Technology

[kgauck]

I could post other images of horses and warriors before the stirrup, but the Tapestry is a familiar source.

Alexander was strictly Greek. Macedonian royalty was even allowed to participate in the Olympic games, a competition ritually banned to non-Greeks. The Macedonian people were considered non-Greek by the Hellenes because they seemed primitive.

Like all satire, it plays on an intentional (one hopes) misunderstanding of the object of the satire.

[geeman]

At 07:12 AM 11/28/2007, RaspK_FOG wrote:

>On the matter of the lance, though, I have to make a point: you are
>correct only when it comes to the modern notion of a lance; a lance
>is, in fact, a long, thin spear, commonly but not exclusively used
>by horsemen. In fact, the word lance is very ancient (i.e. the Latin
>word lancea, and its Greek cousin λόγχη).
>What we know is that cavalry did not benefit from the tremendous
>momentum of horses in the use of a spear; rather, the horseman would
>use the swiftness and bulk of the horse to deliver a blow to a
>possibly cowering or fallen foe and gallop to the next position he
>could make use of. On the other hand, people could swing some of
>their shorter melee weapons, benefitting from the ability to
>transfer part of that momentum without falling off their steeds.

True. We have to be careful about nomenclature. By "lance" I mean
the specific, heavy weapon employed in the mid to later period of the
Middle Ages, and not what D&D separates out into spears and various
pole arms, any of which have been called "lance" at one point or another.

The overall point, though, is that without the stirrup one isn`t
going to get what in BR are called "knights" or what I prefer to call
"heavy cavalry" since that term is less loaded. and the various
values (particularly the "charge" value) should differ for such
units. I suppose one could have some other type of mounted soldiers
that didn`t use either stirrups or lances and still have stats
similar to BR "knight" units. Ogres mounted on mammoths or trolls in
giant lizards, for example, would have to qualify at least as heavy
cavalry, right? Whether such mounts have nice saddles with fixed
stirrups and wield long, vambraced spears has to be
incidental.... Generally, though, in BR such units are unique enough
that they get their own descriptor.

Gary

[Beruin]

Excellent information on glass making.

To add to this, look here, as we already discussed glass quite thoroughly few years ago.

[AndrewTall]

While not arguing against stirrups per se; I note that a saddle can be shaped and fitted to help the rider stay in place when swinging weapons etc albeit at the expense of mobility. I saw some recreations a while back showed that some saddle features previously thought of as purely decorative were in fact designed to help the rider lob spears, etc without falling off the horse. Shaped saddles could be even more effective with animals with different body shapes to a horse - if the animal is taller at the back than the front (varsks?) then a high backed saddle would for example be quite easy to build and use, although the ride might be precarious!

[Beruin]

I've been reviewing several old posts and it seems to me that several areas are pointed out as Bronze Age, Iron Age, etc... I was wondering what is the difference in BRCS between the ages? Not so much the weapons/armor as ther is a table for that in the rules.

How does a Bronze Age Vos family get water and cook meals? How does this differ from a Brecht (renaisance?) family? Has someone already looked at this in any detail at all?

This discussion has focussed mostly on military technology so far, but I'd like too come back too a more general view of technological development.
I'll always try to use technological differences to highlight different cultures, but I mostly use these for descriptive flavour, without many hard-and-fast rules. If an issue like a PC wanting to purchase a spyglass, a heavy warhorse or a longbow in Vosgaard crops up, I decide on the spot whether the item is available and what its price is.

As Geeman already pointed out, the problem with technological differences is that many of the changes between bronze and iron age, or early and late medieval, are rather minuscule, at least from our point of view, and only the sum of these small changes make the difference between the epochs. Putting these changes into game terms might quickly turn into a book-keeping nightmare, I guess.
The easiest way to incorporate technological differences is probably via the availability and price of equipment in a certain era and there are a number of RPG products that can help here, like GURPS' Low Tech or Rolemaster's ...and a 10-foot pole.
However, with a little common sense (and historical knowledge), most of these changes are fairly obvious and could be implemented without one of these supplements.

That said, I find it useful to use four interrelated general categories or terms to describe technological differences. These are quality, quantity, efficiency, and innovation.

Quality and quantity are both rather obvious. A more advanced society is able to produce a larger amount of commodities and goods of a better quality than a less advanced culture.

The most basic example for quantity is agriculture. Better irrigation systems, heavier plows, the systematic usage of manure and a more elaborate system of crop rotation all increase crop yields. This does not influence the daily meal of an average Brecht or Vos family very much, but it allows a more sophisticated culture to support a greater population density.
This is in part reflected by the province ratings in BR, which tend to be lower for Rjurik and Vosgaard, and it might be feasible to cap the highest province rating possible according to tech level. However, climate and terrain are also very important here.

The quality, or at least the outward appearance, of food might also change with development. By carefully selecting and cultivating seed plants, fruits will become larger and contain more edible parts. For instance, we might not even recognize a carrot from 600 years ago, it looked much more like a root than a carrot, and many cereals of today, including maize, contain more grains than a few hundred years ago. (this might also fit in under quantity, but hey, I said the terms were interrelated)

For D&D, the most obvious example of quality is in combat, when arms and armour of different quality, or materials, meet.

IIRC, Dark Sun assigned a damage penalty to weapons made of materials other than steel, but this was a bit haphazard at best. Hm, I should look whether our sister site at www.athas.org has anything on this subject...

The Slaine setting has rules for soft iron weapons, which bend when they deal a specific amount of damage and must then be straightened with a full-round action and a strength check or they cause a -2 penalty to attack rolls. This would be a significant disadvantage against steel-using enemies.

Another viable solution might be to use a different damage die for lower or higher quality materials. If medieval steel is the norm, a longsword made from high quality steel, with the accompanying craftsmanship, might use a d10 for damage, while iron uses a d8, but bends and bronze a d6.
If we go for a combat system using an armour penetrating factor, like outlined in the crossbow thread, different materials and tech levels might provide a different AP score.

Once again however, the more details you use, the more complicated combat gets, possibly even bogging down the game.

Continued soon...

[Beruin]

Efficiency means that a society is better able to use the available resources the more it advances. This term might seem a bit redundant, as it often leads to a greater quantity or better quality of goods, but I believe it's different enough to warrant its own entry.

Wind and water mills provide an easy example of a more efficient use of man/horse/ox power (though they might also qualify as an innovation, see below).

I take my other examples from mining and smelting metal.

A bronze age society might only be able to find and exploit the most obvious but often poorer mineral deposits near to the surface. A more advanced culture has the knowledge to find richer deposits and also the technology to dig deep mine shafts and secure them enough and to pump away ground water, enabling them to reach deeper and richer deposits. Of course, the dwarves are the most advanced culture in this regard.

When it comes to smelting the ore, a less advanced society throws away much of the metal with the slag, as its smelting technology is not advanced enough to cleanly separate the two. The resulting metal is also quite impure. A better smelting technology therefore yields more metal and also produces a higher quality.

The transport system a culture uses is another example where efficiency is important. Better roads, the use of wagons and draft animals instead of human coolies, faster, larger and more seaworthy ships all help to transport more goods in a shorter time.

Innovation describes a technology, method or gadget that no one else has, or that at least some cultures don't have. Stirrups would be an example already discussed, other examples would be gunpowder, the printing press, steam power, repeating crossbows, tame varsks, whatever.

IMC, Dwarves are the only culture that can use coal to smelt metal and only the Brecht and the Elves use a wheel to steer their ships, all other cultures use a tiller, which is a bit more awkward to handle, making Brecht and Elven ships a bit more maneuverable compared to similar ship designs of other cultures.

In conclusion, I believe that the four terms quality, quantity, efficiency, and innovation can chart the technological progress level of a culture when paired with different fields of technological development. These fields include, but are not necessarily limited to: Agriculture, Military, Transport, Mining&Metalworking, Architecture, and Communication.
Other fields might be possible, up to one for every craft or profession skill, but these are the most important imho.

A culture can be advanced in one field, and lacking in another. For example, the Aztecs and the Incas were basically stone age cultures, but AFAICR their agricultural systems were quite sophisticated and could support a large population.

[Beruin]

While technology certainly is one important aspect, we should bear in mind that it's not the only important descriptor for a society. Its culture, the natural environment the people live in, the available resources, the climate all shape the outlook and appearance of a people and help to differentiate between cultures.

Russia, for instance had a serious shortage of gold and silver, up until about 1600, when these metals were finally found in the Ural mountains. As a result, squirrel pelts were used as a coin substitute.

IIRC, both the Mongols and the Huns used stirrups, but never developed anything similar to the charging knight. They preferred to stick to their traditional hunting weaponry. Then again, they probably had the best bows of their time.

[stv2brown1988]

This discussion has focussed mostly on military technology so far, but I'd like too come back too a more general view of technological development.
I'll always try to use technological differences to highlight different cultures, but I mostly use these for descriptive flavour, without many hard-and-fast rules.

Originally that is what I was more interested in. When describing the regions what are the technological differences between the cultures. For example, as the PCs sail from Muden they see Brecht windmills and water mills lining the shores...(Which cultures would use wind mills and/or water mills?)

As they sail west they see the somkestacks of metal smelters...
If Dwarves are the only ones who can use coal for smelting, what do all of the copper and coke (is this coal?) mines in Brechtur do with their products? Is coal used for heating homes, if so how, in a fire place or stove?

As they leave Brechtur behind and sail near the shores of the Rjurik lands, gone are the smokestacks and mills, leaving only untouched wilderness. When they finally come ashore and stay in a inn they find it to be very smokey (sp?) inside with lots of ash on the walls from the constant burning fires. In Scotland didn't they use peat for heating homes? Is peat just dried out grass and something?


And so on...

The PS for Ariya mentions the Regent having a guild holding for water clocks/fountains or something. What would these be like?

[kgauck]

Windmills are a late midieval development and much more effecient than watermills. Both watermills and windmills need a reliable source of water or wind respectively. Water mills can be divided into the more effecient and more complex over-shot mill, where the water runs from a pond with some pressure over the water wheel generating more power. The under-shot mill is a waterwheel sitting on top of a flowing river attempting to get some energy from the passing water. Its easier to build and mantain than an over-shot, but has a serious limit to the power generated, since flowing water can just bypass the wheel. The undershot wheel is very ancient. The overshot wheel appears at the hieght of the Roman Empire, but disappears with the fall of the Romans until the high middle ages.

So Dark Ages cultures might be limited to the under-shot waterwheel, High Medieval cultures to both waterwheels, and Renaissance cultures might get both of those and windmills.

[stv2brown1988]

Windmills are a late midieval development and much more effecient than watermills. Both watermills and windmills need a reliable source of water or wind respectively. Water mills can be divided into the more effecient and more complex over-shot mill, where the water runs from a pond with some pressure over the water wheel generating more power. The under-shot mill is a waterwheel sitting on top of a flowing river attempting to get some energy from the passing water. Its easier to build and mantain than an over-shot, but has a serious limit to the power generated, since flowing water can just bypass the wheel. The undershot wheel is very ancient. The overshot wheel appears at the hieght of the Roman Empire, but disappears with the fall of the Romans until the high middle ages.

So Dark Ages cultures might be limited to the under-shot waterwheel, High Medieval cultures to both waterwheels, and Renaissance cultures might get both of those and windmills.

Would it be fair to consider these invovations part of a Research action by the PC regent? For example, Rogr Aglondier of Ilien may research the overshot mill or windmill to try to give Ilien an agriculture advantage of some sort. Maybe windmills for pumps to provide water for cattle? (I don't know, I'm just reaching here...) Or how about the roman acqudects (sp?) to provide running water to homes/village squares, would this be a research domain action to invent and then a "Wonderous Structure" to build?

Steve