> bows requiring far more training to be effective I still think it should=20=
be more
difficult (and require more training/practice) to ping a little point stick
through the air at a target a long way off than it would be to hit somone
over the head with a big stick if they are standing next to you RQ rules do
not really reflect this increased skill factor, I don't expect HW is going=20=
to
attempt it (?) This was the reason crossbows were preferred to longbows,
and I expect why gunpowder replaced longbows (not sure on this point)<
In my experience learning to shoot a long bow accurately enough to
hit a mass formation of enemy soldiers is not that difficult It's=20=
easy to
be at least as accurate as an early firearm user What _is_=20=
difficult
is being able to do it and keep doing it for the length of time needed to
destroy an enemy force by firepower alone _That_ is why longbowmen
needed such lifelong practice and why various English statutes forbade
football or insisted on archery practice after church on a Sunday
The muscles used to shoot a high poundage longbow are a unique combination - I know that if I take up my longbow tommorrow and shoot for any length of time I will ache in places I didn't know I had places the day after! Perhaps the fatigue point cost of prolonged archery should be doubled for any bow-using Orlanthi who attempts to shoot for any length of time
Sorry, this is suddenly getting very roolzy!
In summary I agree that Orlanthi don't have any archers worthy of the name from the POV of Argrath studying his order of battle
Doesn't prevent bow-armed skirmishers on the army's flanks though
Richard Crawley
Powered by hypermail