Knights & Knaves Alehouse

I don't understand; perhaps I'm being thick. What's wrong with that sentence?

Well, as far as I understand it, you can't actually wear a Shield, like you can a Helmet, Boot or Hauberk. You carry a Shield. On the other hand, you can wear a Sword in conventional English and it might be possible to actually wear a Shield, if one was so inclined, but it is not, as far as I am aware, usual practice. I'm probably just being anal, though (or maybe wrong, possibly); I would no doubt complain if somebody was described as 'firing' a Bow, rather than shooting one (unless, of course, fire was actually involved).

I meant it exactly as I typed it.

I suppose it depends whether you're holding the shield with a punch-grip or have it strapped to your arm.

PapersAndPaychecks wrote:I suppose it depends whether you're holding the shield with a punch-grip or have it strapped to your arm.

Perhaps, but even in that case it would be a fairly unconventional use of language, as far as I am aware.

SemajTheSilent wrote:I meant it exactly as I typed it.

Fair enough. Are you equating the use of a shoulder strap of some sort with wearing, then?

Matthew wrote:Fair enough. Are you equating the use of a shoulder strap of some sort with wearing?

Certain varieties of shields do not require a hand hold but are actually strapped to the forearm as P&P eludes to above. Something can actually be held in the hand of the shield arm so it is worn not carried.

What variety of Shield would you have in mind? The light type used by certain Steppe peoples is all I can really think of, off hand, and that to facilitate the use of Bow whilst mounted.

Interesting question, that, about whether a shield is worn or carried. Lots of shields were worn slung, to allow use of a spear (P&P pointed this out in a discussion about whether spears are one or two handed). All the pictures I'd seen of Greek hoplites and in the Bayeux tapestry, etc. show this sling on the shield - I'd always assumed it was for when the shield wasn't in use. However, if you think about it, a Greek Hoplite had to be wearing his shield rather than carrying it - a 20 foot long spear isn't held in just one hand...

All right, let's do the shield lecture.

Primitive shield designs have a central punch-grip. There's a hemisphere of metal, called a "boss", protruding out of the front of this shield to protect the user's left hand. Generally such a shield comes with a shoulder-strap designed for easy carrying or use with a spear.

Later shield designs, such as kite shields and particularly heater shields (which were sometimes made of metal), and certainly bucklers which were used in combination with a two-handed claymore, were strapped to the forearm. With kite shields and heater shields, this is because of the extreme weight of the shield -- punch-gripped, you literally couldn't hold it for more than a half hour or so. With the buckler, it's strapped to the forearm because the user needs both hands his claymore.

I don't think the weight argument holds much water. Greek Hoplite Shields and Roman Scuta weighed between 10 and 20 lbs. They were held rather than strapped to the arm. Round Shields, Kite Shields and Heaters all fall into a similar weight range. I am yet to see any medieval images of one strapped to the arm of a combatant (but I would be interested to see one). In any case, strapping the Shield to the arm would make no difference to its weight; it would still be a great burden. In all cases a strap might have been used to offset the weight over a protracted period or to allow it to be slung over the back (and certainly can be seen in the case of the Bayeux Tapestry). This may be construed as 'worn', but, as far as I am aware, it would be unusual to describe it so.

Light Bucklers might well be strapped to the arm, but most were of the punching variety and were held or hung from a belt when not used. Very light types were strapped to the forearm.

Interesting debate so far.

The answer is: it's simple shorthand...that's all. I wrote it as "wears chainmail and shield" because I don't believe in complicated stat blocks or explanations. Anyone reading it will understand what it means. Hopefully.

This has given me a new hobby: from now on, I'll put interesting little phrases into my works in order to see who says what.

It's just semantics. Bilbo Baggins wanted to "wear a sword instead of a walking-stick." Tolkien wasn't getting into the details of how Bilbo would hold either.

David
Stardate 6788.8

IMO, I think the word "carry" suffices quite well in describing the martial and mundane possession of NPCs. When you use the word "carry" the DM is able to decide whether or not the NPC is actually *wearing* his armor at different times: on patrol(yes), in a tavern(maybe), eating dinner with his wife(no), out fishing by the pond(maybe).

Surely the good soldier does not sleep in his chain armor and hold his shield whilst snoring away. Thus the verb "carries" allows the DM to consider the when and where. Notwithstanding, it's all semantics...

--Ghul

Okay, you lot just forced me to get my shields out of the shed and take some photos.

Kite shield strapping arrangement:



Punch grip strapping arrangement:



Slung shield strapping arrangement:

May be time to get out von Eschenbach and Chretien and see what the translations say, if I can find the right phrase...