Armor Confusion

This is kind of a continuation of the Shield Article in the last post.

A big part of the confusion comes from the ahistorical mix of armors in the pseudo Europe and the understandably mediocre research. Let me be clear none of this is not the authors fault. Back then they were short research material and what they did have was old inaccurate Victorian stuff. Given what little they had, they did a pretty good job and most importantly its playable.

The armor issues as I see them are

1st the existing armor types in B/X are Elizabethan not medieval (Buff Coat, Mail, Plate)

2nd Leather was in fact was rarely used in Europe as armor early on because of the expense and the inability to easily repair it . This category should be layered textile defenses, probably using the same stats as leather.

3rd Happily the mail rules are fine though there should be two or three lengths of it (the most common short hauberk, what D&D calls a mail shirt, longer hauberks and full mail) with different stats.

Now it helps to that mail was really effective (it can't be cut or trusted through with anything but a heavy longbow or specialized weapons) but it was horribly expensive. Defeating it was done not with a sword slash or cut but either with specialized thrusting weapons, going around the armor or by beating the wearer to death with a mace (the #1 weapon) . Not very heroic.

Shields were used in the mail period because they were cheap and effective especially for warriors who could not afford armor and they could protect weak spots (the legs typically) and prevent a solid blow. Still very useful.

4thThat leaves Plate Mail. What D&D calls plate mail is probably a coat of plates over mail!

A coat of plates was a common armor used later than mail . It looked rather like a modern ballistic vest with inserts within budget and comfort for many soldiers but as Widby showed, it too was mostly impervious. Most wounds were on unarmored legs.

Shields were still used at that period and and even later but by skirmishers and in personal combat.

What we think of as plate was what Gygax called Field Plate and Full Plate in AD&D. It was unbelievably expensive but it was Plate was basically immune to most weapons save very strong crossbows at close range and highly specialized weapons and joint attack techniques that were almost all two handed.

A really good set of white harness, 2mm or so Italian steel was essentially impervious to everything other than sustained bludgeoning attacks and specialized weapons (the Poleaxe was the #1 choice)

As I mentioned this was was pretty expensive stuff (as in price of a house or more) but even so its later cheaper cousins (and note munitions grade armor was cheaper and less labor intensive than mail) provided good protection.

By this time less well off troops mostly dropped the shield because it was tactically no longer needed , polearms were needed for battle field work and they were all two handed.

How we work that into D&D without big changes is tricky.

5th and last comes all the oddballs...

Studded which is a misinterpretation of brigandine (a common European leather and scale sandwich armor) and didn't exist in Europe although I suppose could be used for boiled leather scale if desired.

Scale which was dark ages stuff in Europe (though scale sandwich as above was common enough )

Banded which was Roman Lorica Segmenta and not used after Rome fell .

and "Splint" which was not clearly defined and was apparently mail with greaves if it existed at all.

Ugh, its little wonder there is some much confusion.

As for fixes well, thats another post for another day..

In which I way in on the Great Shield Controversy

There has been a lot of debate on the shield rules in older editions, whether they are good, whether they need changing and so on.

For me this is somewhat a matter of system. In OD&D and SW. I think the rules stand up just fine bonuses are few and far between and even a meager +1 (or more with magic) can make the difference between life and death. Were I using this rules set or Lament of the Flame Princess I'd probably use the rules as written with maybe the addition of the excellent Trollsmyth Shields Shall be Splintered rule.

However if use a more B/X, Labyrinth Lord or AD&D 1 or 2 flavored game I'd use a different set.

However before I go over that a not so brief bit of history.


D&D is basically a plug in for a wargame written by people with no combat experience.

Its understandable, European Martial Arts were hibernating, Asian Martial Arts were hard to find trainers for and fraught with bad training, and the sword and shield sport of the SCA was in its infancy. Certainly none of these things were available in Lake Geneva at the time.

However the shield itself is one of the most useful battlefield instruments known and is criminally underestimated in D&D . Even today we see shield walls and shields in use (the Vancouver sports riot FREX) on a semi regular basis.

Historically there were roughly 3 kinds of shields

Bucklers, a fist load shield the size of a pie pan most commonly carried for personal defense, were in use from around from the 13th century or earlier to the early 17th and possibly later in other areas (the Okinawan Timba and the Filipino Tameng ) Giving them a +1 AC and +1 to Hit or whatever bonus a second weapon gets (as they are an excellent off hand weapon) is about right. These weight about 2lbs (a shade under a kilo) and are not disposable as they are all metal.

Bigger shields are amazingly useful both on offense and defense and are a combination of mobile cover and weapon . They were also cheap enough for any man to own.

Downsides , they were heavy (8-12 lbs) awkaward to carry (save the buckler) and disposable. They stopped being used at a point when armor grew strong enough that they were no longer as useful and only the buckler which was carried for personal defense and was socially acceptable almost anywhere persisted.

Amusingly 3rd edition has a pretty good nomenclature for the bigger ones.

1st up are light Shields. These were in use from the dawn of history well into the 18th century in some areas (by Highlanders) They were decently protective and somewhat offensive.

They probably should get +2 to AC (or be used +1/+1 as above) with possible extra bonuses for a fighter or shield wall tactics. However are disposable and as such can use the splintered shields rules as if desired and will wear out . The easiest way I do it is to make all non magic shields gone after one adventure. These weight about 7-8 lbs (a shade under 4 kilos)

2nd were large shields which are still in use (as riot shields) they weigh up to 15lbs (7 kilos or so) and provide good coverage (+3 to AC) but being so large probably should not be treated as an off hand weapon. What opportunities they provide are negated by the limits they put on action. As above they are disposable and fighters and shield walls should probably get extra bonuses

Magic shields should probably work as whatever size they were and with whatever bonus but not wear out for ease of use.

However if verisimilitude is a goal D&D AC rules need a bit of work all around. In most editions, its no possible to accentuate offense or defense, basic stuff like skilled voiding is mostly ignored and magic gear is grossly over accentuated.

Its not really feasible to rewrite the rules but if I did well shields would be more useful, it would be possible to fight defensively or offensively and AC would scale with level rather than just gear.

That would not rule out magic gear, only make it a cherry on top rather than an expected part of kit.

What makes things confusing is that Plate, Sword and Shield was a generally an ahistorical combination save early on when a coat of plates (which looks much like a modern ballistic vest with inserts) might be worn over mail and the sword used vs lightly armored targets or as art.

The problem was that a sword cut cannot penetrate armor,even mail . Thrusts will not penetrate mail either although they could be used vs. joints in later plate (what Gygax calls Field Plate and Full Plate in AD&D)

Normally opponents were battered to with blunt weapons (all those maces on the Bayeux Tapestry) or hit on unarmored spots. This is covered very well by the To Hit Rules although some bonus blunt vs mail or plate might be worthy.

I'd probably give blunt weapons +1 to hit vs plate or chain and edged weapons +1 damage vs leather or unarmored if I cared.


Over time I have come to like armor class, seeing it as "roll to find an unarmored spot or weak point" and seeing damage rolls as quality of a hit. It works well and is fast and decently accurate at least at low levels.

The problem however comes in scaling AC with level. I am not in the HP are your skill crowd and I find the rules unsatisfactory

Let me explainn

A L1 Fighter say will only hit a plate armored (AC3) guy 15% of the time. This is about right as it represents a stab to a joint or smash to an opportune location.

Obviously modifiers can be used as needed and in those circumstance the rules as written work fine.

The problem is that to hit goes up much faster than AC, after about 3rd level or so. In 1e using the optional 1 per level rule a 6th level fighter has a 40% chance or scoring a hit (sans mods) which is a too much. Add in mods and it gets even worse.

If AC (sans magic) rose at a reasonable rate along with attack , most of these issues would vanish.

L0 Characters Variant HP system

One of the better under appreciated rules in 2e was the alternate hit points for L0 characters. Rather than a standard d6 or a measly d4 ala B/X , NPC's got hit point based on their lifestyle.

I found this suited my vague ideas of verisimilitude better and added a tiny bit of boost where needed.

You'll notice below than Men at Arms have more than 1 hit die. This is intentional as it prevents fighter bonus attacks (I use doubling ala 2e) from being used against them.

My version of the chart with average HP in brackets looked something like this

D3 (2) small children

D4 (3) Highly Sedentary People (scholars, some seniors etc)

D6 (4) Regular Folks (merchants etc)

D8 (5) Laborers (including blacksmiths and farmers and the like)

D8+1 (6) Men at Arms (these are the regular folks with combat training and gear that make up most Medieval armies , not full time professional soldiers who are Fighters)

Hot Elf Chick? RUN!

When I think of Hot Elf Chicks this is what I think of.

La Belle Dam Sans Merci.


My advice is if you see a hot elf chick , don't hang around to mack on her, RUN! Elves are well as Sir Terry puts it (reposted here)

Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder.
Elves are marvelous. They cause marvels.
Elves are fantastic. They create fantasies.
Elves are glamorous. They project glamour.
Elves are enchanting. They weave enchantment.
Elves are terrific. They beget terror.
The thing about words is that meanings can twist just like a snake, and if you want to find snakes look behind words that have changed their meaning.
No one ever said elves are nice.
Elves are bad.

Terry Pratchett, Lords And Ladies

Now if you traffic with that lot and something awful comes of it, don't tell me I didn't give you fair warning.

A Great Gaming Quote for D&D

From Old Geezer, one of the original Gygaxian players and whose real name escapes me, from over on Big Purple. Paraphrased very slightly

Abstraction, is the font of realism.

For D&D this perfectly suitable and true. Better armor is more effective, more skilled people are harder to kill (more HP) , better weapons are better at killing, combat is sometimes random.

Its not a reality simulation but it provides perfectly playable results that are not that far off from the haphazard nature of a real fight.

This is why I think that despite tons of excellent more "realistic" systems D&D endures. Its good enough and its fun, and thats plenty.

Bringing the game down to Earth by limiting Spells

There has been a bit of chit chat around the 3x/Pathfinder community, and the Trollsmyth as and Dragonsfoot about bringing the game back down to Earth.

The usual solution is something called E6 which essentially limits the game by declaring anything over 6th level as Epic.

I even seen this taken as far as Holmes as the whole game over on Dragonsfoot


As a big fan of the hex crawl and of low level play I can see the attraction here, its using the familiar and fun D&D game engine of your choice to play down to Earth "realistic" Heroes that feel more like Conan than Goku.

However I think there is an easier way. Limit spells. As I see it the real trouble makers are not high level fighters and rogues or even the blaster mages, but a whole raft of "suck the fun from the game" spells.

My list (taken in part from here) (who also has an excellent TFT page, here)

Air Walk
Astral Projection
Blink
Dimension Door
Ethereal Jaunt
Etherealness
Fly
Mass Fly
Mass Overland Flight
Mount
Overland Flight
Pass Wall
Phantom Steed
Phase Door
Plane Shift
Refuge
Rope Trick
Shadow Walk
Teleport
Teleport Greater
Teleport Object
Teleportation Circle
Transport via Flames
Transport via Plants
Tree Stride
Wind Walk
Word of Recall
Clone
Raise Dead
Resurrection
Reincarnate
True Resurrection
Gate
Magnificent Mansion
Refuge
Rope Trick
Secure Shelter
Tiny Hut

plus any other spells like these. and while you are at it limit the duration of wall of iron and wall of stone to say 10 minutes (1 turn) per level .If desired you can also get rid of Bags of Holding and similar items and spells like Secret Chest. Heck if you want to take it to the max, ban rings of sustenance, food and item creation spells and continual light too.

When you do this your spell casters become much more mortal, still needing to find shelter, food and supplies. In addition they can't just appear at the adventure Instead they have to travel like everyone else. Time for a Hex Crawl!

Best of all this does not preclude cool travel items if desired, flying ships, magic mounts and whatever.

Also if you don't want to be a total ogre you might still allow a fly or even mass fly spell at 1 round a level or even the regular duration. Even at 20th level its more a problem solver and combat spell then a plot ender anyway.

These limits still allow a lot of creative fun on the part of the players of all classes while getting rid of most of the shortcuts that can take the game in what some might consider too fantastic a direction..

As for the HP/AC issue. Its nothing to be concerned about in old school games (they cap at 10ish anyway ) but Pathfinder DM's may want to create an alternative system. Its up to you.

The Accent Toolbox

Funny enough the only accents I lack are good upper class ones. This rarely matters much in game,as the P.C's don't usually move in those circles. Still having a wide range of accents can improve RP fun, if you know when to use them and the other players don't mind or have real world issues with them.
I'd be curious as to what accents you can do well enough to get away with in game?

My list includes

Canadian (Toronto-ish)
Highland Scots via Groundskeeper Willie (like most gamers)
Generic Eastender/Chav
Bad Eighties Russian
"Bushie" Aussie complete with outdated strine.
Generic Native American (something like Graham Greene)
Northern Irish (I sound like Gerry Adams from Sein Fein )
Mexico City (learned in Spanish Class)
a kind of German via the Pulps
"Gangster" Italian
80's style Street Hood
L.A. Gangsta (this is more slang than accent)
Evil Southern Sheriff
Arkansas Regional via Slingblade
Boomhauer (from King of the Hill if you call that an accent. I use it for a Ghoul Clan)
and Generic Cowboy

Acrobatic in Armor: Yep

Just in case anyone wondered, armor is not particularly encumbering, certainly not enough to slow down someone by half. And while yes armor is really hot and somewhat encumbering and deserving of a penalty to endurance and to acrobatic maneuvers it has only a moderate effect on agility.

Most of 2e and before were written before we new anything about armor. So a lot of what shows up in books is flat wrong and comes from stuff like A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court more than any scholarship .

The limiting factor on armor was its cost, think "buying your own tank" cost not just a fraction of your starting wealth.

Now when I play B/X or Labyrinth Lord I use the rules pretty much as written. They aren't "historically accurate" but they work and thats good enough. I do tend to be generous though and I never penalize any Dex to AC bonus or anything like that.

A video for the interested, on You Tube showing a workout in what D&D calls Plate Mail or Field Plate depending on edition