Time Period Inspired Fantasy

Anyone.. ?

What is wrong with Roman Orcs and Cossack Elves?

>>51961102

Not a fan, prefer a set time period and mostly humans.

File: 1487961985607.jpg (48KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 500x500px

>>51961243

How dull.

So... Warhammer, then?

>>51961470

Warhammer had some ridiculous leaps in periods, even within the Empire, and was surrounded by HUGE PAULDRON BAD LARGE Warcraft villains.

Maybe not the best example.

>>51961480
>Maybe not the best example.

So... The Artesia comic series then?

>>51961515

The whatnow?

>>51960768
I don't like it since the fashion and image selection is very limited if everyone conform to that time period and region cultures.
Much better for me is to set the setting in modern or space fantasy and have all culture fashion and armor become possible along with modern fashion which allow more fun and far more vary character design.
There is nothing stopping you to roleplay a black guy wearing Roman Legionnaire armor and weapons to fight against monsters in such setting.
Or a white girl in chinese dress beating the living shit out of evil spirits in downtown Tokyo.

800s-1100s>1200s-1500s

Literally only thing better in the latter is existence of longswords (by which i mean actual, two-handed longswords, not D&D misnomer), but I can live with this little anachronism of allowing them in earlier period than they actually were used I mean, Tolkien did the same so why I shouldn't?

>>51961427
>>51961427
Your pic sure isn't dull tho.

>>51960768
Eight hundred is the best hundred

>>51961427
hey that's the @ilovebrucewillis babe
good taste mate
not in art mind you but in women

>>51960768
>that retarded square on the norman's chest

REEEE THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A FUCKING VENTAIL YOU RETARD ARTIST

>>51961427
moar liek dis pls

>>51962601
This.
Best weapon variety and you avoid ugly ass full mail and the whole "plate armor is undeadable" issue. Just open helms, hauberks and comfy boots.
You also get to use big, long kite shields
for maximum fashion points.

>>51960768
>six pics for medieval era, 100 years apart
>two pics for ancient era, 600 years apart
I guess we know what period this guy was most interested in...

>>51965279
It also skips over 18th century armors.

Also I'm pretty sure the legion stopped wearing segmentata before 100.

>>51960768
>100CE
Stop this fuckery, everyone
it's AD. 100 AD not 100 CE

>>51965352
>insisting on AD when it hasn't been standard historiographical practice since the 50s outside of vulgarization
Find something else to get triggered.

>>51965336
They never were standard issuem widely distributed form of armor to begin with

>>51965352
Deal with it, christfag.

>>51965422
Yeah, I never quite get the fetish for them in representations of Rome. It's not like historians, no matter how solidly romaboo, pretend that half the standard roman kit wasn't borrowed from celtic tribes.

>>51965352
Get with the common era.

>>51965352
Actually it's AD 100

>>51960768
I approve. I don't like the theme-park settings.

File: jckxmntql7pcl5aecmxwqb57iilhwlv6_hq[1].jpg (21KB, 497x639px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 497x639px

>>51965365
>>51965442
It doesn't make sense though. I understand wanting to have a secular calendar, but this isn't a secular calendar. The "Current Era" still starts with the birth of Christ and not an event that could be considered from a secular perspective (such as for example the fall of the West Roman Empire, that'd be a pretty good cut-off point for the "Current Era").

It's using the Christian calendar while pretending not to use it. I don't care what perspective you look at this from, it's retarded. To reveal how retarded it is at its core, just ask what "Current Era" means, and why we're better off using that rather than the traditional "Anno Domini".

File: pu_Artesia_056-057.jpg (676KB, 1600x1226px) Image search: [Google]

676KB, 1600x1226px

>>51961555
Artesia, its a comic book series about a witch in a low fantasy setting. It has dope armour and dope tactics. It's pretty realistic, except for the magic.

>>51961427
Is that Amy Louise?

>>51970640
Is that the comic with that templar character? The one where there was a crusade behind held against the russians?

>>51970464
you're not wrong but damn dude you sure get triggered over the tiniest things that maybe 0.00001% of earth's population actually cares about

most people who use AD don't even know what it stands for anyway (and its "common era" not current era)

File: 1461194347835.jpg (1MB, 1986x1522px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1986x1522px

>>51971943
No, it's the comic with pagan Joan of Arc and her Scottish troops defending Mithraic Europe from not!Ottomans and their demonic allies. It has tons of armor porn and sameface.

File: Jannisary.jpg (387KB, 800x1143px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 800x1143px

>>51960768
What part of the world in the 13th to 16th century? Some parts went insanely fast during that time, while others just remained the same

File: Artesia's Captains.jpg (2MB, 3914x1528px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3914x1528px

>>51972512
Not to mention good ol' porn porn in the form of group sex -- which Artesia seems to exclusively indulge in...

>>51962601
Longswords make more sense when there's monsters with damage-resistant hides.

Spears still make more sense, but that was true for polearms vs. actual longswords too so whatever dude.

Late medieval is bad for what most people think of when they think of D&D.

I think somewhere in one of the 3.5e books it mentioned this, proper D&D civilization is "points of light" in an overall very dark and unexplored world.

A single ankheg can pretty much shut down a few hundred acres of farmland until some professionals hunt it down, and there's no way there's only one of them anyway.

Monsters have a chilling effect on the growth of civilization and that should be reflected in your setting.

If you remove the longswords and late-era plate armor The Witcher's setting is pretty good for that kind of thing. Inside the cities it's business as usual but two or three miles away it's trackless wilderness where the local villagers have sworn fealty to ancient bloodthirsty gods.

File: 1463958908773.gif (1MB, 300x217px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x217px

>>51975612
She's a busy lady. Just one partner a time is like eating a steak with a toothpick.

>>51972512
>penetrating plate armour like that

File: 42347df5fed771de95b39bcab99ea580.jpg (398KB, 2000x1678px) Image search: [Google]

398KB, 2000x1678px

>>51960768
I feel sad.

>>51978371
Some dudes have powerfull magics in their swords making them chop armour like it's nothing.

File: pu_Artesia_Afire_181.jpg (481KB, 984x1524px) Image search: [Google]

481KB, 984x1524px

>>51979309
This guy for example. If you look at the second panel, has a spirit helping him in combat, and if you look at his sword some powerfull runes helping him fuck armour up.

>>51960768
Why is the hoplite lacking his spear?

>>51970640
>a low fantasy setting

I dunno man, gods are real and magic is common enough in the setting. Gods even pick favourites and their servants walk the earth.

>>51975623
I honestly tend to have "ahistorical" glaives in that kind of setting, mainly based on ahistorically heavier development of war scythes and dacian falx. They would easily fill the main purpose of a longsword.

>>51960768

>everyone is implied to have functional lethal weapons
>1600s has a fucking walking stick

>>51980330
>1500s is a dude in a tin suit with no weapons
>1200s bashes people with shields

I am using your logic.

>>51975612
>Not to mention good ol' porn porn in the form of group sex -- which Artesia seems to exclusively indulge in...
I love the comic but I've never found sex in Artesia arousing. Maybe it's because none of the girls have tits or I'm not into gangbangs.

>>51980330
>what is a pike
>what is a weapon taller than the frame

>>51980489
It's probably the sameface. I have the same thing.

>>51980621
Sameface doesn't bother me much. Why are all the girls so flat though?

>>51976132
What's the source of this again ? Isn't it a hungarian movie or something ?

File: Tragedy of Man.jpg (284KB, 1024x746px) Image search: [Google]

284KB, 1024x746px

>>51980811
Yes, it's Tragedy of Man

>>51980885
Nice thanks.

>>51980489
Maybe Smylie's just more interested in drawing dudes?

>>51975623
TBHQ longswords make more sense in earlier period than the period they were historically used at all.
Main reason of their late appearance was advancements in metalurgy allowing to make them, and not developements of other weaponry that triggered their evolution.
Of course, plate armor making a shield less and less useful was some reason, but the same plate armor makes the lognsword itself rather useless against anyone who isn't a light armored peasant.

While in earlier ages longsword at least can be used against armored enemies, even FULLY armored for the standards of the period.

And lack of shield isn't that much of a disadvantage in skirmish, or even none in duel, whee two handed leverage and precision evens out the capabilities of the shield pretty well. I'd say even surpases them. Shield is only so critical in actual full scale battles, where it protects you form misilles and allows creating tight, well defended formations.

So longsword, even if was not invented yet in the early medieval period, would actually be quite useful thing in that environment, at least as a duelist weapon, but versatile enough to be applied in other situations. Probably more so than in it's native era, where it was also dueling weapon, but only in duels where people were unarmored, and pretty shit in any other form of combat other than slaughtering underarmored commoners.

>>51980999
But longswords became a thing to fight armors in a first place. They became longer and pointier to aim at gaps and weaknesses. They used to be larger and shorter

>>51980885

> My helmet has lobster claws your argument is invalid

>>51981150
and yet they were terrible at it

>>51980885
>find a torrent
>only one seeder
I hope it's good

>>51981229
Do we have precise sources relative to weapons efficiency ? We know a lot of sword arts which were conserved in books. That always was the noble weapon and the secondary one, meaning it couldn't be so terrible, or else people would have dropped that shit completely

>>51981233
it's weird so maybe you'll like it if you have weird taste
at the very least it'll give you some eclectic patrician cred

File: you underestimate me, woman of little virtue.gif (3MB, 420x315px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 420x315px

>>51981279
>at the very least it'll give you some eclectic patrician cred
You know how to talk to people

>>51981271
fact that people had to invent combat techniques involving them that basically turned them into impromtu mace or short spear, instead of using them as intended by design, to even make them viable against full plate speaks for itself, I think.

>>51961102
Because you are wasting 2 cultures and 2 races.
If you are making (race) (historical culture), you are shit at world-building

>>51981336
>making a weapon versatile and thus naturally weaker than the specialized version speaks for itself
You sound like one of those youtube experts

>>51965365
>Implying this hard
Do you come from a post-commie country?
Because you sound like coming from a post-commie country.
It was literally created by Soviet Politbureau decision to remove this pesky religious stuff from history. And then idiots picked it up. It changes absolutely nothing, since exactly same shit is used as the point of change, but the name is needlessly fucked up.

>>51972266
>most people who use AD don't even know what it stands for
Spotted American

>>51980999
>rather useless against anyone who isn't a light armored peasant.

>While in earlier ages longsword at least can be used against armored enemies, even FULLY armored for the standards of the period.

These two sentences don't add up.

>>51981365
It sounds 'our era', 'нaшa эpa' in commieland. Before Peter the Great we counted years since the Creation. IIRC 'Common era' comes from eternal Anglo and Jews.

>>51981365
>It was literally created by Soviet Politbureau

???

The year numbering system used with Common Era notation was devised by the Christian monk Dionysius Exiguus in the year 525

>>51981521
You might be talking to /pol/

>>51981466
>full armor in 1500s
Full suit of metal plates covering almost whole body
>full armor in 1000s
A hauberk and open faced helmet. Maybe some bracers if you're lucky

And if you mean that there was some "middle ground" and what was "full armor" in early medieval could be considered "medium" latter on, then nope. There is no reason to produce obsolete weaponry, this wouldn't be cheaper, less encumbering or anything. Hauberks and scale armor coexisting with full plate within the same culture and period is D&D tier shittery. You either had some form of plate armor, maybe not perfect and 100% full, but still a plate, or were stuck with helmet, gambeson and maybe aventail and those metal panels on arms, I don't remember how they are called.

>>51980999
>And lack of shield isn't that much of a disadvantage in skirmish

A skirmish without missile weapons - makes me wonder why you'd send out only heavy infantry on a raid or patrol.

>>51981729
I meant skirmish in RPG "small party combat" sense, not military one.

>>51981572
http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/works-of-art/14.25.1540/

Chain was still being produced. Not only for linking pieces of mail together.

>>51980999
>>51981760
If shields aren't useful in the game you are playing then it's a shit game.

>>51981572
>Hauberks and scale armor coexisting with full plate within the same culture and period is D&D tier shittery.
16th century poland is dnd bullshittery?

>>51981572
>>51982026
Here have some more

http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/32781?sortBy=Relevance&when=A.D.+1400-1600&what=Mail&ft=*&offset=0&rpp=20&pos=4
http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/32371?sortBy=Relevance&when=A.D.+1400-1600&what=Mail&ft=*&offset=0&rpp=20&pos=9
http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/34827?sortBy=Relevance&when=A.D.+1400-1600&what=Mail&ft=*&offset=0&rpp=20&pos=17
http://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/34324?sortBy=Relevance&when=A.D.+1400-1600&what=Mail&ft=*&offset=20&rpp=20&pos=33

God I love the MET

>>51982026
>>51982104
OK, I concede to this one, although I'm still not aware of cases of those being used as armor on it's own and not under some form of plating.
>>51982046
winged hussar's plate is far from "full" m8, and scale armor of the period was a meme that was worn for swag and not actual effectivenes. Chainmails of the period also didn't strive to total protection, and all of that was only viable because of firearms rendering actual full plate obsolete. Another thing is in the eastern part of area in question full plate armor technology basically never existed and wasn't used until it got obsolete because of the reasons above.
>>51982045
I'm not talking about a game either. I'm talking about type of combat encounter that is most often depicted in games, and how shield WOULD be useful if such combat happened irl (which almost certainly was happening here and there but unlike games, irl it was never so widespread and important to design tactics and weaponry around it). I'm also not saying that shield isn't useful at all in such conditions, but that unlike actual battlefield, it's advantages don't surpass advantages of two handed weapon.

>>51982463
>firearms rendering actual full plate obsolete
Full plate was still worn during the 30 years war and the English civil war. Plenty of firearms going around then.

There is this story from the ECW about a parliamentarian cavalryman being shot in the head at point blank rnage with a pistol twice. And the helmet wasn't even dented.

>>51982463
>and not under some form of plating
Why would they wear a full hauberk under a suit of plate armour? Even in transitional periods that never happened.

>>51982564
To add, full ""plate"" armor is still worn today to improve the survival of special forces when handling urban menaces.
It might not have the same look as the medieval kind, but its principle is the same.

>>51982635
Changing the look of the armor to mimic the medieval look is easy with a few metal spray cans though but you can't vandalize your own equipment.

>>51960768
Its called "The dark eye" and its been around for decades.

File: 90275496a76c84b211b5e121db376d05.jpg (76KB, 736x529px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 736x529px

>>51982564
>There is this story from the ECW about a parliamentarian cavalryman being shot in the head at point blank rnage with a pistol twice

Sir Arthur Haselrig, commander of the London Lobsters at the Battle of Roundway Down. Technically "only" 3/4s armour rather than full plate, but the lack of lower leg protection doesn't detract from the fact the rest of the body was encased in proofed plate.

>>51982463
I don't understand why pseudo-historians like you don't put more research in so you don't look like an idiot.

>>51961102
Nothing wrong with taking inspiration from history, but just doing a one for one copy is a bit of a waste/boring.

File: 8703_1_3-quarrelsome-knights.jpg (66KB, 638x869px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 638x869px

>>51963638
For the record, this is what the Norman "bib" actually looked like. It was a ventail, and only looks like reinforcement on the chest because the art was depicting it being opened and hanging over the breast.