Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

Kelly Wilkinson · Posted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:02 pm Post subject: Leves/Princepes/Triarii

Scott,

As a future List X-Rule, I wonder if Leves/Princepes/and Triarii could be give the option to use their 1hcw in subsequent bounds of combat when it would benefit them to do so? After all, the Hastati who are young and rash and a bit nutty shouldn't get to have all the stabbing and cutting fun, should they?

Kelly

machiavelli · Recruit Joined: 20 Apr 2006 Posts: 6

Weren't these veteran troopers with LTS? Or are you talking about Imperial period Triarii? I wouldn't think they should get the 1HCW. Ditto for the Leves I should think....

Princepes and Hastati should get the 1HCW rule if they don't.

Kelly Wilkinson · Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 5:15 pm Post subject: 1hcw

Chris,

Considering that Triari,and Princepes most likely started out as Hastati, and considering that they are both armed with a gladius. . . and further considering that these were more Veteran troops, I can't imagine why they wouldn't be allowed to use their 1hcw. Heck, even my Irregular burmese crossbowmen get 1hcw, why not the Romans who likely trained to use them on a regular basis. As far as Velites and Leves/Rorarii it matters not to me but they were Regular and trained in the "Roman fashion which should be enough of a reason."

Kelly

machiavelli · Recruit Joined: 20 Apr 2006 Posts: 6

The 1HCW is there to model the gladius after throwing the pilum.
If a Triarii is armed with an LTS, would he disgard it?

Kelly Wilkinson · Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 11:48 pm Post subject: 1hcw usage

Chris,

Let me put it this way, if it is to their advantage, a soldier will use the best weapon available to them. For instance, it is a documented fact that American soldiers from the 101st Airborne in large numbers used Panzerfausts in preference to their issued Bazooka's when they could get their hands on them. The Romans were trained to use their gladius and this training is included with veteran troops such as the Princepes and Triarii. In warrior, troops fighting Hi or Mi get a better factor fighting with a 1hcw, that is a given. I also feel that once one chooses to go with the 1hcw, they cannot go back to the LTS until they have rallied (hence a reissue of the LTS or they pick them back up, whichever).
Kelly

machiavelli · Recruit Joined: 20 Apr 2006 Posts: 6

Okay, I will buy your response as the LTS is gone when switching to 1HCW. But as far as a whole unit degrading to gladius when an LTS is available may be harder to swallow. Would have to see a historical reference for this.

Samurai trained with tanto short knives yet you will rarely find evidence of use other than in personal one on one situations. Training with both short and long sword was common as well yet its adoption wholesale by large number of Samurai has little evidence.

Training and the carrying of a weapon does not necessarily translate into large scale battle use. We are modeling unit combat and not individual combat with Warrior, if I am not mistaken. Hence, you don't see the use of a net by a former Retarius (as in the Spartacan/Servile list) as the weapon is not as practical. I would suspect that the LTS was the favored weapon of the Triarii as early Romans used it quite extensively.

So, not disagreeing with you per se but I think you will find that most (if not all) historical references point to the LTS being the preferred weapon of the Triarii. As far as the other troop types you mention, I don't have any historical basis to form an opinion.

I do see where you are going with the 1HCW as an option. But I think this is more of a gamesmanship issue rather than typical historical use.

Kelly Wilkinson · Posted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 3:26 am Post subject: Gamesmanship and Games

Chris,

Why do you think steady LTS/P troops lose their -2 factor for subsequent bounds of combat? My guess is that the enemy has gotten under the spears which have somehow lost their effectiveness. Livy states that usually Phalangite blocks needed to be disordered somehow or outmanuevered for them to be pushed back. How does one simulate a similar sized unit of Triarii/Princepes breaking off smaller units to whip it's opponents? It seems to me that once the -2 factor is lost, the spearmen would go to a closer form of hand to hand especially against other infantry. To me this would not be the case with mounted as the added reach of the spears would play an important factor in such combats. What do you think? As far as Gamesmanship goes, one must be "gamey" as it is through a "game" that we are trying to simulate superior Roman combat to that of the many previously successful military concepts that they (the Romans) were able to squash.

Kelly

PS Thanks for responding as much as you have, it's nice to get a response from someone with an open mind who makes good points.

Scott McCoppin · Posted: Sat Jul 08, 2006 4:35 pm Post subject:

Kelly and Chris,

I am a bit confused by this thread. When I first saw this, I went back to the Polybian Roman list and then reviewed the Roman Infantry Rules at the front of CW...Hastati and Principes (HTW armed) both get the 1HCW. The only groups mentioned that do not get the 1HCW are the Triarii and Leves/Velites - correct? I will let you two decide upon the Triarii, though I would most likely weigh in on the LTS remaining in subsequent bounds unless I see compelling evidence otherwise and the Leves / Velites....well I am not sure either way. I realize that the Camillan list allows for LTS armed Principes, but I would then lump them into the Triarii category as this list reflects the changes from Hoplite based tactics to the Polybian style armies...

On another note, I would argue that the methods employed by the Gallic armies could justify the Warriors getting the 1HCW in subsequent bounds as they were basically depending upon the prowess of the individual swordsmen in combat after the initial rush...