FA+
Shop
540
Views
Views
16
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Artwork (Traditional) / General Furry Art
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 600 x 569
File Size 86.8 kB
Report this content
More from AraKaraath
Yay! I've finally got a decent design for my partial plate armour. Its left-biased asymetrical for use with both firearms are two handed swords alike, while it doesn't provide complete protection, it provides flexiblity and manuverability which are essential in combat. I'm also showing of my gemfire staff, one of the few khrol'Gah artifacts designed for offence and defence. And some sod seems to have stolen my wings! (originally it wasnt supose to be me but was a concept sketch that grew into full blown image.)
Category Artwork (Traditional) / General Furry Art
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 600 x 569px
File Size 86.8 kB
Well, from what I�ve read on the subject: a flat helmet topped would simply transmit the force of a blow directly unto the pate. If one looks at things like the Morion or a pig-faced bassinet, they have curved tops to deflect blows.
Also, the torso is the centre of mass, the largest and easier target to hit and I�d imagine that it�d be absolutely essential to protect as much of it as possible.
For example, the upper chest in that design is only partly covered, but in that location is the lungs, and if ones lungs are pierced, one will expire after a time from lack of oxygen and it�s not as if Medieval/Renaissance medical knowledge could deal with anything like that.
Also, the lower torso is a large and unprotected target. The Abdominal aorta and the illac arteries are left unprotected by that design, and if any of them were cut or pierced, death through blood loss would result in a matter of a minute or two (for a human anyway) unless it was staunched immediately.
If the organs in the abdomen, say� the intestines are pierced, faecal matter will leak out into the body cavity and cause infections and all sorts of vile things and death will be certain. The Kidneys too are vulnrable. IIRC, there was a �kidney belt� for that kind of thing.
"full plate" armour as �Maximillian� style plate or whatnot did not restrict movement much. I�ve read that such a suit did not usually weigh more than about 27 kilos at most, and that was all one would wear for fighting.
Why today, soldiers may carry more than 40 kilos of equipment and that�s not distributed equally over the body like plates are.
I�ve seen photos of people standing, sitting down and performing many ranges of movement in modern reproduction harnesses.
A historical suit of armour would probably have a breastplate, greaves and all that, and chain mail to protect everything left bare.
Of course, if it�s fantasy armour or whatnot that�s all beside the point, but I�ve found making studies from reproduction suits of armour to be most instructive in such matters. :)
Also, the torso is the centre of mass, the largest and easier target to hit and I�d imagine that it�d be absolutely essential to protect as much of it as possible.
For example, the upper chest in that design is only partly covered, but in that location is the lungs, and if ones lungs are pierced, one will expire after a time from lack of oxygen and it�s not as if Medieval/Renaissance medical knowledge could deal with anything like that.
Also, the lower torso is a large and unprotected target. The Abdominal aorta and the illac arteries are left unprotected by that design, and if any of them were cut or pierced, death through blood loss would result in a matter of a minute or two (for a human anyway) unless it was staunched immediately.
If the organs in the abdomen, say� the intestines are pierced, faecal matter will leak out into the body cavity and cause infections and all sorts of vile things and death will be certain. The Kidneys too are vulnrable. IIRC, there was a �kidney belt� for that kind of thing.
"full plate" armour as �Maximillian� style plate or whatnot did not restrict movement much. I�ve read that such a suit did not usually weigh more than about 27 kilos at most, and that was all one would wear for fighting.
Why today, soldiers may carry more than 40 kilos of equipment and that�s not distributed equally over the body like plates are.
I�ve seen photos of people standing, sitting down and performing many ranges of movement in modern reproduction harnesses.
A historical suit of armour would probably have a breastplate, greaves and all that, and chain mail to protect everything left bare.
Of course, if it�s fantasy armour or whatnot that�s all beside the point, but I�ve found making studies from reproduction suits of armour to be most instructive in such matters. :)
wow....my brain hurts from readin all that mess....personally i'm not too big on plate armor....too clanky....not to mention you can get up underneath it way too easily....i should know *still has a big scar from a gash when his friend's sword hit his leg under a plate in a suit of armor*
Comments