Armor regardless if it's boiled leather, lamellar, or platemail covers vitals, and could potentially prevent injuries that can be easily received in combat without them. Luckily for the DA verse the warriors/rogues are peak humans in terms of physical feats.(Batman, Punisher) [/quote]
Yes but I think gamers forget it is fantasy and can't somehow get
their mind around the concept that in such an environment (peak human) speed
and agility are comparable to armor. In D&D since the TSR advanced
product, it was possible to wear a t-shirt and have a comparable AC to
the paladin.
[quote]
It seems that the climate, and terrain are to blame for the conquistadors woredrobe change and it's not solely the natives doing. [/quote]
Partly. Mostly because the heavy armor was unneccessary given the Aztec weaponry. It was more "practical" to put down the heavy armor.
[quote]
The Mongolians were not lightly armored considering that their forces wore armor of iron made of segmented scales, lamellar, and their version of gambeson thrown in for good measure. [/quote]
As with all armies, the Mongols had different troops for different purposes. Their primary striking force, however, can not be considered heavy armored horseman. The Mongolian horses were smaller and ridden hard; there's no way heavy armor would have been "practical," not to mention the Mongols stressed mobility. They were certainly noticably lighter armored than their European opponents (as well as the Chinese who they also defeated).
[quote]
The defeats of the Poles, Hungarians and Teutonics were a culmination of ill prep, training, tactics, terrain, experienceand a clash with the better trained Germans or French(lol) wouldn't have been the same as the above mentioned.[/quote]
Terrain actually favored the Europeans as they were fighting on their own territory. There is no question though the Mongols were superior warriors. The Germans were not better trained during that era (they lost the real Battle of Tannenberg to the Poles) and if the French were Europe's best warriors, their mixed battle record during the Crusades (most of the Knights were French) does not auger well in a hypothetical clash vs the Mongols. Mongolian horse archers used their mobility to evade charges by heavily armored knights and provided they were on flat terrain, they were all but invincible.
Edit: the Mongolian's most notable defeat at Ain Jalut was to lightly armor horsemen from Central Asia, the Malmuks.
[quote]
- JD i wholeheatedly agree with you that armor is not the end all be all on the battlefield, especially in a fantasy game/setting but watching Isabela use all her CC moves then tank blows that her def couldn't bypass during cooldowns always looked off to me.
[/quote]
That's more the limitation of a CRPG. If we were reading a novel or if a DM was describing the action, there would be no such thing as a cooldown and Isabella wouldn't just stand there trying to tank. In general I think when it comes to fantasy, we need to suspend a little bit of disbelief (especially when our beliefs are based on nothing but our gut feeling [e.g. real warriors encase themselves in armor]) and accept that RPGs and especially cRPGS have very real limiations of how best to implement fantasy ideas into actual gameplay.
I do think we agree much more than we disagree
[/quote]
Modifié par Joy Divison, 09 octobre 2012 - 04:43 .
Retour en haut
