Arturius: Setting

Elennsar · Post by **Elennsar** » Tue Mar 03, 2009 11:42 pm

The old thread will remain for general discussion.

This thread is set aside for setting discussion.

Elennsar · Post by **Elennsar** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 12:13 am

A long time ago, the majority of the land in question was once united in one great kingdom. Now it has fragmented, thanks in part to barbarians and also due to some really nasty evil stuff. The setting is roughly equivalant to the Dark Ages in that regard. Elements of other things are sneaking in, however, but that's the current model.

Anything people desire to bring into this thread from the old thread, please suggest or quote (either or).

This is not about why the setting being what is interests me - this is about building the setting, figuring out who is where and why and what they have to do with each other.

Minor rules discussion - such as if there's a "cultural template" for people who are from one area over another may go here as well.

So, first things first. Is this a decent map?

Its not particularly to scale other than in a general way (it is a sixty-second thing), so that's one of the first priorities after figuring out if the general lay out works.

Grek · Post by **Grek** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:23 am

Proposed political map:

I also have one without words/arrows/borders.

The basic idea is that lots of "barbarians" are invading because they live on the leeward side of the mountain, which is deserty and you like on the windward side, which is quite fertile.

Elennsar · Post by **Elennsar** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:29 am

Pretty nice, thank you.

Desertly might be too strong - but its the less fertile region, that's for sure.

Now that I'm looking at it, I'm thinking that the area of the kingdoms (you and the others) might need some expansion eastward, or something.

But the general outline seems workable. What do you think?

A quick note: This area in question is part of a continent, just like Greece+Macedonia+Thrace is part of a continent. So the "favorable" side of the mountains vs. "unfavorable" might be too extreme - still, you do have the best farmland.

Grek · Post by **Grek** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:35 am

I'm cool with having them expand eastwards. And yeah, by deserty, I mean drier and less productive than average. Not actually sand and camel bones.

Elennsar · Post by **Elennsar** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:39 am

::nods.:: Steppelike might not be a bad comparison.

I'll post a revised version of the map in a bit.

For the time being, any thoughts on the other kingdoms?

The idea of having (including the one of the PCs) five kingdoms as "successors" to the Great Kingdom is sounding appealing, but five is arbitrary - three just sounds too small, and I don't really want lots of little ones, otherwise anywhere between 4-10(?) is probably workable.

Note: Map in spoiler.

I'm not sure about this, but it does make the eastern area much more interesting. The blue box is where a cannel (like the Suez cannel) might be dug, or a strait, or something.

Grek · Post by **Grek** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 1:56 am

The image link doesn't seem to work.

Elennsar · Post by **Elennsar** » Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:00 am

Try it again, messed up the map and deleted/reuploaded.

Should be fine now.

Hmm. Maybe its just me, but while I like the way the west turned out, I'm not sure if that improved the east. But I don't like the idea of the east just turning into a finger shaped penisula. Doesn't feel right.

Naturally, thoughts are welcomed.

Grek · Post by **Grek** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:18 am

It's alright, I think. What's that western island? What do you think about a second group of barbarians invading from the east?

Elennsar · Post by **Elennsar** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:20 am

Its a "There's other stuff out here" - I didn't really think of it other than thinking it made sense to include.

As for eastern barbarians, its a thought. Particularly if the East is like it is in map #2 - otherwise, too many "civilized" kingdoms, would be too easy to just ally, smash the barbs, life goes back to normal.

Also more opportunities for different kingdoms and such...though I'd rather not do anything too close to the Middle-East or Asia - this is a setting that, in the main, is influenced strongly by Europe (mostly if not entirely because that's what I'm familiar with).

The eastern barbarians aren't allied with the northern ones, I presume.

That's about all that comes to mind off hand.

Grek · Post by **Grek** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 8:00 am

What about some huns? Huns make excellent bararians.

And yes, the two aren't allied.

Elennsar · Post by **Elennsar** » Sun Mar 08, 2009 10:19 am

Huns do, indeed.

What do you make of the idea of having five civilized kingdoms as the heart of the setting?

Grek · Post by **Grek** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 2:06 am

Sure. Any idea what they would be? I can see one that's very warlike, but at peace with you; another that's rich; another that's occupied by Barbarians; yourselves; and one other.

Elennsar · Post by **Elennsar** » Tue Mar 10, 2009 2:26 am

I like the sound of that - as for the other, hm.

Well, I'd like the idea of one being more nautical than the rest - but that might be better with the rich one.

Nothing exciting comes to mind.

Grek · Post by **Grek** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:37 am

Putting aside the map for a bit, what sort of weapons and armour will there be? We've basically confirmed swords, spears and axes for weapons and shelds, helmets and a sort of chest armour which I forget the name of as the armour. Also, bows for some troops but generally not for the players.

What do you think about the following:
Pike. Really really long spear. Like ten or twenty feet. I'm not even kidding.
Hammer vs. Mace. Should there be a difference?
Flail. Mace on a chain. Pretty sure these are in, but I'm checking.
Daggers. Will the fact that you have one come up if you also have a sword?
Sword lengths. Should there be different sizes beyond '1 hand' and '2 hands'? Sword shapes?
Polearms/poleaxes/halberds. There's seriously like a dozen different types, but do we really need all of them?
Bow types. Will it just be "bow" or will there be different sorts?
Javelins, slings and crossbows. Will anyone be using any of these?
Helmets. Will helmet design factor into it or will we have them all be "Helmet" And will people wear things with visors?
Armour. How much will be worn? Mail? Mail and Plate? Padding, Mail, Plate, more Mail, Tabard and the same for the horse?
Shield sizes? Are there any?
Chariots. Will people ride them?

Elennsar · Post by **Elennsar** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:47 am

What do you think about the following:

In order, and some of these I may go back on, but the present answers are:

Pike. Really really long spear. Like ten or twenty feet. I'm not even kidding.

Not included.

Hammer vs. Mace. Should there be a difference?

Probably not.

Flail. Mace on a chain. Pretty sure these are in, but I'm checking.

Actually, not sure - the only historical example I can think of flails as a serious thing is late in the medieval era.

If you've something refering to them before 1100, though, by all means - though don't expect me to treat them as a very good idea.

Daggers. Will the fact that you have one come up if you also have a sword?

Sometimes.

Sword lengths. Should there be different sizes beyond '1 hand' and '2 hands'? Sword shapes?

Short sword (gladius like), straightsword (ye standarde arming sword), saber/scimitar (about the same, not as good for thrusting though if it matters - if not, it may be the same), two-handed sword. Probably -not- bastard - though having a hilt on your straight sword so you can effectively use it in two hands is fine by me.

Polearms/poleaxes/halberds. There's seriously like a dozen different types, but do we really need all of them?

Not really - consider a halberd if included to cover the "lovechild of an axe and a spear".

Bow types. Will it just be "bow" or will there be different sorts?

Bow, composite bow.

Javelins, slings and crossbows. Will anyone be using any of these?

Javelins and slings probably. Crossbows no. At least not in the area in question (what lays further to the east isn't being developed yet)

Helmets. Will helmet design factor into it or will we have them all be "Helmet" And will people wear things with visors?

Mail coff, (leather) cap, standard helm. And no - this is in the open faced era.

Armour. How much will be worn? Mail? Mail and Plate? Padding, Mail, Plate, more Mail, Tabard and the same for the horse?

Cloth/thick clothing, leather, scale, mail. Breastplates/cuirasses do exist, as do greaves, but otherwise mail is your best bet (in general - if you had to face a lot of bludgeoning weapons, scale is a bit better)

Shield sizes? Are there any?

Small (round), round (medium), kite. Possibly a couple others if really needed, but they'd be essentially the same statwise - though some shield types are better when forming a shieldwall.

Chariots. Will people ride them?

No.

Grek · Post by **Grek** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 11:12 am

Pikes are there if you have alot of people, some wood and really don't want charged at by cavalry or anyone else for that matter. It really, really sucks for the guy trying to attack a wall of 10 foot long spears head on, because they attacker is either charging and putting all of that momentum into a spear going through them or trying to walk up and then get circled up on. Rome used this sort of tactic alot. When most people think "spear", they're really thinking "pike".

Halberds are basically the lovechild of an axe and a spear. It's another anti-cavalry thing, used to hit a guy who's on a horse when you're on foot. Sometimes you would have a halberd that's on a pike.

Flails are weapons used by the cavalry. Basically, you run at the guy and as you go past, you smack them in the face with your flail, which either knocks them flat on the ground or, rarely, rips their head off. It's part of the reason why cavalry was so sacry; nobody wanted a spiked mace to the face at 40 miles per hour.

Elennsar · Post by **Elennsar** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 11:16 am

Pikes are there if you have alot of people, some wood and really don't want charged at by cavalry or anyone else for that matter. It really, really sucks for the guy trying to attack a wall of 10 foot long spears head on, because they're either charging and putting all of that momentum into a spear going through them or trying to walk up and then get circled up on. Rome used this sort of tactic alot. When most people think "spear", they're really thinking "pike".

The shorter end isn't a problem, but the 12+ end is getting into "No." Once its unwieldy as anything other than "form of a wall of and poke", its not a weapon sufficiently useful to exist unless you really, really want to tell cavalry to f--k off. (Infantry...Roman legions thrashed phalanxes.)

Halberds are basically the lovechild of an axe and a spear. It's another anti-cavalry thing, used to hit a guy who's on a horse when you're on foot. Sometimes you would have a halberd that's on a pike.

Nasty things, yup.

Flails are weapons used by the cavalry. Basically, you run at the guy and as you go past, you smack them in the face with your flail, which either knocks them flat on the ground or, rarely, rips their head off. It's part of the reason why cavalry was so sacry; nobody wanted a spiked mace to the face at 40 miles per hour.

Where are the actual examples of this, though?

One reason for the "No." to pikes and polearms is that they take a fair amount of getting used to heavy cavalry as a threat - and steady infantry.

Not just brave, organized too.

Grek · Post by **Grek** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 12:19 pm

Really, I can't find anything earlier than about 1300 for flails. Swords, lances, and some occisional reference to a mace, but nothing with a chain. Is 1100 the official cutoff point?

Elennsar · Post by **Elennsar** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 1:06 pm

Not exactly...but anything between roughly 900 and 1100 is probably out and anything after 1100 can be assumed to be out unless otherwise stated.

Exceptions may exist - but I'm trying to keep things limited to roughly that point. Once you get into the age of crossbows and so on, its a different setting.

Now, I don't see any reason why flails would have be invented later than maces or whatever - but as someone who doesn't care for them, I'm not really eager to make an exception to it.

Now, if you think they'd add something besides just more choices (I think spear, axe, mace, sword is sufficient) - I'm interested in hearing.

There's also quarterstaves, but they're relatively poor vs. armor (if nasty weapons vs. lightly armored or unarmored people in the right hands.) so using one extensively isn't recommended.

angelfromanotherpin · Post by **angelfromanotherpin** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 2:07 pm

Grek wrote:Really, I can't find anything earlier than about 1300 for flails. Swords, lances, and some occisional reference to a mace, but nothing with a chain. Is 1100 the official cutoff point?

Agricultural flails have existed since forever, and have been used as improvised weapons since forever, but flails are not made specifically as weapons in significant numbers until the 13th century. They were a response to the improving armor technology.

So in the aesthetic that Arturius seems to want, flails should be given the same amount of regard as hoes or pitchforks, and be about as effective.

Elennsar · Post by **Elennsar** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 11:55 pm

Maybe less. A hoe or pitchfork could give you a reach advantage over someone with a dagger.

Grek · Post by **Grek** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 4:00 am

Northeast: owns the strait, occupied by eastern barbarians who tax heavily. Moderate climate.The barbarian government is not diplomatic and kills messengers from time to time.

Southeast: Very cold, with ice. Lots of boats, drinking and people who wrestle bears. Lots of fishing, lots of sailing, lots of really strong fighters but not much organization. They sometimes raid people with boats.

North-Center: Little leadership, tribal, lots of serfs farming, but rather mountainous with semi-swampy forests in the south. Poor roads and doesn't care that barbarians are settling on their west coast. Forts and fiefdoms scatter the countrysize. Cattle raiding takes place.

South-Center: Was heart of old empire, declined and collapsed after a series of revolts broke it's economic back. Only a small city-state now, similar in size to North-northeast.

Southwest: You are here. Not as cold as Southeast due to large amounts of coastline, but lots of rain and fog. Northern barbarians are sailing down from the north to take your land, have basically taken control of northernmost penisula.

North-northeast: Very small state, on peninsula just north of that little harbour next to the word "mountain". The wealthy former monarchs of the Northeastern Country are in exile here, seeking an army to reclaim their throne.

Elennsar · Post by **Elennsar** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 4:05 am

Interesting set up (though I think you might be overdoing it with the cold) - could you take the map and draw how you would lay out the borders?

Elennsar · Post by **Elennsar** » Sat Mar 21, 2009 4:37 am

Something that the issue of having two very different sets of barbarians as well as the pentarchy (the five civilized kingdoms) kind of brings up - I don't know if we need to make any really defining decisions now, but it would be good to know if it will matter...

Is religion a serious concern here? That is, are the "barbarians" infidels/heretics/pagan (with that being worth noting beyond the fact they're barbarians and that's enough of a reason to be at least a little worried.)