Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Tom McMillan]

In a message dated 4/17/02 7:02:54 AM, WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com writes:

<< >There is one more that I remember. It used to be everything ran from
the player's right. I'm fairly sure the right to left sequence was done
based on western historical precedence that attack plans (in some,
certainly not all, more famous battles) flowed from right to left
because the elite units were placed on the right. Actually, this was
more of a western medieval thang that survived well into the 18th
century. >>

I'm not sure a Western Medieval thing, as it was always a big deal with
the Spartans. (See Mantinea and Leuctra). Another famous example is Culloden,
where Murray put his own clan on the right, and the MacDonalds were so p.o.ed
their heart wasn't in the fight. A problem with this in Warrior is that there
is no 'player's right', as there is no 'phasing player' in a given bound, as
in WAB or DBM. (Making players go R-L in DBM coiuld simulate this, except
that there is no cumulative morale. )

You mean why does SHK suffer a weapon factor mod for being shieldless and SHI
do not? SHI without shields are certainly shieldless, you just don't get a
weapon factor mod for it.

So why the mod for SHK but not for SHI? The tables reflect armor, order and
fighting style, not just armor.


I must respectfully disagree with this one. The shield was still around by
Agincourt, but disappeared with the Gothic armour of the late 15th century.
It disappeared because it was no longer needed, the armour being fully
sufficient (until guns.)
Shieldless SHK should actually be much BETTER armoured than shielded.
Like the Swiss pikeman suffering shieldless while the Macedonian does not,
just another example that post 1450 we are starting to leave the period, and
things don't quite fit right anymore.