CronoDAS comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 7 - Less Wrong

7 Post author: Unnamed 14 January 2011 06:49AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (495)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Mass_Driver 14 January 2011 10:07:08AM 12 points [-]

In canon, the hardness and thickness of materials are described as stopping spells, especially stunning spells. Hagrid, e.g., is able to resist several Aurors' stunning spells for a few minutes because of his thick, hard, half-giant hide. No form of cloth or wool clothing is ever described as stopping a magical attack, but Harry can hide behind (presumably granite) gravestones for some time while Death Eaters blast away at them. Toilets, which presumably are not quite as thick or hard as gravestones, are shown as stopping one offensive spell but then exploding.

IMHO wearing metal armor is a brilliantly canonic tactic. The least plausible facet of it is that first years in January, average age 11.5, probably cannot build enough muscle mass to wear a full suit of medieval armor at all, let alone in two weeks. I do not think we have seen evidence that wizards are stronger than ordinary folk, as opposed to more resilient. The captains are described as wearing only metal shirts, but they practice by swinging metal objects on their hands and feet -- this is odd.

Comment author: CronoDAS 15 January 2011 12:43:43AM 12 points [-]

Actual medieval plate mail, of the kind intended to be worn in battle, weighed about as much as the safety equipment that hockey goalies wear today. There was a guy in a History Channel show that did cartwheels while wearing it. So Harry wearing plate mail probably would work, assuming he could get it to fit properly.

Chain mail, however, was indeed heavy and cumbersome, and "armor" designed for merely decorative or ceremonial purposes could indeed have been heavy enough to compromise the wearer's mobility, but Harry wouldn't have been wearing something like that.

Comment author: TobyBartels 18 January 2011 05:44:29AM *  0 points [-]

Then how come plate mail is listed with a higher encumbrance than chain mail in my D&D manual?

ETA: :-)

Comment author: wedrifid 18 January 2011 07:57:48AM 5 points [-]

Then how come plate mail is listed with a higher encumbrance than chain mail in my D&D manual?

Perhaps the same reason that the D&D spells Melf's Minute Meteors and Meteor Swarm have much of their effect in the form of fire damage.

Comment author: CronoDAS 18 January 2011 06:04:09AM 4 points [-]

1) Because the D&D designers either didn't know the truth or didn't care and 2) because it works better for game balance.

Comment author: magfrump 28 January 2011 09:06:01AM 0 points [-]

If you care about this kind of thing I recommend Riddle of Steel.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 18 January 2011 05:57:48AM 0 points [-]

D&D arms and armor has very little connection to history. Indeed, many historical fighting styles are either impossible or very difficult under the standard rules. (This is true in both 3/3.5 and 4th. I don't know how true it is in earlier editions.) Similarly, arrows are aren't nearly as deadly as they were historically. And then you have ridiculous things like the "dire flail" which seems to be a recipe for getting yourself hurt real fast.

Comment author: Randaly 26 January 2011 04:15:07AM 0 points [-]

@ arrows: "I have seen soldiers with up to 21 arrows stuck in their bodies marching no less easily for that." ~Beha ed-Din Ibn Shedad (an advisor to Saladin)

To be fair, the source I read the quote in ("50 Battles that Changed the World," page 34) implied that Beha meant that the arrows were mostly absorbed by their cheap quilted armor, not their actual bodies.