Quote from: Cave Bear;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?
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.
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.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: SHARK;Scale 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: mAcular Chaotic;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...
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.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: Omega;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.
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;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.
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
Scale armour vs lamellar armour
Post
by GrishnakTheGoblin » Sun Dec 11, 2:46 pm
Goto LIONSHELL to know more.
Bonjour,
In real life, do scale armour and lamellar armour offer the same protection? Should they be considered the same in 1E/2E AD&D?
Thanks for any info.
Regards from Canada,
François
Re: Scale armour vs lamellar armour
Post
by Matthew- » Sun Dec 11, 2:49 pm
Lamellar probably offers slightly better protection overall, everything else being equal (coverage, quality, et cetera), but AD&D is not set up on that basis so it is going to be misleading to compare them without taking into account the things that are not equal.
It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after one’s own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.
– Yoshida Kenko (-), Tsurezure-Gusa ()
Re: Scale armour vs lamellar armour
Post
by Datagoblin » Sun Dec 11, 3:42 pm
Depending on the materials used, I am assuming you are talking about iron in both armors construction. 'Lamellar' armor was frequently used as augmentation to chain mail (mail), so you should take that into consideration.
Scale mail was used, for one example, by the Romans. In some instances it was preferred over mail for its better protection against certain types of attacks. They also had something called 'Lorica Plumata', which was scale over mail.
To keep it simple, I would say that iron Scale armor should have its own AC (go by the AC chart in the books) and perhaps 'lamellar' would be something in addition to Chain Mail...Possible the armor class of chain +1 for lamellar? Charge accordingly for the extra armor addition. Unless you are going to have lamellar armor stand alone (for example certain types of Japanese armor), that would be my best guess for the game.
G
Be content to remember that those who can make omelettes properly can do nothing else.
Re: Scale armour vs lamellar armour
Post
by sambudak » Sun Dec 11, 4:16 pm
I thought that was splint? Lamellar and mail?
Re: Scale armour vs lamellar armour
Post
by Datagoblin » Sun Dec 11, 5:18 pm
For more lamellarsinformation, please contact us. We will provide professional answers.
sambudak wrote:I thought that was splint? Lamellar and mail?
Nope. Check here for some really good in depth discussion: http://www.dragonsfoot.net/forums/viewt ... 1&start=15" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
There is no 'lamellar' armor in the DMG (1st ed). Since the term itself is not properly descriptive of that type of armor (meaning a bunch of styles of armor were considered lamellar), I was trying to suggest a useage that would fit in the game for the OP.
G
Last edited by
Datagoblin on Sun Dec 11, 5:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Be content to remember that those who can make omelettes properly can do nothing else.
Re: Scale armour vs lamellar armour
Post
by Matthew- » Sun Dec 11, 5:21 pm
In second edition they changed the description to something more like lamellar over mail, which is probably from where the confusion is arising.
It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after one’s own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.
– Yoshida Kenko (-), Tsurezure-Gusa ()
Re: Scale armour vs lamellar armour
Post
by Datagoblin » Sun Dec 11, 5:29 pm
I think you are right Matthew! I was going off of 1st ed AD&D for my input.
G
Be content to remember that those who can make omelettes properly can do nothing else.
Re: Scale armour vs lamellar armour
Post
by sambudak » Sun Dec 11, 8:41 pm
I'm still wishing I hadn't sold my 1e DMG, but yeah 2e splint is what I described. Using actual armor nomenclature alongside the gamespeak confuses things too.
Re: Scale armour vs lamellar armour
Post
by genghisdon » Mon Dec 12, 4:32 am
GrishnakTheGoblin wrote:Bonjour,
In real life, do scale armour and lamellar armour offer the same protection? Should they be considered the same in 1E/2E AD&D?
Thanks for any info.
Regards from Canada,
François
Lamellar ought be a step better than scale, or else equal, your call. mail & lamellar would be "better" than mail or lamellar alone (duh). Scale is statted poorly in AD&D IMHO.
Who watches the watchmen?
IMPERIOUS REX!!
"DIE FOR THE DOW"
Re: Scale armour vs lamellar armour
Post
by GrishnakTheGoblin » Mon Dec 12, 10:59 pm
If you are looking for more details, kindly visit bellows cover.
Bonjour,
Thank you all for your input and the link to the banded mail discussion (nice pictures there).
genghisdon wrote:Scale is statted poorly in AD&D IMHO.
How would you stat it?
Regards from Canada,
François