Results 1 to 7 of 7
Thread: Question Regarding Mercenaries
-
11-06-1998, 04:13 PM #1Whalejudge@aol.coGuest
Question Regarding Mercenaries
Archers actually do require an extensive amount of training. Crossbowmen
would have an easier time, I believe. Merc archers may be crossbows
-
11-06-1998, 07:20 PM #2Jim CooperGuest
Question Regarding Mercenaries
darkstar wrote:
> LEADER: Kuldzir Wainier (MDw; F5l Unblooded; Age 132)<
FIFTY FIRST LEVEL FIGHTER!?!?!?!! JESUS, that's A LOT of orog heads!!!!
And for only 3GBs a month? Jeez, sign them on!
:D
Cheers,
Darren
-
11-07-1998, 10:50 AM #3Tim NuttingGuest
Question Regarding Mercenaries
I like your idea, Ian.
Actually, this is probably where you will find many fighters above 9th level in
BR. Once they attain that and a place to call "home", the fighter attracts a
unit of warriors and the "regent" bodyguards... Most would be mercs or perhaps
"family" units that, while under the control of a non-regent, follow the
commands of a given regent, something like "Issolder's Irregulars", a group in
some fiction I've been toying with, extremely loyal to the Roesone family, have
been for a long time. They receive monetary compensation from the baroness and
exist almost entirely under Daen Issolder's direction.
Tim
-
11-07-1998, 01:37 PM #4darkstarGuest
Question Regarding Mercenaries
Jim Cooper wrote:
>
> darkstar wrote:
> > LEADER: Kuldzir Wainier (MDw; F5l Unblooded; Age 132)<
>
> FIFTY FIRST LEVEL FIGHTER!?!?!?!! JESUS, that's A LOT of orog heads!!!!
> And for only 3GBs a month? Jeez, sign them on!
I think that should be F5.
- --
Ian Hoskins
e-Mail: hoss@box.net.au
Homepage: http://www.box.net.au/~hoss
ICQ: 2938300 AIM: IHoskins
-
11-08-1998, 01:31 PM #5Sindre BergGuest
Question Regarding Mercenaries
Craig Greeson wrote:
> Greetings all,
> I've never liked the fact the BR Rulebook basically says a character
> can
> hire an unlimited number of mercenary units as long as his gold holds
> out.
> I'm creating some rules to somewhat limit the availability of
> "general"
> mercenary units in my campaign and make standing mercenary companies
> more
> in demand. I have a question for you military historians, and for
> anyone
> else who would just like to throw their 2GB in. Of the various
> mercenary
> units, which do you feel would be more readily available than others,
> and
> which could be formed together quickly vs. requiring long training
> together? Here's what I was thinking:
>
> Merc. Irregulars: Common / virtually no training required
> Merc. Archers: Uncommon / little training required
> Merc. Infantry: Uncommon / some training required
> Merc. Pikemen: Rare / training required
> Merc. Cavalry: Very Rare / training required
>
> Currently, I'm leaning toward making only Irregulars, Archers, and
> Infantry
> available via a general call for mercenaries. It seems to me these
> units
> could be put together relatively quickly from freelancing men at arms.
>
> Pikemen and Cavalry, on the other hand, seem to me to be more
> specialized.
> It doesn't seem like you should just be able to throw together some
> guys
> who have handled a pike before and say "OK, go stand fast against a
> charge
> by Ghoere's Iron Guard." Plus, as I said earlier, I'd like to see
> some
> standing mercenary companies I'm developing get more involved in the
> campaign.
>
> Any opinions?
>
> Regards
> Craig
> *****
> ************************************************** *******************
> To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the
> line
> I like this idea and most other things that have been said in this
thread, but I would regect the idea that Archers demanded little
training...The big problem with a Longbow compared to the crossbow is
the training time ! An english king even ruled that all able men was to
(by law) train archering every Sunday afternoon!
- --
Sindre
Take a look at my homepage and Birthright PBMG at:
www.uio.no/~sindrejb
-
11-08-1998, 02:37 PM #6Craig GreesonGuest
Question Regarding Mercenaries
Sindre Berg wrote:
> I like this idea and most other things that have been said in this
> thread, but I would regect the idea that Archers demanded little
> training...The big problem with a Longbow compared to the crossbow is
> the training time ! An english king even ruled that all able men was to
> (by law) train archering every Sunday afternoon!
I did not mean to imply in my original post that learning how to use the
longbow (or any other weapon) effectively was not extremely difficult.
What I was saying was that I assume men who sign up for a mercenary company
already have some skill with the appopriate weapons that unit uses. Thus,
when I said archers and infantry took less training than pikes and cavalry,
I meant they took less training to operate effectively as a unit. I'm no
military expert, but my limited understanding is that pike and cavalry
units have to be pretty precise on the battlefield. I would guess archers
who are individually skilled with the bow could be formed into an effective
unit easier than pikes of cavalry. Is this an incorrect assumption?
Regards
Craig
-
11-08-1998, 07:23 PM #7Kenneth GauckGuest
Question Regarding Mercenaries
- -----Original Message-----
From: Craig Greeson
Date: Sunday, November 08, 1998 8:44 AM
>
>I did not mean to imply in my original post that learning how to use the
>longbow (or any other weapon) effectively was not extremely difficult.
>What I was saying was that I assume men who sign up for a mercenary company
>already have some skill with the appopriate weapons that unit uses. Thus,
>when I said archers and infantry took less training than pikes and cavalry,
>I meant they took less training to operate effectively as a unit. I'm no
>military expert, but my limited understanding is that pike and cavalry
>units have to be pretty precise on the battlefield. I would guess archers
>who are individually skilled with the bow could be formed into an effective
>unit easier than pikes of cavalry. Is this an incorrect assumption?
>
It depends on your conception of war in Cerilia. Fighting as a unit as
opposed to a a crowd of individuals was pretty rare before the gunpowder
era. The Swiss and Flemish pikes and the Greek hoplites were local peolpe
formed into local units, that is the soldiers knew each other as neighbors,
and so the civic cooperation that existed was extended to war. There was no
training of strangers to act as a cohesive whole until the Romans, and then
again until Roman methods were imitated by Maurice of Orange c. 1570's. The
pikes of the Swiss and the Flemish were imitated by others, but never
successfully, because it was the local character of the recruitment that
made it work.
The only thing I would say about why trained units should not exist in
Cerilia is that its very expensive, and the states of Cerilia are the former
provinces of a former empire, that is they are to small to bear the cost.
Bouruine, Avanil, and Ghoere would be the first to handle the expence and
their neighbors would submit or be conquered.
BTW, in my opinion the pikes in the game represent the imitation pikes, not
the Flemish or Swiss (or Greek).
Kenneth Gauck
c558382@earthlink.net
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Similar Threads
-
Hello, and a question
By faultline in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 5Last Post: 07-04-2009, 01:56 AM -
The Brecht and Mercenaries
By geeman in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 7Last Post: 03-28-2008, 12:07 AM -
Question
By Birthright-L in forum The Royal LibraryReplies: 0Last Post: 04-03-2004, 04:30 AM -
Question Regarding Mercenaries
By Craig Greeson in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999Replies: 1Last Post: 11-06-1998, 01:59 PM -
Thanks and another question
By Bryan Palmer in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999Replies: 0Last Post: 04-24-1998, 10:04 PM
Bookmarks