Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Thanks for the writeup Lenny!
So I went to visit Lenny and did a ‘Session Zero” combat playtest with Lenny and Charles a couple of days after their first session. I’m recounting this from memory so I may have forgotten a couple of things.
They used pre-generated characters from the Monsterberg adventure – Lenny took Kalina Krol, a beguine mystic, and Charles had Gerd von Gleichen, a Furrier from Konstanz. Gerd had militia experienced and was well armed with a heavy arbalest crossbow and a longsword, and wearing Gothic half-armor. Kalina was less well armed but carried a latchet crossbow and a sword, while wearing a mail shirt under her habit.
The scenario started as Gerd and Kalina were strolling down a forest road. They were approached by three young bandits. They started trying to parley with the young fellows and offered them food, but both rolled very low on their Diplomacy checks (unusually for Kalina who is something of a diplomat) and the Bandits had predatory intentions. I rolled on the Encounter Reaction table on the ‘Hostile’ column and came up with ‘Attack’.
The bandits were carrying javelins and were armed with small dussack sabers, and wearing felt coats for (limited) protection. As they approached, things turned hostile and the bandits decided to attack, so we rolled initiative. One of the three bandits charged with his dussack while the other two hung back to throw their javelins.
Gerd managed to draw his longsword before they closed in. He was hit with two javelins, one of which bypassed his armor and caused a significant wound. I think Kalina, while behind Gerd, spanned her crossbow and shot the lead bandit, wounding him. Then the lead bandit, who was charging, attacked Gerd with his dussack. Gerd has the MF ‘Versetzen’ so he used this to attempt a simultaneous attack and defense with two dice. They fought for two rounds IIRC, and using Versetzen Gerd parried the blow and wounded his assailant twice, the second time (using three dice) he scored a critical hit which did 20 damage and killed the guy. We rolled on the ‘Grave injuries’ table and it came up as a cut throat. Gerd sliced his blade right through the guys throat and he fell instantly dead, blood spurting.
I did a morale check which the Bandits failed, so the remaining two Bandits fled down a side trail leading into the forest from the road. Kalina and Gerd pursued warily, spanning their crossbows on the way. They arrived in a clearing where the two remaining young bandits had approached a campfire where their three larger uncles were rising. These men were Brigands. Better armed with spears, shields, and sabers, and wearing iron lamellar armor with iron caps. The younger Bandits had gathered more javelins from around the campfire.
We rolled initiative again. Kalina and Gerd went behind cover to steady their crossbows and used the protection of the trees. The fight started with an exchange of missiles, as Gerd shot, seriously wounding one of the Brigands with a bypass attempt. Kalina also hit and seriously wounded the same Brigand with her latchet crossbow, scoring a critical hit (we said he was struck in the face, the bolt careening off of his cheekbone and leaving a huge gash). Kalina was in turn hit by 2 javelins but her hidden armor largely protected her.
One of the Brigands had top initiative order, and he charged Gerd with his spear. Once again Gerd managed to use Versetzen to parry the blow and wound his assailant, who was now near death, but then the other two Brigands attacked, one managing to score a bypass hit which caused substantial damage. Gerd was down to about ten hit points. Seeing Gerd wounded and beset by three tough Brigands, Kalina drew here sidesword, ran up and stabbed the lead Brigand with it, scoring an ‘Artful strike’. This finished off the lead Brigand.
Kalina and Gerd then initiated dialogue, warning the Brigands that they had friends coming. They both rolled high on Bluff skill checks. I rolled on the morale table and it came up with a Flee result, so the remaining Brigands and Bandits decamped for the woods.
We ended it there. Again I may have mixed up a couple of details but that is basically how it went (Lenny can correct me). Next time we do one of these I’m definitely going to record it.
Several good academic articles on cleanliness and public sanitation in medieval cities here
So I think from reading about them, the niche for the longbow was to shoot as ‘clout shooting’, or shooting into an area as opposed to specific individual targets, to a distance of 250 meters or maybe more, with relatively heavy killing arrows.
Whereas the recurves had a bit more range with flight arrows but were used at that range to wound and harass. Both weapons had a relatively short range for shooting individual targets closer to around 50 meters. For the Steppe Nomads, that is where the killing was done. They could take advantage of their mobility to cause incremental damage at what was for them a safe range, then move in closer for the kill when the enemy morale was wavering.
Crossbows, especially when used supported on a wall (or on a pavise, the gunwhale of a boat, the side of a wagon etc.) could hit individual targets out to about 150 meters. The Mongol secret history describes their horses being killed at (what we think is) about that range. They were also used for ‘clout shooting’ depending on the circumstances, but were apparently not as effective in that role.
Crossbow bolts were as we have already noted, much shorter as well as being heavier. They also had paper instead of feather vanes and usually only two instead of three as was more typical on bows (? or was it?)
Crossbows were also used on horseback, as were (somewhat surprisingly) longbows apparently though so far as I could determine, not until the 16th Century and mostly up in the Scottish border region.
Wow epic post! I’ll hve to watch those videos to catch up.
My point about longbows is this (from a historical perspective):
Steppe nomad recurve bows were used basically two ways – with flight arrows as harassing weapons from a distance, and with heavier arrows to kill at close range.
Jan Dlugosz described it this way:
“The Tartars wage war in a way quite different to that of other nations. They fight from a distance, pour a rain of arrows around and on the enemy, then dart in to attack and swiftly withdraw; and always they are on horseback. Often they pretend to flee and then wound or kill those who thoughtlessly pursue them. They use neither drums nor trumpets. Often they leave the battlefield in the full fervour of the fight, only to return to it shortly afterwards.”
With flight arrows, the recurve bows had very long range. All their arrows varied somewhat in weight and length but the average was about 20 grams for flight arrows, and 40 grams for war or hunting arrows. Their range with the war-arrows was considerably less than with the flight arrows. Maybe about 250m effective range with war arrows and 350 or more with flight arrows.
Longbows were also used with both flight arrows and various types of war arrows. With broadhead arrows they could still shoot pretty far, perhaps about the same 250 meters range as Mongols and Turks managed with their recurves. People in the English warbow society have managed shots as far as 300 meters with broadheads. But their arrows are heavier, again there is a lot of variability, but the average weight for a broadhead is estimated at around 60 grams. So that is a much heavier payload. However maximum range with the (roughly 30 gram) flight arrows is only slighly improved, at around 280 – 300 meters.
Crossbow bolts for hand portable (as opposed to siege type) crossbows were around 80 grams. Wall crossbow bolts could be as much as 250 grams. Range is still hotly debated, but Raplph Payne Gallwey claims to have shot an antique one a distance of about 400 meters around the turn of the 19th / 20th Centuries. Modern replicas have rarely exceeded 250 meters.
Very interesting. That said, I am certain that they do not understand the physics of the late medieval crossbow. I’ve debated this with modern engineers for 20 years, but historical data and now modern testing keep proving me right.
Depiction of a (ultimately failed) weavers uprising in Cologne in 1371
If you have an extra $25k laying round you can own the book and read all about it and many other misadventures in Köln. https://www.abebooks.com/…/Cologne…/10758873315/bd
One thing about St. Sebastian is that there are dozens and dozens of paintings and sculptures depicting his martyrdom, some crude, but many quite exquisite. I agree with you in this case as in many others, the artist is doing something typical for Renaissance paintings, wherein they simultaneously depict a story from saintly hagiography (or from the bible, or from Classical Mythology) while at the same time showing, and making some commentary upon, the realities of their own day. This was intentional.
The thumb ring always seemed odd to me, hard to imagine. How could your thumb even with a ring / hook be strong enough to hold some of those very powerful bows. But I know they did it. I’d love to try it one day. I’ve looked with longing at some websites that sold recurve bows in the past but never could afford one at the times I was thinking about it.
There are many heroic epics where the hero can draw a bow further back than anyone else, which is another thing I found confusing.
The short powerstroke of the latin style crossbow is a whole nother kettle of fish. They really don’t know why or how those things worked yet (in my opinion). We had a big argument about it (yet again) on MyArmoury recently.
The niche that the English style longbow seemed to have been big, relatively heavy (~ 60 gram) arrows – and long arrows- which could be shot at a good distance, especially as ‘clout shooting’ (area shot) weapons.
I haven’t shot a bow in a long time but it seems like there are a variety of ways to shoot them. What do you think of the thumb ring?
That could also be a matter of timing or as you suggest, of rivalries. It’s kind of surprising how much these people knew given the limitations of their period – no phone, no radio, no internet, and travel only by horseback. Books copied by hand. And yet many of these fechtbüch authors do seem to either know a lot about or actually have copies of many of the other books, which is pretty amazing. It’s not like just downloading from a link today!
But they may not have all known about all the other contemporaneous authors. We do find some gaps like that. I’ll ask my friend Christian Trosclair who does a lot of the translations on the Wiktenauer to chime in here if he has the time, he can probably provide some insight.
A couple of good sources on late medieval towns (Central Europe):
“Imperial and Free Towns of the Holy Roman Empire
City-States in Pre-Modern Germany?”“Towns and defense in later medieval germany”
The only thing I can think of about Talhoffer is that his books are not heavily glossed and he does kind of have his own variant of the zedel, but neither of those things is unusual. Talhoffer is hard to work from because he doesn’t explain much, he just has those (comparatively) good illustrations. So not that many clubs work from Talhoffer, it used to be kind of a running joke that beginner clubs “worked with” talhoffer because there was one talhoffer book in the public domain – a 19th Century fascimile which had the pages out of order, making it even more confusing to try to work from. But it was one of the first of the fechtbücher which was available for many years so people tried (and mostly failed) to figure it out.
This book was the source of a lot of the images I used in the original version of the Codex because those images (having been printed in the 19th Century) were in the public domain.
A lot of HEMA people and related researchers – especially club leaders, have all kinds of theories about fencing masters, (and have done since the current revival started about 20 years ago) even veering into theories about secret societies and all kinds of other ridiculous stuff. Some of them, I’m embarrassed to say, think they are better than the masters from the era when people still actually fought for real with swords. This is an age of rampant narcissism.
We also have the general theory which goes back to Sydney Anglo that the German fencing in general was at least eventually degraded and became a sport for the burghers after it got away from the ‘real knights”. But none of this is actually based on any real data – in fact a lot of my own research into the context of fencing has shown that this theory is B.S. since we know that the burghers were just as warlike as the nobility, and in fact quite a few burghers were knights themselves. This isn’t all that well known in Anglophone circles though I guess.
That isn’t to disrespect Sydney Anglo who is an legit academic and vastly more erudite on the subject of historical fencing than 99% of HEMA people. That particular context ust isn’t really his field. Unfortunately most of the English speaking and especially the American HEMA / WMA folks know very little history beyond what is in the fencing manuals themselves, especially when it comes to the regions where the older fencing manuals come from (Holy Roman Empire and Italy, basically).
The truth is we have the barest fragments of data about the lives of most of the fencing masters, so anything we do learn (like this) is a big deal. I think some people jumping to the conclusion that Talhoffer losing a fight means he was a bad fencer or a poor fighter – and some have said stuff like that on Social Media – even though there isn’t a HEMA fencer alive who hasn’t lost a fight, is pretty ridiculous. Nuance is not one of the strengths of our current cultural moment in general, and sadly most people aren’t going to get anywhere near understanding much beyond how to do a zwerchau.
