Balance between troop unit type

Dungeons & Dragons MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
21
  • -----Original Message-----
    From: Bearcat
    To: birthright@MPGN.COM
    Date: Saturday, February 07, 1998 9:05 AM
    Subject: Re: [BIRTHRIGHT] - Balance between troop unit types - limits

>I think that you maybe overestimating the capabilities of both the knights
>and the infantry. If you look on page 28 of the DMG you will see that
“since
>fighters tend to rise above the level of the common soldier few armies are
>composed high- or even low-level fighters”, thus most of the infantry will
>be comprised of 0-level fighters, not the 1st level fighters that you
>mention above. Most generals would kill for troops as skilled as that.

Well, probably not 1st Level Fighters, as there isn’t much difference
between
them…now second-level fighters, they might be worth something..

And you really have to look at one thing, a very minor, but critical thing,
that AD&D combat is scaled for small-scale individual Melees with
precious little on handling large units…for example a Company of
0-Level Knights could charge a 10th Level fighter, and going by the
AD&D rules, guess who would win?

It should be noted though that the largest and most powerful mercenary
unit(well ARMY really) of the Forgotten Realms, widely regarded as
power-trip central, is the Flaming Fist, a group of around 2000 soldiers,
composed of fighters of at least 4th Level…with Mages and Clerics to
boot…

BTW: It only costs 10,000 gp a day..}:+)

22

On Sat, 7 Feb 1998, Bearcat wrote:

> I think that you maybe overestimating the capabilities of both the knights
> and the infantry.

I made the infantry first level to demonstrate the gulf between knights
and even low (well the lowest) level fighters.

> As for the knights if you look at page 38 of the PHB the knights listed as
> elite units are 1st level not fifth. And this number is much more
> optimistic than the elite “knight” body guards that are mentioned on page 10
> of the BR rule book.

The elite infantry automatically [emphasis in rulebook] given are
freebee’s, so of course their not the Argonauts. By elite I read elite
morale and possibly weapon specialiazion or other special skills, better
than the run of the mill.

Knights, on the other hand, if you mean anything remotely like medieval
knights live to fight. They have little else to do. Even in managing
their little landholdings they are just preserving the income provided to
aquire armor and horse. Turned over to the company of men at age seven, to
serve as a page or varlet, he already begins his on-the-job training.
There he takes care of arms, armor, horses, gear, and so forth. At fourteen
or so, he becomes a squire, drilling in sword and shield, taking part in
mock battles, following his knight to war, learning knightly behavior and
campaigning first hand. By 19 or 20, he might be ready for knighthood.
Here he might be 1st level, but a comapny of knights would have all ages.
Veterans of many campaigns (and knights will go on many campaigns) we be
in their company. These guys live for this. A random collection of
knights does not yield a bunch of first level fighters. When the
demographics charts say there are a few who climb beyond the lower levels,
these are knights and adventurers. Examine the real exploits of knights.
They are not first level fighters.

> Anyway, going back to page 28 of the DMG we find that “there is little
> difference in ability between the typical foot soldier and the 1st level
> fighter”. This means that the only difference between your elite knights and
> the infantry are the weapons, armor and mounts that they are using.

Knights are not typical foot soldiers. The difference is the difference
between combat hardened rangers and the guy who signed up for the GI bill.

A demand for service in England in 1229 yielded some five or six hundred
knights. All Engalnd able to raise three warcards of knights? The Earl
of Warwick was obligated to pay the crown six and a half knights in 1277,
and five in 1310. The Earl of Cornwall, 15 knights. The Earl of
Winchester, 10. As we know, the realms of Cerilia are about the size of
these kinds of noble lands. Baruk-Azhik is half the size of Wales, about
the size of Lancaster.

I suspect your knights are not my knights.

Kenneth Gauck
c558382@showme.missouri.edu

23

Forgotten Realms is so full of game-breaking characters, though, there has
to be an army like that to keep abusive players from ruling the whole
planet.

> From: E Gray
> To: birthright@MPGN.COM
> Subject: Re: [BIRTHRIGHT] - Balance between troop unit types - limits
> Date: Saturday, February 07, 1998 6:13 PM
> It should be noted though that the largest and most powerful mercenary
> unit(well ARMY really) of the Forgotten Realms, widely regarded as
> power-trip central, is the Flaming Fist, a group of around 2000 soldiers,
> composed of fighters of at least 4th Level…with Mages and Clerics to
> boot…
>
> BTW: It only costs 10,000 gp a day..}:+)

24
  • -----Original Message-----
    From: James Ray
    To: birthright@MPGN.COM
    Date: Saturday, February 07, 1998 11:32 PM
    Subject: Re: [BIRTHRIGHT] - Balance between troop unit types - limits

>Forgotten Realms is so full of game-breaking characters, though, there has
>to be an army like that to keep abusive players from ruling the whole
>planet.

Excuse me? Please don’t be making blanket statements about the Forgotten
Realms and abusive players. They can happen anywhere, all it takes is the
right combination of DM and player…

25

>From: James Ray

>>Forgotten Realms is so full of game-breaking characters, though, there has
>>to be an army like that to keep abusive players from ruling the whole
>>planet.
>
>
>Excuse me? Please don’t be making blanket statements about the Forgotten
>Realms and abusive players. They can happen anywhere, all it takes is the
>right combination of DM and player…
>

...and the setting and rules to back them up.  ;-)

I agree that the mojority of the responsibility lies with the players

and DM, however, if the setting/rules “back up” these so-called
game-breaking characters I must lay some of the blame on it.

DM: WHAT!? You are a 1st level elven fighter and you have a THACO of 12 with
your bow?
Player: Yup. You said we could use “Book X”, and I did. Besides, look at
(insert FR NPC with simmilar THACO and level).
DM: Uh, well, hmm. Ok then. I guess if NPC’s can do it, so can you.

The FR seems to fit this bill.  Heck, there are whole ARMIES of 2nd or

higher level fighters running around. BR doesn’t seem to be falling into
this…yet. We will just have to see in the comming months…

Denakhan the Arch-Mage.

26

> Anyway, going back to page 28 of the DMG we find that “there is little
> difference in ability between the typical foot soldier and the 1st level
> fighter”. This means that the only difference between your elite knights
and
> the infantry are the weapons, armor and mounts that they are using.

Morale & training? Fear factor?

Ummm… how likely mr spud infantryman (with a halberd and shortsword,
dressed in a drape of leather with metal studs on it) to stand in the way
of a man on a VERY big horse dressed in a full suit of metal armor with a
very long lance who is bearing down at him on full gallop? How about your
12 buddies in the first rank? How many of you will certainly die? I don’t
think I am a coward, but that would put the fear of God into me and I just
might run rather than be skewered.

Keep in mind that if the AD&D combat system is used as a comparative that
Armor Class (none of these 0-level spuds has Dex bonuses) gives that knight
a +7 to hit on his attack roll. Same for his horse, which gets two
attacks. Oh yes, mounted combat gets the knight a +1 to hit. Those
infantrymen get a +2 from the knights AC and a -1 from attacking a mounted
man. Or they could hit the horse and have a +4 to their rolls (barding).

3 attacks at a to hit of 12/20
vs.
5 attacks at a to hit of 19/20 or 16/20 (vs. something with about 20hp)

odds favor the smaller numbers of men with the better equipment and the
superiority of being on a fighting beast.

> This usually is not enough when you have “10 knights and 15 squires to 25
> knights” against a unit of 200 infantrymen. However, when there are 200
> knights involved the warcard numbers begin to make sense.

Even when the cost of raising 200 men to that level of equipment is 80 gold
bars? Use the equip list from the PHB and check it out.

27

Perhaps the word “raising” was not clear. You are right, these men (and
women - we ARE in a fantasy world here, not history) are collected from
existing an existing stock of individuals.

For Manta - What did you think I meant by “raised”?

On a second issue that seems to be highly debated here. I will throw in
that I do not believe that ANY member of the average raised fighting force
in question is above 1st level, or even that. Remember that 1st level is
something special, it is something above the normal person, even the normal
soldier, and the normal noble. Look at the rulers of Cerilia, for the most
part the average is 4th level.

Second:
If the knights (even assuming a low number and not the 200 generalized
figure) were of higher level, why aren’t the bodyguards. A regent’s
“elite guard” consists of a few dozen 0-level warriors. Why doesn’t he
just tell them all to go away and pay for the knights to guard him 24 hours
a day?

Third:
We’ve all played 4th and 5th level characters before. How much would
anyone here, as a your 5th level character with horse and plate armor and
all you needs charge for your services, knowing you were in such high
demand because your fighting skill equals that of your ruler? (Or at least
is pretty close)

Well, my “humble” opinions (they aren’t are they?)

Good Gaming
Tim Nutting
Servant of the Gorgon :slight_smile:

28

> Third:
> We’ve all played 4th and 5th level characters before. How much would
> anyone here, as a your 5th level character with horse and plate armor and
> all you needs charge for your services, knowing you were in such high
> demand because your fighting skill equals that of your ruler? (Or at least
> is pretty close)

Knights are bound by obligation to serve. While some may try to evade
that obligation, they are not professional mercenaries hiring themselves
out, they are part of the politico-military fabric of a given realm.

The Cavalier, Myrmidon, Noble Warrior, any paladin, all would make a good
faith effort to answer the call of their overlord. They would not crassly
demand a charge for service. While they would expect land, title, and
ransom, this only futher enmeshes them in a system of mutual obligation.

If you don’t want knightly units in your campaign, more power to you, but
what you are describing is just heavy cavalry.

Kenneth Gauck
c558382@showme.missouri.edu

29

>
> Another reason to consider knights to be a very small band of higher level
> (averaging maybe 5th) fighters rather than what the rules generalized
> about elite troops would be the very high saving throw knights recieve.
>
> Kenneth Gauck
> c558382@showme.missouri.edu

Are we back at discussing this again. I remember a while back when it

was concluded that it was not 200 menn but 200 HD of troops( including horses )
so a night unit had perhaps 60 Knights( that is 1lvl/0lvl ). If the knights are
as high as 3lvl then there are perhaps only 40 Knights in each unit.

Just my 4000gp.

Espen A. J.

30

> I agree with just about anything you said.
> Remember though, Knights are gathered (from a regent´s nobles and their
> trusted men at arms)not raised. It´s one more reason for their number to be
> smaller than 200 (unless you have a really BIG province).
> And if they were raised, how would you do it?How do you raise third, let´s
> say fourth level fighters?

Here’s a suggestion. Muster a basic unit in the usual way. Involve them in a
bunch of battles (where they actually fight!) and training (use “muster unit”
again). By now, those 100+ original knights may be whittled down to 50+, but
are really mean, skilled, and Veteran. Give 'em a plus on charge or melee.

Obviously this is not a specific rule, but since it’s less common to have
veteran units than “green” I would think a hard and fast rule would be less
“realistic” then simply reaching a unit-by-unit agreement with a PC. It’ll
make more of an impact on a PC when a long-surviving unit who’d supported and
bled for king and country dies…

  • -DKE
31

> Are we back at discussing this again. I remember a while back when it
> was concluded that it was not 200 menn but 200 HD of troops( including horses )
> so a night unit had perhaps 60 Knights( that is 1lvl/0lvl ). If the knights are
> as high as 3lvl then there are perhaps only 40 Knights in each unit.

I was going to write a typical long-winded essay on this but, yeah; the above paragraph
pretty much says it all. It’s important for some list members (myself included) to
remember that while Cerilian cultures are modeled on those of fuedal Europe, they aren’t the
same. The fact that most cerilian peasents are free, let’s call them yeomen, throws a wrench into the manorial system that in the RW supported the knight.

IMO, there’s about 100 knights, squires and mounted sargents (about half being sargents) in
a unit of knights. In the RW during this time period (hypocritical aren’t I?) many mounted
men-at-arms were no longer “knights” in the traditional, land holding sense but professional
soldiers paid for their services by the government or another lord/organization. I wouldn’t
say they were mercenaries per se, but they weren’t above pillaging in, say, a Latvian
“crusade” with the Tuetonic knights when things were dull in France.

The reason I went with 100 is 1) it’s simple 2) HD in D&D also translates into combat power.
The knight unit (charge 6) is twice as good as INF (melee 3) so the war cards should reflect
the same order of magnitude of troops 3) I didn’t think the horses HD should translate
directly, the rider is the lions share of the team’s combat potential 4) people above first
level are the NCOs/officers/war band cheifs/heros scattered throughout all units to lead
them. I’d agree the number per card would be reduced if you somehow managed to collect a
bunch of 3rd level fighters into a unit. By D&D rules this would be quite a feat. For this
type of unit detail I would suggest (gasp!- another game!) C&S, which does a much better job
of representing the dynamic of medieval europe than D&D.

So much for not being long-winded. I really didn’t type lots that I wanted to- really.

Randax

32

On Thu, 19 Feb 1998, Espen Andre Johnsen wrote:

> Are we back at discussing this again. I remember a while back when it
> was concluded that it was not 200 menn but 200 HD of troops( including horses )
> so a night unit had perhaps 60 Knights( that is 1lvl/0lvl ). If the knights are
> as high as 3lvl then there are perhaps only 40 Knights in each unit.
>
> Just my 4000gp.

It doesn’t need to be 200 HD, it needs to be a combination of HD, THAC0,
AC, and such factors to represent a Melee 4, Defense 4, and Charge 6.

Kenneth Gauck
c558382@showme.missouri.edu

33

I think that unlike pikemen,infantary or archers who are mustered and given
basic training with their weapons, Knights are gathered from the nobles in
the province in question.Not all nobles are fighters, but those who are
tend to become knights(noble warrior kit from The comp.FTRHb.).Fighting is
their life, not their job.In times of peace the soldier from infantary
unitX or Y goes home to his faily and relaxes for a while.The noble warrior
quests,takes part in tournaments and trains for battle because battle is
glorious and glory is his goal.I´m not saying that knights progress in
levels and footsoldiers and bodyguards stay 0level for the rest of their
lives-it would make no sense!-The thing is footman veterans die more
often(they gain experience but their armor is the same!) than Knights,and
so,infantary(or archers or whatever!)units are constituted of a mix of
veterans and green members.Inmy campaign I give XP to all NPC´s ,bodyguards
included(if after 12 lucky skirmishes against huge goblins-ie bugbears- a 0
level bodyguard manages to survive why doesn´t he gain first level or pass
to second after that?He´s a person just like every PC.)

I´m sure some of you do not agree with me but this is the way I see it!
My humble 2 escudos
MANTA

> From: Tim Nutting
> To: birthright@MPGN.COM
> Subject: Re: [BIRTHRIGHT] - Balance between troop unit types - limits
> Date: quinta-feira, 19 de fevereiro de 1998 2:41
>
> Perhaps the word “raising” was not clear. You are right, these men (and
> women - we ARE in a fantasy world here, not history) are collected from
> existing an existing stock of individuals.
>
> For Manta - What did you think I meant by “raised”?
>
> On a second issue that seems to be highly debated here. I will throw in
> that I do not believe that ANY member of the average raised fighting
force
> in question is above 1st level, or even that. Remember that 1st level is
> something special, it is something above the normal person, even the
normal
> soldier, and the normal noble. Look at the rulers of Cerilia, for the
most
> part the average is 4th level.
>
> Second:
> If the knights (even assuming a low number and not the 200 generalized
> figure) were of higher level, why aren’t the bodyguards. A regent’s
> “elite guard” consists of a few dozen 0-level warriors. Why doesn’t he
> just tell them all to go away and pay for the knights to guard him 24
hours
> a day?
>
> Third:
> We’ve all played 4th and 5th level characters before. How much would
> anyone here, as a your 5th level character with horse and plate armor and
> all you needs charge for your services, knowing you were in such high
> demand because your fighting skill equals that of your ruler? (Or at
least
> is pretty close)
>
> Well, my “humble” opinions (they aren’t are they?)
>
> Good Gaming
> Tim Nutting
> Servant of the Gorgon :slight_smile:
>> To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the
line
> ‘unsubscribe birthright’ as the body of the message.