"Who are these suicidal nutcases trying to take on dragons in melee?" We prefer to be called paladins, thank you very much!
Sigurd/Siegfried. He dug a pit near where the dragon drank and hid in it. Then he plunged his sword into it from below. At least in some tellings of the story.
Nice. I like stories where the "hero" manages to defeat an more powerful foe with strategy. Not by plot armor
Welsh longbowmen were rightly feared in medieval combat. Their arrows could punch through armor plate. Equally feared were Swiss Pikemen, especially within a turtle formation. No other nations had or trained in these weapons. I also want to point out to @SorcererV1ct0r that the Witcher series is based on writing from a Polish writer. Back in medieval times, footmen were a last resort. Your main battle weapon was the cavalryman. Knights were on horseback, using swords, and sometimes, spears.
If you want to dive into a real can of worms, you could always check out the numerous videos about longbows vs chain/plate mail on Youtube and what/how much they actually punched through. The catfights in the comments can be quite intense. -insert Michael Jackson popcorn gif-
Welsh longbowmen were rightly feared in medieval combat. Their arrows could punch through armor plate. Equally feared were Swiss Pikemen, especially within a turtle formation. No other nations had or trained in these weapons. I also want to point out to @SorcererV1ct0r that the Witcher series is based on writing from a Polish writer. Back in medieval times, footmen were a last resort. Your main battle weapon was the cavalryman. Knights were on horseback, using swords, and sometimes, spears.
If you want to dive into a real can of worms, you could always check out the numerous videos about longbows vs chain/plate mail on Youtube and what/how much they actually punched through. The catfights in the comments can be quite intense. -insert Michael Jackson popcorn gif-
Moderator Edit: Your holiday wish is our command!
This debate bow VS armor is like our debate guns VS armor in "post firearms" time.
In some battles, bows defeated armor and in others, armor defeated bows. Instead of "can bows pierce armor", the question should be : How likely is that the model "A" of a bow, with an specific arrowhead type in this circumstances, at "X" range, pierce this armor??? Is like asks if an anti materiel rifle can pierce an vehicle's armor, depends a lot of many variables.
What i mean by that? You can't just say that a 14.5x114mm will pierce any armored vehicle. It can pierce armored vehicles? Depends. What type of ammo? The angle? The armor of the vehicle? The battle? Where you hit? (...), an 14.5x114mm at close range can pierce even a Panther tank from rear, but can pierce an Panzer 2 from front at more longer range and is ineffective against a Tiger heavy tank on WW2(unless you hit the viewport). On modern days, still used against APC/IFV but is ineffective against a MBT except against tracks, sensors, etc; see how much changed on anti armor warfare in just 60 years.
The real question we should ask ourselves is; "can armors pierce bows?" Spiked shields are a thing after all. :P
That talk gets even more ridiculous when enchantments are involved. If magic arrows had any sense of RL physics, then acid projectiles would completely ignore even the thickest of fullplate armors. Of course, the arrow would have been dissolved by its own acid a long time before any archer could even hope to shoot it first. Especially if they were enchanted with RL superacids.
And don't even get me started what that would do to the archer himself. Given that the quiver would have been dissolved as well, including the archers backside where said quiver was placed...
If magic exists and is common, i an sure that armor will evolve into fighting magic, so if there are arrows who can magically conjure an acid/fireblast/etc when hit, probably there are magic who can "ban" this magic. So if for example you need to chant something in an unknow alphabet in order to conjure and the arrow works by when "strike", linking one part of the enchantment with another, is possible to have an armor who will try to ban this enchanment.
So, multi layer armor will be much common. People will have many layers of many armors each one casting difference defensive spells.
Comments
Moderator Edit: Your holiday wish is our command!
In some battles, bows defeated armor and in others, armor defeated bows. Instead of "can bows pierce armor", the question should be : How likely is that the model "A" of a bow, with an specific arrowhead type in this circumstances, at "X" range, pierce this armor??? Is like asks if an anti materiel rifle can pierce an vehicle's armor, depends a lot of many variables.
What i mean by that? You can't just say that a 14.5x114mm will pierce any armored vehicle. It can pierce armored vehicles? Depends. What type of ammo? The angle? The armor of the vehicle? The battle? Where you hit? (...), an 14.5x114mm at close range can pierce even a Panther tank from rear, but can pierce an Panzer 2 from front at more longer range and is ineffective against a Tiger heavy tank on WW2(unless you hit the viewport). On modern days, still used against APC/IFV but is ineffective against a MBT except against tracks, sensors, etc; see how much changed on anti armor warfare in just 60 years.
That talk gets even more ridiculous when enchantments are involved. If magic arrows had any sense of RL physics, then acid projectiles would completely ignore even the thickest of fullplate armors. Of course, the arrow would have been dissolved by its own acid a long time before any archer could even hope to shoot it first. Especially if they were enchanted with RL superacids.
And don't even get me started what that would do to the archer himself. Given that the quiver would have been dissolved as well, including the archers backside where said quiver was placed...
So, multi layer armor will be much common. People will have many layers of many armors each one casting difference defensive spells.