It's really not the same in usage, but the most similar on the weapons-list in RQ, which isn't exhaustive at all. The basic properties of the Kopis could be the same as the Scimitar. Knowing, that the Kopis was a Hoplite-Weapon, I imagined the Scimitars being Kopis (and their use would be perfectly allright with Yanafali, being curved). The successful use in history indicates, that it didn't break up the rank, but I'm wondering how any slashing weapon could have been used in the ranks despite the space-problem. Any input (hopefully with sources and/or historical evidence)?
????:
> >A cluster of yurts is by no means a mobile defended group, the
> >Rathori on foot can cover greater distances per day (50 km)
> >than the CharUn rider (30 km)
>A horseman with two or three remounts can cover considerably more than
>this per day (the Mongols regularly covered 60 KMs per day and could exceed
>80 km is pressed) and should easily outpace a footman.
I can't believe that somebody on foot is swifter than somebody on horse
(even without remounts). Can it be that here movement on paved ways is
compared against movement in rugged terrain?
Martin:
"In a sense, it's simple math. A band of 100 raiders strikes a town of
500.
Of these 500, probably 2/3 are either old, women (not impossible that
they'd
fight, but historically we don't have a lot of evidence for this* so
let's
assume not), or children. So you're left with 175 men or so, vs. 100
raiders. Of the 175, few or NONE would be professional fighters -
otherwise
they'd be in an army somewhere and not on a farm or monastery (a
particularly attractive target for the Vikings - maybe for the Rathori
too?). Of the 100 raiders, almost all would be hardened veterans,
organized, usually with the element of surprise. 1.75:1? With those
factors working in their favor, I'd bet on the raiders. They ransack
the
town, chase away the inhabitants (far more common, and pragmatic, than
killing them - if you kill them, whom are you going to raid next year?)
and
take anything of value."
The here presented POV accounts not for any fortifications built around
this small town. Fortifications are rarely estimated in play as good as
they were in history. Especially raiders who have no sieging engines
with them, could be fended off by a small proportion of their size. Good
build fortifications (like some in England or Wales - unfortunately I
don't have my Palladiums Book of Weapons, Armour and castles with me)
were defended in history with 12 men against a whole army. And even far
worse built fortifications would allow 30 men to hold off these 100
raiders.
No need to discuss the availability of these fortifications - constantly
raided people would care very much for them!
Martin again:
"It's a lot less bulky, actually, even considering the quiver IMO, when
thinking of some of the real war spears I've seen. But the longbow was
used
as a hit & run weapon to some degree by the Welsh. I don't know if the
fact
that they couldn't really carry off any hit & run tactics successfully
outside of Wales was because of the weapon, the Welsh, or other
circumstances."
I think that the hardest problem was the differing terrain - making a
good point against footsoldiers with longbows raiding steppes.
From: Peter Metcalfe <metcalph_at_bigfoot.com>
> >On the Rathori, I find them (a depicted in the Genertelan Player's Book)
> >peculiar for a number of reasons; they have Kite Shields and Longbows as
> >cultural weapons,
>
> Plus battle axes. Put alongside the Kite Shields and one
> wonders where they get the metal from. The obvious solution
> is the Uncolings (as third-eye blue middlemen) but they do
> not use axes and their shield is much smaller.
>
The cultural weapons tables are awkward for many cultures. It has been a
RQ-rules-construct to point the players in the right direction. IMG I
made this obsolete by not allowing any other weapon than available due
to cultural tech level.
IMO the use of shield and bow is not compatible.
Cheers,
Andreas
Powered by hypermail