Crew of a galleon

[Robbie]

In the 2nd ed the crew of a galleon was considered a unit of irregulars when disembarked.

How is this handled in BRSC? I've looked up the galleons on the net and it is stated that a typical crew complement was between 200 and 400 which would justify the 2nd ed rule.

[Lord Rahvin]

Why would you want to do that?! Wouldn`t you effectively lose the ship if
you lost that unit of irregulars?


On 7/17/07, Robbie <brnetboard@birthright.net> wrote:
>
> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
> You can view the entire thread at:
> http://www.birthright.net/forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=3932
>
> Robbie wrote:
> In the 2nd ed the crew of a galleon was considered a unit of irregulars
> when disembarked.
>
>
>
> How is this handled in BRSC? I`ve looked up the galleons on the net and it
> is stated that a typical crew complement was between 200 and 400 which would
> justify the 2nd ed rule.
>
>
>
>
> Birthright-l Archives:
> http://oracle.wizards.com/archives/birthright-l.html
>
>
>

[AndrewTall]

I presume he wants to have the crew join a raid to boost the units carried in the hold. I'd be more worried about losing the galleon - if the crew gets killed can whatever other units survive crew the ship? A galleon is an expensive thing to have captured by an enemy, even if you can ransom it back...

[irdeggman]

The rules don't address converting crew into troops.

If you wanted to I would go with a general rule that if a ship has 3+ hits then you can convert 2 of those hits into a single unit of irregulars. No more than 1 unit per vessel.

But, as Lord Rahvin pointed out this unit is special and must be kept tracked of separately since damge it receives directly affects the ship itself.

Apply any damage this unit receives equally to the ship itself. If the unit dies or deserts then the vessel has permanently lost those hits, until recrewed.

If a damaged crew unit goes back to it's vessel the ship is treated as having that damage until recrewed.

Recrewing is treated as healing unit damage.

[ConjurerDragon]

Lord Rahvin schrieb:
> Why would you want to do that?! Wouldn`t you effectively lose the
> ship if
> you lost that unit of irregulars?
According to the 2E rules, no. If you lost the unit of irregulars you
could "replenish" the ships marines by hiring for 1 GB in the next
friendly port.

It was not the entire crew, but the part of the crew of a *large* ship
(galleon/roundship) or ship dedicated to warfare only (Zhebec) that was
expendable to fight on land.

[kgauck]

Brecht and Rjurik came with special marines units. The Brecht marines were presumably part of the crew, the Rjurik I think represent the whole crew in the viking style.

[Lord Rahvin]

It was not the entire crew, but the part of the crew of a *large*
ship
(galleon/roundship) or ship dedicated to warfare only (Zhebec) that was
expendable to fight on land.

I thought that was represented by the troops being carried...

[Robbie]

Thing is, galleons could be sailed by a skeleton crew, since they took into consideration the effects of disease, malnutrition etc, which isn't a factor in Birthright since the distances are so small. No new worlds to sail to :)

The reason I asked this is because I'm trying to imagine a naval nation like Mieres, Suriene, Ghamoura or any pirate for that matter.

These realms or individuals could invest in ships and not care much for land armies. You bring a half dozen galleons/zebecs/roundships and you can unload 3-4 units from the crew complement on an unsuspecting and undefended province (meaning that you leave a portion of the crew aboard to control and sail the ship should something happen)......

[irdeggman]

The 2nd ed rules (both in Cities of the Sun and Naval Battles):


Roundships, galleons and zebecs are so large that they all carry small contingents of marines as part of their crews. These marines can function as one unit of irregulars if landed on enemy shores, making them handy for quick raids or other such missions. The marines must remain in the same province as their ship unless either the units or the vessel is destroyed. If the marines die, the ship’s boarding value falls to 0 until the regent replaces them by spending 1 GB and mustering troops in any of his ports during the domain turn.


Which fits pretty well with what I suggested above to use for house-rules.

The problem with "marines" as a designation in the 2nd ed material is that there wasn't anything specified as a "benefit" or "attribute" that they possessed. It was merely a "label" that carried no actual game mechanic attributes with it. At least the BRCS put something there.

[ConjurerDragon]

> irdeggman wrote:
> The 2nd ed rules (both in Cities of the Sun and Naval Battles):
>
> ------------ QUOTE ----------
> Roundships, galleons and zebecs are so large that they all carry small contingents of marines as part of their crews. These marines can function as one unit of irregulars if landed on enemy shores, making them handy for quick raids or other such missions. The marines must remain in the same province as their ship unless either the units or the vessel is destroyed. If the marines die, the ship?s boarding value falls to 0 until the regent replaces them by spending 1 GB and mustering troops in any of his ports during the domain turn.
> -----------------------------
>
>
> ------------ QUOTE ----------
> Which fits pretty well with what I suggested above to use for house-rules.
>
> The problem with "marines" as a designation in the 2nd ed material is that there wasn`t anything specified as a "benefit" or "attribute" that they possessed. It was merely a "label" that carried no actual game mechanic attributes with it. At least the BRCS put something there.
> -----------------------------

No mechanic attribute except the explicite rule that those special "marines" are *a unit of irregulars* (which existed as a war card unit)?

[AndrewTall]

>

No mechanic attribute except the explicite rule that those special "marines" are *a unit of irregulars* (which existed as a war card unit)?

But no different when fighting on board ships, etc - I would have thought that in ship:ship boarding actions the marines should have some mechanics advantage - galleon marines raiding a longship of sea-sick irregulars get no benefit from hours of training to fight on board ship? I'd put them as the equivalent of infantry in boarding, or raiding a seaport possibly, and as equal irregulars on land or some such if using the old rules.

[rarier]

When dismounted for a land action the marines counted as 'Irregulars', a vast underestimation IMO since most were trained at least as well as regular infantry... but I digress.

The biggest advantage of marines in Cerilia is that they are the only unit in the 2nd Ed setting that could fight as part of a naval action. Troops on board as passengers were just that... weapons racked, armor stowed and horses penned below... so they were useless. Marines could fight and -then- debark to join a raid... leaving the pure crew to sail away once things were finished. Of course using them left the ship without such troops and less able to handle boarding actions.

At least that's what I remember from the last campaign I ran... and that's been nearly a decade now. Gearing up for a new one though, by player demand the thing is back!!!:eek:

[irdeggman]

> irdeggman wrote:

No mechanic attribute except the explicite rule that those special "marines" are *a unit of irregulars* (which existed as a war card unit)?

But that is like saying they are anuirean irregulars or the like.

Other than the label they had no "special" abilities. They couldn't land and move and were subject to all of the same restrictions any other unit had when disembarking - that is what I mean.

[kgauck]

When dismounted for a land action the marines counted as 'Irregulars', a vast underestimation IMO since most were trained at least as well as regular infantry

The warcard was supposed to represent something in the ballpark of 200 men. The numbers of marines on ships often numbered a dozen or several dozen on large ships. The unit of irregulars represents sailors sent off ship stiffened by marines and under the command of the captain of marines. Ships could be loaded with regular military units, so the number of actual marine infantry would always be relatively small compared to a war-card. What makes up the balance and how good is this balance?

An irregular unit seems about right for a body of sailors on land, even if they do have a dozen or two of marines in their number.

[ConjurerDragon]

AndrewTall schrieb:
> This post was generated by the Birthright.net message forum.
> You can view the entire thread at:
> http://www.birthright.net/forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=3932
> AndrewTall wrote:
> ------------ QUOTE ----------
>
>
> No mechanic attribute except the explicite rule that those special "marines" are *a unit of irregulars* (which existed as a war card unit)?
> -----------------------------
>
>
>
> But no different when fighting on board ships, etc - I would have thought that in ship:ship boarding actions the marines should have some mechanics advantage - galleon marines raiding a longship of sea-sick irregulars get no benefit from hours of training to fight on board ship? I`d put them as the equivalent of infantry in boarding, or raiding a seaport possibly, and as equal irregulars on land or some such if using the old rules.
>
Those "marines" (NOT Marines - those are an existing warcard unit!) are
not fighting as an additional warcard of irregulars in a sea-sea battle.
In such a battle (in 2E) the "marines" were the normal inherent
"boarding value" of the galleon/roundship/zebec.
"Marines" destroyed in land battle --> boarding value 0 until replenished.
Additional warcard units added to that boarding value depending on what
type of unit it was but not the irregulars that were the ships fighting
complement to begin with.