Armor Check?

[V'rass]

Full plate even if its mobile is very heavy. The armor itself may only weigh 50-70 pounds which is easy enough for a trained warrior standing still or walking slowly. However once that warrior starts exerting himself the weight is magnified. For the first few minutes to an hour yes the warrior would have an easy time. However if that warrior is forced to exert himself extremely for several hours or even a full day as might happen during a major battle or a siege the weight plus the heat factor would combine over time to cripple him. Bear in mind also that while the armor may only wiegh 50-70 pounds his weapon and or shield could very well weigh just as much. Even the strongest warrior can only fight so long carrying around 100-150 pounds worth of gear until exhaustion, dehydration, or heat stroke occur.
Finnally such armor is both hard to use on uneven terrain and is a death trap in some.

I forget the name but there was a battle in the middle ages between england and france where one side consisted mainly of archers and skirmishers and one side was almost all heavy units and knights. The day they fought also happened to be very rainy and the terrain was even worse then it would normally be. Everybody was certain the side with the lighter units would be obliterated... peasant archers and foot-men vs the very best warriors of a kingdom, almost anyone would bet on the elite warriors.

The battle was indeed a slaughter.... but it was the lighter army that won. The knights in their heavy armor were too slow, too overburdened, and were unable to even get close enough to the archers who could evade them effortlessly. The muddy terrain sealed their fate... the people wearing plate armor sank into the mud and became immobilized thus allowing the lighter units of the opposing army to eliminate them at leisure. It was an outcome no-one could have predicted.

Score: Speed/Agility 1 Bruteforce/Power 0

[AlwaysSummer Day]

Well it would likely only take a few minutes for the unarmored man to lose the fight. If you are talking battle than the man in fullplate probably would have multiple horses, a squire running him water, lances, and fresh horses.

The battle you are talking about is likely Agincourt which massed Longbows beat melee weapons. Not really speed from lack of armor at all.

[Ambaryerno]

Dude, I actually STUDY this stuff, (ARMA) AND I've got a lot of the gear. The gambesons and jacks worn under the plate armor weren't particularly heavy. Certainly not as heavy as what would have been worn under mail. Part of it its because the purpose of the plate armor wasn't absorption, but deflection. You don't need as much padding underneath when the armor is built around keeping your opponent from landing a solid blow.

Furthermore, the Wikiquote was referring to errors regarding the BASKETHILT Claymore, not the earlier two-hander.

@V'rass

The equipment worn by a fully-armored knight was no heavier than that worn by a modern soldier. In fact in many cases it was lighter, and it's certainly much better distributed.

You're also thinking of Agincourt. And the situation was VERY complex.

First, the English had a very strong defensive position. The French couldn't take advantage of their number due to the lay of the ground, nor could they outflank the English position (the English were on a narrow rise with the ground falling rather sharply on either side). The English also had time to prepare the battlefield beforehand (trenches, caltrops, stakes, etc.) to prevent the use of the French horse.

It also ignores the fact that while the French did have a lot of very heavily-armored knights, the theory behind the makeup of the armies was RADICALLY different.

The French built around the feudal system of warrior elite supported by levies. They were also heavily concerned with chivalry, ransom, and individual prowess on the field. The English, by contrast, never developed feudalism as was practiced on the Continent. In large part this owes to their Saxon heritage of a strong central monarchy (aside from squabbles like the Barons' Wars, the Anarchy, and the Wars of the Roses, the English didn't have the same sort of infighting that feudal powers on the French experienced). William of Normandy saw how well it worked so more or less kept many of the Saxon systems of governance intact, just stuck his own people in their place.

Furthermore, the archers at Agincourt were NOT mere peasants. These guys were semi-professionals who trained for YEARS precisely for this purpose when they weren't attending to their farms. In fact for a long period in the Middle Ages, English yeomen were required BY LAW to practice archery in their spare time.

Simply put, the English had a level of discipline that even with their vast advantage in numbers of knights the French couldn't hope to match.

Ultimately, Agincourt had very little to do with Light vs. Heavy. It had FAR more to do with the ground, tactics, preparation, and the fact that the English were simply a more cohesive and professional force.

[V'rass]

Agincourt... that is the one, i knew it started with an A.