The Forge Archives

Hello all!

I've been trying to keep up with this forum (because this game and you guys are so darn cool) but it has been quite hard because of all the posts and time constraints so forgive me if these are some old questions being brought to the forefront.

First of all are there any defaults for wrestling, or any defaults to lances say from polearms or possibly other weapon styles?

Secondly when you are a landed nobility is the gold you get each year a profit that goes stright to you or do you still have to pay for your servants and such? Along those same lines do you get a furnished manor(within reason) or do you just get the lands and the serfs and you need to use your gold to outfit everything in your manor and also maybe outfit your servants and your garrison?[Please try and explain this one as fully as possible for what they get because it kinda matters, thanks]

I now this is probably a silly question but just to be clear, When you hire mercenary men do you need to supply them with weapons and or arrows and such or does the hire cost cover all expences associated with them. AKA they bring all their own stuff

This is all I have for now but i'm sure I forgot some things.

Thank you in advance

-Kevin Beyer

Well i dont have the book on hand so im not sure about the first two but the way i play as far as paying for mercenaries is that they bring all their own stuff up to a point.  I mean, have you ever read a book where a mercenary comes to the job unprepared and has to go out and buy stuff?  Nah, hes always got everything on hand.  now if there is something outlandish or out of the ordinary for a mercenary there might be an extra charge.  i also charge different prices for different jobs.  it would cost more to hire a mercenary to kill someone than to steal from them or protect you for example.  

Actually, on second thought, i dont think there are any defaults for lances, but im not sure.  i believe there are defaults for wrestling.

Gidday Kevin, welcome to the forum.

Actually, I don't recall any of your specific questions being asked before, so you don't have to worry about that. As a general rule, though, we encourage folk to have a nosey through the old topics on the forum, there's some really good stuff out there, some of it hard to find these days :-) (A good place to start is the "new to the forum? Read this first" sticky post, although that's not all-inclusive of all the good stuff on here).

Defaults
According to the manual, most weapon styles default FROM wrestling, but none of them default to it. Now, in your own game you're of course free to do whatever you like, but that's just the way Jake sees it. I wasn't there when he wrote it, but I'm guessing the concept is that when you learn to wrestle and brawl with your hands, a lot of the techniques and moves are useful in other weapon/fighting styles, thus the default from Wrestling. The reverse isn't necessarily true though - just because I can swing a sword I don't really know how to grab someone and choke-hold them. That's IMO of course, and YMMV.

Lances? Well, there are no defaults from or to lances, and that really makes sense. Being able to sit straight, stay on, coax the horse the way you want to go, and hold a long stick straight while letting momentum do it's thing is totally different from being able to move about without the horse, and stick someone with the pointy end of something sharp. That's why no defaults. Again, Jake may contradict me here but I'm pretty sure I have it right - I used to fence and I also used to live on a farm with several horses, so I'm at least slightly knowledgable about the difference :-)

Landed Nobility
Check out table 7.4 in book seven, it explains that landed nobility spend (approx) 20% of their wealth each year on a Seneschal who manages their affairs. I would say that would cover a small staff (who the Seneschal pays from the money you give him), and a landed nobility title would most likely come with a mansion (unless you were awarded it in game and it was a split of someone elses land). The best answer here, of course, is: a) it would be different from country to country and b) do it how you like, it's your game now, we're just here to bounce ideas off of.

I would rule that you have to pay the cost of your own garrison, however. Table 7.5 in book 7 outlines the cost of guardsmen and suchlike per month, and yes, you have to outfit them as well. Being nobility is expensive, you know. :-)

Mercenaries
As for mercenaries, no, they would come with their own gear. Of course, the more you pay them, the better they are and the better gear they have. They're also a lot more expensive than hiring guardsmen.

Anyway, welcome again to the forum.

Brian.

Quote from: Brian Leybourne
According to the manual, most weapon styles default FROM wrestling, but none of them default to it. Now, in your own game you're of course free to do whatever you like, but that's just the way Jake sees it. I wasn't there when he wrote it, but I'm guessing the concept is that when you learn to wrestle and brawl with your hands, a lot of the techniques and moves are useful in other weapon/fighting styles, thus the default from Wrestling. The reverse isn't necessarily true though - just because I can swing a sword I don't really know how to grab someone and choke-hold them. That's IMO of course, and YMMV

Other way around in the book I think.  :-)  Everything defaults to wrestling but nothing defaults from.

Quote from: Brian Leybourne
Lances? Well, there are no defaults from or to lances, and that really makes sense. Being able to sit straight, stay on, coax the horse the way you want to go, and hold a long stick straight while letting momentum do it's thing is totally different from being able to move about without the horse, and stick someone with the pointy end of something sharp. That's why no defaults. Again, Jake may contradict me here but I'm pretty sure I have it right - I used to fence and I also used to live on a farm with several horses, so I'm at least slightly knowledgable about the difference :-)

Brian.

Having a little trouble seeing why nothing defaults to lance myself.  Since all the other proficiencies can be used on foot or on horseback, within reason, how can using a lance be any more dissimilar than say using polearm proficiency on foot and a cut and thrust from horse back?  personaly I gave it a -5 default
Aaron

Quote from: Aaron

Quote from: Brian Leybourne
According to the manual, most weapon styles default FROM wrestling, but none of them default to it.

Other way around in the book I think.  :-)  Everything defaults to wrestling but nothing defaults from.

You're wrong. Go back and read that section again. The proficiencies as listed are FROM, not TO.

Quote from: AaronHaving a little trouble seeing why nothing defaults to lance myself.  Since all the other proficiencies can be used on foot or on horseback, within reason, how can using a lance be any more dissimilar than say using polearm proficiency on foot and a cut and thrust from horse back?  personaly I gave it a -5 default

They really don't correlate. Even using a sword or a mace from horseback is done very similarly to how you use them on the ground (but you're controlling the horse instead of running around). This is very different from using a lance (the only link being riding the horse, and that's covered by your Riding Skill). Pikes and Spears from horseback simply CANNOT be used as you would use them on the ground (short spears maybe), and if you tried it, I (as GM) would make you use Lance proficiency, because that's how you would have to use them.

Believe me, they're different. Using a lance is not like using an axe, or a sword, or anything else, be those others from the back of a horse or not.

Having said that, IYG, and if you like defaulting at -5 to a lance, then all power to you. You have to play the game the way that works for you.

Brian.

I don't have the book here, so can't compare how I read what it says in there, I know however that one of them old Fechtbuecher states "All fencing comes from wrestling". Now, that didn't keep masters at arms from teaching armed combat first in some cases, but it frequently contained a gratuitous kick of bash with the fist, or the recommendation to go into unarmed combat at a certain point (e.g. a "durchlaufen" under the opponent's blade)

Brian and the rest of you, thank you for the posts I really appreciate it! And yes Brian i've looked at the newbie section before I posted...great job by the way!

I do still have a couple other questions though. You say that none of the weapons default to wrestling but under all the weapon styles in my book anyway they have the default to wrestling under all the styles and under the wrestling style they have nothing listed after this. I though that the defaults listed after each weapon style default to the styles listed at that cost(pg 50 upper right hand paragraph)? Sorry I'm a little confused.

Secondly what do you use as a cost for barding? I was thinking that according to how you do fine quality and best quality items that standard barding would possibly be 5x the cost of whatever armor you want on the horse. Does this sound right?

Thank you,
Kevin

Ha, now I'm confused.

The defaults listed under each weapon are your default for other stuff. So, on p. 55, Pole Axe, if you have a Pole Axe Prof. of 7 then your default for C&T is 4, Dagger is 4, Wrestling is 4, and Pole-Arms is 6, etc. Make sense?

All proficiences default some to wrestling because it's assumed that a swordsman/etc. has learned to wrestle as part of the foundation Irmo talked about. I know lots (and I mean lots) of wrestlers that can't swing a sword, though.

Jake

Quote from: Jake NorwoodHa, now I'm confused.

The defaults listed under each weapon are your default for other stuff. So, on p. 55, Pole Axe, if you have a Pole Axe Prof. of 7 then your default for C&T is 4, Dagger is 4, Wrestling is 4, and Pole-Arms is 6, etc. Make sense?

All proficiences default some to wrestling because it's assumed that a swordsman/etc. has learned to wrestle as part of the foundation Irmo talked about. I know lots (and I mean lots) of wrestlers that can't swing a sword, though.

Jake

So it's a very low default. :)

Actually, I learned to wrestle long before I had any formal training with swords. It does teach several key things, mostly in footwork. I should think about a -2 default to Pugilism or Dagger would be appropriate.

The way it is, you'd have to be kwazy to buy a Wrestling proficiency instead of just learning it as a part of another style. :)

Quote from: Jake NorwoodHa, now I'm confused.

The defaults listed under each weapon are your default for other stuff. So, on p. 55, Pole Axe, if you have a Pole Axe Prof. of 7 then your default for C&T is 4, Dagger is 4, Wrestling is 4, and Pole-Arms is 6, etc. Make sense?

All proficiences default some to wrestling because it's assumed that a swordsman/etc. has learned to wrestle as part of the foundation Irmo talked about. I know lots (and I mean lots) of wrestlers that can't swing a sword, though.

Jake

Admittedly, I don't have the revised book yet, but unless you changed it, the original manual clearly says that the defaults are from the other listed proficiencies, not to them.

"Defaults are signified with a negative proficiency modifier based on which proficiency the default originates from" (Page 50). So it's either badly worded, or I'm stupid, or you changed it in revised :-)

Doing them FROM makes more sense IMO as well - when I'm running through the castle having just escaped from the dungeon and I find a greatsword (that I have no proficiency in), I can just look at the Greatsword proficiency page to see what I get in it from any other proficiencies I do have. If the proficiencies are TO, then I have to go through every proficiency listing in turn, looking at the greatsword entry for each one, and work out what default I get that way. Much more work.

Sigh. If that's the case it means the character generator needs a major change because all the proficiencies are from. Gah.

Oh well, not the first time I've looked stupid and it wont be the last. I still stand by my lance/horseback comments though :-)

Brian.

As I recall it is re-worded in the new edition. OTOH even your way works allright--the numbers are usually reciprocal to each other.

Jake

That's cool, been looking forward to the revised book anyway, now I just have another change to check out :-)

Speaking of the CharGen, it's almost done, by the way. Creating, saving, editing characters etc is all completed (and spiffy, I'm especially proud of the Weyrth map that you mouse-over to get info on the countries, and click to select your nationality), I'm just finishing off the printing aspect and I'll change the weapon defaults, and V1 will be done. Should be next week sometime, touch wood.

Brian.

as a wrestler now studying longsword I found certain things transfer well, on my first day of ARMA I was told to go and freeplay against another guy, I had no clue what to do with a sword so I just waited for him to do something then put my sword between his sword and my body and then went to grips as fast as I could. This was highly amusing since I never attacked with my sword and used it more like a long thin shield: block, block block.
As a side note many wrestling techniques work great in a sword fight such as the duck-under, firemans carry, arm drag and most trips and sweeps.

As a note, i did look up the revised version and the quote brian mentioned is in there and alone may be confusing, however if you check the following example in the next paragraph it shows how the defaults work quite clearly and states "defaults listed in the following section follow the weapon they originate from" ie defaults from great sword are listed under great sword.
I figured that may help for those who are using the first print, and good correction in the second go Jake.

Great posts and finally I'm more clear on the proficiencies. Anyway, any ideas on my second question about barding costs?

Thanks, you guys are great!
-Kevin

Kevin, just go ahead and give the guy free barding and a couple companies of cavalry, and let the lance default to 'Mass Weapons & Shields' at -1...

OK, maybe not.  Greetings all, I'm the reason Ryuuko is asking a lot of these questions.  With his able help I've (almost) completed my first ROS character.  Without boring you with details he is a landed noble Knight / Clergyman.  Currently, the aspect of the character I'm looking forward to playing the most is actually running the lands.  I may have to readjust my spending some (17 gold, 10 silver currently remaining in the coffers... goodbye 'fine' full plate) to have money left for Keep maintenance.  

Which brings me to my question / request.  If anyone out there can provide me with a rough idea of what a medieval Knight's properties would be composed of it would be a great help.  One influencing factor might be that the land has been entrusted to his family for at least two generations (I believe that was done, or am I wrong?).  I'm also thinking of establishing some things that the land and people may be well supplied with (arable lands, ores, naturally defensible terrain{one or two things, not all...resist munchkinism}) / talented in (agriculture, mining, metalsmithing, stone masonry, etc) and areas in which there may be deficiencies, possibly severe.  And yes, I realize that the particular country which the character lives in will determine some of the above, but I'd like to make it a truly unque holding instead of a microcosm of the home country.  

OK, I think that's just about enough of that, except to say that it's been a while since I've been psyched up about a character like I am now.  ROS has an excellent character creation system and world setting... I'm looking forward to claiming my half of the Xanarian Empire by whatever means neccessary.  Thanks guys.

Quote from: Brian LeybourneYou're wrong. Go back and read that section again. The proficiencies as listed are FROM, not TO.

Brian.

Is that right? (sly grin)..

Quote from: Brian LeybourneOh well, not the first time I've looked stupid and it wont be the last. I still stand by my lance/horseback comments though :-)

And fair enough too.  But let us agree to disagree on this as I believe timing, footwork and distance would all be way different on horseback than of foot.

Quote from: Brian LeybourneThat's cool, been looking forward to the revised book anyway, now I just have another change to check out :-) Brian.

Get that new book already Brian!! lol...


Aaron..

Quote from: AaronAnd fair enough too.  But let us agree to disagree on this as I believe timing, footwork and distance would all be way different on horseback than of foot.

Yes, but you're missing my point. Even if I accept that swinging a sword from horseback is entirely different from doing it on the ground (it's not so different IMO, but I'll accept your statement to make my point), both are still a world away from jousting/lancework.

The reason Mr. Swordsman is capable of using his sword skill on horseback is because he's a good rider (one hopes) and he's praticed controlling the horse with his knees or one hand, moving about, dancing forward for the strike and dancing back for evasions, etc. That doesn't mean he knows anything about keeping the horse moving at top speed and on target while maneuvering a heavy 15' long pole so that its point is going in the right direction. The cross-over in skills between the two is his horsemanship, not his swordsmanship.

Trust me, I don't ride anymore (been living in the city for many years now) but used to be a pretty good rider, and being the medieval geek I am you can believe I have tried a bit of jousting. It's not anything like swordfighting (which I have also done). No, it's not even like spear/pike work, either.

But to each their own.

Brian.

I''ve got a couple more questions that came up.

1. Can you willingly make a spell of three or spell of many with only a single vagary so that given the time you can make it more effective?

2. I hate to bring this up again but what is the cost of barding?

3. Is a familiar totally under the control of the Weire at all times? Can they cast spells from the familiar if they are in that mind at the time?

Thank you,
Kevin Beyer

Quote from: RyuukoI''ve got a couple more questions that came up.

1. Can you willingly make a spell of three or spell of many with only a single vagary so that given the time you can make it more effective?

2. I hate to bring this up again but what is the cost of barding?

3. Is a familiar totally under the control of the Weire at all times? Can they cast spells from the familiar if they are in that mind at the time?

Thank you,
Kevin Beyer

I wish Rick were around to answer this.

1-Sure.
2-Got me.
3-I would say no.

Jake

Quote from: RyuukoI''ve got a couple more questions that came up.

1. Can you willingly make a spell of three or spell of many with only a single vagary so that given the time you can make it more effective?

2. I hate to bring this up again but what is the cost of barding?

3. Is a familiar totally under the control of the Weire at all times? Can they cast spells from the familiar if they are in that mind at the time?

Thank you,
Kevin Beyer

1. Jake's the man.

2. I'm not certain about this... What I can do, however, is give you the cost to equip a Carolingian Knight in the 9th century.

Cost of Equipping a Carolingian Knight:
Helmet = 6 Cows
Coat of Mail = 12 Cows
Sword with Scabbard = 7 Cows
Leg Armor = 6 Cows
Lance and Shield = 2 Cows
Horse = 12 Cows
Total = 45 Cows

You will notice, I am sure, that I did not provide a cost for barding... Hopefully you can extrapolate a reasonable cost despite this.

3.  See #1 above.

Chris

That's a lot of cows.

Personally, i would add another 45 cows to that total for the cost of barding.

IIRC, barding hadn't been invented at the time of the 9th Century, which is why you can't find a cow equivalent value for it.. I could be wrong, but i'm pretty sure about this one.

Quote from: arxhon
IIRC, barding hadn't been invented at the time of the 9th Century, which is why you can't find a cow equivalent value for it.. I could be wrong, but i'm pretty sure about this one.

I think you are right.  Barding had been invented much earlier in the east (Scythians, Alans etc)  but was not in western europe until the late middle ages (1400's).

Quote from: toli

Quote from: arxhon
IIRC, barding hadn't been invented at the time of the 9th Century, which is why you can't find a cow equivalent value for it.. I could be wrong, but i'm pretty sure about this one.

I think you are right.  Barding had been invented much earlier in the east (Scythians, Alans etc)  but was not in western europe until the late middle ages (1400's).

True.  Persian heavy cavalry carried armor as early as their wars against the Greeks (6th century BCE).  Parthian cataphractoi equipped horse and rider (nobles only) with armor of bronze or iron scales.  That was pre-1st century BCE.  The Sarmatians (1st and 2nd century CE/Black Sea region), known for being the culture to develop the first western-style saddle, protected their mounts with scales of iron, bronze, horn, or hardened leather.  The Romans copied this, fielding heavy cavalry (cataphracts) in the Sarmatian style as early as the 2nd or 3rd century CE.  These troops were the progenitors of the Byzantine cataphractoi that European knights would have run across during the Crusades (11th century CE and later...the first was called by Pope Urban II in 1095 at Clermont Cathedral).

Western Europeans fell behind the times after the "Fall" of the Roman Empire.  It's successors, the Germanic tribes of Northern and Eastern Europe were, for the large part, unarmored save for chieftains.  This continued until the 8th century CE with the unification of the Franks under Charles the Great (Charlemagne).  Knights became armored, but horses remained largely unarmored until the 12th century when early types began to see limited use.  Cloth first, and then leather, to protect the horses flanks and withers were eventually replaced by the mail and plate barding you begin to see in the 14th century.

Sorry for the ramble. *grin*  Kinda got carried away.  Not really sure what my point was.. other than it was possible that mounted warriors as early as the 9th century could have protected their horses with armor...but that it was unlikely.  And that I still don't know how much it would cost.  Other than it would probably not cost the same as a trained warhorse...until you get to later periods.  But that's just a guess.

Chris

That was a very good historical analysis, Sneaky Git. I learned stuff. :-)

Just examining costs here...a full suit of plate, including the helm is about 16g, and a destrier is 40g (imperial standard). Considering that there are evidently several types of barding (cloth, leather, chain, and scales) it's tough to come up with a set price right away.

This falls under the category of Seneschal fiat for now, i guess.

I just thought of something. Was something like "Half barding", meaning covering the front half of the horse, ever used?

Quote from: arxhonThat was a very good historical analysis, Sneaky Git. I learned stuff. :-)

Just examining costs here...a full suit of plate, including the helm is about 16g, and a destrier is 40g (imperial standard). Considering that there are evidently several types of barding (cloth, leather, chain, and scales) it's tough to come up with a set price right away.

This falls under the category of Seneschal fiat for now, i guess.

I just thought of something. Was something like "Half barding", meaning covering the front half of the horse, ever used?

I know, with quite a bit of certainty, that the Persians made use of such armor... hmm... I think around the time of Darius II (4th-5th century BCE).  As for later, I have seen paintings that depicted "half-barding," but am uncertain as to its prevalence.

Chris

Quote from: Damascus

Which brings me to my question / request.  If anyone out there can provide me with a rough idea of what a medieval Knight's properties would be composed of it would be a great help.  One influencing factor might be that the land has been entrusted to his family for at least two generations (I believe that was done, or am I wrong?).

Wow.. umm a knights holdings and properties depended a lot on the situation he and his holdings were in. There was a huge amount of variety between even two neighboring holds. I think that every decent land holding would (should) have a mill(water, wind or "tidal"), a certain amount of arable land an amount of forest, pastureland and a few roads (oh boy! more exepenses!) as well as access to a waterway of some sort... but you would be amazed at how many battles were fought over the rights of access to something as mundane as a stream. If you want to get more in depth, just let me know.

Quote from: DamascusI'm also thinking of establishing some things that the land and people may be well supplied with (arable lands, ores, naturally defensible terrain{one or two things, not all...resist munchkinism}) / talented in (agriculture, mining, metalsmithing, stone masonry, etc) and areas in which there may be deficiencies, possibly severe.  And yes, I realize that the particular country which the character lives in will determine some of the above, but I'd like to make it a truly unque holding instead of a microcosm of the home country.  

Don't forget the problems inherent to owning rich lands... many raiders/robbers/bandits which leads to using up some of your manpower in keeping the trouble-makers in check as well as having to contend with guilds and those troublesome townsfolk and the underside of a wealthy feof as well... corruption! Just imagine the fun of having to effectively deal with a local gang of thieves in your village stealing all the chickens... you want them held in check, but you want them around as a way of finding out about spies and saboteurs. Gets complicated fast, donnit?

Quote from: DamascusOK, I think that's just about enough of that, except to say that it's been a while since I've been psyched up about a character like I am now.  ROS has an excellent character creation system and world setting... I'm looking forward to claiming my half of the Xanarian Empire by whatever means neccessary.  Thanks guys.

I haven't even played it beyond simulations but already the blood flows.... err... heh...

This may be oversimplifying it, but I would just look up the pertinent costs of the type of armour you want for the barding and then multiply the base price of a human set by ten. So a suit of Chain Barding (fully covered flanks, whithers & neck) would be 5gp for the human set * 10 for a total of 50gp. Want a chanfron? An enclosed chanfron would set you back the price of a human great helm times ten or 15sp*10 = 150sp (about 7gp, 10 sp) So to armour your ride will cost 57gp, 10sp. No wonder this stuff got ransomed back!

As a side note, I think that there should also be a limit on which kind of beast can wear the heavier barding. So a plain ole' horse would be limited to rider. A Courser could wear chain (maille) proofness, a Charger would be able to sport leather barding and only a Destrier could handle the bulk and weight of a suit of full harness. Also the animal would suffer the same penalties from barding as the human wearing similar type of human armour would.

That actually sounds like a great way to handle it, Salamander. Good job!

It doesn't need to be complicated.

As you pointed out, the stuff is expensive which would make for a good adventure of two (the Duke's barding got stolen, and you have to recover it).

Thank you, I am glad to have made a contribution!
=)

Quote from: SalamanderThis may be oversimplifying it, but I would just look up the pertinent costs of the type of armour you want for the barding and then multiply the base price of a human set by ten. So a suit of Chain Barding (fully covered flanks, whithers & neck) would be 5gp for the human set * 10 for a total of 50gp. Want a chanfron? An enclosed chanfron would set you back the price of a human great helm times ten or 15sp*10 = 150sp (about 7gp, 10 sp) So to armour your ride will cost 57gp, 10sp. No wonder this stuff got ransomed back!

As a side note, I think that there should also be a limit on which kind of beast can wear the heavier barding. So a plain ole' horse would be limited to rider. A Courser could wear chain (maille) proofness, a Charger would be able to sport leather barding and only a Destrier could handle the bulk and weight of a suit of full harness. Also the animal would suffer the same penalties from barding as the human wearing similar type of human armour would.

I don't know.. Seems a bit on the expensive side, doesn't it?  Salamander, how did you come up with the x10 multiplier?  I feel that it generates costs that are prohibitively expensive.  Especially considering that the average yearly income for a landed noble is 50 gold (10 of which goes to a Steward...a good investment), and you still haven't taken into account expenses (manorial upkeep, armsmen, livestock, household, etc.).

Now, I certainly agree that horse armor should be expensive...and that calculating costs should not require a degree in higher math.  However, I can't help but feel that a bigger area does not necessarily equate to more expensive.. know what I mean?

What do you think?

Chris

Quote from: arxhonI just thought of something. Was something like "Half barding", meaning covering the front half of the horse, ever used?

Kind of.. it depends on the kind of barding you're using.

This is all covered really well in Of Beasts and Men, but in a nutshell, you have the following:

Crinet: Chain or lobstered plate covering for the neck of the horse.

Chanfron: plate "face mask" with eye holes.

Peytral: hangs down from the Chanfron and/or Crinet and provides protection to the breast of the horse

Crupper: leather or chain covering for the rear of the horse, attached to the saddle and hanging down the flanks.

Flanchard: protective coverings hanging down the sides of the horse, and protecting the sides and back. They require that a Saddle, Crupper and Peytral be present for them to be attached to.

Saddle: Duh

Caprisons: blanket-like covering for the horse. Usually made of heavy cloth, but possibly also in tough leather or chain, hanging down as low as the knees

Cuissart/Grevíere: A Cuissart is a metallic plate that covers the upper legs of a horse (the "thighs"), while a Grevíere covers the lower leg (the "shin").

That's a brief look at barding, there's heaps more in OBAM.

Brian.

Quote from: Brian Leybourne

Quote from: arxhonI just thought of something. Was something like "Half barding", meaning covering the front half of the horse, ever used?

Kind of.. it depends on the kind of barding you're using.

This is all covered really well in Of Beasts and Men,

Brian.

Oh yessss.. my precioussss.  When are we seeing you... Soooon we hopessss, my precioussss.  Yesss...

...er, right.

Of Beasts and Men, can't get it soon enough... and yet you taunt us with it.

Fiend.



Chris

QuoteOf Beasts and Men, can't get it soon enough... and yet you taunt us with it.

I think it's part of the marketing strategy. :-)

Thanks for covering that bit about half-barding, Brian. Looks like you're sinking a helluva lot of work into OBAM, Brian and Jake. Keep it up!

Quote from: Sneaky GitOf Beasts and Men, can't get it soon enough... and yet you taunt us with it.

But of course, why do you think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king?

Now go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!

Sorry... just seemed the appropriate time for a Monty Python moment. :-)

Brian.

Quote from: Sneaky GitI don't know.. Seems a bit on the expensive side, doesn't it?  Salamander, how did you come up with the x10 multiplier?  I feel that it generates costs that are prohibitively expensive.  Especially considering that the average yearly income for a landed noble is 50 gold (10 of which goes to a Steward...a good investment), and you still haven't taken into account expenses (manorial upkeep, armsmen, livestock, household, etc.).

Well, for starters the armour question is best responded to with; if you feel its too pricey, by all means select a lower multiplier.

That out of the way, the reason I selected that number had to do with a few factors, in a few books I have read about things being ransomed back. For example in the quick bio of Chaucer's life, they mentioned he was ransomed back for just a little less than somebody's war horse, 40 pounds sterling I believe. And somewhere else I read that the armour was most likely ransomed back for a like price (I don't remember where I read this).  It mentioned that 40 pounds then would buy what 5000 pounds would in 1984 (Date of the edition's translation) so about 9000 USD around that time, if I recall. So the ransom in 1984 dollars was 9 grand... fast forward to today that's about 16-18G, or a ransom for barding of about 17,000 dollars. Most ransoms ran between one half to one third of the going price if I am not mistaken.... so that barding would be worth between 34,000 and 51,000 dollars. I just extrapolated and figured the stuff new might cost a hint more, so I guestimated a factor of ten.

Also, when I interpreted the holdings idea, I figured that the Landed Noble would have the animals and wages figured into his total cost-benefit ratio. So he is actually getting 50gp a year free and clear. As for the barding, well, he can buy it with the 250gp he has in pocket to start. My rationale behind this is that the armour and such were already in his possession, the 250 gold is a mixture of material possessions and coin in the coffers. Besides a knight could wait months for a set of barding to be finished.

Quote from: Sneaky Git
Now, I certainly agree that horse armor should be expensive...and that calculating costs should not require a degree in higher math.  However, I can't help but feel that a bigger area does not necessarily equate to more expensive.. know what I mean?

What do you think?

Chris

In the days of yore, a knight had two maybe three types of horse at his disposal, a Palfrey, a hunting horse and a war horse. To train a good riding horse was not too much trouble, you could have them ready two to three years after foal. The hunters were a bit trickier, learning to obey some simple directions and some interesting maneuvers as well as being used to the din of the hounds and the cries of the prey. A warhorse is an entirely different matter. One has to find the brightest and biggest animals with a steadfastness that brooched on the eerie, teach it to obey verbal and non-reign commands as well as how to lash out at the right people in the midst of a pitched battle. As you can guess that was a huge investment, not only of money but of time. Time was the knight's concern. If he had a run on his warhorses and ended up loosing them all in a season or two, what has he got left? A few palfreys and a couple of hunters, not going to fight with them, no sir! So he has to wait until he has more warhorses foaled and up to speed, if he had one who foaled the very same year he lost the other warhorses he would not have a decent mount until four to five years later. So if I were in his shoes, I would throw down the coin to ensure that my rides were as well protected as possible. So you go to an armourer who has the skill to make your barding, it will have about five times the dimensions as that as human armour. That turns into 25 times the surface area. I think that alone covers the multiplier of ten, of course this larger piece is going to be more challenging and is going to take much more time to make than a suit of harness for a man.

So there you have it. I hope I have explained it to your satisfaction.

=)

Hey Dam.  Go out and pick up a copy of Lordly Domains for Pendragon.  It'll have pretty much everything you want to know about running land from a single manor up to a kingdom including the duties owned to ones lord and the various privileges and special taxes a land owner can assess.

Thanks, Salamander.  That was good info.  I'd ask more, but I fear my seneschal may already be plotting against me... if chickens suddenly show up missing I'm gonna break out in a cold sweat.  Actually, with what he's already thrown at me in our first session missing chickens might be a blessing.

And to everyone responsible for TROS, a big thank you!  I had a ball with the game this weekend and I'm looking forward to picking up my own copy and passing on the good word.  OK, I'm actually looking forward to seeing the reaction on the face of players when they hear what kind of damage they're doing / is being done to them.  Beats the crap out of "take 10 hp damage" or "mark off 6 boxes for a serious wound".

Will do.  Thanks, Valamir.

Quote from: SalamanderIf he had a run on his warhorses and ended up loosing them all in a season or two, what has he got left?

Warhorses were certainly expensive and often hard to come by.  Historically kings or states (cities what have you, leaders in general) had to start paying back knights and men-at-arms for lost horses.  They (leaders) also required steeds of a minumum value when hiring mercenaries.  As such, at the beginning of campaings or seasons, cavalry and mounted bowmen would have their mounts assessed and the value recorded.  If the horse was lost in a battle, the state would (was supposed) pay the knight the value of the horse minus the value of the skin etc.

Quote from: Salamander
I would throw down the coin to ensure that my rides were as well protected as possible. So you go to an armourer who has the skill to make your barding, it will have about five times the dimensions as that as human armour. That turns into 25 times the surface area. I think that alone covers the multiplier of ten, of course this larger piece is going to be more challenging and is going to take much more time to make than a suit of harness for a man.

=)

I had some lists of armor weights some where.  Gothic (~1475) plate armor for a man weighed around 57-60 lbs.  If I remember, that for a horse was ~75-80 lbs.  Thus the overall, metal content was similar.  I don't know whether making larger pieces would be more challenging or not.  It might be lest time consuming than fashing lots of smaller pieces.

NT

I did not know that a set of barding weighed 75 or so pounds. Cool. Thanks toli. One more thing to add to my puddle of knowledge.

As for the craftsmanship involved, yeah I think there is a heck of a lot of work and skill required to make something that big and not pound it out to the toughness of foil with that amount of metal.

The leaders setting up to reimburse the combatants was something I had heard a little about, and I think that statement complements what I said previously.

Quote from: SalamanderI did not know that a set of barding weighed 75 or so pounds. Cool. Thanks toli. One more thing to add to my puddle of knowledge.

No problem.  I've got a bunch of information at home on amor weights.  I'll see if I can find it.   I have some costs as well.  I don't think I ever found an actual value for the cost of barding.  It might not be that expensive, however.  If I remember around the 1470s or so, men-at-arms were required to have full plate, sallet, bervor, lance, mace, longsword, and dagger, and....barding (by Charles the Bold at least).  It is also a period of time when heavy cavalry regained some importance for a while because of excellent armor and barding.

Obviously the cost of armor and barding would vary.  In Stahl where there are good armorers and big horses, barding would be more common and cheaper...than other places...

NT

RE Barding

Here is some info I dug up at home:

Year ~ 1450

weight of man 140 lbs
weigh of armor for man AND horse 163 lbs
arms, clothing, saddle 30 lbs

Total carried by horse 333 lbs (1)

Armor for man alone 57 lbs (3)

Leaving 106 lbs for the barding

Year ~ 1480

weigh of man 140 lbs
weigh of armor for man and horse 126 lbs
arms, clothing saddle 30lbs

Total 296 lbs (2)

Armor for man alone ~47 lbs (4)

Leaving 79 lbs for the barding


(1) Paris, Musee de L'Armee
(2) London, Wallace Collection
(3) Glasgow, City Museum
(4) London, Wallace Collection


I also looked in some other games that I have.  They list the price of barding at 1.5 - 2.5 x the price of a similar suit of armor for a man.  Obviously this has little to no real historical value, but might be useful in a game sense for reference.


NT