| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Africa is an entire continent loaded with different cultures. You'll have to narrow it down for us.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
You could pick this up. It's very cheap and if you're looking at doing an African Setting it's an excellent resource.
Also, if you can find a copy somewhere, this issue of Dragon Magazine has an excellent article on African weapons and armour. It was one of my favourite Dragon articles back when I was playing 2e. :)
|
Africa is an entire continent loaded with different cultures. You'll have to narrow it down for us.
Lol yeah your right though after a cursory bit of googlefoo anything that isn't ancient egypt would be beneficial. If I am to narrow it down say congo or tropical africa.
As for Nyambe I had totally forgotten about those books but are they trying to be historically accurate for things like armor or more mechanically beneficial? It's been a long time since I've perused that and with 3rd party I know it can be hit or miss.
|
I guess warrior like tribes might have used bone armor if that would be even called as armor. They were exposed to much to call it armor of any kind.
I would say if I remember right that it was made of wood mostly. If they did use any protection, it was mostly focused on light large shields to stop spears and javelins.
I am saying only this stuff which I remember from movies, so if it's correct or not, I have no idea.
I believe Nyambe is accurate in its trappings though its fantasy Africa not historical. Also I like how the print copy costs half of the PDF...
North African armour (in Medieval times)would probably have been similar to that used in the Middle East. As far as sub-Saharan Africa's concerned, it looks like some mounted warriors in West Africa wore padded armour, at least - images here, even if they're posed photos from Victorian times.
As others have said, would need more details.
You've given us a minor narrowing down, but that area would still have hundreds of nations, particularly through time.
If you want a historical armor of that area, I would recommend looking up the Ghana, Mali and Songhai empires, one of the most long lived continuous empires in the areas and usual time for fantasy.
The Mali empire (which would be closest to the place and the time to what is usually used for fantasy), they tended to use chainmail armor (scalemail was also popular at the time in other tropical nations). The main characteristic that made that distinguishes it would be decoration (they would use Mali symbolism rather than European cross ones, more suns and lots of red and gold) and they used barbed arrows (particularly poison ones).
It would *not* be bone bar possibly for minor decoration for lower classes (and during the fantasy time period, Europeans were far more likely to be in warrior tribes) and unlikely to be wood. Movies tend to be terrible places for education, and sadly our schools tend to miss out the great African empires.
Mwangi Expanse represents Africa in golarion. I usually envision SubSaharan (below the Sahara desert) Africa was fairly primitive in terms of armor and weapon development. Using mostly spears and shields and not possessing any real armor on the body. You should probably do research on the Zulu tribes warriors and see what they used. To me, the Zulu represent some of the best warriors that subSaharan Africa had to offer.
I would think anything from imported silk to imported steel plate. Some of those areas were rich traders after all.
|
I really don't think any of the Congo tribes ever wore armor, to speak of...though I could be wrong about that. Most of the Congo is pretty thick tropical jungles, and any significant armor would be a significant detriment. Very few tropical societies ever wore much at all, really...and even those covered head to toe favored very light cloth.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
As for Nyambe I had totally forgotten about those books but are they trying to be historically accurate for things like armor or more mechanically beneficial? It's been a long time since I've perused that and with 3rd party I know it can be hit or miss.
They do try and be accurate. Even so far as giving characters a Feat that increases their AC because of the lack of high AC protection available.
|
|
As for Nyambe I had totally forgotten about those books but are they trying to be historically accurate for things like armor or more mechanically beneficial? It's been a long time since I've perused that and with 3rd party I know it can be hit or miss.They do try and be accurate. Even so far as giving characters a Feat that increases their AC because of the lack of high AC protection available.
Zulus fight almost like some style of monks, preferring mobility...that makes sense. :)
I mean really, no one wears hot heavy armor when you're in a tropical area of temperatures of 80+ degrees. It's already hot outside, heavy armor gets very hot even when its not hot outside. Inside that armor your likely to roast from the humidity and temperature until your marinade yourself into nice cut of meat. Also, the jungles tend to have dense underbrush and little line of sight through things. It means any fights tend to happen face to face because there isn't much room to fight far away from one another. This would mean increased mobility would be important to either chase or run away from enemies you encounter. Trudging around in full plate is just an awful idea.
|
Africa is an entire continent loaded with different cultures. You'll have to narrow it down for us.Lol yeah your right though after a cursory bit of googlefoo anything that isn't ancient egypt would be beneficial. If I am to narrow it down say congo or tropical africa.
As for Nyambe I had totally forgotten about those books but are they trying to be historically accurate for things like armor or more mechanically beneficial? It's been a long time since I've perused that and with 3rd party I know it can be hit or miss.
That's better but you're still talking about an area 5 times the size of all of Europe combined spanning over 10,000 years of semi-recorded history.
Honestly if you look at the continent as a whole Africa as a whole has more land area than China, USA, Europe, India and Japan put together.(see here True scale of size)
And as the birthplace of all civilization, industry, and commerce pretty much EVERYTHING from skins and shields to full brigandine armor is available depending on when and where you look.
An easier way of answering this question is what TYPE of African arms and armor are you interested in or what type of culture are you after?
We can tell you about the vast armies of Nubia that easily conquered Egypt during it's 25th dynasty with their light armor, heavy bows an cavalry. Or maybe the Chainmail wearing longsword and lances of light cavalry of the Tuaregs.
Give us a bit more detail in what you are after and it might make this a bit easier to answer.
I mean really, no one wears hot heavy armor when you're in a tropical area of temperatures of 80+ degrees. It's already hot outside, heavy armor gets very hot even when its not hot outside. Inside that armor your likely to roast from the humidity and temperature until your marinade yourself into nice cut of meat. Also, the jungles tend to have dense underbrush and little line of sight through things. It means any fights tend to happen face to face because there isn't much room to fight far away from one another. This would mean increased mobility would be important to either chase or run away from enemies you encounter. Trudging around in full plate is just an awful idea.
Didn't some of the Ancient Greeks train themselves to run and fight in heavy armor during the hot summer? Of course, they did that because of the reason you mentioned, meaning they'd shock the enemies who weren't expecting it.
|
|
I mean really, no one wears hot heavy armor when you're in a tropical area of temperatures of 80+ degrees. It's already hot outside, heavy armor gets very hot even when its not hot outside. Inside that armor your likely to roast from the humidity and temperature until your marinade yourself into nice cut of meat. Also, the jungles tend to have dense underbrush and little line of sight through things. It means any fights tend to happen face to face because there isn't much room to fight far away from one another. This would mean increased mobility would be important to either chase or run away from enemies you encounter. Trudging around in full plate is just an awful idea.Didn't some of the Ancient Greeks train themselves to run and fight in heavy armor during the hot summer? Of course, they did that because of the reason you mentioned, meaning they'd shock the enemies who weren't expecting it.
Yeah, but they weren't from the jungle. ;)
I've never been to Greece, is it more of a dry heat over there?
Didn't some of the Ancient Greeks train themselves to run and fight in heavy armor during the hot summer? Of course, they did that because of the reason you mentioned, meaning they'd shock the enemies who weren't expecting it.
I did use hyperbole and say no one, but what I meant is that in SubSaharan Africa people didn't wear heavy armor because it was too damned inconvenient. Also, the Greeks definitely didn't wear full plate either. A lot of Greek armor was breastplate only. Which still would have been uncomfortable, but managable, with the right support (i.e. people giving you water on often). Also, there is something to be said for deciding that tactically the drawbacks of more armor were worth the extra protection when fighting foes with less advanced weapons and armor.
I think Greece is geographically a poor fit for having the same weather conditions in comparison to the jungles of Africa. I feel like the bayou of Louisiana is much better fit in terms of similarity, though not quite as much water.
|
|
I think Greece is geographically a poor fit for having the same weather conditions in comparison to the jungles of Africa. I feel like the bayou of Louisiana is much better fit in terms of similarity, though not quite as much water.
This assumption that Africa is a giant jungle is really, REALLY wrong.
Yes noticeable chunks of it are filled with jungles, but there are just as many parts that are wide open savannahs, mountainous peaks, empty deserts and massive lakes. Literally any terrain type you can imagine is there and most of them are at least the size of Nebraska (or England for you non-Americans).About the only thing universal about the continent is that the sun is very bright all year around. Even the temperature varies extremely all over the continent.
|
Zulus fight almost like some style of monks, preferring mobility...that makes sense. :)
Pre Shaka this was true. However, post Shaka they fought much more like Roman legionairies.
Pre Shaka they used medium hide shield and long spears called Assegai, designed for throwing. Most combat was at a distance.
Shaka changed all that, using larger cowhide shields and adding the shorter Iklwa, a spear much better suited to stabbing. In combat they formed into formations designed to encircled the enemy. They used close unit formations to form shield walls, threw their Assegais, and then closed on the enemy, engaging them with shield and Iklwa. In this regard, a Zulu warrior used his large cow-hide shield, Assegai and Iklwa in much the same manner as a Roman legionnaire used his Scutum, Pilum and Gladius.
In neither case, however, did they wear armor. It just wasn't suited to the climate and terrain and required resources they did not have easy access to.
|
|
I think Greece is geographically a poor fit for having the same weather conditions in comparison to the jungles of Africa. I feel like the bayou of Louisiana is much better fit in terms of similarity, though not quite as much water.This assumption that Africa is a giant jungle is really, REALLY wrong.
Yes noticeable chunks of it are filled with jungles, but there are just as many parts that are wide open savannahs, mountainous peaks, empty deserts and massive lakes. Literally any terrain type you can imagine is there and most of them are at least the size of Nebraska (or England for you non-Americans).About the only thing universal about the continent is that the sun is very bright all year around. Even the temperature varies extremely all over the continent.
He specified the Congo region.
|
|
]
Zulus fight almost like some style of monks, preferring mobility...that makes sense. :)Pre Shaka this was true. However, post Shaka they fought much more like Roman legionairies.
Pre Shaka they used medium hide shield and long spears called Assegai, designed for throwing. Most combat was at a distance.
Shaka changed all that, using larger cowhide shields and adding the shorter Iklwa, a spear much better suited to stabbing. In combat they formed into formations designed to encircled the enemy. They used close unit formations to form shield walls, threw their Assegais, and then closed on the enemy, engaging them with shield and Iklwa. In this regard, a Zulu warrior used his large cow-hide shield, Assegai and Iklwa in much the same manner as a Roman legionnaire used his Scutum, Pilum and Gladius.
In neither case, however, did they wear armor. It just wasn't suited to the climate and terrain and required resources they did not have easy access to.
Shaka's style of combat was still highly fluid, almost a dance, not like a phalanx at all. The Iklwa isn't suited for the phalanx style, but rather a very mobile one.
|
|
Shaka's style of combat was still highly fluid, almost a dance, not like a phalanx at all. The Iklwa isn't suited for the phalanx style, but rather a very mobile one.]
Zulus fight almost like some style of monks, preferring mobility...that makes sense. :)Pre Shaka this was true. However, post Shaka they fought much more like Roman legionairies.
Pre Shaka they used medium hide shield and long spears called Assegai, designed for throwing. Most combat was at a distance.
Shaka changed all that, using larger cowhide shields and adding the shorter Iklwa, a spear much better suited to stabbing. In combat they formed into formations designed to encircled the enemy. They used close unit formations to form shield walls, threw their Assegais, and then closed on the enemy, engaging them with shield and Iklwa. In this regard, a Zulu warrior used his large cow-hide shield, Assegai and Iklwa in much the same manner as a Roman legionnaire used his Scutum, Pilum and Gladius.
In neither case, however, did they wear armor. It just wasn't suited to the climate and terrain and required resources they did not have easy access to.
Who said anything about Phalanxes? I was comparing their tactics to Romans who use a much more flexable and mobile maniple formation than the Greek Phalanx. I was also comparing them more to how they used their weapons than how they used their formations.
|
|
Who said anything about Phalanxes? I was comparing their tactics to Romans who use a much more flexable and mobile maniple formation than the Greek Phalanx. I was also comparing them more to how they used their weapons than how they used their formations.Shaka's style of combat was still highly fluid, almost a dance, not like a phalanx at all. The Iklwa isn't suited for the phalanx style, but rather a very mobile one.]
Zulus fight almost like some style of monks, preferring mobility...that makes sense. :)Pre Shaka this was true. However, post Shaka they fought much more like Roman legionairies.
Pre Shaka they used medium hide shield and long spears called Assegai, designed for throwing. Most combat was at a distance.
Shaka changed all that, using larger cowhide shields and adding the shorter Iklwa, a spear much better suited to stabbing. In combat they formed into formations designed to encircled the enemy. They used close unit formations to form shield walls, threw their Assegais, and then closed on the enemy, engaging them with shield and Iklwa. In this regard, a Zulu warrior used his large cow-hide shield, Assegai and Iklwa in much the same manner as a Roman legionnaire used his Scutum, Pilum and Gladius.
In neither case, however, did they wear armor. It just wasn't suited to the climate and terrain and required resources they did not have easy access to.
Just further explanation...the formations they used were far more flexible...not actually disagreeing.
|
|
Just further explanation...the formations they used were far more flexible...not actually disagreeing.Who said anything about Phalanxes? I was comparing their tactics to Romans who use a much more flexable and mobile maniple formation than the Greek Phalanx. I was also comparing them more to how they used their weapons than how they used their formations.Shaka's style of combat was still highly fluid, almost a dance, not like a phalanx at all. The Iklwa isn't suited for the phalanx style, but rather a very mobile one.]
Zulus fight almost like some style of monks, preferring mobility...that makes sense. :)Pre Shaka this was true. However, post Shaka they fought much more like Roman legionairies.
Pre Shaka they used medium hide shield and long spears called Assegai, designed for throwing. Most combat was at a distance.
Shaka changed all that, using larger cowhide shields and adding the shorter Iklwa, a spear much better suited to stabbing. In combat they formed into formations designed to encircled the enemy. They used close unit formations to form shield walls, threw their Assegais, and then closed on the enemy, engaging them with shield and Iklwa. In this regard, a Zulu warrior used his large cow-hide shield, Assegai and Iklwa in much the same manner as a Roman legionnaire used his Scutum, Pilum and Gladius.
In neither case, however, did they wear armor. It just wasn't suited to the climate and terrain and required resources they did not have easy access to.
Ah, got it!
|
|
Ah, got it!Just further explanation...the formations they used were far more flexible...not actually disagreeing.Who said anything about Phalanxes? I was comparing their tactics to Romans who use a much more flexable and mobile maniple formation than the Greek Phalanx. I was also comparing them more to how they used their weapons than how they used their formations.Shaka's style of combat was still highly fluid, almost a dance, not like a phalanx at all. The Iklwa isn't suited for the phalanx style, but rather a very mobile one.]
Zulus fight almost like some style of monks, preferring mobility...that makes sense. :)Pre Shaka this was true. However, post Shaka they fought much more like Roman legionairies.
Pre Shaka they used medium hide shield and long spears called Assegai, designed for throwing. Most combat was at a distance.
Shaka changed all that, using larger cowhide shields and adding the shorter Iklwa, a spear much better suited to stabbing. In combat they formed into formations designed to encircled the enemy. They used close unit formations to form shield walls, threw their Assegais, and then closed on the enemy, engaging them with shield and Iklwa. In this regard, a Zulu warrior used his large cow-hide shield, Assegai and Iklwa in much the same manner as a Roman legionnaire used his Scutum, Pilum and Gladius.
In neither case, however, did they wear armor. It just wasn't suited to the climate and terrain and required resources they did not have easy access to.
I've recently become interested in the Zulus...particularly of Shaka's period. They were a serious warrior people. Cool stuff. :)
This would be a pretty cool warrior to see around, taking down Trolls and Ogres and stuff.
Blemmyes were a late Roman foe that lived where coastal Sudan is now. The dry climate allowed them to use more armor with their cavalry. Not sure about their infantry. I do know they were serious warriors, going up against the Romans a number of times. They wore Byzantine style armor in the later period.