"Medieval Skirmish - Brainstorming a Command & Control System" Topic

I have had at the back of my mind a Medieval skirmish game for quite some time. It was to be for raids and such during the Hundred Years' War. For a long time, it lay fallow; I didn't see how rolling on a Pillage Table would add much to the game.

Lately, I had a bit of inspiration. I would divide my troop types into "Gentle" or "Base". This speaks not to their fighting qualities, but to their motivations. Gentle troops seek glory on the field, and are sometimes more careful of their honor than of their lives. Base troops are moved by material gain, and want to live to spend it. The way this comes into play is via Objective cards, drawn for each character (or unit). Each card would be double-ended, like a domino. One end would state the goal for the Gentlemen, the other for the Base men. There would need to be an overall objective for the game, but one could also seek victory by achieving as many of these lesser goals (which may allow both sides to claim victory, but so be it).

I decided that there would also be a third class, the Hearties (I was thinking of Falstaff). These old campaigners and poor knights have a foot in both worlds, thirsting for both glory and loot. They are a necessary go-between for the other classes, but are unpredictable. The player may decide for each Hearty character whether he will attempt the Gentle or Base objective. This class may also be the most susceptible to treachery.

The big influence on my thoughts hasn't been historical reality, but Shakespeare's "Henry V"; specifically, Kenneth Branagh's 1989 movie. The pageant of courage and cowardice, nobles and commons, with their changing fortunes was what I wanted to capture in the game. I welcome any suggestions, constructive criticism, or thinking aloud. Thanks for reading.

Ron

Interesting concept. Would the armies be labeled Base, Gentle, and Hearty by unit, or by individual, so that you might have a base baron leading several gentle knights, some of whose followers were hearty or even base?

I also wonder if you could use this approach for the Crusades, where you also have a distinction between those who were there for the pillage, plunder, rape, etc, and the more Godly, who might want to go off to rescue a holy relic.

Grelber

Grelber,

I had not thought of using this system for the Crusades, but it's a great idea. The objectives in the deck might be different by period or by nationality – I suppose the Hundred Years' War would play very differently from the Crusades (or the Wars of the Roses). I also hadn't thought about men of higher rank whose motivations were Base (though in reality many were). Initially, I had thought of labelling the troops individually, but it might be cumbersome for larger games. I had thought that units of common soldiers might be "along for the ride", but their conduct would depend on the sort of man leading them. A lot of the dramatic tension falls to the Hearties, as I thought it would be easier for them to lead their men to do something selfish than to motivate them to larger goals. I also wanted treachery to play a part in the rules, but haven't figured out how it would be implemented.

It is also just occurring to me how this might work in tandem with unit (or model) activation and random movement rates; a noble might wish to spare some village, but by the time he gets to it, the lads are already in mid-pillage.

Bear with me, this is still very early in its development.

Ron

Check back in Miniature Wargames magazines for two articles:

DAIS – Dark Age Infantry Slog by the Andy Callan (between issues no. 2 and 15 can't recall which one) and Medieval Warfare Command and Control by Guy Hassell (issue 17).

I have found DAIS online here is the link:

DAIS

caelcantch, its an interesting system to set objectives, but i dont see it as a comand and control system