Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: loneeagle@******** (Lone Eagle)
Subject: Lionheart's Armour (was Lung, another one on Harlequin and
Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 13:34:57 +0000
At 12:44 PM 4/1/2003 +1100, Simon & Fiona wrote:
>If Harlequin was those people, then the question has to be asked why
>Dunklezahn got his talons on the items in between, and why he chose to give
>them back again.

There are a number of items which one has to wonder how the big D got hold
of, considering he's only been collecting them for 50 years.
However Gurth made a good point, there are very few pieces of armour from
before the 14th century here in GB which are in any condition, those which
do exist are in the Royal armouries. Richard the Lionheart died in France
so AFAIK it's debatable as to whether his armour would have been brought
back. If it weren't it would have fallen to the French armourers to
maintain it. Considering the revolution it's unlikely it would have
survived at all.
So is it possible that an item made in the fourth age could have retained
its "abilities" during the fifth? IIRC Richard was killed while on a recon
op and unarmoured, he was famous though for being in the front line so it's
quite surprising that he didn't die earlier.
Unless his armour was in fact a magical artifact from the fourth age...
Quite an interesting thought.

Lone Eagle
"Hold up lads, I got an idea." - Please be patient, this site is under construction

Version: 3.12
GE d++(---) s++: a->? C++(+) US++ P! L E? W++ N o? K? w+ O! M- V? PS+ PE-()
Y PGP? t+@ 5++ X- R+>+++$>* tv b+++ DI++++ D+ G++ e+ h r* y+>+++++

GCC0.2: y75>?.uk[NN] G87 S@:@@[SR] B+++ f+ RM(RR) rm++ rr++ l++(--) m- w
s+(+++) GM+++(-) A GS+(-) h++ LA+++ CG--- F c+

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Lionheart's Armour (was Lung, another one on Harlequin and, you may also be interested in:


These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.