Studded leather

Why not? Follow me:
> Leather Armor
> Hardened Leather Armor
> Studded Leather Armor

>stuttering leather

Isn't the crossbow's weight about the pull strength?

>Guy Fieri

Nobody wants to be your gf on runescape

...

>ACTUALLY it's called gambeson

youtube.com/watch?v=sJWPEVuv1Mg

I'm referring to 5e where a heavy crossbow has a carrying weight of 18 lbs. I don't even think a bow/crossbow with a draw weight of 18lbs would fly more than a few feet.

Do you wish for a historical example?

Fantasy and realism are not mutually exclusive you fuckwit.
Quite the opposite, good fantasy is realistic, realism gives better immersion.

In the setting magic exists. Ok fine, no problemo let's have magic (preferably in a somewhat logical way).
But studded leather has literally no use as armour, it won't stop thrusts, arrows or cuts or blunt impacts.

"But it's fantasy!" is a fucking stupid argument

Because studs have no function and add no protection.

Not him, but I partially disagree with you.

In that good fantasy is believable, not realistic. Because reality requires too much suspension of disbelief sometimes.

Pedantic I know, but the difference is significant.

Depends.

Unless the studs serve to hold pieces of actual armor underneath in something that more closely resembles so called "Scale Mail" they're useless.

>studs have no function
Not true, as they are often used to reinforce areas.
That's why wooden doors studded with rivets or iron bands, levi's jeans that were noted for their toughness due to copper rivets at the seams.
You later bring up scale mail, when there are few, if any, examples of it to be found because the leather that bound it always disintegrated.

Firstly I am nit the user that talked about scale armour, if anything studded leather is a misenterpretation of brigandine armour.

And no studded armour does nothing. Adding a small rivet in corners of seams is a completely different thing, that prevents tearing from wear and use.

Studded armour as shown in fantasy settings (only places where such armour can be seen) has studs like 5/10 cm apart. Surely you can see how that is useless against thrusts and also against cuts.
Hell, even non overlapping lamelar armour is very weak if stabbed and offers much less protection to cuts.

>Depends
That is a valid point.
Adult diapers do indeed provide protection and security.

Yes but to be believable fantasy has to be realistic to some extent.
Like having weapons or armour at least somewhat functional, or not having absurd buildings without explaining it with magic or something.
I mean unless it is shown to be otherwise the basic laws of physics tend to be the same so if you have something that defies them without it being magical or something it stops your suspention of disbelief

>realism gives better immersion.
Nah. You wouldn't even give a shit if you hadn't gone out of your way to research these things for the express purpose of complaining about unrealistic fantasy settings.

You probably have no idea how reality works, anyway.

Sure looks like you have a lot of good arguments in favour of your thesis, seeing as you've pased to personal attacks

Also if you really think realism doesn't give immersion please educate yourself you ignorant fuck

>Fantasy and realism are not mutually exclusive you fuckwit.

Yes they are. What you want is Fantasy and Authenticity which is quite different from realism.

>Quite the opposite, good fantasy is realistic, realism gives better immersion.

No. Good fantasy is authentic. You want the sword to behave like a sword and not a gun. You do not want the sword to be as useless in most encounters against armoured opponents as it realistically would be. A sword is versatile but like every weapon it has strengths and weaknesses and finally limits.

>But studded leather has literally no use as armour, it won't stop thrusts, arrows or cuts or blunt impacts.

Also most Two-Handed weapons do not have any use either outside of formations, same goes for shields. Lets remove them. One guy using a sword and a shield is unrealistic after all.

>"But it's fantasy!" is a fucking stupid argument
I agree! While we are at it lets add an additional rule that says whether you engage more than one combatant you are automatically dead after all this isn't very realistic either how someone well-versed in battle can defeat two opponents who are as well-versed as he is in combat.

Clearly you should not go into battle due to realism. Sounds retarded? Well there you go, its the same argument you presented taken to the extreme.

TL;DR: OP is a retard and so is everyone who agrees with him.

>two handed weapons and shields are useless out of formation

Thank you for once again proving your ignorance.

>if you fight more than one opponent you are automatically dead

In rpgs where you play non hero level characters you do. In hero level rpgs you don't because you are a hero and the opponent is usually much weaker than you.

Tl;dr you and anyone who agrees with you is an ignorant fuck with the tastes and setting appreciation of autistic mentally 12-year-old anime loving neckbeard

>says stupid shit
>you are stupid
>no you must disprove my stupid shit with high quality arguments and put a lot of effort into it when it's clear that I put none!

No, it served to hold the armor itself.
> Armour used by the militia-sailors from Yue region (粤, modern day Guangdong and Guangxi province, especially Guangxi). This armour is made of cowhide, cut into multiple bands and treated with tung oil, then joined together with studs (turning it into a studded leather armour). Its spaudlers can be further reinforced with cow horn plates.
>Yue Bing Kui Jia was considered the best among leather armours.
greatmingmilitary.blogspot.com.br/2014/11/leather-armour-of-ming-dynasty.html

What?

I agree with these points.

In my experience, some real yet relatively unknown things actually took away immersion. Mostly a case of me researching it better than my audience.
>army base dug into a glacier
>girandoni rifles
>pykrete
>the amount of stupidity available in the beginning of WW1
>real dual welding
>most soldiers dying more of disease than combat
>real studded leather
>bronze not being inferior to iron
>cannonballs bouncing on water
>that some slaves prefered to be such
Those are some that provoked some type of "No, wait, it can't be true" from the players.

>Someone who understands
Thank you user

And yes historically details not commonly known can have the opposite to that desired, but that is why I consider pre-game briefings to be so important

>sentence fragment

What about Studded Chain Plate?

>Thank you for once again proving your ignorance.

Thank you for not having an argument. Next time just save yourself the trouble and just reply "YOU ARE RIGHT, YOU HAVE WON".

>In rpgs where you play non hero level characters you do. In hero level rpgs you don't because you are a hero and the opponent is usually much weaker than you.

Thats why I mentioned
>in battle can defeat two opponents who are as well-versed as he is in combat.

Of course apart from not knowing shit about combat you also cannot into reading. I am not surprised, I didn't call you just randomly a retard as an insult, you are the real deal. Honest to god legit retardation.

>Tl;dr you and anyone who agrees with you is an ignorant fuck with the tastes and setting appreciation of autistic mentally 12-year-old anime loving neckbeard
Not nearly enough buzzwords, I am neither hurt nor impressed.

>pre-game briefings
Hadn't considered that. Don't think that'll work, but it is worth a shot. They did surprise me before.

I remembered another.
>samurais using rocket launchers
They did love it afterwards, both because it takes away from the cliche and "dick rockets!". Someone asking for the extra difficulty modifier to make the rocket literally penis-shaped was fun. I included a "moral debuff" on the enemies he used that on.

You are either playing dumb on purpose or terribly misinformed about suspension of disbelief.
It actually works the opposite way from what you're implying. The more familiar something is to the audience, the more jarring it feels when it doesn't conform to expectations. Conversely, the further something is from reality to begin with, the easier it is for the audience to accept. A flying pig is more jarring than a flying dragon.
Most people don't believe in real magic, so there's no point of reference for fictional magic, it was disconnected from reality to begin with. But anyone who's ever owned an object made of leather is familiar with the properties of this very real material, making it grounded in reality.
Picture it like a rubber band stretched between reality and fantasy. If only one end is held, there is no stretch.

>Two-Handed weapons do not have any use either outside of formations

longswords are two handed formost, a good user can use it one handed, even a bastard sword is a lot harder to use with one hand

greatswords are actually rarely used in warfare
they are usually used for elite guards as they're scary as fuck.

give me one war a maul or a great axe has been used in

roundshields are not very common outside of war but ARE sometimes carried around in case of combat, again not very common in west europe but very common in east, bucklers are shields and offer just as much protection in 1v1 combat as a round shield would, in celtic times carrying a galic shield was very common but that was a fucked up place at the time.

youtube.com/watch?v=nmdZYXu4zVw

leather is very fucking though and the studs are very dence on the bracers, pecks, shoulders and if the armor has it, leg flaps that cover the thighs. anything you search on google will be fucking false.

the idea of light, medium armor is fucking false, the movement you get from leather to chainmail is no different, plate restricts of course but far less than DnD implies and you sure as fuck wouldn't need to have 16 strength to use it trust me. to wrap it up, the greeks were extreamly effective and yet used armor made of cloth. what makes you think that leather doesn't offer protection?

wtf do you think 1-2 armor difference is somehow unrealistic you autistic fuck, if you don't know shit about history don't pretend to because you'll be sniffed out automatically.

>someone well-versed in battle can defeat two opponents who are as well-versed as he is in combat.
But you pretty much can't do that in any game. If you meet two opponents and each of them is as strong as you are, your odds of winning are minimal.

In fact, I'd argue your odds of doing that in real life are actually better than in a game, since in real life they might get in the way of one another, or just get unlucky.

Thank you, I learned something.