Cyberlore Majesty Forum Forum Index Cyberlore Majesty Forum
Original Majesty Forum on Cyberlore.com


about Daughter of Krypta II: Blood of Krypta
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Cyberlore Majesty Forum Forum Index -> 1001 Ardanian Nights
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Cooker



Joined: 20 Mar 2000
Posts: 1710

 PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2005 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Alfryd wrote:
Quote:
...and don't get any ideas about skeleton horses.

Aww...
Quote:
And I'd think that Monks would use mounts to get to the battle in the first place, then (like wizards), dismount to do battle.

I don't really see monks as mass-melee combatants. Something about their combat style suggests they excel in one-one combat, in the use of stealth and mobility, but not so much in crowd control or mass damage. Also, being lightly armoured is more of a disadvantage against a dozen opponents, as parry will only stretch so far with enemies on every side. Paladins have good armour and probably support buffs, so they'd be more the mass-melee type.


Paladins use a great sword. This is interesting because the use of such weapon in civilized armies is usually strictly restricted to hacking tips off enemy pike formations. However this heavy weapon can kill anyone, armored or not, if one scores a direct hit with it. The trick, of course is to hit someone, then not gets stabbed to death by a person using long sword, before itís bought to bear again.

This means perhaps paladins are only extremely effective against light infantry and cavalry (guardsman and mounted warriors) but less effective against heavy infantry (WODS and warriors on foot) while they can still kill them with a single swing, the price of paladin make it ineffective, since the next in rank would simply come up and kill her before she could bring her sword about again.

Thanks for putting up with my analysis on long swords, great swords and pikes.
 
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail ICQ Number
TaleSpinner



Joined: 08 Sep 2000
Posts: 2018
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

 PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 3:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Sigh, so many justifications upon justifications. Why can't I just make things up as I go along? ;)

I find it fun trying to put the mechanics of Majesty into a real-world sense. Why aren't there many mounted heroes in the game? Perhaps it's as simple as that in Ardania, there aren't any horses at all, or ones that are good enough to bear heroes into battle. The only "horses" we see in the game are just those that pull wagons along in caravans. Perhaps Ardanian horses are simply too small to use for warfare, or maybe there are only Ardanian mules and no horses at all.

Are there several Sovereigns or just one? I'd be inclined to say that there is just one. A single Sovereign acting as a high king over noble/royal houses, all united since the days of Sydrian. The prince in "Rescue the Prince" is just a prince from another royal house that pays homage to the Sovereign.

Thanks to everyone for reading and keeping an interest over this story. I promise to spend my next meal-time thinking about that to write next. Wink
 
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Cooker



Joined: 20 Mar 2000
Posts: 1710

 PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 5:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Noticed without horses, it's hard to have civilization in the first place since mobility of everyone is severely limited. Itís hard to conceive a place with early civilization but no horse.

As for the prince, can a non-royal house have a prince? Isnít it supposedly the title of a son of a king?
 
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail ICQ Number
Alfryd



Joined: 03 Dec 2002
Posts: 914

 PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Quote:
Noticed without horses, it's hard to have civilization in the first place since mobility of everyone is severely limited. Itís hard to conceive a place with early civilization but no horse.

The Incas? Hell, they didn't have the wheel. They still had a system of sanitation, irrigation, administration, artistry and mathematics more sophisticated than the Spanish at the time.

Also, I'm pretty sure the title 'Queen of Valmorgen' is tossed around at some point.
_________________
The living are a species of the dead, and a very rare species.
 
View user's profile Send private message
Cooker



Joined: 20 Mar 2000
Posts: 1710

 PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Alfryd wrote:
Quote:
Noticed without horses, it's hard to have civilization in the first place since mobility of everyone is severely limited. Itís hard to conceive a place with early civilization but no horse.

The Incas? Hell, they didn't have the wheel. They still had a system of sanitation, irrigation, administration, artistry and mathematics more sophisticated than the Spanish at the time.

Also, I'm pretty sure the title 'Queen of Valmorgen' is tossed around at some point.


good point there Alfryd, but I don't believe the Incas has spread very far.
as for queen of Valmorgen, can it have any meaning beside the regent of the kingdom of Valmorgen ?
 
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail ICQ Number
Sorotor



Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 283

 PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Hm, let's see here. I agree with Talespinner to the effect that Ardania doesn't have any good quality horses. Although, if they have mules, they have to have some kind of horses. As to the necessity of horses -- pfft, Cooker, I'm surprised at you, who claim to be such a fan of Wizards. Who needs mounts when you can teleport? And it's not like Wizards have a monopoly on the spell, either. Teleport Amulets are on sale in every major marketplace in Ardania, discounts on the weekends. Then there's Winged Feet and Vingilance, the latter in case slower Daurosians need to get somewhere in a hurry. Considering that Lunord was one of the first patrons of civilization, his emphasis on transport magic would more than make up for the lack of mounts.
Kings are simple. As long as TaleSpinner doesn't openly contradict the History et al., he can invent to his heart's content.

Cooker wrote:
As for the prince, can a non-royal house have a prince? Isnít it supposedly the title of a son of a king?


"Prince" could be the title of the son of any ruling house, be it that of a king, emperor, or duke. In some cases, rulers themselves are called "Princes"; their realm is a principality.

Cooker wrote:
Paladins use a great sword. This is interesting because the use of such weapon in civilized armies is usually strictly restricted to hacking tips off enemy pike formations. However this heavy weapon can kill anyone, armored or not, if one scores a direct hit with it. The trick, of course is to hit someone, then not gets stabbed to death by a person using long sword, before itís bought to bear again.

This means perhaps paladins are only extremely effective against light infantry and cavalry (guardsman and mounted warriors) but less effective against heavy infantry (WODS and warriors on foot) while they can still kill them with a single swing, the price of paladin make it ineffective, since the next in rank would simply come up and kill her before she could bring her sword about again.


Says who? What makes you think Paladins are so inept with greatswords? Especially given preternatural speed and strength.

Oh yeah, and about the story ... the Priestesses are calling to send the Lazari into battle, aren't they?[/quote]
 
View user's profile Send private message
Alfryd



Joined: 03 Dec 2002
Posts: 914

 PostPosted: Fri Sep 16, 2005 10:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Quote:
This means perhaps paladins are only extremely effective against light infantry and cavalry (guardsman and mounted warriors) but less effective against heavy infantry (WODS and warriors on foot) while they can still kill them with a single swing, the price of paladin make it ineffective, since the next in rank would simply come up and kill her before she could bring her sword about again.

Favourite Roman infantry technique- Johnny barbarian hefts his greatsword, you stab him 5 times in the gullet and take a coffee break before he connects, or notices he's dead. Bloody Romans.
Quote:
Ranger serves as archery backup and skirmishers in wars.

That makes sense militarily, but I doubt the free-spirited rangers could easily be regimented into the standard Acme Military Hierarchy(tm). I imagine they'd operate semi-independantly.
Quote:
Rogues do not fight in wars so there is no reason for them to appear in a large battle in either case.

That's not neccesarily the case. Remember larceny comes from latron, or mercenary soldier? They'd be more effective in an espionage capacity, but in a mass battle you could use them as crossbow support. Plus, they're cheap as dirt and twice as common.
Quote:
... because there are no somatic components for Divine spells in Ardania.

Thank goodness for small mercies. D&D is suffering from a case of chronic creeping featurism disorder.
Quote:
There is a mention of a queen in Valmorgan in the game. That leads me to believe that noble houses are usually kingdom of their own. However there are mentions of ďTake up Ardaniaís crownĒ in the intro, which imply there is one king or at least one bigger and badder then the rest.

Probably. Ancient Ireland had a similar, for want of a better word, political system where each modern Province (Munster, Leinster, Connacht and Ulster,) was a kingdom with it's own monarch, who owed nominal allegiance to the High King at Tara. This didn't prevent their troops from merrily slaughtering eachother at a whim, of course. The High King was more powerful than any single lesser monarch by virtue of the fealty he could command and the lands he directly controlled (around modern Meath,) but an alliance of two or more would tip the balance against him.
It's interesting to note that Krolm, based on Conan's Crom, was probably in turn derived from the chief Irish deity, Crom Cruach. The few persisting records of his worship are not always pleasant reading.
Quote:
Sigh, so many justifications upon justifications. Why can't I just make things up as I go along?

In the words of M.C. Escher, "Why must we be forever caught up in this blasted realism? Why can't we just enjoy ourselves?"
Strict adherence to realism would entail that a single, well-struck blow would usually kill an opponent outright, rendering hit points obsolete. Cooker has proposed something similar to this, but it's just not compatible with the demands of an RPG. (And what is this XP point nonsense anyway?...)
Quote:
Good point there Alfryd, but I don't believe the Incas has spread very far.

They were at least as big as Spain, in mountainous terrain. Building a large civilisation is a matter of organisation and infrastructure, the primary advantage of the horse is in military matters, for rapid communications and tactical response.
Quote:
Says who? What makes you think Paladins are so inept with greatswords? Especially given preternatural speed and strength.

It's not a matter of ineptitude, it's a question of physics. Strength of 21-25 and minimal artifice, as listed, is not sufficient to treat a greatsword like a toothpick. A WoD might manage it, but they have bugger-all defensive skill.
Quote:
Kings are simple. As long as TaleSpinner doesn't openly contradict the History et al., he can invent to his heart's content.

And if he *does* contradict it, I'm willing to bet his version would be more entertaining. Historical revisionism is no crime if the history was fantasy to begin with.
_________________
The living are a species of the dead, and a very rare species.
 
View user's profile Send private message
Sorotor



Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 283

 PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

What does Artifice have to do with it?
And there's more to swordplay than overhead chopping, you know. Of course, the bigger the blade the less wieldly it is, and the more restricted your options. Just what size of blade do you mean by "greatsword", anyway?
 
View user's profile Send private message
Cooker



Joined: 20 Mar 2000
Posts: 1710

 PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Mules and horses

Wait a second, mules are a cross between donkey and horses, and are sterile. That means for mules to exist, there has to be horses, simple biology.

Mounted troops have proved effective against infantry. Long Swords and short swords are useless against a mounted opponent, because they cannot reach it. Only spears and bows work. Carrying an extra spear around tend to load down troops. Carrying a bow and a quiver does the same.

I do agree with Fal that teleporting would be a good way to save experienced troops, as for greens, the amulets are as expensive as recruiting a new one. The winged feet may work if they are not a one shot spell.

Kings, queens and princes

It would be most acceptable if those royal houses are headed by dukes. This way taleís one king theory is not violated, neither does majesty canon. However, can dukes have queens? Or their spouses are simply called mistress?

Long swords and great swords

I think paladins will actually wield shields and long swords in military engagements. A great sword can serve as a backup when a paladin is greatly outnumbered. It can be swung horizontally in a wild arc that cuts a not so pretty dent into enemy formation. Holier, and more experienced paladin might be able to afford an enchanted or well crafted blade that is lighter. Although they are less lethal to opponent, they are far less lethal to wielder.

I think the great sword might be a weapon preferred by barbarians who have the strength to use it, and lack the brain to use anything else. The axe and club idea is good unless the opponent has a shield, if that is the case, then he is ineffective twice in the amount of time the warrior is effective once. Shield isnít much help against a six feet long monstrosity swung at the speed of a train.

Scythe

I mean, why would anyone use such a weapon? They are unstoppable by shields, sure, but one could always charge a shielded formation with horses. If the shield users have pikes (hoplites, Macedonian pikes), charge it with a lunatic holding a great sword.

The only advantage Scythe has over a sword is that itís not much heavier and it does have a greater reach. The problem of a Scythe is that itís ungainly, because of its length. (Newtonís law of rotational motion) a skilled swordsman can chop off the blade of the Scythe, giving the wielder a wooden stick. Making the handle out of metal on the other hands, make it to slow to hit anything.

Ramblings

Of course I enjoy the story, there is little doubt, but I also enjoy nitpicking Ö
I donít think they are mutually exclusive.
 
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail ICQ Number
Cooker



Joined: 20 Mar 2000
Posts: 1710

 PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Sorotor wrote:
What does Artifice have to do with it?
And there's more to swordplay than overhead chopping, you know. Of course, the bigger the blade the less wieldly it is, and the more restricted your options. Just what size of blade do you mean by "greatsword", anyway?


Quote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greatsword

The term great sword refers to any of a number of large two-handed swords used in medieval Europe.

heavy examples of High Medieval knightly swords, Oakeshott types XIIa and XIIIa
the 16th century zweihander
Ealy modern broadswords of the Schiavona type
the bastard-sword or Spadone type


Quote:

The zweihšnder could be up to 6 feet (1.8 m) long from the base of the handle to the tip of the blade, with a 4 to 5 foot (1.2 to 1.5 m) blade and 1, 1 1/2 foot (300 to 450 mm) hilt. The weight could range between 2.8 and 5 kg.




A bl**dy scary weapon

I think however, it makes more sense for paladin of Ardania to use Claymores (not the landmine, damn it).

Quote:

The two-handed claymore seems to be an offshoot of Early Scottish medieval swords which had developed a distinctive style of a cross-hilt with downsloping arms that ended in spatulate swellings. The average claymore ran about 55 inches (1.4 m) in over all length, with a 13 inch (330 mm) grip and a 42 inch (1 m) blade. Fairly uniform in style, the sword was set with a wheel pommel often capped by a crescent shaped nut and a guard with straight, down-sloping arms ending in quatrefoils and languets running down the center of the blade from the guard.


Quote:

It was somewhat smaller than other two-handed swords of the era, and was widely feared because its lightness made it faster in combat than its European counterparts.


With some training, this might be wielded like a long sword, instead of a club.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longsword

Interesting, technically, the longsword we usually refer to in mythology are arming swords, and the technical longswords are what we call bastard swords in fantasies.
 
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail ICQ Number
Sorotor



Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 283

 PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 1:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Okay, Cooker, you've just about proved my point. I doubt that a Paladin's sword, even one five feet long and with those little flanges, would weigh more than ten pounds. It wouldn't take a superman to wield a weapon like that effectively, and Paladins are a tad superhuman. Never mind weight reducing enchantments and the fact that a sword of mithril would weigh, at most, a tenth of a steel sword of the same size. In fact, I imagine it would be harder to handle a sword made entirely of mithril; the weight versus the size would throw off the wielder.
Oh, and the wife of a duke is a duchess ... the adjective is ducal (from French "duc") and his domain is a duchy or dukedom.
 
View user's profile Send private message
Cooker



Joined: 20 Mar 2000
Posts: 1710

 PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 11:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Sorotor wrote:
Okay, Cooker, you've just about proved my point. I doubt that a Paladin's sword, even one five feet long and with those little flanges, would weigh more than ten pounds. It wouldn't take a superman to wield a weapon like that effectively, and Paladins are a tad superhuman. Never mind weight reducing enchantments and the fact that a sword of mithril would weigh, at most, a tenth of a steel sword of the same size. In fact, I imagine it would be harder to handle a sword made entirely of mithril; the weight versus the size would throw off the wielder.
Oh, and the wife of a duke is a duchess ... the adjective is ducal (from French "duc") and his domain is a duchy or dukedom.


Historically, the bastard sword was just there to club another person until he dies. It usually takes one hit, not even armor helps. Trying to fence with that thing can be an absolute nightmare.

The greatsword was used against pikes.


I tend to agree magic and mithril will allow proper fencing in that but they ARE expensive (I donít have accurate majesty data but mithril sword upgrade for paladins could be around 1K, enchantment +3 cost even more) so it would make sense for paladin to fight with shield and arming sword before she could afford a greatsword light enough to use as anything more then a metal club.
 
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail ICQ Number
Alfryd



Joined: 03 Dec 2002
Posts: 914

 PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Quote:
[The two-handed claymore] was somewhat smaller than other two-handed swords of the era, and was widely feared because its lightness made it faster in combat than its European counterparts.

That does sound promising.
Quote:
I think paladins will actually wield shields and long swords in military engagements.

Bear in mind paladins have another advantage- a supernatural sixth sense for danger that would alert them to potential hazards and perhaps accounts for their exceptionally high dodge/parry despite encumbering armour.
You're probably right that paladins would be too expensive (that is, rare,) to form the main ranks in any mass conflict, they'd be more valued for their support skills, morale value and crowd control, being in the front ranks.
Quote:
I tend to agree magic and mithril will allow proper fencing in that but they ARE expensive... ... it would make sense for paladin to fight with shield and arming sword before she could afford a greatsword

I suppose this is where the maj developers chose to sacrifice realism in favour of simplicity and aesthetics. I forgive them.
Regarding scythes...
Quote:
...Making the handle out of metal on the other hands, make it to slow to hit anything.

Not for an 8-foot WoD with strength 36, superhuman by any definition, remember. You must bear in mind WoDs have a very peculiar fighting style, effectively treating opponents like wheat to be mown down. They rely on sheer bulk and possibly supernatural health regen to allow them to ignore enemies' blows while they swing away- and on the sheer terror engendered by lopping many heads off in one stroke to break their coordination.
Quote:
What does Artifice have to do with it?

I'm assuming here that sensory acuity and manual dexterity are components of artifice, which would be relevant to combat.
Quote:
I doubt that a Paladin's sword, even one five feet long and with those little flanges, would weigh more than ten pounds.

You still need to apply double the force for equal finesse with a longsword of half the weight. Strength 20+ is very high, practically supernatural for women, but not quite outside human capacity.
Quote:
The axe and club idea is good unless the opponent has a shield, if that is the case, then he is ineffective twice in the amount of time the warrior is effective once.

I would have thought you'd deflect the shield with the club and carve in with the axe on the same incoming stroke. Assuming you can wield both weapons with decent skill. Nonetheless, that does open an interesting RTS rock/paper/scissors dynamic for consideration.
_________________
The living are a species of the dead, and a very rare species.
 
View user's profile Send private message
Sorotor



Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 283

 PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 8:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

I refuse to give up on this.

"We can see by the evidence offered from the academic professionals and other sources presented in this essay, that the two-handed great sword of Europe was not the crude, lumbering, bludgeon with a point that it has been made out to be. Was this a heavy weapon? Yes! But not the excessive weights one would think. Although it is considerably heavier than its smaller relatives, it is still in fact, an agile, lightweight weapon and if used properly, an incredibly deadly tool for both close-quarter combat and all-out battlefield melees."

This is from an essay linked to the Wikipedia entry that Cooker posted above. I would recommend that you read it in its entirety: http://www.ejmas.com/jwma/articles/2004/jwmaart_shore_1004.htm

The greatsword is not a bludgeoning tool; just because it doesn't handle like a rapier doesn't mean it's a clumsy weapon with only one or two uses.
 
View user's profile Send private message
TaleSpinner



Joined: 08 Sep 2000
Posts: 2018
Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

 PostPosted: Sat Sep 17, 2005 10:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote Back to top

Why do I get the feeling that if I don't show paladins lopping off the heads of goblin pikes in the upcoming battle, I'll get a number of retaliatory posts in here about the role of Majesty paladins in general warfare? Rolling Eyes
 
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Cyberlore Majesty Forum Forum Index -> 1001 Ardanian Nights All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum