While Ive never seen a depiction of a "fantasy" leather armor historically, my understanding is that what we call brigandine or a coat of plates, being a leather garmet with plates of hardened leather or metal, was extremely common. Are you saying this isn't the case?
That would be fine if resists on leather were dropped by half. That would be a good trade off. You want to cast your going to need more magic in your suit to protect you. You want protection go with metal (or stone I view them the same). Woodland armor is still way way way stronger but at least it balances the human only armor.
If u want all warriors to run around in metal yes
Based on my readings it surely was choice; religious and cultural.
It happened, no idea how common it was.
You were given some bad information. It was not choice. In fact Celts would take armor off of dead Romans. The idea that it was a type of beserker was something that a few Roman "historians" came up with. It was designed to show their savagry and insanity. Bodica wore armor as did many of her troops and that was one of the largest Celt uprisings. It was just limited to those that could afford it. Inital before the Marian reforms this was the case with the Roman army as well. It was the fact that there are really no options for armor in the real world other then metal. If you don't have metal at your disposal you are forced to do without. Brigandine armor as it was is more a fantasy concept. Most suits of semi plate armor going back to roman times required some kind of padding under them. This was at first a leather jerkin. Later as the armor became first chain and then plate this became larger and thicker and went to a quilted padding. At that point it became what is known as a arming jacket. That being said the only time in history that larger thicker armor was available and was not taken was during the latter crusades and that was largely due to climate and the difficulty of altering the armor to fit a new wearer.
For the most part we can duplicate the steel if we wanted to. While there was some discussion of Damascus steel in the past its more about usage. Tool grade steel is what most weapons would be made of were they made today. There just isn't much use for it anymore. As for armor making its still going on. There aren't many people doing it but there are ways to get fully functional suits of armor. Fully functional weapons are easier to get but it’s important to remember that for the most part these weapons were not designed to parry blows that’s more a Hollywood conceit.Nice discussion, really highlights how much technology we have lost the means to reproduce. Blue steel, Carbon or Toledo steel.
In my mind, the highest grades of metal should allow for lighter weight, more flexibility without giving up protection, or bite harder, hold an edge longer, negate some armor protection if there is enough momentum behind the blade, think axe as opposed to sword, or pierce through armor of lesser materials with great ease. That's just conjecture on my part though.
Just a couple of thoughts I have had over time, how is it that metal, any metal, allows for diffusion of damage types as they are represented in UO. *shrug* And really the biggie for me, how is it that the strength requirement is almost halved when gold is applied to armor? Its stooopid, I know, and I am not asking for answers.
However, the writer in me wishes things would make enough sense so as not to force us into suspend disbelief in the world we are in and the systems that exist within it.
Looking over in the Mage Tower thread brought back fond memories of days gone by. Life was simpler and you could look how you wanted to look. I'm fiddling around with another game now, where crafting is very very different. I'm trying to decide how much better I like it and why.
Source was this book:
I'd heard that or read that somewhere too.
Oh they trained for it, that being said imagine striking two equally strong things together. Its not a good idea. If anyone here is thinking of sword fighting please for the love of god wear proper protective equipment and if you have dependents have your life insurance premiums up to date. For the most part hitting two swords together is a bad idea. This is one of the leading reasons a shield was invented. That being said it was something that was considered and put in the manuals, but those manuals were more like katas then actual fights which tended to be very violet and relatively short. If anyone wonders why a scimitar and a metal baseball bat have around the same weight to them. Take one out and swing it against a think tree all day. As for most of the historical work on the druids. That is based mostly on conjecture or the English archeological record which is fragmented at best. I love the UK its a beautiful place and the people are nice. That being said the weather is cold and wet which means most things get destroyed (like Japan) so most of the record comes from peat bogs which is imho far to small a sample to draw conclusions from. Of course that might be because I am a historian and not an archeologist. As to Japanese armor most of that is because they are trying to summarize many many decades of armor and technology and put it into one area. Metal was used as it was available but it never widely was. That is likely one of the reasons that the Samaria code developed as it did. If your looking for more information on Japanese armor I do have a few books somewhere in my collection on it I would be happy to give you titles.