Yes, however the cost of constructing and maintaining fortifications - even a palisade wall - was prohibitive and thus made them uncommon in the real world until the relative wealthiness of the middle ages. I would consider the raided-peoples economic levels to be at the more subsistence-level "Dark Ages" category, where all they could afford from their slightly-better-than-subsistence-level economy would be the occasional motte & bailey style structure.
For that matter, fortifications appear to be far, far rarer in Glorantha than in the RW, so this would argue against their common use even further. So yes, raided people would wish they had walls, but it would be the rare community indeed that would have them.
> From: Peter Metcalfe <metcalph_at_bigfoot.com>
> IMO the use of shield and bow is not compatible.
Further, as Hsunchen, their primary purpose of weaponry would be for
hunting. Only secondarily would the weapons be used for war. It's
typically at what we would call barbarian-level that one would find articles
that are useful ONLY for war - such as a sword, or shield, or even armor.
Thus most Hsunchen cultures should use spears, axes, bows, and other
dual-purpose weapons.
Peter:
> >But wait, just to use your examples, horseflesh - that would be running
> >away self evidently.
>
> But horses aren't kept in yurts, are they? And if they run away,
> then the Rathori can fire into the herd and expect to hit a couple.
OK, so they kill a horse or two (unlikely to kill them, but let's assume). Then what? They have a half-ton of horseflesh lying on the ground a long way from the forest?
>
> >Weapons, well, they'd be
> >being used. I can't think of a less efficient way to get a weapon than
to
> >try to rip it out of a warrior's hand?
>
> Perhaps you have forgotten what the eastern Rathori do not have
> metal weapons and the CharUn do? The Praxians do raid the
> Orlanthi and other people for those necessities.
>
That is a very good point - I had forgotten that. That alone - metal - is
enough in my mind to justify even very risky raids.
> >The
> >Rathori would leave the forest full of animals to go onto the steppe -
> >totally out of their natural environment, and a region second only to a
> >desert in lowest animal population per hectare (ok, third after arctic
and
> >desert) - to get Leather goods? That's pretty silly.
>
> What is animal population density got to do with this since worked
> leather goods are not found in the wild? The CharUn have a higher
> technology than the Rathori as can be seen in their clothing
> (worked leather and crude hides). Hence CharUn leather goods will
> have value in Rathori society.
I'm dubious - even the lowest tech RW societies can work and tan leather. Urine and animal brains (seriously) is all you need for supple, water-resistant tanned leather. You don't even need fire. Animal populations = raw material for leather, obviously. Personally, I'd rather shoot a deer in the forest and make buckskin myself - even though it may take a little longer - than to try to steal a buckskin shirt from a Char Un village (esp if they have metal weapons & I don't, as you pointed out above). My chance of dying making it myself is pretty much zero. My chance of dying to the Char Un would be pretty high?
>
> >They're the only wealth that couldn't be easily tossed onto a horse and
> >ridden away.
> >You don't have to pack up the tent to run away with the money, and if the
> >money's gone, why risk your skin (as a raider) to grab an empty tent?
>
> Perhaps you ought to look at Praxian Housing on p12 of the Players
> Book: Genertela where it makes the distinction between house tents
> (everything is unpacked for stays of more than a week in one area)
> and travel tents (smaller, less comfortable, defensible etc). The
> Pentans will have similar living arrangements and thus to suggest
> the Pentans can toss everything and ride away at all times is just
> plain silly.
>
And sillier still to think that ANYTHING a raider could want (with the
caveat about metal goods, in the point you made above) and reasonably get
away with isn't mobile? If it takes the Char Un time to pack up and move
this "valuable stuff" what ever it may be, wouldn't it take the Rathori at
least thrice as long? And, short of exterminating the entire village,
brevity=life to a raider.
So, raiders would be coming to take what might be termed "portable
valuables". Granting that in a nomadic society this definition would be
broader than a static one, my point remains: whatever is mobile and easy
enough for a raider to steal, is essentially mobile and easy enough for the
far more highly skilled and fast moving Char Un to get away with at the
onset of a raid.
> > > >If the Char Un use them for food, and most of the hoofprints
represent
> > > >beasts sans riders, doesn't that mean that they'd have LOTS of
remounts?
> > > No, for the simple reason that most horses are unfit for riding, just
> > > like most trollkin are unfit for warrior duties.
> >Totally, utterly disagree. Completely. Worked 2 years (summers) as a
> >rancher in Montana/Wyoming, very frequently had to deal with wild mustang
> >herds. I would expect that a horse herd is a horse herd. These were wild
> >mustangs that had never been broken or human-trained.
>
> You have obviously forgotten that these mustangs were descended from
> Spanish horses that had been bred to take a rider for something like
> two thousand years. The CharUn horses are not in the same position
> as they are bred for things meat food, milk, draft and carriage.
> Under such circumstances, you will tend to get a diversification of
> specialized types just like you do for _cattle_.
Why? If doing such specific breeding would make the horses LESS generally useful, why would they bother? I rate the Char Un as at least as technically skilled horsemen as the Mongols, and AFAIK the Mongols never did anything as silly as breed OUT the general utility of their horseflesh as a riding beast?
And in any case, now we're postulating that "Gloranthan Horses" are somehow essentially different than RW types? That there are "milk horses", "meat horses", "draft horses" and "riding horses" and they are not 99% identical? Sure, in the real world we have draft horses, but even in this case, hopping on one and riding it isn't fundamentally different than riding a quarter horse or an arabian. And they still run faster than a Rathori footman. Same with "mountain ponies".
End of The Glorantha Digest V7 #533
Powered by hypermail