Re: Playing Heroquest again: some questions

From: donald_at_m3-wNCOZozYx4IPwCRAFElLP63r1VxyYHk2X1FSx-OPip6tJSQeRMcSVtwDB6_PK3Sq1N
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 15:16:07 GMT

In message <gq5ldr+gmg1_at_eGroups.com> "valkoharja" writes:
>
>> The basic idea is that equipment is very seldom a story element.
>> Heroes don't prevail because they have cuirboilli rather than
>> leather armor.
>
>I appreciate the sentiment, but I also think that real life classical
>heroes (say bronze age Greece) tended to be the guys with excellent
>quality panoplies of full armour and great equipment. The wealthy,
>well armed and armoured nobility will have been the people who are
>seemingly invincible, and can cut down 30 people in a single battle.

David did pretty well against Goliath.

It is difficult to tell how much classical stories are emphasising the exploits of the wealthy and successful while ignoring the rest of the soldiers.

Given the cumbersome nature of Greek Bronze Age Armour it is unlikely anyone wearing it could kill 30 people by themselves without collapsing from exhaustion or being tripped up. However they and their followers could.

>I like to have some of that reflected in my Glorantha as well... but
>then again I'm a fan of a very low tech glorantha were good equipment
>is rare and random guy in the fyrd / dara-happan infantry has a lick
>of paint on his shield, a leather helmet and a spear. :)

Sure, to me exceptional equipment for the typical Orlanthi is grandfather's sword. But he'll still be glad of his spear and his clan beside him when faced with cavalry.

-- 
Donald Oddy
http://www.grove.demon.co.uk/