Avatar of Nevis
  • Last Seen: 2 yrs ago
  • Joined: 11 yrs ago
  • Posts: 299 (0.08 / day)
  • VMs: 0
  • Username history
    1. Nevis 11 yrs ago

Status

User has no status, yet

Bio

User has no bio, yet

Most Recent Posts

After looking it up-no, that picture is largely how they were armored. I'm not sure where I got the vambraces and greaves from-and, logically, they weren't going to be worrying about their arms and forelegs getting struck in same way as a swordsman or even shorter spear user would because of the range of their pike.
Huh, I hadn't come across that name for the Swiss mercenaries before. Yes, though, there was an intense rivalry between the Swiss and German mercenaries. Initially, the Swiss were generally thought of as the most elite mercenaries in Europe-however, after one battle (it's been a while, I don't recall which one) a force comprised of Germans defeated the esteemed Swiss pretty handily-and the German's had habits that were much more useful than the Swiss's to employers. Namely, the Swiss would only sell out to one side, whereas the Germans would not only sell their services to two conflicting sides in a war-even a single guild would sell services to both forces. In essence, the Germans were 'I'm a soldier who will do anything if you pay me' with the strength to back it up epitomized, whereas the Swiss were more the true, though less convenient, elite.

I do know that they would often have greaves, though, which is missing on those-perhaps those are from a later year. They look almost late 16th century or even 17th century, and they're wielding what looks to be halberds, whereas the Swiss were particularly famous for their skill with pikes.
As for landsnechkts, they were much more individualized than the Swiss mercenaries were in terms of equipment. They usually bought their own equipment and worked in a wider variety of guilds and so on, thus, their equipment and non-battlefield clothing varied a lot more as far as I can tell. Myself, I think their aesthetic style look as ridiculous as a clown-to each their own, though.

Anyways, for my favorites, for chest, brigandine, for helmets, certain sallets and close helmets, waist, fault or tassets. For clothes, I like clothes (and especially torso clothing) that are very thin and hang close to the body, especially at the side-so the wide, draped styles common among many of the nobles at the time I find very not to my taste. I also prefer narrow shoulders aesthetically, so the wide, masculine shoulder styles also aren't an element I enjoy, either.

For armor-there's a lot of things there that I don't know about, actually. Generally, I have more of a general view of things, rather than too specific details. Armor, I'm actually also much less familiar with than with weapons, so there's that as well.
Eh. I don't drink.

I actually hadn't come across the rivet armor before-though that does explain a few things. I will say that I adore tassets, especially large ones, so I find the ones here that I initially mistook for a fauld really cool.

The styles of the 16th century are odd, certainly. A lot of the stuff looks extremely bad to me-yet, on occasion, I come across something that's entirely characterstic of the early/middle part of the century that I find to be among the most beautiful art from Medieval, Renaissance and Early Modern Europe. I am especially fond of the styles used for arms and armor of the time-aesthetically, full-plate and brigandine are my favorite types of armor.

What's also funny is that the one of the colorful landsnechts (I think I mispelled that) is probably the best representation of mercenaries and men-at-arms of the time because they totally dressed like that. Albeit, the colors would likely be a bit more faded than in that picture-nonetheless, the bright colors, contrast and, to most people today, gaudiness, was entirely characteristic of the Germans and particularly mercenaries.

Anyways, I'll have my cs rough draft up soon. Prepare for the bastard prince!
No, it's not. It's late Middle-Ages and Renaissance with perhaps a few Early Modern elements-not late Early Modern Period. Ie, firearms have not fully supplanted armor and melee by any means and far from every man-at-arms would have one. And at this point, a firearm would be a primary weapon-it would replace a spear or halberd, not be a sidearm, really.

TL:DR No, you don't need a gun by any means.
No 'pissing contest' intended; merely that that particular trope (that's so untrue) is a particular peeve of mine.

Anyways, no, aside from the grittiness seemingly juxtaposed onto a character of a status where it did not belong, I did not see any particular problem (albeit I haven't ready any of the css in full yet, that one included). Ecthelion was just something I noticed.

Also, a guide to general pronunciation-'i' rarely says the 'i' sound. It predominantly indicates 'ih' or 'ee'.

Pictures are awesome-although, brigandines were actually a later armor (there was one shown in the 'over time' picture) that it and variations of it were particularly popular during the 16th century. It, and the one shown (the large plates though definitely not full-plate) were two of the most common basic armor outfits.

I don't really like the Maxamillian style of full plate, honestly. It's cool to see someone who does, though.
Being particularly well-versed in mercenaries (it's been a focus in my historical studies), the idea that mercenaries-especially bands and guilds-were ragtag, unskilled or poorly payed is ludicrous. Mercenaries, by the late Medieval Period, were actually rather elite. Mayhaps not a fully-mounted knight... they were still an extremely strong force, both on the battlefield and politically. Mercenary work was actually very lucrative by the standards of the time, provided you survived.

Also, Ecthelion is 'eh-k-th-el-EE-on', not 'eh-k-th-el-AYE-on'. That doesn't actually rhyme with 'ion'.

And, yes, a pragmatic warrior will wear rags and ragtag equipment when called for-however, the way your cs is written implies it's a regular thing which contradicts his elite stature. Men-at-arms did not change their arms and armor so often; a good piece that he acquired from funds from a single good contract or campaign could easily last him his entire life, especially regarding armor (switched around less often than weapons).
Some issues with Ecthelion... mainly the scraggly equipment. He's a general in a period paralleling the late Medieval Ages and Renaissance and a general-there's no way his armor will be rusted, wearing piles of crude fur or rags. Armor at this point was usually as well-maintained as possible (which was fairly well) and often as fashionable as the person could afford. For someone of his stature, the finest arms and armor would be available to him and it would actually be a social nightmare for him to be using such subpar (and, honestly, unpretty in the eyes of the nobility) equipment-plate armor was usually designed with as much of a refined aesthetic as possible, as were the arms of the wealthy. And he's a famous general. While underdogs and the whole gritty and gruff thing did exist (far LESS at this technological level), it makes no logical sense for your character to be considering his status. You can't be both the elite AND the gritty underdog type.

Also, is Ecthelion from ANYWHERE other than the LoTR (he was Denethor's, the Steward of Gondor's, father)?
I think that deathknight character of mine that he shot down took control of him while I wasn't paying attention. Now where's his character sheet so I can get him under control again...
No one has written a word yet in our collab. Dext said he'd go first and he hasn't written anything yet :/
Ikr

Where is everyone?
© 2007-2024
BBCode Cheatsheet