Talk:Bow Combat/@comment-24019647-20150706065447/@comment-4524243-20150707052230

I have mixed feelings on Bodkins, really.

I know there's a lot of modern sources talking about them punching armour from a shorter range, and just as many saying they were largely ineffective.

But we do know that survivor bias exists, or in this case, mortal bias. Basically, the problem is viewed as what is written as ending lives, even if in the grand scheme of things arrows didn't kill too many people in plate. Plenty of ancient and medieval sources will write of it with shock, because it wasn't the norm.

Bodkin arrows are extremely common because they do have that pressure to pierce thicker armour, but they are also cheaper because they use less metal. If Bodkins were both more effective and less expensive to make, why would Broadheads, the more expensive alternative, survive as long as warbows?

Basically I need to see what my professors know on the subject of Archery in the fall to follow up with the books I've been reading, and videos I've seen. But as far as I can tell, arrows are damn effective on the militia level gear of leather or cloth your basic infantry would be bound to have. Or Magi. The jury is still out on maille, but I think the general consensus is you would be better off with a metal or magic can opener to deal with the Kinshra or their White counterparts.