Re: ARENA Impact armor sux!

From: carl@gergo.tamu.edu (Carl D. Perkins)

Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1993 21:51:00 +0000

In article <srt.748216130@aerospace.aero.org>, srt@aero.org (Scott 'Dr. Pain' Turner) writes...
>jacobus@rock-opera.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) writes:
>>The "expert source" is obviously the Palladium Compendium of Armor and
>>Weapons, by Palladium Games.  The armor table is virtually copied verbatim
>>from the table given in the book.  I didn't take time to check out all of the
>>weapons, but they are probably also verbatim copies.

>Yep, that's the source.

>>This "expert source" is not too expert, in my opinion.  After all, it
>>identifies the "bec de corbin" as a separate weapon from a
>>"crowsbeak", when the latter is the SAME weapon as the former, the
>>name was just translated into English.

>The book is considered fairly accurate by everyone I know who is
>familiar with medieval weaponry, although I'm sure there are some
>inaccuracies.  The general point about impact weapons being effective
>against most armor is certainly valid.
>
>						-- Scott T.

Based on what I recall from the listing, it is not exactly incredibly
accurate.  (Oc course I didn't pay all that much attention at the time
as I've only recently thought I might like to try the game).  You should
keep in mind that people these days who are "familair with medieval weaponry"
have often gotten their knowledge from RPGs which are frequently wrong.  Some
hints for detecting pseudo-experts: if the term "chainmail" or "platemail"
is used, it is not an expert source - the word "mail" is from the french word
for "chain" (meaning, in this case, "chain armor") and, as such, calling chain
armor "chainmail" is the equivalent of calling the number 2 "twodeux" and
the term "plate mail" means "plate chain" which is obviously nonsense
(plate & chain, or vice versa, may be a real type of armor, but that's not
quite the same terminology).

Impact weapons are, in some respects, more effective due to the force they
apply.  In other respects they are less effective - having nearly all
of their mass at the end of the haft mekes them very slow.  Against
an unarmored or lightly armored opponent and axe will be better than a
mace - they have similar masses that are located at the end of shafts
of similar length, but the axe concentrates the force along a much smaller
area and the area does not increase as rapidly with the depth of the cut
as it does for the depth of the crush-mark for the mace - and a sword will
be even better for those truely lightly armored opponent even though it
may not do quite as much damage as an axe it will allow for a more rapid
series of attacks.  Why then is a mace better against plate armor than an
axe (in general)?  Because the armor is about as hard as the axe blade, but
thicker which will tend to make the blade deform or break before the armor
does whereas the mace does not have this problem. On the other hand, if the
axe does get through the armor it will do more damage as the mace is likely
to make biger, relatively shallow, dents in the armor whereas the axe will
make much smaller but deeper cuts into it.  A flanged mace will tend to do
more damage than a normal mace (which is generally just a bit bumpy).  Hammers
do rather well against plate armor as well, and picks (pointy-ish hammers)
even better.  None of these are a quick as a sword of similar weight, of
course, so they tend to do worse against the lighter armed targets.  In a
system that uses two types of damage, call them stun and injury, a mace will
tend to do more stun and less injury than any bladed or pointed weapon - on
the other hand armor in general is not nearly as good at stopping the stun
damage, the more padding it has the better it will do unless the padding is
cut through.

If a mace really was the best weapon, everyone would have used them in the
real medieval period rather than swords - but swords were used all over
the place.  The right tool for the job is the way to go.  If your opponent
is known for wearing plate armor, a mace may well be the thing to use - but
if he is known for wearing light armor it will be harder to hit him with the
mace and an axe or sword would do more damage.

That's what I say, anyway.

So, when's the next posting of the rules and e-mail address?

--- Carl

References

Re: ARENA Impact armor sux!
srt@aero.org (Scott 'Dr. Pain' Turner)
Wed, 15 Sep 1993 18:18:30 +0000
Re: ARENA Impact armor sux!
ut@informatik.uni-kiel.de (Ulrich Teichert)
Thu, 16 Sep 1993 13:53:03 +0000
Re: ARENA Impact armor sux!
srt@aero.org (Scott 'Dr. Pain' Turner)
Thu, 16 Sep 1993 14:57:01 +0000
Re: ARENA Impact armor sux!
srt@aero.org (Scott 'Dr. Pain' Turner)
Thu, 16 Sep 1993 21:48:50 +0000

Referenced By

Re: ARENA Impact armor sux!
srt@aero.org (Scott 'Dr. Pain' Turner)
Wed, 15 Sep 1993 18:18:30 +0000
Re: ARENA Impact armor sux!
ut@informatik.uni-kiel.de (Ulrich Teichert)
Thu, 16 Sep 1993 13:53:03 +0000
Re: ARENA Impact armor sux!
srt@aero.org (Scott 'Dr. Pain' Turner)
Thu, 16 Sep 1993 14:57:01 +0000
Re: ARENA Impact armor sux!
srt@aero.org (Scott 'Dr. Pain' Turner)
Thu, 16 Sep 1993 21:48:50 +0000