Belegarth

by **fideal** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 6:28 pm

Just wondering, mostly from the discussion on the WC topic, what would some well put together cloth armor look like (in or out of Bel)?

by **Thorondor** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 7:07 pm

From my limited knowledge...

Thick (not individual layers, since they could be made from silk). Mostly would be used to prevent scimitars and other similarly curved weapons from penetrating too deep and causing wounds. It wouldn't protect against mass weapons (maces, flails, etc) because the cloth doesn't hold it's form well enough. It also wouldn't handle penetrating weapons too well (arrows, spears) but it might do better against them than regular clothing or even plate possibly...which is part of why they wore padded gambesons under plate (the other reason was for some padding against the solid metal).

by **Fangesta** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 10:29 pm

Rumbeard and Myselves have actually come up with a way to achieve cloth armor that can be designed to different fashions and rigid...we're just waiting to see which way this argument rolls

by **Peanut of Loderia** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 10:49 pm

http://www.uwgb.edu/aldreteg/Linothorax.html

by **Sieglatan** » Tue Apr 19, 2011 7:19 pm

The Mongols, after conquering the Song Dynasty in 1279, would often wear Chinese silk shirts into battle. Since densely woven silk has a high tensile strength, it would resist tearing, and would remain intact, even if it entered the wound along with the arrowhead. The idea was that if a Mongol was shot with an arrow, all he had to do to extract the head and shaft that had entered in his body was to pull on the silk, popping it out of the wound. In true Mongol form, they never took these shirts off (it was believed that bathing offended the heavens), and only replaced the shirts when they literately rotted off of them.

As for Bel, I'd imagine a really thick gambeson would suffice. And by thick, I mean that articulation between the arm and chest would be impossible unless it was attached with a riveted joiner. Kind of like those suits they use to train attack dogs. I'll post a good pic, when I find it~

I can't see how even thick, dense cloth would be better at resisting piercing weapons that existed in the same era that plate armor did (War picks, arquebuses, arbalests, etc.), but you would be a fool to go into battle with plate armor, and no gambeson, for the reason Thorondor mentioned.

by **Kyrian** » Tue Apr 19, 2011 7:53 pm

Fideal,

Here's a thread where they did some destructive testing on various padded jacks:

http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=11131

On page 4 are some pretty good pictures as well.

by **Sieglatan** » Tue Apr 19, 2011 8:16 pm

The MRL hilted Del Tin longsword used on the second slashing test against chain mail is so utterly beautiful. I would love to make a Bel sword with that kind of hilt.

http://www.newyorklongsword.com/pics/mt39.jpg

by **Shino** » Wed Apr 20, 2011 2:48 pm

This thread would be more appropriate in the Armory Forum even for just requesting images.

by **Kasada** » Fri Apr 22, 2011 11:59 am

Not that it's really relevant pre-gunpowder age, but I do recall that 40 layers (o.o) of shirt-thickness cotton will stop a musket ball.

by **forsaken arrow** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 1:51 am

also look at the miyans, they wor cotton or silk shirts that they dipped in vitamin enriched water that proved to be strong enough to stop arrows dead in there tracks. i will send you links on construction on fb.

by **Remdawg Killionaire** » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:08 pm

Yeah, but they didn't have like, English long-bows with AP broadheads that could rip thru a man in armor at 400 paces. Obsidian and stone-tipped arrows are pretty * brittle.

by **Forkbeard** » Fri Jun 24, 2011 10:36 am

2 things:
This conversation is dead, and has moved to another thread.
and
Not only would that **** not stand up to real, post stone age bows and arrows, but it is totaly outside of the belegarth rules, like many other things that really were used(however sucessfully) by people over the years as some sort of protection.
FB

by **forsaken arrow** » Sat Jun 25, 2011 5:46 pm

maybe you should watch deadliest warrior and the tests they did on the armour. THEY SHOT IT WITH AP ARROWS AND THEY USED A * LONG BOW AND IT TOOK THREE ARROWS TO FINALY PENETRATE MORE THAN A HALF INCH AT 20'!! lol anyways the only thing that im not sure about is the time period. it was durring the obsidian and stone age here in the americas but as it relates to europe's . i dont know. if we are only going by europes midevil progression through the ages then how are we allowing anything asian including gaurb into the game or are people forgetting that these cultures technologically grew up at different times. so if you can let in those stupid chinese and korean hats then why am i getting crap for mentioning south american armour? likewise the katana isnt even japanese its FREAKING KOREAN!

by **forsaken arrow** » Sat Jun 25, 2011 5:50 pm

however you are correct about the rules regaurding cloth armour. but the thread wasnt mentioning bel legal cloth armour it was simply asking about cloth armor.

by **Frosty** » Sat Jun 25, 2011 9:29 pm

forsaken your beating a dead horse just stop. and going on a game forum and asking about something that's banned in the game you should expect them to assume that the poster is referring to the issue that is banned in game.

by **forsaken arrow** » Sat Jun 25, 2011 11:14 pm

i wasnt asking about cloth armour i was just mentioning a type of cloth armor that a certian people had used that wasnt mentioned. maybe you should read the whole thread before posting?

by **Isk** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 3:18 am

Okay, first, deadliest warrior and many other sites on the internet claim the Maya stuffed their quilted cotton armor with rock salt. No one that I came across, other than you, seems to think they 'treated it' with salt or some other mineral. This stuffing of armor seemed really weird to me so I did some digging. If they really did it then that could be quite cool and interesting to know about, but from a materials and personal protection standpoint it really didn't seem like such a great idea to stuff your padded jack with rock salt. Either way, they do provide concrete validation of using cotton for quilted armor, which wasn't really done in Europe.

After seeing many, many people, including Deadliest Warrior and National Geographic, make this claim without citing a source I found where it seems to stem from. Bishop Landa wrote an account of the Maya of the Yucatan in 1566 in which he states that the Maya put salt in their cotton armor. This is a conquest period account and is normally taken at face value as simple, acceptable fact. As far back as 1937 William Gates determined in a translation of Landa's work to English that Landa had himself mistranslated the Mayan term for quilted armor as salted armor. There's your weird trivia for the day. For more take a look at:
American Anthropologist
Volume 40, Issue 2, pages 309b–310, April-June 1938

tl;dr
Quilted armor really worked. All over the whole world. Rock salt or mineral dipped armor probably never existed.

by **Forkbeard** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 7:14 pm

Thank you history man.
Arrow, you're a douche.
FB

by **forsaken arrow** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 10:20 pm

thanks Isk

by **Black Cat** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 10:27 pm

Since he is so aptly named, maybe I should put an "AP Broadhead" helm on "Arrow" and shoot him out of a bow (or ballista if you want to get technical) and see if he penetrates some of this "Mayan cloth armor." Just for grins and giggles, of course.

by **Jerlaine Trefenwyn** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 10:48 pm

First of all black cat he weights a bit more than a normal arrow and second a there wasn't any armor back in the day that would stop a "balista". Now what is the huge deal about allowing the cloth armor if there willing to wear that much crap than let em. 1st off it'll probaly slow em down 2nd it will most likely cause them to overheat 3rd seriously we already allow all that Samurai armor * how european is that oh wait IT'S NOT AT ALL!!! So if someone wants to do it because there ancestors did * it I say let em as long as it has historical proof that it worked than it's good either that or we don't allow any samura/asian influenced gear all modern hats sunglasses and so on either. Or is this a case of net trolling. I mean seriously someone asked a valid question and brought up a good point. Case in point Isk pointed out that it was made differently but it was still done so IS IT EUROPEAN NO BUT NEITHER IS ALL THE SAMURAI ARMOR/KATANAS THAT IS USED.

by **Jerlaine Trefenwyn** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 11:03 pm

i know that cloth armor isnt allowed and in all reality i could care less if it is or isnt, however someone asked about it in general and wanted simple information on it. arrows case was legit and all he did was post information on a case where it was used that hadnt been mentioned yet so why are you all on the war path. really?

by **Black Cat** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 11:21 pm

I just think it's funny that someone would name himself "arrow". An "arrow" is either a symbol that points to something or an object that you shoot at your "target" using a stiff, but flexible staff/stick held into a curve by a string attached to each end. (nock it to the string, pull back, and let it rip!)

The thing about Samurai armor is that it is steel and leather, same as our representations of European stuff. The style, construction layout, and methods used to make East Asian armor are different, but the materials we use to recreate them are identical to what we use to recreate European armors. Hence why passing "samurai armor" has never really been an issue.

Cloth armor is a whole new can of worms entirely. It does not follow our current ruleset at all, and I really have no idea how a ruleset governing cloth armor could even be made without inviting cheese (on one extreme) or require it to be so * thick that it becomes a heatstroke nightmare and the ruleset turns out to be a worthless addition. (on the other extreme) Or without making the ruleset ridiculously complicated and going against the KISS principle that the BoW is supposed to follow in an attempt to prevent both of the two previous problems.

by **Isk** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 11:23 pm

Easy, Jerlaine. Fork's initial response was really polite and to the point. Arrow got railed when he got all up in everybody's face with the ALL CAPS and "Why's everybody picking on me" attitude. This isn't General Mayhem, but if you don't have a skin thick enough to handle this comment without getting hurt, you really shouldn't be posting on these boards:

Forkbeard wrote:2 things:
This conversation is dead, and has moved to another thread.
and
Not only would that **** not stand up to real, post stone age bows and arrows, but it is totaly outside of the belegarth rules, like many other things that really were used(however sucessfully) by people over the years as some sort of protection.
FB

We have no problem with non-European stuff. I believe the term used to describe our mix of history and fantasy is pre-gunpowder. Also, unless I misunderstood the outcome of the war council discussion, cloth armor is fine if it's legit. We just aren't changing the rules to explicitly allow or encourage it. Make some wicked-awesome, Mayan, quilted, cotton armor with 15-20 layers of thick cloth and a couple of well informed heralds will probably pass it just fine at an event. Wear lots of feathers, too. I can get you some sweet blue and gold macaw feathers from someone I know if you are going to do this.

by **forsaken arrow** » Sun Jun 26, 2011 11:49 pm

isk thanks for the offer of the feathers but i never said that i would make or even attept to make that type of armor. i was merely mentioning its historic use by south americans to further present ideas. anyways i guess i did take forks message with a different tone than he might have intended. anyways as fork said this thread is dead and theres no point in continuing this conversation other than to argue with a fruity cat.

by **Jerlaine Trefenwyn** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 12:02 am

Isk your right I'll admit that and I agree however Black Cat should ask a question before opening his mouth case in point arrow did not name himself someone started calling him that when they realized how good he was with the bow. And I wasn't responding to Fork actually I was pointing more at someone else. but agreed dead thread we should ask a moderator to lock it

by **Black Cat** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 12:34 am

LOL Arrow called me a "fruity cat". Whatever that means.

Anyway, get the thread locked if you want. I don't really have much more I can say about cloth armor (in or outside of Belegarth) without hunting down and reading a few trustworthy books on the subject first. I'm certainly not going to dump a bunch of money I don't have on cloth to try and make any of this stuff.

by **Zeadman1** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 9:04 am

lol black cat i think Arrow was refering to your picture..... purple and pinkyish colors and a black cat..... good pic but funny.

by **Forkbeard** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 9:08 am

You were TOTALY reponding to me, Capt stupid. Don't try to back peddle now.

Arrow, you were annoucing something unsubstantiated you saw on TV and we gave you the real truth about it. You were WRONG. Admit it. Nobody ever soaked cloth in salt water and used it for anything. That's **** retarded.
Nor did anyone, except you 2 ever say anything about armor having to be European. Where do you get these **** stupid, inbred ideas? Any armor from the pre-gunpowder period in any area of the world is acceptablt as long as it it recognized as real armor, or as being made from materials listed in the BoW.
But a silk shirt with salt stains will never be armor, anywhere.
The fact that you try to use my samurai kit against me in this argument is laughable. Seriously, I laugh at you. he he. It is 100% Bel/dag legal as are my swords. What could possibly wrong with my 12th century Japanese kit? Please, break down why I shouldn't wear it. I would love to hear it.
FB

by **Thorondor** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:19 am

Forkbeard wrote:What could possibly wrong with my 12th century Japanese kit? Please, break down why I shouldn't wear it. I would love to hear it.

The kit is too cool, that's why you shouldn't wear it.

by **Forkbeard** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:33 am

Riiiight, since these hakama(or fake * wrap pants) wearing * don't want people wearing more accurate looking Japanese stuff, as it makes their fake * wrap pants and underarmor look less "ninja" like.
That MUST be it.
FB

by **Zeadman1** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:21 pm

Wow...... over the top much fork? chilax bro.

And no one actualy knows weather they did or not, they were almost compleatly wiped out by the spanish..... its peoples best gueses ether way. Thats the way history works, just like any sciance, its just an educated guess based off of the facts presented and peoples first, second and third hand observations of those facts.

Any way, form has been killed......

by **No'Vak** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:13 pm

Zeadman1 wrote:Wow...... over the top much fork? chilax bro.

And no one actualy knows weather they did or not, they were almost compleatly wiped out by the spanish..... its peoples best gueses ether way. Thats the way history works, just like any sciance, its just an educated guess based off of the facts presented and peoples first, second and third hand observations of those facts.

Any way, form has been killed......

I don't wanna talk to no sciantist.

by **Forkbeard** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:16 pm

No, dude, we DO know for a fact that they did not dip shirts in salt water, or any other mineral soup to make them armor. We KNOW this because it would not work.

Furthermore, we KNOW that they would never be legal in Belegarth because a salty shirt has no way of being idenified as armor. It is just a dirty shirt, lacking even the questionable armor look of ninja brig or linothorax or a padded jack of appropriate thickness and construction, which are acceptable forms of cloth armor.

Eat me.
FB

by **forsaken arrow** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 12:23 am

Lienzo de Tlaxcala is the best source on the ichahuipilli body armor if anyone wants to actually look it up. :idea:

by **Zeadman1** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 7:11 am

It was made with light lether under heavy wool. This would be ritualisticaly diped in salt brine before a battle both to keep the person under the armor cool, and as it dried to give the wool stiffness, it was not just some cotten or silk shirt with salt watter stains on it.

and eat me? realy? nice......thats adult for sure :roll:

by **Forkbeard** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:33 am

Salty wool and deerskin are not armor either.
I read through pages and pages of **** about this. It is not armor. It was armor, to stone age dudes who werent allowed legaly to wear shoes unless at war. It was a ritual garment thought by the locals to give them powers, probly based on the fact that they fight with stone weapons. Swords ripped right through them. THe accounts, by spannish preists, that say they defended against spears and arrows are * written by terrified preists while SOLDIERS were out killing Aztecs by the thousands.
I truly do not give a **** what some researcher says. Theres a guy who says the pyramids are really nuclear reactors. He has all kinds of science that says so. Does that mean it true? NO.
You're **** dumb. Both of you.
FB

by **Jerlaine Trefenwyn** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 10:46 pm

Thanks for calling me stupid Fork you've known me for like what 8 years hell you even trained me with red and single blue at one point at the original demon wars. And I was not back peddling I was referring to Frosty. Was it armor for there people yes but if yo watch the last samurai there armor didn't stand up to muskets either. Would I want it in Bel **** no why because it'd have to be 3 fingers thick which creates problems in many ways. So to the ancient aztecs yes it was their best armor to the rest of the world most likely not!!! Oh and on a side note yes your armor is cool but isn't the Uruk's based off of orcs?

by **Black Cat** » Tue Jun 28, 2011 11:12 pm

Capt Jerlaine wrote:Oh and on a side note yes your armor is cool but isn't the Uruk's based off of orcs?

Yes, they are.

Though all that really means is that Forkbeard is now some kind of Oni.

by **Hendell Stoneshield** » Wed Jun 29, 2011 2:00 pm

Did none of you douches see that FB has been pushing the samurai summer for most of this year? His armor is not about the orcs it is a way to improve the standard of garb/armor for the sport and to show off that FB's armor construction is **** amazing.

by **Black Cat** » Wed Jun 29, 2011 2:33 pm

Hendell Stoneshield wrote:Did none of you douches see that FB has been pushing the samurai summer for most of this year? His armor is not about the orcs it is a way to improve the standard of garb/armor for the sport and to show off that FB's armor construction is **** amazing.

Very true.

I was just explaining that his armor could still be considered in-character with only moderate anachronism.

by **Blackwolfe** » Thu Jun 30, 2011 1:26 pm

Hendell Stoneshield wrote:Did none of you douches see that FB has been pushing the samurai summer for most of this year? His armor is not about the orcs it is a way to improve the standard of garb/armor for the sport and to show off that FB's armor construction is **** amazing.

Fork's armor work is amazing, and his current armor is a work of art.

I however think his previous monster armor was "Forkbeard" and perfect for his persona, I miss seeing it.

Sorry FB, you just too * tall for a Samurai.

by **Jerlaine Trefenwyn** » Thu Jun 30, 2011 5:31 pm

Hendell before you get all huffy puffy and throw a temper tantrum you need to realize I've known Forkbeard for at least 7 or 8 years now. That was what you call a mild if not lame joke I know the Uruk's are Orc and he knows how bad * I think his armor is hell I told him I loved it and it looked amazing at border wars in march I think it was. And that if he offers advise I actually listen. But I agree with Blackwolfe so on a side note Hendell STFU

by **Zeadman1** » Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:28 am

Well that's nice Fork..... you don't have to go all Trol on me ether. The fact is they tested the cloth armor, it worked against arrows with none armor piercing tips,(the type they would be fighting against any way at the time).

As for the whole sword thing? duh..... just duh they would get ripped to shreds by metal swords, but they did help keep the bits of "shrapnel" from the obsidian edged swords they used back at the time from aggravating wounds.

All i am saying is that Cloth armor was Very primitive, but it did actually exist and serve its purpose.

by **Forkbeard** » Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:14 pm

Wow, resurect a few more dead threads to add nothing, why doncha?
You are so wrong and stupid it's not even really funny.
Shut up
FB

by **Thorondor** » Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:24 pm

Forkbeard wrote:Wow, resurect a few more dead threads to add nothing, why doncha?
You are so wrong and stupid it's not even really funny.
Shut up
FB

/agree.

Zeadman1 wrote:stuff

Who let you out of your cage?

by **Black Cat** » Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:51 pm

Zeadman1 wrote:stuff

by **Shino** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 11:08 am

I'm bouncing this over to the medieval arts and sciences.

by **forsaken arrow** » Sat Sep 17, 2011 2:09 am

OMG the drama dragon has been resurrected!

Belegarth

Who is online