[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (TFT) Firearms
Subject: Re: (TFT) Firearms
I do
know that in the Spanish Conquest the role of the gun is exaggerated.
It was the
horse, more than the gun, that awed and defeated the native american.
I like this idea, but doubt it's validity in the intial "contact".
You pack a bunch of horses on a sailing ship of the time and try and have
them hit the ground in good shape 'right off the boat'.
I'd suggest that horses for the leaders provides mobility for the troops if
you use a system where only a Figure with the Strategist Tallent can move
Units on a War Craft /TA map.
(I think you mean composite bow. Compund bow is the one with the cams
and stuff.)
Bows require skill and practice. Pulling a longbow requires practice,
both because you need certain muscles, and because there's a lot of
technique to pulling a hundred pound bow.
Anyone who can lift a firearm can be taught to load it in a couple
weeks. (Yeah, I know about the Civil war finds with the mis-loaded
weapons. But in general...)
A Pope at the time hated triggers.
Wasn't there a bull?
But that's the really early days of firearms. Flashing forward, the
heavily-armored knight disappears. By the Napoleonic wars you still have
some
cuirass-wearing cavalry, but for the most part armor is an after
thought. Melee
weapons are still an important part of warfare, however, since the
deciding
moment in most battles is the bayonet charge, not the musket volley.
There's a lot of factors working there. It's as much the fall of
feudalism and the rise of nation-states that contributes to the fall of
the mounted knight as the gun. The entire economic structure changes,
and the reasons for wars change. Rhe reasons for a particular man to go
to war changed.
And the Elves passed into the west...
When you can make the pill box roll...
Looking at that limited evidence, it seems the biggest effect
firearms had was
getting rid of armor. That, in turn, revolutionized warfare since
"knights" were
pointless and equipping a soldier became far less expensive. The
nobility had to
find a new role for themselves, so they decided to become "officers" and
stop
risking their butts on the firing line. Armor didn't come back, really,
until
the combustible engine made tanks practical at the end of world war I.
The whole 'officer' thing had as much to do with the rise of the
nation-states as anything else. Armies got big once the nations began.
A small army of elites won't win against the sort of mass that became
in vogue. The most effect a single, intelligent warrior could ahve was
to be in a position of not only giving orders, but maintaining morale.
Well put Neil.
Part of the fun of having dictator powers/Actions for a players Figure is
aranging the armys "marching order" the way you want to.
Can you play Chess?
If sucess is measured in 'how many games of Chess can you win?' and you
arn't so good at Chess, maybe you can hire someone who is?
New Followers is the spookiest tallent there is, but then again there is
bureaucracies to protect from such attacks.
So this is all a long winded way of saying that in my humble opinion both
the
shotgun and the battleaxe do 3d6. But chainmail won't do squat against a
shotgun. That's the difference. (admittedly, a shotgun is a poor
example in this
case, since chainmail actually might help...a .30-06 rifle is a
better example).
There are examples of plate armour proofed against gunpowder weaopns of
their day.
The Hurt Locker is a good example of modern 'armour'
Saw Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang.
I know how many pages stop a .22 bullet.
The Hobbit will do it in paperback.
____________________________________________________________
Weight Loss Program
Best Weight Loss Program - Click Here!
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/c?cp=WvtvcDlcA5K1l5hiGNrubQAAJ1GW2i8x6322gmEtm_Fha3RmAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEUgAAAAA=
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"