interesting, and actually serve as a reflection of the fact that various kinds of armour and weaponry works better, faster, cooler, more efficiently, whatever--in different climates, terrains, and circumstances. Just like these realities develop and were embraced throughout history.:D
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: Omega;1127412In Oriental Adventures Oyori, a full suit, plus shield was AC 3 and is classed in the same range as splint mail so AC 4 sans shield.
So assume that its got the same AC as splint in 5e as well. So AC 17 but about 1/3rd lighter. 18 with shield.
Excellent thoughts, Omega! Like splint Mail. I see. AC 17, and 30% lighter in weight. I always keep chewing on the idea that there were reasons why huge armies in the Chinese empires used Lamellar armours; the Mongol Hordes, also widely embraced Lamellar armour. Meanwhile, further to the West, in Central Asian steppelands, there were both nomadic barbarian tribes, and sophisticated civilized kingdoms and powerful empires--they also used Lamellar armour, for use of troops in the deserts, the steppes, mountains hills and cities. Likewise to the south, in India, Lamellar armour was the standard. In the Middle East, and Persia, Lamellar armour was also very popular, for both infantry forces and cavalry. I would think that the professional soldiers, as well as skilled barbarian warriors, generals, warlords and khans, as well as the armoursmiths that crafted such armour to begin with embraced the Lamellar armour designs for good reasons. Lamellar armour provided formidable protective qualities while somehow catching the ever-elusive balance of comfort, coolness, and maneuverability. Good stuff, Omega!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: S'mon;1127431Lamellar seems to fit in the same place as splint & banded, which vaguely resemble actual brigandine & coat-of-plates.
Scale armour is vulnerable to upward thrusts getting in under the scales, I would tend to give it a worse AC.
Greetings!
S'mon! Splint type mail and Banded armour was very popular, weren't they? You know, so often in D&D, we see players immediately grabbing Chainmail and then hopping right to Plate Mail.
I suppose I have this dissonance with the game mechanics and my knowledge of history--great diversities of armies and warriors didn't seem to make the same kinds of choices, across thousands of miles, and centuries of time, you know?
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: SHARK;1127454I always keep chewing on the idea that there were reasons why huge armies in the Chinese empires used Lamellar armours; the Mongol Hordes, also widely embraced Lamellar armour. Meanwhile, further to the West, in Central Asian steppelands, there were both nomadic barbarian tribes, and sophisticated civilized kingdoms and powerful empires--they also used Lamellar armour, for use of troops in the deserts, the steppes, mountains hills and cities. Likewise to the south, in India, Lamellar armour was the standard. In the Middle East, and Persia, Lamellar armour was also very popular, for both infantry forces and cavalry. I would think that the professional soldiers, as well as skilled barbarian warriors, generals, warlords and khans, as well as the armoursmiths that crafted such armour to begin with embraced the Lamellar armour designs for good reasons. Lamellar armour provided formidable protective qualities while somehow catching the ever-elusive balance of comfort, coolness, and maneuverability. Good stuff, Omega!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
OA actually explains this. Though not sure how far it applies to the real world.
But basically it put forward that these regions are alot hotter and wetter and thus more hostile to metal armour where the wearer might well overheat or the gear rust. That and the lamellars were lighter and better suited the more mobile fighting styles of the east. Add to that possible metal shortages or prioritizing weapons over armour and the trend to lamellar makes sense depending on all the factors involved.
Keep in mind that metal was used in eastern armour. Its just that it was not as prevalent as in the west.
On a related topic theres the fact that several eastern cultures did not use shields as much, or in the same ways as in the west. Again for various reasons partially tied to mobility. That and some of the shields that were employed went in rather different directions than in the west. Similar to how different cultures in the west developed unique shield types and shapes that fit their particular fighting styles and to combat particular enemy fighting styles.
Quote from: Omega;1127482That and the lamellars were lighter and better suited the more mobile fighting styles of the east.
This is why I figured that (again, in 5e terms) lamellar was better represented as a variation of scale mail (a medium armor) than with a variation of a heavy armor type (e.g., splint).
Same protection at a lighter weight. I suspect the trade off was that lamellar type armours need some repair afterwards. But the tradeoff was it was easier to replace parts. Who knows. But I'd go still with splint for 5e to represent the full suit.
OA had that piece-by-piece system as well.
Quote from: Omega;1127496I'd go still with splint for 5e to represent the full suit.
If you do so, then Dex has no effect on AC in lamellar, and the lamellar requires a (somewhat) high Strength to prevent a reduction in movement rate (unless worn by a dwarf). It just doesn't feel right, especially for cinematic (as opposed to hard historically accurate) lamellar. It could also be possible that there are lighter and heavier variants of lamellar (mirroring the 5e Plate and Half Plate armors) so both answers are correct.
ACKS assigns lamellar armor as AC 5. ACKS puts Chain at AC 4 and Plate at AC 6.
ACKS puts encumbrance in stone as equal to AC, with +1 stone for a spear/polearm and about 1/2 stone for all the rest of your gear. The breakpoints for encumbrance are at 0-4.9, 5-6.9, 7-9.9, and 10+ for movement of 120', 90', 60', and 30'.
The advantage of lamellar then is that it lies just to left of the breakpoint for encumbrance. If I am in lamellar (5) with pike (+1) and side weapon (+1/6), I'm at AC 6 with encumbrance 6.16 with movement 90'. If I am in plate armor (6), I'm at AC 7 with encumbrance 7.16 and movement 60'. The difference in movement speed has very big implications during mass combat.
Quote from: SHARK;1127455I suppose I have this dissonance with the game mechanics and my knowledge of history--great diversities of armies and warriors didn't seem to make the same kinds of choices, across thousands of miles, and centuries of time, you know?
Part of the reason is that historical soldiers seldom had an equipment list with many kinds of armor to choose from the way players do in an RPG. And soldiers in many times and places don't always get to select their own armor. They may get only what the ruler/general/culture provides.
Like many of you, I love to read about historical armor and weapons. Although it gets tempting to model everything with great granularity, I have recently found myself appreciating more general representations of gear. I'm currently playing a game that defines armor simply as light, medium, heavy, and allows players to describe it however they like. In that light, I would consider a full suit of lamellar, including gauntlets and great-helm, made by a master, as heavy armor. A lamellar hauberk that ends at the elbows and knees, coupled with an open-faced helmet is medium armor. A lamellar vest to protect the torso alone is light armor, assuming nothing else is worn.
Greetings!
Here is a very cool song about Mongol warriors. Besides the music being awesome, I think that the actual photographs of traditional Mongol warriors, as well as the black and white artwork is pretty inspiring! The scenes of the armour and weapons is very cool.
[video=youtube;3rPtuCvbUtw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rPtuCvbUtw[/youtube]
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Kansas City currently has a nice traveling exhibit (https://www.unionstation.org/events/genghis-khan) on Ghengis "pick your own spelling" Khan and the Mongols. Lots of information and artifacts.
Quote from: Bren;1127696Kansas City currently has a nice traveling exhibit (https://www.unionstation.org/events/genghis-khan) on Ghengis "pick your own spelling" Khan and the Mongols. Lots of information and artifacts.
Greetings!
Oh, damn! That exhibit sounds just awesome! I would love to go to that! Artifacts, weapons, Mongolian music, dancers, gold treasures! What's not to like, you know? I'd pay money to go to that, too, for damned sure. I wonder how they are doing that program with all the lockdown orders?
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
It was good. I saw it over Christmas holiday, so I don't know what effect KC's lockdown has on what they are doing.
Quote from: Bren;1127776It was good. I saw it over Christmas holiday, so I don't know what effect KC's lockdown has on what they are doing.
Greetings!
Oh, fuck! You went to the exhibit? What did you learn, my friend? What surprised you the most? Damn, that's awesome, Bren. I am so terribly jealous!:D
I had an opportunity to see the Ancient Egypt exhibit at LACMA many years back, back in 2006 I think it was. The Ancient Egypt exhibit only travels to the United States like, once every 25 years. Or so. I remember seeing it for the first time back in 1976, in San Francisco. So, some 30 years apart. Not quite a "Once in a lifetime experience" but close to it.:D
I learned that Ancient Egypt was a great and mighty empire, and a distinct culture which endured for *millennia* The ancient Egyptians were premier in their day as the greatest of everything, the dominant culture of the age. Their architecture literally aweing the world for centuries. Then there is their writing system; their ancient, mysterious religion; their enduring political system and structure; the noteworthy dynamic that Egypt worked very hard and deliberately to ensure that Egyptian society remained the same, unchanging, for hundreds and even thousands of years. Philosophically, Egypt always struggled to build and maintain Law and Order, resisting Chaos. The Egyptians were premier experts in philosophy, engineering, architecture, medicine, clothing manufacture, cosmetics, perfumes, dancing, and sex. The ancient Egyptians seemed to have the lock on everything to do with sex and sensuality in their day. A truly astounding and fantastic culture!
Then, of course, there was the gold. Gold, and glorious riches that make Bill Gates seem somehow petty in comparison. Besides the huge burial masks and sarcophagi--I saw enormous beds, huge king-size things fashioned from pure, solid gold, carved with hippo heads, and inlaid with turquoise, onyx, and jewels. Chairs crafted from the best bronze, then overlaid with gold and inlaid with ivory, and carved with lion feet on the chair's own feet. Just jaw-dropping incredible artwork, craftsmanship, and majestic, overwhelming wealth. Real wealth, you know? It made me think this treasury is genuinely priceless. This stuff has to be mind-bogglingly valuable and precious. Dragon hoards of fantastic wealth really do exist. *laughs* Ivory inlaid ceramic perfume jars, with elephant head stoppers, inlaid with onyx and pearls for god's sake. Over and over and over, room after room, stuffed with these treasures. Bronze and emerald couches, ivory, gold, onyx, jade, fine woods, the materials used in so many items, it's just stunning. Then you think about the craftsmen that actually crafted all of this stuff. Yeah, the Ancient Egyptians were badass. No wonder they felt like they were anointed and blessed by the gods.:D
I have a blue ceramic hippo, engraved with runes and such, a replica of some kind from similar artwork the Egyptians had. Except theirs was some fine stone, inlaid with turquoise and so on. My blue hippo isn't a great treasure--it cost me I think $50 dollars, but it is a nice memento from the Ancient Egypt exhibit. Such a wonderful trip, to see such majestic beauty and cultural and historical artifacts, from thousands and thousands of years ago. I love these kinds of experiences!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Arrows of Indra has lamellar armor. It gives you AC16.
Quote from: SHARK;1127784Oh, fuck! You went to the exhibit? What did you learn, my friend? What surprised you the most? Damn, that's awesome, Bren. I am so terribly jealous!:D
Lots of stuff was just reintroducing things I'd learned and forgotten or seeing an actual example of something I'd read about. Probably the most interesting thing to me were the models of ger or yurts and the explanation of how they were constructed and erected. Second and third were depictions of siege equipment and the life size model of a Mongol heavy cavalryman. Mongol heavy cavalry are often forgotten or overshadowed by their light cavalry/horse archer troops.