Such "revolutions" did occur. I'm not a historian but am very interested in local history where I live. Researching Ketts' rebelion would be very useful to your writing.

There are plenty of other peasant revolts to look at but Ketts' is useful to you for a few reasons.

Firstly it was a late Medieval revolt, taking place in England in 1549. A bit after your period of interest but but, crucially, before the widespread use of firearms which put an end to the medieval battle order.

Secondly, the root cause of the rebellion was, through a modern lense, an infringement on the rights of the working class by landowners and aristocrats. In the years preceeding the uprising allegations had arisen that wealthy farmers and minor nobility had been enclosing common land with fences and hedgerows restricting its use by the common folk. A parliamentary inspector was denied access to properly inspect the legality of these enclosures in 1548. This combined with other economic hardships and some proto-puritan reformationist discontent with the local clergy bubbled over into rebellion.

Finally it makes clear that common rebellions couldn't beat more militarised and trained armies.... in open battle.

The rebels, achieved some impressive military goals.

They laid seige to and took Norwich, at the time the second most populous city in England, after London.

They defeated the army of the Marquise of Northampton sent to lift the siege, which included a good number of experienced Italian mercenaries.

Contemporary accounts of the rising make the point that these successes were made by clever use of terrain as well as ambush, night assaults, and the capture of arms from defeated opposition. This included the capture of artillery from the Norwich garrison, which allowed the rebels to set up batteries overlooking the city. Of note is that one of the rebels was an experienced artillerist and oversaw the organisation an use of this artillery.

The rebels were organised well by Robet Kett and other sympathetic minor nobility and did not resort to general banditry. Tactically the rebel leadership made some very sound decisions e.g. having captured Norwich and learning that Northhamptons force was enroute, Kett chose to abandon the city for the high ground that the rebels had previously encamped. The relief force was allowed to occupy the city, only for the rebels to launch a night assault by swimming across the river, which formed part if the boundary of the city. The rebels made use of their knowledge of the city alleys to attack enemy patrols in vicious street fighting.

You can infer a few things from the above

1. Large numbers of rebels swam across a river, thus its likely most of them were lightly armed and wore little to no armour.

2. The rebels, or at least their leadership, understood the limitations of their force, avoiding open battle or siege against conventional troops. Preferring to defeat their oppenents in detail with overwhelming rush attacks and close quarters alley brawls.

3. Just because the rebels were common folk does not mean that at least a portion of them were experienced soldiers, able to effectively use captured equipment and perhaps even bring to bare some arms of their own.

The rebels in your story may indeed defeat professional troops, but you will need to write some sharp witted characters because the majority of the rebels would be equipped with clubs, knives and tools, at least until they are able to capture some significant gear. Have your rebels avoid ranged combat, avoid cavalry and flee from or ambush only professional foot troops.

Rebels wear fog, forest, and the dark of night as armour, and use marshland, fire and surprise as their primary weapons.

Obligatory not a historian, but I am quite the enthusiast about medieval arms and armor, specifically around 1400 and I'll try and give some answers.

First and foremost, my most important source: a literal medieval depiction of a peasant revolt. The depiction is from a "copy" of Chronicles of France in the British Library. This specific manuscript dates to around 1380-1400. This miniature painting within the book depicts a peasant revolt of the past, however it depicts stylistically contemporary armor to when the artwork was created. We can assume that this is what revolting peasants would wear, in the eyes of the artist who made it in 1380-1400. We can't say whether he would be correct or not for certain, but this is pretty standard gear for the period. This can give you an idea of what your peasants may have available to them. So, make of that what you will.

To accurately answer the question though, I would need more specifics. 1400-1500 is a very long time, and armor and fashion evolved a lot over a hundred years and what was available to the lower classes changed drastically. Plate armor in all sorts would have been far more available to your average person in 1500 than it would be in 1400, and armor and fashion changed stylistically a lot in that period. So, a more specific time period is needed, preferably down to the decade.

Information on the supply and cohesion of the revolution would help aswell, depending on their resources available and who and what they have under their control and as allies would be helpful aswell. At this point, do they have money, armorers? Have they captured and territory, more specifically have they captured any places with armories?

The laws of the land are important, too. There were many laws in places in Medieval and Renaissance Europe requiring male citizens to own arms, armor, and train with them. Most notably and famously, the English required their citizens to practice with a longbow every Sunday after church, many lands had such laws and whichever land your story takes place in will make a difference.

For some context on how different armor can be, here are two examples of Italian armor from opposite ends of the century:

Here's Italian style armor you could expect to see around 1400: https://imgur.com/a/jSkE0Fe (1/3 scale model)

Here's some Italian armor you could expect to see around 1500: https://imgur.com/a/dKf8W13 (composite extant armor, the helmet is from roughly 1-2 decades earlier).

These are knightly/noble armors, and not indicative of what lower class people would wear, but the variation is pretty much the same. 1400 armor and 1500 armor would be very different even for infantry.

Hi there - we're happy to approve your question related to your creative project, and we are happy for people to answer. However, we should warn you that many flairs have become reluctant to answer questions for aspiring novelists and the like, based on past experience: some people working on creative projects have a tendency to try to pump historians for trivia while ignoring the bigger points they were making, while others have a tendency to argue with historians when the historical reality does not line up with what's needed for a particular scene or characterization. Please respect the answers of people who have generously given you their time, even if it's not always what you want to hear.

Additionally, as amazing as our flair panel is, we should also point out that /r/AskHistorians is not a professional historical consultation service. If you're asking a question here because you need vital research for a future commercial product such as a historical novel, you may be better off engaging a historical consultant at a fair hourly rate to answer these questions for you. We don't know what the going rate for consultancy work would be in your locality, but it may be worth looking into that if you have in-depth or highly plot-reliant questions for this project. Some /r/AskHistorians flairs could be receptive to working as a consultant in this way. However, if you wish for a flair here to do this work for you, you will need to organize this with them yourselves.

For more general advice about doing research to inform a creative project, please check out our Monday Methods post on the subject.