Baldur's Gate : The Sword Coast Chronicles : NWN2 Persistent World

What do you suppose his armor check penalty is?

(delete the S out of HTTPS in your link for youtube to be displayed)

Alright so I have one problem with this video. I have seen it before and if you study medieval history you will notice that they did not really start wearing armor without padded cloth/leather and sometimes even chainmail underneath until after the age had ended. So for this to be accurate he would need to put on quite a bit more. Another thing to note is we do not know what gage steel he is wearing. Is it authentic battle armor or a cheap replica? The difference can be several kilos or lbs. Finally one should note that he can do all this without armor. The armor check penalty is meant to show an increased challenge. If you have a penalty of -10 and you have a skill of 35 I really think you will succeed 99% of the time.

On the other hand it is often a misconception that fullplate greatly interfered with movement. In fact fullplate is lighter, quieter, stronger, and just all around better than pretty much all other armor. A knight in fullplate riding a warhorse carrying a lance, Damascus steel sword, hand crossbow, dagger and a heavy shield was arguably the pinnacle of pre-gunpowder warfare. Perhaps the only thing missing was the Horo.

What the clip does not cover that id be interested in is heat dissipation.
After all the clip cheated on the underarmor and the true weight of hardened steel (even if it were only 2 mm thick, the lucky scoundrels!).
The clip did state they cheated on the armor weight and only offered similar mechanical hinderances by the design itself.

In 3 or 4 levels of underwear and a polar jacket with pants on top I know I for one are not at my best agility.
Being active in riot gear indoors I am hog wet from sweat within half an hour.
Yet, that are in modern materiels and designs.
Weight does little but overheating gets to you fast, and could very well explain a higher armor check due to fatigue over time.


However, as with the melee weaponry the armor on the server is probably overweight in comparison with the real deal at the time.


Edit:
Nor did the clip mention how the ancient knight smelled after a day of exercises, climbing and dancing, but that is irrelevant I guess.

Actual combat armor weighed about 50lbs. IIRC they noted their armor weighed 28kg, so theirs was actually a little HEAVIER than the historical armor. Furthermore, Gothic armor was first appearing during the first quarter of the 15th century, (c. Boucicaut's time) which eliminated much of the heavier padding and the mail underneath, so the style armor they're using WOULD be appropriate. Cherbourg-type armor (the transitional type consisting of plate worn over mail) was already becoming obsolete.

The heat issue is actually much less of a deal without the helm since that's what really restricts airflow. Usually the only time the visor would be closed was during a field battle because of archers, and it was quite common for the helm to be left open when this wasn't a factor for ventilation and visibility.

And yeah, melee weaponry are DEFINITELY overweight. And frankly the terminology blows, too. IE for swords it should look more like this (NWN2 on the left, actual on the right)

Greatsword - Longsword 3-4lbs
Bastard Sword 2-3.5lbs
Longsword - Arming Sword 1.5-2.5lbs
Short Sword 1.5-2lbs

NWN2 does NOT have what most people usually think of when they say "greatsword." Most people think of the big German and Swiss Zweihanders, and they weren't even used like swords. They were usually wielded in half-sword, and treaded more like polearms (based on some practical experience half-swording vs. polearm, I believe the "chopping the head off pikes" thing is a myth. But what they ARE good at is DISPLACING pike heads and getting inside where your edge can still mess a guy up, and they can't really hurt you). They also topped out around 6-7lbs, MAYBE 8lbs at their most extreme. Anything heavier than that was usually ceremonial.

Also, the bastard sword should NOT be Exotic. The terminology is somewhat murky, but it's accepted that the bastard sword was somewhere between the arming sword and true longsword in size, and could generally be used as both (the arming sword was almost strictly a 1-handed sword, though could be used two-handed in a pinch).

All period images from the late 1400's clearly show chainmail or at least padding/leather under fullplate. This really did not end with Gothic or Italian plate mail as there was still vulnerability to pricing weapons. Just look at any period image from the war of the roses. There might have been a point in the early 1500's where pure fullplate was adopted but I can't find any evidence of this.

Also Zweihanders =/= Great swords. Think more of Scottish claymores.

Keep in mind that doesn't necessarily indicate they're wearing plate over full mail hauberks. Frequently mail would ONLY have been used in the gaps.

The Claymore was a Scottish variant of the longsword, defined by its hilt shape.

On the other hand it is often a misconception that fullplate greatly interfered with movement. In fact fullplate is lighter, quieter, stronger, and just all around better than pretty much all other armor. A knight in fullplate riding a warhorse carrying a lance, Damascus steel sword, hand crossbow, dagger and a heavy shield was arguably the pinnacle of pre-gunpowder warfare. Perhaps the only thing missing was the Horo.

You should watch Deadliest Warrior some time. Spartans won the crown for Most Deadly Ancient Warrior. Knights put a good showing but in the end Spartan warriors were the pinnacle of fighting and armor even against the mighty knight. It was pretty neat to see. While knights were incredibly cool looking nothing beat the mobility and strength of the Spartan armor. The shield they carried was the big factor as whatever was not covered in bronze armor was able to be defended with the shield. In fact I think someone once told me that a spear was a pretty poor solo weapon in RL. However all the simulations they did for these warriors were one on one battles. Peeps should check out that show it was pretty neat!

Calodan wrote:

On the other hand it is often a misconception that fullplate greatly interfered with movement. In fact fullplate is lighter, quieter, stronger, and just all around better than pretty much all other armor. A knight in fullplate riding a warhorse carrying a lance, Damascus steel sword, hand crossbow, dagger and a heavy shield was arguably the pinnacle of pre-gunpowder warfare. Perhaps the only thing missing was the Horo.

You should watch Deadliest Warrior some time. Spartans won the crown for Most Deadly Ancient Warrior. Knights put a good showing but in the end Spartan warriors were the pinnacle of fighting and armor even against the mighty knight. It was pretty neat to see. While knights were incredibly cool looking nothing beat the mobility and strength of the Spartan armor. The shield they carried was the big factor as whatever was not covered in bronze armor was able to be defended with the shield. In fact I think someone once told me that a spear was a pretty poor solo weapon in RL. However all the simulations they did for these warriors were one on one battles. Peeps should check out that show it was pretty neat!

Deadliest Warrior is garbage history and should never be taken seriously. And based on Viking vs. Samurai, there's a very good probability most of the fights are rigged for particular outcomes.

Deadliest warrior was terrible. They thought French legionnaires didn't have access to stripper clips. They can't even differentiate a p38 with a c96. This show must be taken as opinion based in opinion.

A claymore is incredibly difficult to wield one handed and generally speaking modern definitions would call it a great sword. It certainly looks and operates the part. Hell even Wikipedia notes this. (Yes another terrible source but still)

Longswords ARE two-handed swords. There's a few one-handed techniques, (usually in grappling, though the English and Italian manuscripts will at times make one-handed strikes for surprise reach) but despite what pop culture says they two-handed swords.

Incidentally, even Wikipedia (which you cited) confirms it as a variant of the longsword:

The two-handed claymore seems to be an offshoot of Early Scottish medieval longswords (similar to the Espee de Guerre or Grete war sword) which had developed a distinctive style of a cross-hilt with forward-angled arms that ended in spatulate swellings.

Historically "greatsword" (and war sword) was merely synonymous with longsword. It only took on its modern connotation later (c. the Victorian Era). Some modern spathologists use greatsword to refer to the heavier forms, (IE the early Type XIIIa blades in the Oakeshott typology) but they're still a form of longsword, with the same general blade and grip length.

The term claymore is an anglicisation of the Gaelic claidheamh-mór "great sword", attested in 1772 (as Cly-more) with the gloss "great two-handed sword".[3] The sense "basket-hilted sword" is contemporaneous, attested in 1773 as "The broad-sword now used [...] called the Claymore, (i.e., the great sword)."[4] OED observes that the latter usage is "inexact, but very common". The 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica likewise judged that the term is "wrongly" applied to the basket-hilted sword.[5]

From the same page. . .

That doesn't contradict anything I said due to the fact that (as I also noted) contemporaneously the term "great sword" was synonymous with longsword.

Deadliest warrior may be garbage history but its better then the crap history they are teaching our kids in this country. If a 40 year old man not only cant find Texas on the map but then points to China and says Texas... yeah thats pathetic. The damn teachers here are worthless, i say throw all of them out!

Btw when it comes to melee combat speed and agility always triumphs over power and brute force...

Intent and the will to follow through are even better then either, most times.

Always is a tall word.



Yes it is a movie.
The point being that as soon as our villain of great speed and agility move too close or/and hesitates it is often a done deal.

That quote is literally saying "Claymores is a translation of the gaelic term for Great two handed sword. The thought that a longsword can be called a claymore came about in 1773. In 1911 this was determined as inaccurate".

Also please look up gambesons and their use under fullplate armor. You have much to learn if you genuinely think they only wore plate armor without any padding at all. As I said before there are many examples showing 14th century knights wearing gambeson under their armor and slowly moving towards doublets in the 15th century. This will be the last time I reply until you offer a source for such a fantastic claim. I'll even give you a wiki source to start at.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambeson

A gambeson (or aketon or padded jack or arming doublet) is a padded defensive jacket, worn as armour separately, or combined with mail or plate armour. Gambesons were produced with a sewing technique called quilting. Usually constructed of linen or wool, the stuffing varied, and could be for example scrap cloth or horse hair. During the 14th century, illustrations usually show buttons or laces up the front.

An arming doublet (also called aketon) worn under armour, particularly plate armour of fifteenth- and sixteenth-century Europe, contains arming points for attaching plates. Fifteenth century examples may include goussets sewn into the elbows and armpits to protect the wearer in locations not covered by plate. German gothic armour arming doublets were generally shorter than Italian white armour doublets, which could extend to the upper thigh. In late fifteenth century Italy this also became a civilian fashion. Men who were not knights wore arming doublets, probably because the garment suggested status and chivalry.[1]

V'rass wrote: Btw when it comes to melee combat speed and agility always triumphs over power and brute force...

Fullplate does not slow you down much and the benefit of being incredibly difficult to harm is massive. To put it simply do you think that people would spend absurd amounts of money and time developing, buying, and equipping armies in armor if it were worse than running around naked?