Page 1 of 1
Pacific North-West Culture
Posted: Sat Oct 30, 2010 4:35 pm
by rbodleyscott
Do we rate any of the armour as qualifying as "Armoured"? (cf Samurai armour)
Posted: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:40 pm
by SirGarnet
It's common knowledge in the US that the Pacific NW tribes were the best armoured, but the degree varied by tribes from full torso and helmet in the central region to often lesser armour elsewhere so Unarmoured should certainly be an option for some tribes.
Osprey reports of the heavily multi-layer leather and wood-equipped Tlingit that their armor was ineffective against the Russians, but a book by David Jones on native armaments is clear that the armour of the neighboring Haida (probably not much different) was proof against arrows, and against musket balls at "moderate range". Since Armoured includes helmet and leather or textile armour more complete than a cuirass, full torso armour would seem justified as Armoured in the book in the same way other armies in the book get generous treatment compared with Europeans fighting each other. I don't see how it could outrage anyone.
Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 6:59 am
by rbodleyscott
The next issue is whether to allow an Armoured option only for the totem men and other veterans, or also for the ordinary warriors.