I like to game in a dark/early middle ages world. The assortment of weapons in the later middle ages/renaissance is more interesting, but i like the "feel" better the dark/middle ages.

Which brings me to a question:

Should helms such as the nasal have a 1-2 point armour value for the face (yeah, it's plate, but only covers a portion). Maybe 1 vs thrusts, 2 vs swung weapons? And of course this would apply to helms with protection for the face.

For that matter, should the pothelm (if it represents the helm I'm thinking of - similar to the british WW1 helm, but with an even broader brim) provide perhaps AV2 vs any type of downward swings?

Turin wrote: I like to game in a dark/early middle ages world. The assortment of weapons in the later middle ages/renaissance is more interesting, but i like the "feel" better the dark/middle ages.

Which brings me to a question:

Should helms such as the nasal have a 1-2 point armour value for the face (yeah, it's plate, but only covers a portion). Maybe 1 vs thrusts, 2 vs swung weapons? And of course this would apply to helms with protection for the face.

For that matter, should the pothelm (if it represents the helm I'm thinking of - similar to the british WW1 helm, but with an even broader brim) provide perhaps AV2 vs any type of downward swings?

I was wondering the same thing about the Saxon and Viking helms that have the face masks, were these purly decerative or would the face mask offer any practical protection (same thinmg for some of the Greek/Roman helms).

ZenDog wrote: I was wondering the same thing about the Saxon and Viking helms that have the face masks, were these purly decerative or would the face mask offer any practical protection (same thinmg for some of the Greek/Roman helms).

This kind of thing, to use in game, you either have to pick a generalization or get really specific.
The locations they protect are in the wound tables. Such as cut/zone IV, they may very well end up saving the character, or at least some of his features.
I'd also say any of that protecting you from a thrust is highly improbable, on the order of spending a luck die for it.
As for pot helms, I'd say it has the possibility of stopping vertical cuts or angled cuts to the face/head. Perhaps a 1-2 on a D6 for vertical cuts to the neck/shoulders, 1-3 for cuts to the face/head. Of course automatically protecting areas it physically covers.

quot;Salamander I think that the nasal would actually do no more than get in the way of a sword blow to the face as it was passing through the poor sod's noggin. I believe the nasal was discarded sometime around 1100 but for the life of me I don't have the facts on why. .

The Nasal's I have seen on helmets are actually a lot larger than one would think of. The nasal extended pretty far down the face and was fairly large. I think it would even offer protection against a blunt thrust, and on occasion with a point thrust. As far as protecting the face from a swing, it juts out a bit from the most pronounced feature on the face, the nose. So I would think swings to the face would frequently strike the nasal, unless from the side (where they may hit the coif), or striking below the nasal when the weapon is swung on a horizontal or upwards strike. Overall, would would have to postion a swing pretty well to get around the nasal.

My thought on the AV - the actual protection offered would be closer to a 3-4, but due to the coverage area being more limited the AV should be reduced.

Same with the kettle helm, the AV would be 3-4 but it's not a true ""face covering".

On another digression, I've seen many games that list the eyes as receiving no protection from a full heaume from thrusting attacks. I would tend to disagree with this, as the eyeslit is not that wide, and a thrust with anything but a needle would have to be placed pretty well. Most blades could only fit through the eyeslit if the thrust was placed in a perfect horizontal thrust.

There's plenty of evidence for "norman" style helmets with nazals being used well through the 1200's, and differing styles, many removable or adjustable, until the end of the renaissance. The nazal is also an integral portion of many helms.

I play live "hack and slash RPG", (hehe not rpg actually, its two large groups hacking at each other with the same equipment as most other use for live rpg).

i have an helmet with nose guard, and it very often gets hits, i can think that if we were "playing" with real swords, it would have saved my ALOT of times, so i don't think anybody should underestimate the nosal guard.
cheap and effective it must have been in the "old days"

Not to mention helping you out with the all too common punch in the face.

I'd agree with those who say a nasal guard won't do much to protect you against a well aimed slash/stab/bash. Obviously true.

But a lot of combat isn't well aimed. When blades (friendly and otherwise) are being swung wildly, that nasal guard could be the difference between a broken nose and having NO nose for the rest of your life. You might even lose an eye or your life from a wild flick of the wrist.

Human skin is easy to cut with a sharp sword. Nasal cartilage isn't much tougher.

Gene

If they weren't effective, they would've been discarded. It'll stop a cut coming at the front of your face. In combat, cuts can come from anywhere, as evidenced by a lot of skulls of individuals who were apparently not wearing helmets with nazals, who had their faced cut through.
A nazal will also save you from punches to the nose, shield bashes to the face, and wide impact or strike across the face where it protects.
One thing I've found about nazals through physical practice, is that if it's struck, it won't rock back into your face significantly. If the helmet fits, the helmet will absorb the impact to the nazal. It provides significant protection for such a small piece.