Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Mark Stone]

Quoting "WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com" <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>:

> Message: 24
> Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 22:57:32 -0000
> From: "Peter Celella" <pcelella@...>
> Subject: Re: Handgunner Use
>
> In my Swiss Army, I was planning on running them as LMI instead of
> LI - figured if I had a max of 8 elements, I might as well get as
> much firepower as possible out of them. I didn't want to do LHI,
> mainly for historical reasons (in accounts of the Swiss battles, they
> just don't seem to be equiped with significant armor). But your
> results sound great. Do you remember how you set up the HG's and how
> you manuevered them?
>

Sorry to come off sounding like a brute here, but this is the kind of thinking
that just absolutely drives me nuts, and, in my opinion, is the kind of
thinking that keeps some players from rising to a higher level of play.

Stop thinking of LHI as "guys wearing armor". That's too literal a reading, and
Warrior will frustrate you with ahistorical results if you read it that
literally.

Think instead of LHI as "guys who were relatively unharmed by enemy missile
fire".

If the latter description fits the Swiss handgunners, then buy them as LHI on
the list even if you purchase and paint figures that are LMI.

To cite another example: Historically, did Almughuvars use shields? Rarely.
Historically, did Almughuvars suffer the fate of typical unshielded LMI?
Absolutely not. So I depict most of my Almughuvar figures as unshielded -- that
way they look right -- but I also buy them on the list as half shielded -- that
way they function right.

Troop type classification, weapon, and shields (or lack of) are intended to work
holistically to provide an overall function for troops that best matches their
historical performance. Do _not_ think of these as being literal and absolute
depictions of how troops were equipped and how equipment supposedly dominated
performance.

That philosophical difference, between a functional and a literal reading of
troop type classifications, is to my mind the single biggest difference between
Warrior and WRG 7th, and a very positive difference at that.


-Mark Stone

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Mark Stone <mark@d...> wrote:
>
> Sorry to come off sounding like a brute here, but this is the kind
of thinking
> that just absolutely drives me nuts, and, in my opinion, is the
kind of
> thinking that keeps some players from rising to a higher level of
play.
>

No need to apologize. I didn't think of your point of view, and now
that you've stated it, it makes complete sense. I'll try to dig into
this paradigm shift. Thanks for the fresh viewpoint.

Peter

> Stop thinking of LHI as "guys wearing armor". That's too literal a
reading, and
> Warrior will frustrate you with ahistorical results if you read it
that
> literally.
>
> Think instead of LHI as "guys who were relatively unharmed by enemy
missile
> fire".
>

> Troop type classification, weapon, and shields (or lack of) are
intended to work
> holistically to provide an overall function for troops that best
matches their
> historical performance. Do _not_ think of these as being literal
and absolute
> depictions of how troops were equipped and how equipment supposedly
dominated
> performance.
>
> That philosophical difference, between a functional and a literal
reading of
> troop type classifications, is to my mind the single biggest
difference between
> Warrior and WRG 7th, and a very positive difference at that.
>
>
> -Mark Stone