Slitherine

When reading the French Ordonnace list in preparation for a test game I noticed that the Francs Archers are rated as 'unprotected' which I found surprising as all of my sources described them as wearing same kind of armour used by English & Burgundian archers (sallets, brigandiens, mail haubergons or jacks) who are rated as proteced. Surely being rated as 'poor' and 'undrilled' takes care of the supposedly poor performance of the Francs Archers without adding unprotected to the mix? Or is there new historical proof that enough of them were unarmoured to warrant the 'unprotected' rating?

DanielS wrote:When reading the French Ordonnace list in preparation for a test game I noticed that the Francs Archers are rated as 'unprotected' which I found surprising as all of my sources described them as wearing same kind of armour used by English & Burgundian archers (sallets, brigandiens, mail haubergons or jacks) who are rated as proteced. Surely being rated as 'poor' and 'undrilled' takes care of the supposedly poor performance of the Francs Archers without adding unprotected to the mix? Or is there new historical proof that enough of them were unarmoured to warrant the 'unprotected' rating?

You may be right. We felt that their low status would translate into a higher proportion of men being poorly equipped. In hindsight, we could perhaps have given them an option to be Protected.