Lunar weapons of war

From: Mikko Rintasaari <rintasaa_at_mail.student.oulu.fi>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 15:46:49 +0300


> From: "Nick Brooke" <Nick_Brooke_at_btinternet.com>
> Subject: Lunars vs. Romans
>
> It is a Generally Accepted Pseudo-Gloranthan Truth (one of the things both
> Greg and Sandy would agree to, I believe) that the Lunar Army (with magic)
> is better than the Roman Army, and that the Lunar Army (without magic) is
> worse. So the Lunars aren't better than the Romans.

I think I might dip my little fly into the ointment here... so far so good though.  

> I would add that IMO the weapon mix for Pelorians in the Genertelan Players'
> Book is lazy and wrong: the typical Lunar infantryman simply ain't a Roman
> legionary (with pilum and gladius). Roll back to Hellenistic or Classical
> Greek if you want a look at what's going on.

Ok. Here comes my own personal view.

I think the solar cultures bear a strong resemblance to to ancient Greek. I use ancient greek for Firetongue in my games, and sparta (or macedonia) as a model for the Yelmalians, modified by surroundings as needs be, of course.
  Dragon Pass left me feeling that phalanx warfare is a speciality of the Yelmalio cult and community (and of the older traditions they are built on).
  I don't like having phalanx warfare be a common thing, as it would be if it were the common strong arm of the Red Moon Empire.   No doubt Dara Happa fields phalanxes of heavy armored spearmen. Their yelmalians propably even use the sarissa.   The red army thoug is supposed to be very modern and _flexible_. The phalanx armies aren't flexible. They are the tanks of the ancient world, very effective when conditions are right, but slow and very limited in application.
  I think the heavy infantry of the Army fight using cohort tactics, of which unfortunately very little is known today. What is known is that the cohorts vere much smaller, more mobile units, than phalanxes, and that they trained in very complex manouvers. For instances front cohort could double the spaces between men, letting pilum throwers advance to the front, let fly and retreat through the cohort, which neatly closed up again to stand up to the enemy charge... and so on.

I think the Red Army is a combination of very diverse elements, but that they are arranged in cohorts or similarily sized, flexible units.

The place for the greek/macedonian model warfare is the purely solar cultures.  

All in my game and my opinion, of course.

> The Greek 'kopis' sword used as a sidearm by hoplites is kinda betwixt and
> between a shortsword and a scimitar (look at a piccy some time), so I don't
> have problems with Lunar hoplites carrying a scimitar for use in
> emergencies. The primary offensive weapon of the hoplite is his spear, not
> his scimitar. He uses the scimitar when something has gone horribly wrong.
> (NB: that great big shield he carries is also important as a secondary
> offensive weapon, useful for slamming opponents aside and inflicting broken
> bones).

Ah, and here's another thing. The great big roman legionaire shields vere great for holding the line and shielding the unit. But... If the enemy charge could break the lines and a general melee ensued then a huge shield is a deadly hinderance. Try it some day... in a free melee you really don't want anything bigger than a target shield.  

> It is unusual IMO for a Lunar Army unit to use scimitars as its primary
> weapon in massed combat, although some cases are known (these include the
> famous Steel Swords Legion, an all-Yanafali elite force who fight en masse
> using iron scimitars and look really cool on the battlefield). But Yanafali
> officers would almost always carry a scimitar, as a matter of honour and a
> symbol of their rank. A Yanafali without a scimitar is only slightly more
> common than a Humakti without a sword.

And to this I agree fully.  

> :::: Email: <mailto:Nick_Brooke_at_btinternet.com>
> Nick
> :::: Website: <http://www.btinternet.com/~Nick_Brooke/>

        -Adept

"thinker, dreamer and adventurer"


Powered by hypermail