Stupid Fantasy Armors

[pmmg]

Even then however, you can actually shape bikini armor to provide at least some protection to vital areas. Sure, midriff will still be exposed, but at least you get some protection for heart and lungs.

Or you can simply set things in antiquity, which had body-shaped breastplates anyway.

We are really going the road of saying if you are going to have bikini armor, at least make it right?

Cant we just take as a given that this is not functional armor for battle. But very well suited for other purposes.

 

[Aldarion]

It depends on the degree of protection I suppose. Some armour is probably better than none at all. But design wise some of it was probably not that practical. A full suit of armour for one.WWI helmets another, and probably lots more examples that were good in principle, but not on the battlefield. Designs can always be improved upon generally speaking.

Uhh, "full suit of armor" was the best example of protection, ever. It was not very heavy (full suit of plate armor was lighter than equivalent mail armor), it was very flexible, and it was basically proof against most attacks (you had to either target the very narrow weak spots such as vision slot or joints, or take a dedicated tin can opener to the task). Its only flaw was that it was hideously expensive.

World War I helmets also generally do not have any obvious flaws. At the very least they were better than no helmets.

 

[Finchbearer]

Yeah I mean I don’t know about full suit of armour…it’s all great until it’s a really hot day and you die of heatstroke, or you want to sneak up on the enemy and all they hear is *clank clank clank* …or when you have to pee…

 

[pmmg]

First time you kneel down, and the breast plate gets pushed up into your chin is probably not pleasant either

 

[JBCrowson]

To take the discussion in a different direction...

Are we in danger of overthinking this?
As writers we aim to give enough details of stuff (including armour, weapons, city walls, people's faces) to allow our readers to form a mental picture of what we are saying. We need that image to be similar enough to ours so that when we later reference something we described earlier it doesn't create a jarring non-sequiteur for the reader. In this case the reader's pre-formed ideas about armour are clearly going to be very significant. If we describe something as chain mail / plate armour or whatever, unless we go into a lot of detail about the armour, each reader will fill in with their idea of the armour we mentioned.

For those of us writing high fantasy (by which I mean fantasy with no in-story connection to the 'real' world) I would argue that there is no need to be aligned with real world history. Even if we use a real culture as a base for one in our invented world, it can be different in any way we want, so long as we are consistent and it works for the story we are telling in that world.

 

[Aldarion]

Yeah I mean I don’t know about full suit of armour…it’s all great until it’s a really hot day and you die of heatstroke, or you want to sneak up on the enemy and all they hear is *clank clank clank* …or when you have to pee…

Depends on which armor...

Full suit of mail is actually very, how to put it, well aired. Padding might be an issue.
Full suit of plate is an issue, however.

But even then:
a) both of these issues can be solved by simply drinking more water
b) neither actually results in "armor that didn't work to actually protect the person wearing it"

And armor will be adapted to conditions, so if armor proves too heavy or too hot for conditions where it is being used, troops will simply get rid of any less important pieces.

it can be different in any way we want, so long as we are consistent and it works for the story we are telling in that world.

But to do that, you need to understand why something worked the way it did in the real world. Of course, readers may not care... but I always saw media as educational, not just entertainment.

 

[Prince of Spires]

We are really going the road of saying if you are going to have bikini armor, at least make it right?

You can't really go wrong with bikini armor, so that's an easy one...

I am now wondering if there are examples of bikini armor. Not so much for protection in a fight, but I can imagine a roman coming up with it and using it for entertainment purposes. They did plenty of weird things, so it wouldn't surprise me.

 

[Finchbearer]

I imagine that in Roman times there was more focus on homoeroticism.

 

[Devor]

And armor will be adapted to conditions, so if armor proves too heavy or too hot for conditions where it is being used, troops will simply get rid of any less important pieces.

Which makes me ask, but how long would a soldier be expected to wear their armor? Would you really be in full plate from dawn to dusk?

 

[Aldarion]

Which makes me ask, but how long would a soldier be expected to wear their armor? Would you really be in full plate from dawn to dusk?

Depends on the situation and army discipline, but I suspect that the answer is "mostly not". Byzantine infantrymen for example marched with their shield and spear, but armor and other equipment were carried in the baggage train and would be put on before battle if there was time (and if there wasn't - well, that is what the shield was for, and why throwing away one's shield was punishable by death or, at the very least, getting nose cut off).

At least in hot conditions which Byzantines regularly encountered, not only did armor cause discomfort to wearer and increase possibility of a heat stroke, but metal armor would quickly be corroded and degraded by sweat. So wearing armor would both unnecessarily encumber troops and make them less combat capable, as well as unnecessarily damaging their equipment.