It's that time again everyone
Peasant Edition
>>47140782
>>47140833
>>47140862
it is only now that I realize I have no peasant weapons or armor
Ill dump what I got. I was going to make this thread myself, glad ones already going.
>>47141206
>>47141398
>>47141419
What weapons would actually be good in actual-tight-quarters-mineshaft-tunnel fighting, for when you don't have convenient 10 foot wide dungeon corridors? I'd sort of guess spears or other thrusting weapons that don't need room to swing.
>>47141444
>>47141454
I'd go with a short spear and heater shield.
Tunnel rats in Vietnam carried knives and a pistol, you might be able to replicate that. Hand crossbows would work fairly well, as you could fire around corners.
>>47141455
>>47141454
Spears, lances, and pikes are all great in narrow halls. Other smaller things like daggers, short swords, clubs, rapiers, and axes would be good too.
You need chopping and thrusting motions.
>>47141545
Sallets are top tier helmets for swordsman characters.
>>47141561
>>47141581
what kind of helmet is the guy in the front wearing?
Kinda reminds me of Shredder
>>47141609
No idea. Looks cool and plausible tho.
>>47141609
It's essentially a sallet, but with an... atypical visor.
>>47141572
Should I post my collection of modern weapons too?
>>47141682
>>47141662
Ramirez, capture thy yonder Burger Town.
>>47141545
Ugh. Those pauldrons....
>>47141581
A sallet with a really shitty modern sports visor. Worse looking than a bar grill
Taking requests
>>47141693
>>47141682
Sure man
I've seen a fa/tg/uy turn down weapon art
>>47141710
>>47141730
Alright lemme post some actual art first
none of yon knaves haveth a tiny maiden upon thine helm, be off with you beggars
>>47141760
are blades from vidya allowed?
>>47141703
>Taking requests
I require burgonets.
>>47141703
probably a weird request, but whatever
Do you have any really ahistorical armor? Stuff that screams the maker has no idea what he's doing, and just making things that seem like they'll work
pic unrelated
i really like this blade, seems like the perfect blade for a berserker type character
>>47141785
>>47141857
it doesn't even have an edge to it. It looks like someone carved it from granite but forgot to sharpen it.
>>47141871
>>47141877
that's some funny looking granite
>>47141883
Time for guns
>>47141898
well obviously they painted it purple.
>>47141902
>>47141917
>>47141789
Will do after I do >>47141805
>>47141805
...I have shitty made crap if thats what you mean.
>>47141911
its made of amber, called kyparite i think.
>>47141936
>>47141968
>>47141985
>>47142000
>>47141939
>>47142013
>>47142032
>>47142000
>M1 Garand
>post-Vietnam ALICE gear
I am irked.
>>47141454
Just think about it for a bit.
Kite shields, with plate armor or mail, short war hammers or spears and daggers as back up, depending on enemy armor, backed by people with incredibly strong crossbows. The kite shield armored guys plug the tunnels while the crossbow men occasionally kill someone when they finish loading another bolt.
Dwarf warfare lol.
>>47141454
Poison gas, trapped corridors, and pitfalls.
>>47142472
Vietnam fucking shit
>>47142715
There was an interesting thread last year about dwarf warfare including gunpowder and one of the most interesting ideas was a fan system to blow the smoke from their cannons down the tunnel into the enemy lines and camps and using the reverberation to collapse tunnels and send deafening echoes down the caves.
>>47141826
The 1400s ones are misleading as hell. The number of people who actually wore full-plate would've been something like under 5% of armor wearing soldiers. That shit was expensive as fuck (had to be a noble) and didn't last long with the ironically overlapping rise of guns.
>>47143003
Probably more that they only do them for 1400 and 1450 and not for later 1400s where they might have been more common.
>>47143135
>>47143150
>>47141703
>Taking requests
Request that you stop tripfagging
>>47143003
>The number of people who actually wore full-plate would've been something like under 5% of armor wearing soldiers. That shit was expensive as fuck (had to be a noble)
The hell you talking about? The mid-to late 15thC was the rise of mass produced plate, as steel was cheaper and easier to work than ever. Along with the rise of the professional non-noble soldier, and middle class, plate was more common than it had ever been.
>didn't last long with the ironically overlapping rise of guns.
If you mean 300 years is not "lasting long". Guns were getting better and cheaper, but no where near the armour killing mass fire that would happen in the end of the 17thC.
Read a goddamn book.
>>47141789
I promised you burgonets.
>>47143200
No.
>>47143172
>>47142911
Don't bother with smoke. Red pepper dust and lime work better. Read your Plutarch /tg/
>>47143203
>The number of people who actually wore full-plate would've been something like under 5% of armor wearing soldiers. That shit was expensive as fuck (had to be a noble)
He is talking about full-plate, which remained expensive and custom ordered even with plenty of partial plate munition grade armors in the battlefiled
>>47143243
>>47143283
>>47141703
>Taking requests
Mauls.
Specifically, archer's mauls, since there aren't really a lot of pictures out there.
>>47143298
>>47143283
>He is talking about full-plate
So whats misleading about the pic? They seem to all be generally focussed on the high end professional soldier except for the last one.
>>47143303
Thats a little harder... A maul was a tool, first and foremost, not a weapon.
>>47143203
The fact that full plate armor was produced well into and somewhat past the Victorian era doesn't mean that they were particularly useful as armor. Most of the suits-of-armor's existence was decorative... like an old parallel to the 1800s style royal guards garb.
Also, kinda moot, but the pic in question and all subsequent comments were about early-to-mid 15th c, not mid-to-late.
>>47143321
>>47143343
I don't agree with him about the pic. In this case, yes, those seem to represent the man-at-arms, sergeant or knight, the upper warriors, except for the 1610's one, which I think represents the average(?) soldier.
>>47143405
>>47143430
>>47143203
>>47143243
>>47143297
>>47143343
Serious question, why do you use a trip?
Do you have problems?
>>47143446
>>47143405
something about the proportions (perhaps the head) keeps tricking me into thinking this is a midget's armor
>>47143467
>>47143481
It is custom armor for children, like 10-year old princes.
>>47143486
>>47143343
>A maul was a tool
Well, this is a peasant edition thread.
>>47143383
>The fact that full plate armor was produced well into and somewhat past the Victorian era doesn't mean that they were particularly useful as armor. Most of the suits-of-armor's existence was decorative... like an old parallel to the 1800s style royal guards garb.
....The fuck are you talking about? No one is talking 19thC.
Are you really trying to tell me that 17thC plate wasn't worn for a valid reason? Pic related
I really don't think you have any clue about what you are talking about. No one was producing plate armour in the 18thC (1700's) and 19thC(1800's) outside of proofed breast plates and maybe helmets.
>>47143481
A child's.
>>47143504
Im just saying, being a wooden hammer, we have no surviving pieces, and you'll rarely find art outside of civilian use, with pieces like >>47143303 being rare.
>>47143504
Wooden wright or coopering mauls haven't changed in thousands of years, so here you go.
>>47143503
>>47143596
>>47143609
>>47143463
Why did you waste an image with a repost from the same goddamn thread ffs?
>>47143621
Did anyone ever read this? I can't, but I'm curious.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10426910902988059
>>47143405
yeah, the 1610's is a heavy musketeer, who would actually be armoured lighter than a heavy pike or targeteer.
In reality, Knights were still wearing full plate in 1610. Pic related.
>>47143630
Because without a relevant pic, he'd get a ban trying to troll me.
>>47143507
Jesus, you're belligerent as fuck. Ironically so since I made a clear understandable analogy and you got butthurt as if you didn't understand that analogies and since you did and are still moving goal-post and pretending that we're talking late 1400s when we were clearing talking early.
>>for example
>now he's a acting like we said "they never existed"
>being this delusional
>>47143794
Please reread everything in the convo, and quit choking on penises. >>47143003 and >>47143383 specifically
He was claiming that by the 1400's armour was fading out of use due to guns, rather than becoming the norm on the field.
Im done with you now. You can go.
>>47143854
>>47143463
so we can filter the cancer out of the thread. he only post pics from old threads anyway, no oc.
though you'll still get him samefaggin as an anon tho, which is probably why he does the it, deniability.
>>47143948
You're adorable.
I know you love me <3
>>47143971
>>47143854
>He was claiming that by the 1400's armour was fading out
Woot? Hahahaha. Quote it or btfo, you lying piece of shit.
>inb4 more moved goalposts
>inb4 only the "loser's-move" not thing but personal attacks.
Also, coats of armor arnt just the tops, though I'm sure that's because you think they're "coats" like modern "coats". Dumbass.
>>47143507
>trying to pass a 3/4ths armor as full-plate
>proves time and again he doesn't actually know what full plate is
>confirmed as a fraud
>>47144007
>>47143003
>The 1400s ones are misleading as hell. The number of people who actually wore full-plate would've been something like under 5% of armor wearing soldiers. That shit was expensive as fuck (had to be a noble) and didn't last long with the ironically overlapping rise of guns.
>inb4 more moved goalposts
>inb4 only the "loser's-move" not thing but personal attacks.
>Also, coats of armor arnt just the tops, though I'm sure that's because you think they're "coats" like modern "coats". Dumbass.
Oh you~, You're trying your best, and its adorable! If you want to sound cooler next time, try "harness".
>>47144090
>Not noticing the field faulds having multiple buckle arrangements for foot and calvary.
>see >>47143694
Keep trying. I am actually flattered with how hard you try to troll.
Here we go, including greaves and sabatons, just for you
>>47144103
>the 1400s ones
A direct reference to the pic he was commenting on.
>the beginning of rest of post
Yeah, he never said they "weren't being wore" or "weren't being produced". So, you've basically got nothing because you got caught in a lie. Yup, basically what I expected.
>>47144173
>So, you've basically got nothing because you got caught in a lie. Yup, basically what I expected.
Whatever helps you sleep at night, love.
Could you at least contribute while you shitpost nonsense?
>>47144154
Whoa, you're legit handicapped. So, do you plan on changing the subject to another armor everytime you get caught?
>keep trolling
You think half-plate and 3/4ths plate classifications are a troll? Why are you even here besides to give out mis-information.
The other other guy was right, you're a cancer to the thread.
>>47144204
>>47144230
I wouldn't even bother, man. It's in his name, he's a joke and a troll. Look at the thread, it's him w/ and without his trip trying to trap people legit interesting in medieval arms and armor. Forget his ignorant idiot ass.
>>47144237
Ignoring the cancerous, unproductive sameposts by anon, does anyone know any decent US sources for legit buff coats? There are some decent priced ones recently on the collectable sword market, but i am pretty sure that they are only garment weight.
http://www.medievalcollectables.com/p-38150-17th-century-sleeveless-buff-coat.aspx
http://www.medievalcollectables.com/p-38147-17th-century-buff-coat.aspx
>>47144314
>>47144468
>>47144478
>>47144526
Guess its art time
>>47144575
For burgonet bro earlier
>>47144588
>>47141902
>>47141936
>bullpup
>>47144874
>>47144978
>>47140782
>Peasant Edition
>Incoming leather and axes
>>47143200
fuck you Gropey is a /tg/ staple, he is the only allowed tripfag
>>47141703
Nice helm Gropester
Swedish peasant levy on the right, illustration from a landsknecht's diary, early 16th century.
>>47146676
Shouldn't he be wearing a gambeson? It doesn't look like he's got any real padding on.
Can anyone recommend places to purchase sword fittings?
Weapons used in the last Swedish peasant uprising, "Stora Daldansen", in 1743. It was brought down with musket volleys and grapeshot on what's nowadays Gustaf Adolf's Square in Stockholm.
>>47147022
He's probably fine like that. Compare with the probably-accurate-enough Maciejowski bible illustrations. Keeping the mail closely fitted saves weight, especially nice on the limbs, and while we can add a quilted gambesson or so on top to both add protection for the man and to protect the mail itself to some degree, that adds both weight and heat, at which point many (depending on the time period) seem to have thought the mail was enough with just a tad of padding underneath.
The lack of a surcoat on the other hand probably renders him hopelessly unfashionable, but hopefully the picture is simply about showing off the mail itself.
>>47147029
I probably can't be of much help, but specifying what kind of sword might make it easier for someone who can.
>>47141857
>>47141966
yo have terrible taste. get out.
>>47143463
He's an attention whore.
>>47143948
Can confirm he samefags as anon, see screencap. I fucked up taking it cause I was on my netbook but the top post was him as well.
>>47146970
Feels bad for those Swedish peasants who probably were Finns. When one region loses 1/3rd of their population in wars overseas and local famines as there isn't enough men to tend the fields you kinda learn to hate Swedes
>>47147346
Quaaaaid...
>>47147374
As we're looking at the fighting between Hans and Sten Sture the younger I think it'd be local volunteer forces (with their own arms and armour) on the Swedish/separatist side here. Sten Sture did get Åbo a few years earlier, but between the "Sture party's" practice of getting grass root support, and Sten's Russian worries, it'd seem a bit odd for him to draft a large number of Finns and ship over to the Swedish west coast.
The use of Finnish forces would be more of a 17th century thing in general, no? Or at least wait until Gustav Vasa had sorted things out to the point where the crown had a much better oversight and control.
And poor Per Brahe seems to have a hard time standing up to mandatory Swedish lessons.
>>47147532
Usage of Finnish troops was more 17th century thing during the Swedish Heyday, but if we look at the wars Sweden went through in 16th century, you can easily see that Finns were quite actice participants in Swedish wars against Danes, Russians and other folk.
15th century and earlier was more or less different Finnish tribes, Swedes and Russians fighting against each other.
A bloody big mess more or less.
>all these assmad faggots shitposting at gropey
Top fucking kek.
>>47147145
>what is artistic license for $1000
>>47147882
see
>>47147299
We know it's you dude
>>47147937
>implying I'm gropey
Top fucking kek you moron, the unique poster count increased when I came in here if you bothered at all to check it. My only posts so far have been
>>47147882
>>47147893
But hey if you want to be assmad, continue to be assmad. The negative emotions of other people gives me joy.
>>47147893
It's a possibility, but it's also possible that the artwork shows things as they actually were, so while we shouldn't categorically accept everything drawn as true, neither should we ignore artwork.
In this case we have multiple illustrations showing the same thing, and with the Maciejowski bible for example the things we can check against surviving artefacts and such tend to be very close to reality, suggesting that it's reasonably accurate overall. Plus, tailoring the mail to a pretty close fit has a clear advantage in the weight savings, which can balance the lesser protection from less padding, so we're hardly trying to prove something outright extraordinary here.
So unless we have somethign in particular suggesting the opposite?
>>47148080
I don't know, the fact that maille armor is nigh useless unless coupled with padding such as a gambeson underneath it? Stopping blade strikes is nice, but a person just wearing maille will end up with all sorts of broken bones and heavy bruising from blows that would otherwise not cause such significant harm with padded maille.
Plus it's obvious they're wearing gambesons under their armor in their art, as they actually show it at times in art and has the same slim proportions.
But using art to judge anything besides the dress code of the time is pretty damn stupid as just a couple centuries later those same breed of artists would be depicting the use of Frogmouths in pitched battle, which is straight-up suicide.
>>47148101
How the fuck did I forget about this.
The Morgan bible you cite proves your point is bunk dummkopf. We see men arming themselves in desperation here and they're slipping maille over their gambesons.
>>47148101
We have absolutely no evidence of gambresons or padding being used under maille prior to the late 11thC, and conclusive evidence only appears in the 12thC.
Maille is more effective with padding, but it is not useless without such by any means. Maille was the principal (at time only) armour in use in Europe for hundreds of years before padding. It clearly worked well enough that maille without padding was still felt to be superior to all other armours available at the time.
>>47148101
Ah, sorry. I got into the mindset of looking for a heavily padded gambeson, as I suspect we have a suitably slightly padded arming garment under the mail in the pic, and I guess I ended up arguing for nothign whatsoever instead, which would indeed be off for this time period.
>as just a couple centuries later those same breed of artists would be depicting the use of Frogmouths in pitched battle
Said artists frequently also frequently draw angels, dragons, chimera and whatnot, so it's indeed quite clear that we shouldn't accept them straight up.
But if we dismiss any sources where we have to approach the material critically, well, then we'd be left with nothing.
>>47148139
Yknow except for the fact that padding did exist and while not in the form of the Gambeson, was used throughout the Early Middle Ages.
And no, maille is shit without padding at all and exclusively wearing linen or a single layer of wool under it because maille does not absorb kinetic energy like plate. It transfers it. Without additional matter to cushion the impact of weapons, while you won't be hacked to pieces, you'll get broken bones despite wearing maille. The most vulnerable spots being your shoulders, shins, and anything else that is extremely bony and lacks covering tissue like the thighs.
>>47148177
Please show me the evidence for padding being in use during the Early Middle Ages. It is not mentioned in any inventory lists, literature, depicted in images and certainly no finds. Check out the myarmoury website and search for Viking padding and see how padding under maille in the Early Middle Ages is a topic that has been done to death with no solid evidence in favour of the idea beyond baseless assertions that maille is useless despite the evidence that is what happened.
What we do have is ample evidence of maille being put over clothing, with no indication that padding is being worn.
Here is another image from the Morgan Bible and we see David shaking off the maille gifted to him, and it clearly over his nice red tunic with no padding and no integrated lining since we can see the inside.
Maille can and was worn effectively without padding, you are drastically overstating the it's disadvantages.
>>47148177
>>47148215
Something I have seen brought up, which may be relevant here, is how we today tend to want armour/sparring gear to keep us from injuries more or less completely, so we won't have to phone in sick on Monday morning, while historically armour may often have been more about outright surviving.
As such, people "back in the day" may have been more accepting of broken bones and whatnot, and not so quick on adopting measures to reduce it, in this case going with little or no padding under the mail (varying with time, lace, personal preference, etc) even though this may seem suboptimal today.
As for your picture, we have only two fellows in the process of donning maille.
The first is the man about to put a hauberk over his head. He is wearing a beige tunic and not any sort of gambeson of padding beyond his clothing. You can tell it is a tunic from the way it hangs and is rucked up about his waist. The gambesons (and arming caps) in this image are clearly marked by rows of dots that indicate the quilting, most also have collar peices which are naturally lacking on tunics.
The chap sitting down is already in maille so I'm not sure how you can tell he is wearing a gambeson underneath, especially as there is no padded colar around his neck unlike on all the gambesons in the image.
What he is currently putting on are gamboised cuisses, or padded leg protection. There were seperate garments that were not connected to a gambeson protecting the torso at all. As we can see in the image in this post in which two figures sport these items, they were often worn over the top of maille chausses or on their own with no maille leg armour and such do not automatically represent under-armour padding but rather the first phase of a trend of wearing padding over the top of armour/independently on the leg.
There is evidence for wearing padding under armour by the time of the Morgan Bible (1250s), but it does not seem to be universal and none of these images suggest that padding is being depicted here. Not wearing padding under maille beyond clothing has a long pedigree and was the rule until the 11th/12thC at which point padding begins to gain popularity.
>>47148313
This is very true, and I think gives us a slightly warped view of historical practices. Although myself and others do wear maille with no/very thin padding and seem to get by well enough.
>>47141454
>>47141535
>>47142213
Fantasy/medieval era mineshafts are not big corridors that you can comfortably stroll through.
They're cramped as fuck, and in the majority of the tunnels you can neither stand upright or swing anything. A spear is going to bump into the walls all the time, a shield is going to make it near impossible to turn, and anything with long reach gets clumsy because once someone is inside your reach, switching your grip or backing off is way trickier than if you're in the open.
What you ideally want is full armor and something like a buckler and a stout dagger. Punch, wrestle, trip people, and don't worry about blocking since you're not going to see shit once people drop or step on the torches.
>>47147299
Fucking pathetic, holy shit
>>47148177
>And no, maille is shit without padding at all and exclusively wearing linen or a single layer of wool under it
"Way better than being unarmored" is a really odd definition of shit.
It stops you from getting cut to pieces, nobody is going to look at that and go "nah, I'll get bruised anyway, better skip it".
Mail is still pretty good at keeping you in one piece even without padding. This makes it a big step up from not wearing armour, which means it's still an attractive proposition.
We understand that having padding too makes a big difference.
But it's like any other invention or development.
When people started riding horses they didn't go "nah, seems like a dumb idea until we invent something to put your feet in, I'll skip that"
>>47148546
He was samefagging in here a little while ago and fucked up too, can't remember what it was about. Somebody called him out on something and he went full damage control
>>47148652
Obviously everyone who uses tripcodes are attentionwhores who like googling themselves, but that doesn't mean their arguments and sources aren't better than yours.
If you say something stupid and some tripfag argues with you, you argue back. With arguments.
Don't waste space and posting time trying to crusade against someone that apparently you care way too much about.
>>47148710
I don't give a shit, I was just mentioning it to the other guy. Now fuck off, Gropey.j/k post more pics
>>47149394
>>47149408
>>47149416
>>47149420
>>47149434
>>47149441
Minidumb semi over, going to post few pictures that are more /k/ than Arms and Armor, but still interesting
>>47146046
>>47144072
More Eastern Roman please.
>>47149451
Oh fuck saved the thumbnail.
Pic related is when you make white snow camo, but it reflects light in too blue shade. That means that it doesn't work as it should, not even in shade.
>>47149467
Effectiveness of AT-mine on hardened steel.
>>47149502
Sidemine and heavy Claymore.
Dump is over.
>>47149516
>>47149502
damn those are cool
>>47149467
As it was said in a shodo video on youtube, "there are many many different colours of black", or in this case, white.
If I'm an adventure of a broadly defined medieval fantasy land, do I want a stirrup crossbow, lever (pull or push?), repeating, or windlass? Or do I just pull that shit myself and get some muscle?
>>47149672
depends a lot on you. Windlasses are nice as they require a lot less strength, but are expensive. Stirrups require you to bend over to reload, while windlass and lever can be reloaded when standing/crouching behind a shield. Repeating are basically useless, they trade off power for volume of fire. You're not gonna get any penetration with them, and anyone with armor can no sell them
>>47149552
Fuck image limit. Otherwise could find few more pics.
>>47149595
Development of modern camos is nowadays science as fuck.
>>47144819
>not liking full length barrels in shorter rifles
>>47149712
I'm leaning towards a lever action, like a pull since that seems more compact.
new thread?
>>47147299
Convenient you leave the rest of of that thread out. The janitor deleted that for a confirmed IP jump. That shit happens, yo'.
>>47150278
Gropey just happened to be shitposting about himself at the same time as his buddy he claims was on the same IP, in the same thread? That was his explanation after all.
>>47143343
The inclusion of heraldry does seem to point towards a member of the knightly class or above. The halving the families arms with another in the 1450 one seems to point towards someone who presides over substantial landholdings, at least from his mother's side which is why he's halved them.
>>47143203
>Read a goddamn book.
I'm interested, recommend me some.
