AP of various Armour

[Owl]

I got Arms of Legend today (as well as Monsters!) and I decided to start with looking at the armour section, because I know that if I get to play this game someone is going to ask about armour (it's like they expect to get stabbed!).
And I see that brigandine armour has an AP of 7 while plate has 6. This surprises me since I would assume that plate would be more effective than brigandine, based on... well, it's a piece of solid metal really?
Can anyone explain to me how brigandine has better protection than plate, at least so I can defend it to my players? DOoes it have to do with brigandine only being availible as a skirt and arm covers?

 

[Dan True]

The plate represented here is not a full-fitting late-medieval plate. Think of it instead as 1200/early 1300 plate - i.e. pieces of plate over mail. So, the brigandine will actually cover more, as it is multiple plates in hard leather, covering everything.

The full-fitting late-medieval gothic plate has been in Wraith Recon set at AP 8.

- Dan

 

[Owl]

Thanks for the reply! I suppose that makes sense, it's good enough for me at least.

 

[Kirche]

Owl,

I have to say I've just been looking through my just received copy of Arms of Legend and disagree with quite a few of the listed APs,

for example
banded seems to suggest Lorica Segmentata ie the 1st century 'traditional' Roman armour which would be worth quite a bit more than 3AP as would lamellar - quite rigidly laced together scales.

The description of Plate doesn't seem to suggest 13th century reinforced Mail

Plate: Made of moulded individual metal plates, this armour provides excellent
protection but is encumbering and comes with a heavy price tag

it doesn't mention Mail at all.


Brigandine grew out of the Coat of Plates as a transitional armour between mail and plate and whilst protective would not be as protective as a breastplate. ( it continued to be used however as high quality materials could be used as a front covering instead of leather or linen and was used when it was less seemly to wear heavier armours.)

I'll probably just alter the armour section myself - changing the APs and removing armour types that are doubted to have existed ie Ring Mail which is believed to have been 'suggested' by the way contempory artists represent Mail.

It's nice to see Bezainted thou

Sorry I understand I'm probably being a bit of a pendant than is required, but the one thing I was looking forward to in this book was better rules and info on armour that didn't have it's roots in early D&D.
it's just my just my 2p

That said the rest of the book I like a lot :mrgreen:


Kirche

 

[Simulacrum]

In RQ (and I presume now in legend) there has always been an ancient rather than medieval starting point in describing and typing armour. 6pnt plate, is, in my view, nothing to do with plate and mail of the 13th century, but with the bonze or iron plate of the ancient world; a pair of greaves or a muscled cuirass, for example. I'd ascribe plate+mail a higher value. In prior RQ editions it was possible to layer armour - i.e. a more detailed view was taken of construction and materials; I could layer mail over quilted padding, or wear a plate breastplate and greaves, with leather pterges covering abdomen etc.

As it happens, the AP value of helmets have always ben an indicator that sometimes one should be prepared to be a bit more flexible in apportioning AP values. A Helm might be a cap, open-faced or closed (and that's a highly simplistic breakdown). Is a full face-covering helmet of hardened and perhaps reinforced leather less protective than a simple bronze (plate?) conical cap (such as a greek pilos) with no cheek flaps, neck guard etc?

As a ruleset covering multiple milieus it is impossible for Legend to go into serious detail that works for everyone without looking like another sort of game with a heavily simulationist feel.

On the other hand, once you have a setting designed, you will (presumably) limit the available range of armour and weapons to those appropriate to the cultures in your campaign. At that point the list is probably short enough to go into detail. Two things I do for example:

1) Describe a helmet and award it an AP value (often I do this in reverse, naturally)
2) Point out the same armour can be made in different materials - in AoT (as in real life) Lamellar armour can be produced from leather, horn, metal or a combination of the three...so lamellar armour can come in several flavours of AP value.

 

[Kirche]

In RQ (and I presume now in legend) there has always been an ancient rather than medieval starting point in describing and typing armour. 6pnt plate, is, in my view, nothing to do with plate and mail of the 13th century, but with the bonze or iron plate of the ancient world; a pair of greaves or a muscled cuirass, for example. I'd ascribe plate+mail a higher value. In prior RQ editions it was possible to layer armour - i.e. a more detailed view was taken of construction and materials; I could layer mail over quilted padding, or wear a plate breastplate and greaves, with leather pterges covering abdomen etc.

I haven't read RQ so I can only comment on Legend.
Having the 'Arms' book include include Brigandine naturally made me think of a more Medieval - Late Medieval feel as that is the period that Brig is from, this aside if all the armour is made from Iron as the book suggests ( it lists steel as a alternate material but not Iron) Brig should still have a lower value than Plate.
I can't find anything on layering armour

As it happens, the AP value of helmets have always ben an indicator that sometimes one should be prepared to be a bit more flexible in apportioning AP values. A Helm might be a cap, open-faced or closed (and that's a highly simplistic breakdown). Is a full face-covering helmet of hardened and perhaps reinforced leather less protective than a simple bronze (plate?) conical cap (such as a greek pilos) with no cheek flaps, neck guard etc?

I'd agree but it doesn't mention any value for helms.

As a ruleset covering multiple milieus it is impossible for Legend to go into serious detail that works for everyone without looking like another sort of game with a heavily simulationist feel.

A fair point, some discussion on 'suggestions' for time periods of armour would have been nice though

On the other hand, once you have a setting designed, you will (presumably) limit the available range of armour and weapons to those appropriate to the cultures in your campaign. At that point the list is probably short enough to go into detail. Two things I do for example:

1) Describe a helmet and award it an AP value (often I do this in reverse, naturally)
2) Point out the same armour can be made in different materials - in AoT (as in real life) Lamellar armour can be produced from leather, horn, metal or a combination of the three...so lamellar armour can come in several flavours of AP value.

Absolutely, I couldn't agree more. This is something I will be doing - also noting that certain weapons are better against certain types of armour.
as an aside - when is the Iron companion book coming out I can't wait to look at the equipment lists
AoT is my favourite setting atm and what persuaded me to get Legend in the first place

As I said in my previous post this is just my 2p and I'm probably being way to pendantic

Kirche

 

[Simulacrum]

can't find anything on layering armour

It's not there - the core rules prevent you doing it by stating only the highest level of protection counts when wearing multiple types (page 95) and all armour is already considered lined or padded (page 94). I'm not mad keen on that rule, but it does prevent arms race of layers. On the other hand there should be a difference between wearing a helmet over an arming cap and wearing one without, even if you penalise the lack of arming cap rather than reward the addition to keep AP points in a certain zone.

I'd agree but it doesn't mention any value for helms.

It doesn't - the assumption is that the armour type is applied. So you pay for the equivalent of plate, brigantine etc and just assume the helmet is the same. Now of course it isn't - the helmet is likely to be different from the rest of the panoply, and in reality the construction types of armour listed are usually not even appropriate to making a helmet out of (hence if such examples existed historically, they are very rare).

A fair point, some discussion on 'suggestions' for time periods of armour would have been nice though

Maybe that's something we can do in this forum. It's as relevant and interesting (at least) as elaborating on spell lists etc.

This is something I will be doing - also noting that certain weapons are better against certain types of armour.

I can't make my mind up whether to try and model this in at any point in the basic weapon/armour stats. May be a step to far for my games. I have done it a bit with combat manoeuvers (e.g. Pierce).


Iron Companion text is delivered to the edit and all art work is done...So I'm guessing end of march for print at the moment, so long as there aren't too many revisions needed.

I'm always pleased to hear someone is enjoying AoT. Helps keep me focussed.

 

[Marrethiel]

It's not there - the core rules prevent you doing it by stating only the highest level of protection counts when wearing multiple types (page 95) and all armour is already considered lined or padded (page 94). I'm not mad keen on that rule, but it does prevent arms race of layers.

An interesting point, doestn' AoT allow layering of armour? I am sure I remember seeing that and thinking it was different from the core RAW.

 

[Kirche]

can't find anything on layering armour

It's not there - the core rules prevent you doing it by stating only the highest level of protection counts when wearing multiple types (page 95) and all armour is already considered lined or padded (page 94). I'm not mad keen on that rule, but it does prevent arms race of layers. On the other hand there should be a difference between wearing a helmet over an arming cap and wearing one without, even if you penalise the lack of arming cap rather than reward the addition to keep AP points in a certain zone.

Ah I didn't think I'd seen it :wink:

A fair point, some discussion on 'suggestions' for time periods of armour would have been nice though

Maybe that's something we can do in this forum. It's as relevant and interesting (at least) as elaborating on spell lists etc.

Could do, it'd certainly be as interesting to me

This is something I will be doing - also noting that certain weapons are better against certain types of armour.

I can't make my mind up whether to try and model this in at any point in the basic weapon/armour stats. May be a step to far for my games. I have done it a bit with combat manoeuvers (e.g. Pierce).

I've done it before - 2 ways either give the armour different values of protection
eg blunt /pierce/slash

or give certain weapons a bonus vs certain armour
eg big crushy hammers v mail.

I quite like a bit of combat crunch but it could be a bit much esp the 1st suggestion

the combat manoeuvers work as well - I did like seeing sunder for the poelax in the main rules ( 1st time I've seen a poleax modeled well )

Iron Companion text is delivered to the edit and all art work is done...So I'm guessing end of march for print at the moment, so long as there aren't too many revisions needed.

I'm always pleased to hear someone is enjoying AoT. Helps keep me focussed.

Excellent!
Kirche

 

[Simulacrum]

An interesting point, doestn' AoT allow layering of armour? I am sure I remember seeing that and thinking it was different from the core RAW.

It does, but not in simple stacking terms, more by describing a combo of armour -
The main purpose of 'Taskan Layered Armour' is not to rack up huge AP totals, but to put something between you and a bypass armour manouevre - which is precisely what sophisticated armours are for. In the circumstances the armour is still in a range of 4-6 points (Lamellar at variable AP value + 'Padding', the value when bypassed is still 1 or 2AP). AoT is prescriptive about what sort of armour is generally available, although a very wealthy warrior could potentially have some locations racked up to 7 or 8AP by using pieces of plate in place of lamellar.

This is all really to say that for your campaign, you can customise the armour available if you want to get crunchy or to better represent a particular historical type.