Didn't see a thread where this really belongs but I have a question concerning armor aesthetics. Pic related, I've always loved these waistcloths on knights or suits of armor but I've never been sure what to call them besides waistcloths. Would anyone happen to know what this would be called?
Suits of armor with cloths, robes, skirts and loincloths thread?
>>44262579
I think it's a tabard
>>44263261
As far as I remember tabards are above the armor, but it is still a coat or something and then the armor as second layer.
>>44262579
I wanna say fauld but I don't think those go all the way around like in your pic.
>>44263316
Its worn under the armour and reaches to the waist .
>>44262579
>long loose fabric that's a tripping hazard
>sloped helmet that directs force downward, shattering the neck and spine
>domed breastplate that creates organ-destroying concussive notes when struck
>exposed tubing directly in line with the majority of Joachim Meyer's
Kunst des Fechten's killing strokes
>split knuckle gauntlets that will trigger arterial ruptures throughout the arm when struck, causing instant death
>over-reinforced boots with straps that will twist and snap the ankle with a single step, setting off a chain of metabolic reactions in the bone marrow that will result in rapid methane production and heat generation that will result in spontaneous combustion
I hate it when people post such stupid, impractical and unrealistic armor.
>>44264355
What if it's not armor meant to protect, but to hinder? Like some sort of penitent-crusade-esque type of "protection." The knight-bro did some un-knight-bro shit, and now he's being forced to wear this armor in battle until he can redeem himself.
>>44264355
>setting off a chain of metabolic reactions in the bone marrow that will result in rapid methane production and heat generation that will result in spontaneous combustion
...Wait, what?
>>44264564
That's pretty metal.
>>44262579
OP that is a freaking sci-fi knight, there was no robes that you wore under the armour, that would have been terribly impractical.
>>44263866
No it's not, sheesh. Under the armour is usually something like a gambesson or other padded garment.
A tabard is worn as a simple garment by peasants, soldiery etc, and from roughly 1450 a and onwards it was worn by knights, ABOVE the armour, usually decorated with the knights arms. It was important for battlefield identification, so the idea that you wore it under your armour is of course pants on head.
You wore a tabard above the armour to show everyone who you were/what side you were on.
>>44264355
Oh you tease!
>>44262579
..Battle skirt? I really don't know what else.
>>44264355
I can't help but feel that these start to get a little silly rather quickly.
>>44264649
>>44264714
>synthetic muscle suit
>all muscles are exposed, except for the head, shins, and left forearm
>ample space between synthetic muscle for spear thrusts, arrows, and simple thrusting weapons
Killed by peasants/10
>>44264714
>>44264933
>>44264714
>>44264714
Is that the crysis nanosuit?
>>44264933
>"Ok, which one of you drew a mustache on my helmet?"
>>44262579
If the garment is padded, and worn under the armor, it is called a gambeson or arming jack. They usually don't go far past the waist.
If the garment is worn over the armor, and is simply two rectangles of fabric sewn together at the shoulder, and belted at the waist, it is a tabard. They would frequently fall to the knees, but if they do and you are cavalry, then they would have a split to the crotch.
If a garment is worn with armor that is essentially a long coat, it is a surcoat. They were sometimes (Read: Incredibly rarely) worn beneath the armor in particularly cold weather. Otherwise, they were worn like tabards.
If a garment is worn about the waist, and may or may not be at least partially armored, then it is a fauld. A fauld can also be a skirt-like arrangement of armor. If the (Cloth) fauld is pleated, then it is a kilt.
Robes were also occasionally (In Europe) worn with armor. It was usually completely shrouding the armor, and worn that way by monks.
>>44264627
They're just fucking around.
>>44264649
That's a Surcoat.
Basically people, if it splits in the front, it's a surcoat. If it splits on the thighs, it's a tabard.
>>44264355
you forgot
>handle of sword is vastly shorter than blade, exposing the wielder to an excess of danger, likely to sever an artery the moment he tries to swing it.
>>44265935
>sword is double-edged, so it's just as likely to hurt your opponent as it is to hurt you
WHY DOESN'T ANYONE ACTUALLY LISTEN TO IDIOMS. SO MANY LIVES COULD HAVE BEEN SAVED.
