Forums → The Tavern → The Archer Sterotype

Oh spikeabc, please read my former post:

I think bowmen where lightly armored by leather because it is allot more flexible than cast iron and other metal alloys. Archers needed the flexibility to quickly reload their bows with arrows. Another aspect of leather versus metals is that leather is silent. I imagine archers sometimes played a sniper roles on the battlefield, thus being sometimes hidden in enemy territory. Wearing metal would create lots of noise, and inevitably lead to the sniping archer being discovered, caught, and killed. Leather was also taken from livestock, and no mining had to be done. I am no expert on historical facts, but I am using logic to come up with an answer to your question. Therefore, I could be wrong, but if you want a true answer, or want to disprove my theories, research this topic online. I would love to know the real answer.

Archers were never sent on the front lines because in a one on one close combat fight, melee weapons beat range weapons.

About the 30 pounds thing, that didn't apply mid-evil days. the bow you are referring to is a compound bow, with isn't a true bow people used in war. My bother in laws family has one that require 40 pounds. These are the bows that are used in most archery competitions today I believe

personally, I'd rather being wearing armor then not wearing armor if i was on the front lines shooting arrows.

Well I don't really have much to say on the historical aspect of this because it already has been pretty much covered. However I think that in the gaming aspect of it archers would be pretty OP if they had strong armor and a high-powered ranged attack. Maybe the cost of the archer could be increased, but still...

I bow hunt with full coveralls (which are very bulky) and I never seem to have a problem aiming or getting in the full 360

About the 30 pounds thing, that didn't apply mid-evil days. the bow you are referring to is a compound bow, with isn't a true bow people used in war. My bother in laws family has one that require 40 pounds. These are the bows that are used in most archery competitions today I believe.

I still think crossbowmen would have a bit of armor, at least a sturdy studded jerkin. The Spaniards got it;

Cross bows are no toys either,
Christians in crusades had crossbows which in order to be reloaded had to be put on ground vertically and then their strings drawn back with both hands.
And that was a main reason they lost a crusade(I forgot which one) as arabs were mounted skirmishers and whole christian army had to stop for crossbowmrn to reload in order to keep formation.
While arabs were on horses so they were able to get near them quickly and with not much causalities.

Christians in crusades had crossbows which in order to be reloaded had to be put on ground vertically and then their strings drawn back with both hands.

give me a cross bow any day yeah ftw

Recurve or compound

Actually, seeing where this is going, I am going to make an archery thread! Because this is all off topic.

Because this is all off topic.

The crossbows, talking about how other bows are more powerful.

does it matter? they're both the same size

the scottish guard, a unit in the french army was fully armord, with half-plates armors.

the basic reason is that archer were made of hunters from the villages.

remmember, in the ages were bows were in full use, the armies were built by a knight and his companions. a lord of aa castle came with his 'gang'. it was clearly a gang wars. and archers were mostly young boys from farms. they had a bow for hunting, and couldnt afford buying a donkey, so will they buy scalemale just in case?

and in the later years, archer jobs was to support the cavaley. killing pikemans, taunt {most peopels dont like to stand still while under fire} and finish off the injures in the end of the battle.
the only archers who were armord up were spiecel guards, like hte byzantine guard archers and as i said, the scottish guard of the french king. and a unit which was armord up, was mostly meant to go on melee after some rounds of shooting. whould you give pilots a assult rifle?

and if you mean in rpg games, yea, most of them are very very Stereotypical. as a one who love playing a elvish knight yes, full armor and a basterd sword}, i hate when they make me be a light armor archer {and in some games, make me be a female elvish *****, i mean common, a bra made of steel is armor?! what you wnat this rogue to do, give me money in 1 dollars Bill?!}

but mainly, blame tolkin and legolas. if he had full plates, all these games whould look Completely different×¥

i full agree danielo and i want to say something else: I think that archers are usualy light-armored because the heavey-armor can influence their aiming a lot if they aren't experts or the target is very far from them and maybe as semone said before the heavy-armor is slowing their reloading too.

-Alexandrica the archer-