![[OC] Post was removed? First time that's ever happened to me. Either way. My full armor.](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/23f8d87f-de4d-46ca-a792-b60710f125d4.jpeg){kind=link}
The armor is full steel. I have just painted it to look worn and “experienced”
Can’t strap the breastplate solo without longer straps lol.
Fun fact, the breastplate isn’t small, solitary breastplates are sized like this so the wearer stoll has full range of motion. If it was any longer you wouldn’t be able to bend or lean.
Jammies are also on. Couldn’t be bothered to change into my trousers.
speaking of legs, I made arming points for the leg harness and they work GREAT!
This Wenzel bascinet isn’t my main helm for this fit even though it would be more historically accurate to this style of armor.
My armet just isn’t finished and painted yet, but that will be my main.
Also omitted is the maille skirt I have on order and the cloth layer of the armor.
Just wanted to see how everything sized up.
Basically a surcoat and my hood that I’d normally pair with the armor.
It wasn’t until the late 14th-15th century and beyond that bare armor was the fashion.
Here’s my kit before I bought the breastplate and leg harness, and also the helmet I intend to wear with this kit.
I am getting a plume holder installed and then I will paint it to match!
Was the reason for the change in cloth vs bare armour just fashion, or was it functional too?
I’m aware of tabards and cloth for Brigadine armour and such, just not why
That’s a really cool suit dude. Thanks for sharing
Just fashion I am guessing. Knights still occaisionally had their armor painted from time to time as people still like color, but bare armor was just more in style.
So I know it’s on the site that should not be named, but there’s some good info on it here
https://www.reddit.com/r/ArmsandArmor/comments/17g4pzh/why_did_knights_stop_wearing_surcoats_in_the/