admin
Site Admin
Posts: 2,085
|
Post by admin on Aug 31, 2017 7:58:32 GMT
One thing we have determined for the Aeultian Empire is the enmity from their neighbor, Escia. Escia is a much smaller kingdom, but punches well above its weight. While we are still tweaking the numbers, they have a population of around 5 million to the Empires 35 million, but are considerably more militant - the a caste system similar to India with Scholar Wizards at the top, and the warrior caste the second most important in their social hierarchy.
We still need to tweak the numbers, but my thoughts are that the Escians make up for a lack of numbers by having a higher percentage of their population in active military service as members of the warrior class. In Feudal Japan at it's peak, around 8-10% of the population were 'Samurai' - now naturally not all were front line warriors, but they were trained to fight and had the gear for it. So in terms of army size, the Empire could in theory muster an overwhelming force and crush them - but it would come at a huge cost, and leave the Empire vulnerable to other enemies if they locked into a total war situation.
The history of conflict between these two nations is long - starting about 1500 years ago, they mounted Escians wielding Tachi/Katana like curved swords versus the Empire at the time with Romanesque armor, weapons and tactics. The first clash was perhaps one of the most bloody, and if history is any guide, the mounted Escians would have wreaked havoc on the Imperials unless and until they changed their weapons and tactics as a response.
So assuming we have lightly armored, fast and mobile Escians using bows, spears and swords against the Imperials with kite shields, pilum, bows and magical shortswords (plus their secret weapon, 500 militant centaurs with horse bodies and human torsos scaled to horse dimensions) how do you think both sides would have changed their weapons and tactics over the centuries.
The most recent conflict has been going on and off for the last 500 years or so and, because both civilizations consider themselves to be highly cultured and sophisticated, formalized rules of engagement have turned war almost into a sport and they have developed ways to avoid unnecessary loss of life. For example, battles can be avoided by individual duels in front of both sides, truces and ceasefires are easy to call and are honored, and they have their own version of a 'Geneva convention' on the treatment of prisoners, with prisoner exchanges and humane treatment. Officers are not bound, etc and treated in a cordial manner if captured, and there is mutual respect on both sides now.
Only recently has this changed, as the Empire - lulled by centuries of relative peace - have scaled back their armies, while the Escians secretly built up their forces and launched a full scale attack which has driven the Imperials back and pushed off balance, so that now they are responding by bolstering their armies and training new soldiers as fast as they can to push the Escians back.
So, the first question is, how do you think the tactics and weapons would have evolved? And 2, does the war becoming like a sport sound reasonable? There are some historical precedents, and an eternal war can be a powerful political tool..
|
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Aug 31, 2017 8:36:21 GMT
Roman legions had problems with Hannibal and Parthian cavalry, which were fast movable troops with good tactics and didn't play the "legion game", attacking a defensive positioned legion frontally.
Different specialized forces (heavy/light cavalry, heavy/light infantry, mounted infantry?, archers) working together with good and variable tactics and the stone/paper/scissors game.
This still might be the key to beat a bigger Aelutian legion with only some specialised troops and more uniform legionaries and a bit rusty tactics.
Evolving weapons and tactics:
Less strain for the empire to change things, more for the Escians.
Overall more differentation between light and heavy forces and archers, more different armor, shields, weapons for the specialized tasks.
More mobility and good commanding systems for different troops.
Limited border combats to show your battle readyness and give officers experience without intention to start a big war on both sides, after a few hundred years some kind of sport?
|
|
|
|
Post by onekelvin on Aug 31, 2017 12:13:17 GMT
Still not quite sure how technology works in this world so, take my guess with a grain of salt.
At the beginning the Imperials have lorica, gladii and shields, right? And the Escians have tachi, katana, bows and large amounts of cavalry.
Assuming this conflict starts at a period analogous to 0-200 BC we could be anywhere from 1300-1500 AD equivilent tech right now. But this Empire never fell, so we'll make it 1300 and give them the benefit of undisrupted technological progress so that the equivalent is 1500-ish.
The horses are the main advantage of the Escians. Lorica is nigh-impervious to cuts, and there's actually a video here debating a duel between a Roman legionary and a Katana samurai.
There's another less interactive one that lists advantages, and keep in mind armor as well, but basically on foot the legionary will win most of the time if he has his shield. The armor, the shield, the helmet all render slices and cuts basically useless, removing much of the katana's effectiveness. Therefore I have to assume that the primary advantage is the horse.
From what I understand, in medieval warfare the switch from shield wall to pike block was primarily due to the use of shock cavalry. Cavalry can bowl through and wreck shield walls whereas pike walls can set their pikes and skewer horsemen and horses before they can engage.
So, I from 0AD-1000AD I suspect the Empire would drop the shield for pikes and polearms, and probably update their armor to a more solid plate.
The Escians would probably adapt to the pikes by switching focus heavily to mounted bowmen.
The Empire would also switch tactics. Horses have trouble engaging in deserts, jungles, mountains, etc, so the Empire would probably attempt to manipulate events so that if they had to engage the enemy they would do so on ground that would wear out the cavalry. They would also add footarchers or crossbowmen to take out the cavalry. A standing archer can outperform a mounted archer in accuracy and rate of fire, it's just if the mounted archer switches to a sidearm and charges they are likely to run down the footman. Combining field tactics and different weapons would make the Escian cavalry less effective.
From 1000AD to 1500AD the Escians at this point would probably resort to guerrilla warfare, if they can't engage the Empire's numbers directly, they should use the horses for mobility and act more like mounted infantry. A tachi will suck against a gladius and shield, but is a pretty fair counter to a pike. If the cavalry dismounts and engages in small battles they would be able to effectively match the new tactics of the Empire. Ride around the main forces, attack far behind enemy lines, dismount swordsmen and archers and engage, then re-mount and retreat before the main force can catch you.
The Empire would likely hold the centaurs in reserve to take advantage of fleeing or dismounted men.
Dunno when duels would start, but in terms of equipment gladius+shield > katana/tachi > gladius alone. In later years you might see formalized dueling with equal weapons, or a more even matchup of katana vs poleax. The slashing weapon will lose more and more effect with better armor though; full plate makes cutting less than useless. If you look at swordsmanship from the era of plate armor, they tend to use the sword like a sharpened quarterstaff, driving the point into gaps and wrestling and hooking with the guard. If the Empire uses full plate, then duels might be formally unarmored, or if armored, the Escians might choose an alternate weapon like a warhammer or tetsubo-type club.
As far as I can tell war tends not to be sport; if it's war then it's war, but I could see a long chilly armistice with lots of "unsanctioned" duels and skirmishes occurring in no-man's land. The only war for sport I know of were the flower wars in Mezo-America, and those happened the way they did because the Aztecs had complete dominion over their neighbors. And even though it was sporting for the Aztecs, it bred resentment in the other tribes and villages.
|
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Aug 31, 2017 12:27:20 GMT
A legion's unit doesn't have to be equipped uniformly.
For a shieldwall only the first (two?) lines would have only shield and gladius (after throwing spears), the lines behind them could have longer axes, rapiers (?), polearms and long lances, then the archers.
And reserve units to change with exhausted frontliners or support them.
So they work as a little well defended castle.
|
|
|
|
Post by vacuousmermaid on Aug 31, 2017 20:21:29 GMT
My take on the evolution of arms and armor. i.imgur.com/IZXO1zo.jpgI shortened the fauld slightly and added large tassets to make mounted combat more comfortable. The helmet has become sort of a burgonet with an exaggerated tail and a closed face like a barbute to provide much better protection with the loss of the shield. I kept the fur sleeve over the right armor because I think it just looks really cool. I assumed the sword would remain largely unchanged due to magic ore and the fact that a short handy sword would be better in a close wrestling type armored fight. Maybe the hilt remains largely unchanged but the blade becomes slimmer with a more reinforced point? An alternate thought in response to cavalry, that is dubious in a practical sense but kind of fun in a fantasy world, is to double down on shields and make paired units. A shield bearer whose sole job is to use a large two-handed shield and a spearman who is paired with him. They fight as a unit and are raised together as boys and basically forced to live life like they are in a three legged race. Thus when they are fighting they know exactly what the other is doing. Kind of cool for flavor and means that Aleutia has great troops but if they die it takes a long long time to replace them with new comparable troops. You could also come up with more social aspect of these "brothers" in arms that maybe their entire life is shared. Like only having a single name, sharing a spouse, heirs are considered from both, etc. These could also be prestigious special troops in comparison with standard infantry. They would hold a higher social rank than a standard soldier although with the weird caveat that it is two men that are essentially living as if they were a single person. So you would still have rank and file pike men to fill out the army but also a considerable portion would be these extremely skilled paired soldiers which would be iconic and important tactically. |
|
|
|
Post by onekelvin on Sept 1, 2017 2:31:14 GMT
Looks good to me.
If there's armor under the fur sleeve then I can't think of anything I would change.
As for the shield-brother units, it might be doable, but it's going to be tough to justify. The main thing to theory-craft around is what benefit the shield provides that armor does not, and why it would be two-handed at the expense of a man with a weapon.
Here's a vid on dual-wielding shields, not quite the same but there are some useful pointers.
You'd need to figure out what benefit the two-handed shield has. A man with a regular board isn't going to hold back a horse. If it's a pavise then it can be set up and there's no reason to have a dedicated wielder, and if you put a spike on the front long enough to hurt a horse chances are that the horse will still bowl over the shield man even if it gets injured, and you might as well have a pikeman.
It also seems that the shield-brother is the irreplaceable one since a man who knows how to use a pike can be taught to stand in a line relatively quickly but a man who just uses a shield will need cross-training to be useful otherwise.
So yeah, it's a toughy.
Perhaps the shields are magical? Perhaps they require a chant to be constantly uttered? Perhaps they need to be made of lead or require two hands to activate? Perhaps the pike-brother is a battery via Anima-vestra and he needs to train constantly to strengthen his body and mind so that he can survive the shield's usage? Perhaps the shield has different modes that require the chant to change? One has an AOE, another makes the shield project an immovable barrier?
For the expense of training, magical items, etc, I see something like this being used sparingly, and it's use would really depend on the properties of the shield. If it's anti-magic you could spread them across a formation to provide coverage from wizards. If it was used as a siege weapon it would have to be worth more than the equivalent number of pavices and bowmen you could obtain for the price. If it can cover the entire front of a line or a square of archers then it would be useful in sieges for allowing unobstructed firing lines.
I dunno; it's magic and standard RPG magic isn't my forte.
|
|
|
|
Post by bladerunner2534 on Sept 1, 2017 16:42:38 GMT
The way I would see the paired soldiers working would be if one of the pair was armed with a ranged weapon--such as pilums or a (cross)bow, while the other held a large shield and a weapon used to prevent attacking troops from getting too close to the valuable force of trained marksmen. The shield-bearer would have to synchronize their movements to those of their partner--duck down or move out of the way to allow the marksman to take a shot, then cover back to prevent the marksman from being cut down by answering volleys while reloading.
|
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Sept 1, 2017 23:03:56 GMT
There's some evidence ancient Greeks and Native Americans used large round shields to cover two or three men from arrows: one footman holds the shield (and a spear and maybe a few javelins) so an archer or two can shoot without worrying about return fire.
|
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Sept 2, 2017 3:59:22 GMT
Another cavalry idea:
Heavy Escian cavalry can use a fantasy riding animal which is heavier than a horse, carries more wheight, has a thicker skin and skullbone (or triceratop horns) etc. a mixture between a horse on steroids and a bison.
That would be a cavalry attack!
It's weak could be, that it can't go far out of Escia, perhaps it needs a certain food/gras.
So it could stop an Aelutian infantry invasion into Escia but can't be used for an invasion of Aelutia itself.
They can be also much slower than horses except for very short shock attacks, so the riders need really heavy armor + shields against arrows wenn coming closer to the legion before the shock attack starts.
Super heavy cavalry.
And those beasts could haul a chariot with place for 2-3 men and a mounted heavy ballista = mobile artillery/tank.
|
|
|
|
Post by celegon on Sept 2, 2017 8:15:23 GMT
i submitted a creature like that in the beast thread. basicly a prehistoric rhino
|
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Sept 2, 2017 8:52:21 GMT
Your giant boar would fit, combined with an armadillo.
I don't think only light cavalry or mounted archers like mongols or samurai could win against a legion maniple in defensive linup / testudo.
Neither the legion can win in this situation (except with alchemically battledogs/dogunculi).
For a legion you need a nutcracker!
|
|
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 2,085
|
Post by admin on Sept 3, 2017 6:28:12 GMT
Awesome ideas guys, and the concept of a co-operative shield wall is a good and innovative one. And yes, there are indeed some unique cavalry possibilities - the 'rhinos' could be used by the Escians much like the Indians/Carthaginians/etc used Elephants.
With regards to the Castir, these are close to Katana in some respects, but monotempered - probably closer to the Dotanuki swords in that they are strong enough to withstand impacts from shields and armor, but are best suited to medium to lightly armored opponents.
All good stuff, and will be incorporated into the metastory accordingly.
|
|
sevicler
Member
How do I edit status?
Posts: 272
|
Post by sevicler on Sept 9, 2017 12:39:30 GMT
Not related to tactics, more towards the weapons each nation uses.
Flame of the Host/Brand of the Fallen: Made by GODS(!). Turns its bearer into invincible physical gods/manifestation of gods on earth.
Aelutian Gladius: Functionally indestructible, ignores armor. Can be used as a prayer tool. Also mass produced and used by soldiers numbering 60000. Wow.
Sword of Danu: Sentient and autonomous. Powered by moonlight. Can talk to its bearer and give ancient advice.
Vorpal Sword: Liquid sword. Imagine the T-1000's arm-blade from Terminator 2 in fantasy. Yeah. Also has a spirit that will not harm 'good people'.
Goblin Knicker: Inherently poisonous and powered by moonlight. Makes people scared and unable to sleep. And controls the undead during a 'blood moon'. Also teleports to its owner's hands if its thrown.
Orc King War-Cleaver: Blood magic. Also is an autonomous boomerang for some reason. Gets more powerful the more it kills.
Odin's Oar: Contains the essence of a demigod. Slows down time (wat). Makes its bearer immune to magic. Also indestructible. Preserves the memories and soul of its wielder so that any future wielder would gain access to their skills and knowledge.
Lhasian energy sword: Jedi Lightsaber. Enough said.
Castir: A run-of-the-mill carbon steel blade forged by a normal smith in a normal workshop. Its only advantage is the fact that the Castir is easily mass produced.
But so is the Gladius.
That's an interesting dynamic, don't you agree? Story-wise, this makes the Escians interesting because they somehow are able to fight opponents with magic blades and their special properties without actually dying and still maintain their warrior-culture. And actually winning the current war with the Empire.
Practicality wise...Poor Escians. It's really difficult to justify their current victories. I think I'm gonna add an arbitrary 'special ability' for the Escians.
Not for the Castir, mind you.
Escian Anti-Magic Talismans: Now, because the Escians have no 'super-special magic blade' in their inventory and that they basically despise the use of magic at large, they began developing new methods to counter everybody else's super-special sword. The current mass production Talismans worn by the Escian soldiers are the focus of their attention.
The Talismancers of Escia began working on a new mass production model. Now, instead of simply protecting its owner from magic spells, these new talismans also affect their enemies' magic swords. The talismans disrupt any magic blade's more exotic properties such as a goblin sword's inherent poison being negated or the Gladius' armor-piercing ability being greatly reduced.
Of course, the talisman's ability to affect the super-special-swords are affected by chance. It doesn't always work as intended. The more enchantments and magic a sword is imbued with, the less likely these talismans would affect it.
But this is no incentive for people to pour magic into a sword. Making magical swords should always be a lengthy and expensive endeavor. Especially for those blades completely immune to these talismans.
Your suggestions are welcome.
(This post is copy-pasted with slight edits in the Castir thread)
|
|
|
|
Post by onekelvin on Sept 10, 2017 2:39:36 GMT
I thought we nerfed the armor-bane properties of the gladius so that armor would still be used.
From the magic discussion thread:
"As to armor being useless, remember, Coronatite is rare – they ran out of it for a few hundred years until it was discovered in the badlands. Magic armor works as normal, but is much harder to make – and a shield will ‘kind of’ work, in that if you do it right, the sword will go in and could well get stuck. So it is, pardon the pun, a double edged sword.. Shields would basically be hacked apart first, there would be a lot of splinters after a battle..
But I hear you, I will tone it down a bit. Maybe make it twice as likely to puncture armor as regular steel, and still inherently magical (+1).
SIDENOTE: Don’t forget, the Aelutian Gladius design was a competition winner, and will be a real sword in a few months, so we want it to be cool enough that the army will keep using it and modifying it over the centuries, otherwise it would have just been superseded. "
My thoughts is that the gladius is cool. It just is - the furniture looks nice, the colors are good, the triple fullers and finger rings mesh well -it's a cool sword. It doesn't need armor-uselsessafying-rend to be more cool, they might just hold a very good edge without needing to be serviced. Armor and weapons rusting was a significant problem for the Romans and one that took many hours a week in oiling, polishing, and repair - if your sword never rusts or blunts then that's a very practical sword.
I mean, most famous swords aren't actually super magical.
Glamdring, Orchist, Anduril, Sting - of all of those swords only the last two are inherently magical, and neither one has a combat-spacific enchantment. Sting has an AOE race-specific awareness enchantment, and Anduril can allow the user to engage ghosts. The Uruk cleavers are iconic despite being utterly un-magical and mundane in construction. The Sword of the Father and the Atlantean sword are just cool-looking steel. Mostly the swords just last the ages - they become famous because they are around forever and pass through the hands of many owners.
|
|
sevicler
Member
How do I edit status?
Posts: 272
|
Post by sevicler on Sept 10, 2017 4:09:33 GMT
onekelvinWe did, but now it works like this: The footsoldier gladius used by the Aleutian Empire still has armor-rend that works by chance. It doesn't always pierce armor but still has a chance to. The exact success rate was never given, but assuming that its 30% would still make armor-rend kind of OP. However, officers and important people in the Empire are still given Armor-rend gladii with the original properties that rendered armor useless. Which is to say, guaranteed armor-rend.
|
|
|
|
Post by onekelvin on Sept 10, 2017 4:36:57 GMT
But the armor-rend is total? like hit a plate-armored knight three times and the third one goes right through him? I still don't like that. And wouldn't that mean it would cut weapons in half too? "Ting ting TINK" and your sword clatters in two. Or the first hit, or the fourth.
I just don't like it. Even a one-out of three makes nice non-magical armor not worth the effort and cost of making it. You might as well toss all armor but helmets and go straight to Napoleonic Wars-type cloth uniforms. And if this rending is applied to ranged weapons armor becomes even more useless. Armor-rend guns are why armor went away in real life: that's why I don't like it. The sword doesn't have to be OP to be cool.
|
|
sevicler
Member
How do I edit status?
Posts: 272
|
Post by sevicler on Sept 10, 2017 5:49:55 GMT
onekelvinI was actually wrong. The website didn't use the word "Armor-rend" at all. Nor does it mention that it works by chance. However, it does mention that the imperial Gladius is 'Twice as effective as a normal steel blade when thrusting." We can define that as 'quite likely to penetrate armor' rather than 'guaranteed to penetrate armor'. But this ability works ALL the time. But this doesn't apply to the Officer Gladius, which still has guaranteed armor-rend with the un-nerfed effects. Here's the flavor text: 
|
|
|
|
Post by onekelvin on Sept 10, 2017 7:04:24 GMT
onekelvin I was actually wrong. The website didn't use the word "Armor-rend" at all. Nor does it mention that it works by chance. However, it does mention that the imperial Gladius is 'Twice as effective as a normal steel blade when thrusting." We can define that as 'quite likely to penetrate armor' rather than 'guaranteed to penetrate armor'. But this ability works ALL the time. But this doesn't apply to the Officer Gladius, which still has guaranteed armor-rend with the un-nerfed effects. Here's the flavor text: Well, let me see here....  Mrm... zur....m-hmm...erm huh, hmmm... Yeah, that might do it. It's a world of difference to rest on a single line but "twice as effective in the thrust" still allows for good armor. Padded armor and chain-mail will still protect against slashes and cuts, plate will still be invulnerable enough to be useful and require pole-weapons to engage, and the enchantment makes sense since the way the gladius was used primarily was in the thrust, not always but mostly. Also I appreciate the practical enchantments - the maintenance and edge go a long way in an army. I'm satisfied. Mostly.  |
|
sevicler
Member
How do I edit status?
Posts: 272
|
Post by sevicler on Sept 10, 2017 7:33:22 GMT
onekelvin I was actually wrong. The website didn't use the word "Armor-rend" at all. Nor does it mention that it works by chance. However, it does mention that the imperial Gladius is 'Twice as effective as a normal steel blade when thrusting." We can define that as 'quite likely to penetrate armor' rather than 'guaranteed to penetrate armor'. But this ability works ALL the time. But this doesn't apply to the Officer Gladius, which still has guaranteed armor-rend with the un-nerfed effects. Here's the flavor text: Well, let me see here.... Mrm... zur....m-hmm...erm huh, hmmm... Yeah, that might do it. It's a world of difference to rest on a single line but "twice as effective in the thrust" still allows for good armor. Padded armor and chain-mail will still protect against slashes and cuts, plate will still be invulnerable enough to be useful and require pole-weapons to engage, and the enchantment makes sense since the way the gladius was used primarily was in the thrust, not always but mostly. Also I appreciate the practical enchantments - the maintenance and edge go a long way in an army. I'm satisfied. Mostly. Good to hear. Now, what do you think about the Escian Talismans affecting a magic sword's more exotic and powerful enchantments? (it doesn't affect mundane enchantments such as durability). Would it help justify their current victories against the Empire or is it unneeded in the current meta? Oh yeah, keep in mind that the Escian Castir is basically a mundane carbon steel sword with an unusual design right now. And I'm not planning to make it magical because the Escian culture despises magic to an extent. As I mentioned, these Talismans don't always work as intended. Their effects weaken if it encounters powerful magical weapons imbued with a lot of magic. However, this isn't an incentive for people to imbue their swords with even more magic because talismans are easy to make while magic swords are extremely complicated. What's your $0.02 on this? |
|
|
|
Post by onekelvin on Sept 10, 2017 11:17:21 GMT
Well, let me see here.... Mrm... zur....m-hmm...erm huh, hmmm... Yeah, that might do it. It's a world of difference to rest on a single line but "twice as effective in the thrust" still allows for good armor. Padded armor and chain-mail will still protect against slashes and cuts, plate will still be invulnerable enough to be useful and require pole-weapons to engage, and the enchantment makes sense since the way the gladius was used primarily was in the thrust, not always but mostly. Also I appreciate the practical enchantments - the maintenance and edge go a long way in an army. I'm satisfied. Mostly. Good to hear. Now, what do you think about the Escian Talismans affecting a magic sword's more exotic and powerful enchantments? (it doesn't affect mundane enchantments such as durability). Would it help justify their current victories against the Empire or is it unneeded in the current meta? Oh yeah, keep in mind that the Escian Castir is basically a mundane carbon steel sword with an unusual design right now. And I'm not planning to make it magical because the Escian culture despises magic to an extent. As I mentioned, these Talismans don't always work as intended. Their effects weaken if it encounters powerful magical weapons imbued with a lot of magic. However, this isn't an incentive for people to imbue their swords with even more magic because talismans are easy to make while magic swords are extremely complicated. What's your $0.02 on this? From what I understand it wouldn't matter too much. The Escians are engaging the Empire with a different set of tactics, similar to Carthage vs Rome historically. Even if magic was off the table it's unlikely an Escian army would win a straight slug-fest with an Empire legion on their own terms, but the Escians aren't fighting on the Empire's terms. They're fighting on their own terms with a high degree of cavalry usage, with horse archers and lancers. z the Empire is used to winning in stand-up infantry-heavy fights, their tactics and equipment including their use of enchantment were all specialized to that end, but now fighting the Escians it's rare that they get the chance for their strengths to play a part since by the time the Escians are within sword-range the Empire has already been hit with lances and arrows and the Escians are wheeeling away to reform for another pass. I could see these talismans existing, but if the Escians are distrustful of magic they would likely be rare since they are magic themselves and largely unnecessary for victory under the current battle setup. If and when the Empire starts changing tactics and equipment I could see the Escians starting to adopt them along with ever more drastic measures as their advantage is whittled away. For example if the Empire switched to plate and pike with crossbows and/or guns in response to the calvalry, I could see the Escians put in a position where they might need to end up in close combat. Cavalry would have to be made heavier or kept in reserve and the Escians might end up fighting the Imperial legions on foot with their swords like the Landsknets vs the Swiss pikemen. In such a melee a talisman would be important to ward away the enchantments of the Imperial weapons since the gladius would once again be brought to bear, and perhaps even the pikes would be enchanted. So my two-cents is that it depends on how close the Escians usually get to those weapons in the first place. And if they did become common it would be nice to have specifics about them since the Empire might try and figure out a way of targeting anything that eroded their advantage, from a spell that targeted talismans to assassinating shamans to prevent their creation. |
|
