Help support TMP


"What no swords? Medieval Warfare." Topic


Medieval Warfare

21 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please don't call someone a Nazi unless they really are a Nazi.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Medieval Warfare Rules Board


Areas of Interest

Ancients
Medieval
Renaissance

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Ruleset


Featured Workbench Article


Featured Profile Article

The Gates of Old Jerusalem

The gates of Old Jerusalem offer a wide variety of scenario possibilities.


923 hits since 2 Jan 2017
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

count zero99uk23 Dec 2009 10:26 a.m. PST

Ive been reading the rules for Medival Warfare. Im slowly working my way through there are some parts that are a bit iffy, thought im going to do some practice games with cardboard cutouts.

Anyway, my one big query at the moment is where are the swords? For me at least id have thought the sword was the main close assault weapon of this time (i could be wrong) but the lists seem to just go down to axes and javelins? Is
there a reason for this?

I have asked the same question on the Yahoo group but this place gets more trafic :)

Thanks
Zero.

lkmjbc323 Dec 2009 11:11 a.m. PST

Swords are part of other hand weapons I believe…. been along time since I messed with MW.

Joe Collins

Ron W DuBray23 Dec 2009 11:33 a.m. PST

swords were very hard and expensive to make and were mostly back up weapons for rich knights and lords out on the battle fields in Medival times. you did not live to get into combat with a sword against a unit of spears and other pole arms. spears and pole arms ruled the battle fields till agencourt, then it was bow arms then cannon.

if a line of men can kill you at 7 to 9 feet away with pole arms a sword of 3 feet is not much use.

count zero99uk23 Dec 2009 12:04 p.m. PST

So no swords then :)

Just in the book there are pictures of minis with swords. I guessed it would be something like that.

Grizwald23 Dec 2009 12:09 p.m. PST

"swords were very hard and expensive to make"

Really? A really good sword might be expensive, but a sword of some sort was a very common sidearm.

"and were mostly back up weapons for rich knights and lords out on the battle fields in Medival times."

Most medieval troops would carry either a sword or a long dagger as a backup weapon for when they were unable to use or had lost their primary weapon (spear, pike, bow etc.).

Who asked this joker23 Dec 2009 12:09 p.m. PST

Lots of soldiers of the Medieval Period would have swords. They might even have them as main weapons. However, armies of this time period are not uniform. They bring what they have. Nobles, undoubtedly, would have swords. They would also have access to other weapons like pole axes as well.

Daffy Doug23 Dec 2009 12:14 p.m. PST

Our rules, and most rules as far as I can tell, lump swords, axes, maces, hammers, into a single class of one-hand melee weapons. Only in a skirmish game, you MIGHT differentiate between them….

1066.us

count zero99uk23 Dec 2009 12:23 p.m. PST

In the army lists in Foundrys Publication of Medieval Warfare from page 90 onwards none of them have any swords listed. The nearest thing is Axe but it says at the beggining of the book that this refers to a long 2h axe (or 2h sword)

Im just trying to get my head around these rules and to work out what miniatures i need to buy. Im new to wargaming and even more new to this type of wargameing having only played a WW2 skirmish system before hand.

So i dont want to be buying any miniatures with swords for the army?

Thanks :)

StCrispin23 Dec 2009 12:55 p.m. PST

the game assumes that all figures have some sort of hand weapon, be it a mace, sword, axe, or something. so there are no special rules for them. I freely mix figures with swords in with my other figures, and use the weapon that the majority of the models have for rules purposes. As you look for medieval figures, you will find that most are armed with some sort of pole arm, if it is a later period, or spear, if it is earlier (or of course, a missle weapon).

What period are you thinking? Vikings, crusades, hundred years war? that will help with answers. Medieval warfare can be fun, epecially the comand rules and such, but some aspects are a little hard to grasp, and the close combat chart can be a bit scary (so many modifiers, then you do math) but it is not too bad to get the hang of. Try warhammer, or something like it, for a little more straight forward aproach.

Who asked this joker23 Dec 2009 1:00 p.m. PST

Good thoughts here. The game is a large scale battle game so individual hand weapons are factored into the "other weapon" category as they should be. So, if you so choose, you could have a unit of sword armed knights and a band of club wielding Scots and they both would be classed as "other weapons". Armor, of course, would likely be different that that is generally factored in by the unit. Armored Infantry for example.

Griefbringer23 Dec 2009 1:05 p.m. PST

So i dont want to be buying any miniatures with swords for the army?

There is no need to arm all the models in the unit uniformly – what matters is that you (and your opponents) can easily tell how a particular unit is armed. Besides, the weapons listed are the main armemnt of the combatants – you can thus pretty safely assume that every combatant also has some sort of back-up weapon (sword, mace, club, dagger etc.) in case, though this plays no particular effect in the game (since everybody has it).

Thus, for example on a unit of spearmen you could easily include a minority of models armed with weapons other than spears.

Also notice that there is the weapon type Warband Weapons which is sort of "anything goes" where you could expect models to be armed with a wide variety of weapons.

count zero99uk23 Dec 2009 1:40 p.m. PST

Thanks again :) i do like these message boards, lots of quick answers :)

Anyway, ill be looking to do War of the Roses and maybe some England vs France spats, 100 years war or some such, ive a fair bit of reading to do anyway as im a bit lacking in any knowledge outside of bad films.

Im still reading the rules, about 50 or so pages in on my first reading and a lot of the rules are still a bit over my head :) ill be posting more questions im sure as the weeks go on :)

Laters all and merry christmas.

StCrispin23 Dec 2009 2:57 p.m. PST

figures for both the Wars of the Roses and the Hundred years war will mostly have pole arms, so there won't be much of an issue. A few sword models here and there would look good as well.

lugal hdan23 Dec 2009 5:33 p.m. PST

I view swords as being the "sidearm" of the day, much the way that a pistol might be today. To stretch the analogy, you'd use your sidearm for unexpected violence (and to intimidate people), but you'd grab an assault rifle for any serious fighting.

(Leftee)24 Dec 2009 11:31 p.m. PST

Swords are so 12th Century.

Griefbringer25 Dec 2009 3:51 p.m. PST

But as the people on the 3rd Crusade used to say:

"There is no century like the 12th Century."

(Leftee)26 Dec 2009 12:11 a.m. PST

Yes but sequels are never as good as the originals.

rampantlion26 Dec 2009 9:33 a.m. PST

I was under the impression that a sword was quite a special and rare weapon during parts of the middle ages. I focus mostly on the feudal period and I think swords carried by the common infantry soldier of the day would be pretty rare. Knives, axes, daggers of all types yes, but swords, I don't think so. Later in the middle ages (wars of the roses, later 100 years wars maybe) could have been more common, but in the early feudal age the sword was a knight's weapon, not the common man's. Just my opinion.

RockyRusso26 Dec 2009 12:34 p.m. PST

Hi

This is another case of looking back and making modern ideas fit the past. In fact, most weapons for most eras are tools. And Ram is correct that something like the "knight's sword" is a special weapon for a rich guy.

That said, the problem is that there are sharp long knives in modern parlence that could be called 'swords" as well. Making distinctions, I feel, based on wargame thinking.

Is a bowie, a bolo, a knopis a scramaseax a "sword" a large knife or a tool?

In the philippines, for example, when I was there in the 60s, everyone in the uplands of Luzon carried a bolo that looked like a bowie on steroids. over two feet long, with a chopping edge at the front, razor sharp at the hilt for peeling. Carred by men, woman and children would qualify as a sword in most people's minds. But for the Igarot, it was a workaday tool. Course they did do the occasional "head hunting" but you get my point.

Rocky

Griefbringer26 Dec 2009 3:12 p.m. PST

Yes but sequels are never as good as the originals.

Large parts of audience were supposedly very disappointed when the Crusade IV was released back in 1204, claiming that it was just riding on the fame of the three previous episodes. However, some of the critics applauded it for taking an familiar concept and applying it to something new, and in the Byzantine areas a bit part of the audience was (literally) held captive by it.

The Venetian producers stated that they wanted to re-invent Crusade and bring a fresh touch to it, stating that the original concept of just going to Holy Land to chop Saracens was just so 12th century, and that the modern audiences really want the concept updated to match 13th century standards.

In the meanwhile, rumours state that the Pope, who holds the rights to the concept of Crusade, would like to see the next episode directed in a more conventional fashion, bringing the Saracens back to the fray. On the other hand, there are some rumours of a script being written for an independent sequel Crusades: The Albigensian Years which is supposed to make the audience get totally catharic.

(Leftee)27 Dec 2009 3:52 p.m. PST

Very nice! Funny, and in an appropriate idiom!

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.