Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-24-2014, 05:50 AM   #11
Peter Knutsen
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Europe
Default Re: The mechanics of a city in no mans' land

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerious P. Cats View Post
Likewise the city would be pretty effective in regulating trade up and down the Elbe. Historically Vikings had trouble with fortified river cities blocking their movements. In the campaign the Romans might not try to block raiding down the Elbe but the would regulate it, taxing ships that passed through, and trying to prevent attacks on Roman territory (or punishing those who were carrying Roman goods, stolen or not). In fact this would probably be the best way to the Romans to supply themselves, as shipping from Rome itself would be really unreliable.
It makes no sense to "punish" a ship carrying Roman goods. First of all, the soldiers can't magically know which goods are Roman and which ones aren't. Secondly, it could well be legitimate trade, and Rome would want to encourage that, if not consciously (meaning they understand how economics works) then at least by habit.

Also, the Norse used different ship types for different things. It makes good sense for the Romans to allow through the wider cargo-type ships mainly used by traders, but to ban the passing of the narrower "longships" mainly used by raiders. Although of course nothing stops people from using the wrong kind of ship. Both ways.
Peter Knutsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2014, 02:23 AM   #12
Dangerious P. Cats
 
Dangerious P. Cats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Default Re: The mechanics of a city in no mans' land

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen View Post
It makes no sense to "punish" a ship carrying Roman goods. First of all, the soldiers can't magically know which goods are Roman and which ones aren't. Secondly, it could well be legitimate trade, and Rome would want to encourage that, if not consciously (meaning they understand how economics works) then at least by habit.
Just because something doesn't make sense doesn't prevent people from doing it :P

But more to the point the reason the Romans ventured so far through generally impenetrable forest to take the city is because Viking raids had become such a problem for the empire. As such preventing raiding is a priority for the commander of the city. Policy wise Roman soldiers are meant to stop any ship they think is going to raid Roman lands (they are fine with the Vikings raiding anyone else) from passing through and to confiscate goods and even imprison crew of ships that are returning from raids against the Empire (again, they're cool if it's not against Rome), but not impede trade otherwise. Functionally it doesn't work so well. Soldiers are given a good deal of discretion in matters yet are very poorly equipped to make good judgements. As you mention above soldiers don't magically know the origin of goods and might confiscate something because they think it's stolen by mistake, or on purpose as opportunities for corruption are rife. In a city where trade is unreliable and soldiers are rather powerful it would be very easy for soldiers to abuse power, and they probably would. This doesn't mean that they confiscate goods every time, just that going through the city means you run the risk of loosing your shipment to the guards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen View Post
Also, the Norse used different ship types for different things. It makes good sense for the Romans to allow through the wider cargo-type ships mainly used by traders, but to ban the passing of the narrower "longships" mainly used by raiders. Although of course nothing stops people from using the wrong kind of ship. Both ways.
Also there's the question of whether the soldiers on the ground would understand ships enough to know the difference between a trade ship and a warship.

Also longships were involved in trade historically, sort of. One of the staple real world trade goods that Vikings dealt in was slaves, and it was one of their largest trade items, especially with Byzantium. To get slaves Vikings would go raiding in their long ships, abduct people then sail to where they would be sold. Also for the historical Romans had a huge apatite for slaves and the slave trade in the Roman world was huge. I'm my setting I'm assuming that Viking slave trading is super important to how they interact with the Roman Empire, so regulating via ship type would not be viable. But it is a great idea for conflict in the campaign, as guards might assert that the type of ship the party is travelling proves they're off to raid.. So still a very cool idea.

On a related note I am wondering how the garrison would reinforce itself given the difficulties in getting troops there.
__________________
There is no "i" in team, but there is in Dangerious!
Dangerious P. Cats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2014, 02:44 AM   #13
Michele
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Udine, Italy
Default Re: The mechanics of a city in no mans' land

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanW View Post
Basically, the same feeling a modern New Yorker would feel on a visit to farm/ranch country.
Hmm... yes, but make that a farm on a faraway island in 1870, before the invention of radios and airplanes. The supply ship comes every three months. And it may well not be carrying the advanced item you ordered six months ago.
__________________
Michele Armellini
GURPS Locations: St. George's Cathedral
Michele is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2014, 04:25 AM   #14
Peter Knutsen
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Europe
Default Re: The mechanics of a city in no mans' land

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerious P. Cats View Post
Also there's the question of whether the soldiers on the ground would understand ships enough to know the difference between a trade ship and a warship.
It's actually trivial to measure the length and the width of the ship, then calculate a rough ratio. Even a lowly optio ought to be able to do that. Or give him a wooden board with a painted-on lookup table if he can't do simple arithmetic.

And it may be possible to just eyeball it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerious P. Cats View Post
Also longships were involved in trade historically, sort of. One of the staple real world trade goods that Vikings dealt in was slaves, and it was one of their largest trade items, especially with Byzantium. To get slaves Vikings would go raiding in their long ships, abduct people then sail to where they would be sold. Also for the historical Romans had a huge apatite for slaves and the slave trade in the Roman world was huge. I'm my setting I'm assuming that Viking slave trading is super important to how they interact with the Roman Empire, so regulating via ship type would not be viable. But it is a great idea for conflict in the campaign, as guards might assert that the type of ship the party is travelling proves they're off to raid.. So still a very cool idea.
You're right that it makes sense to use the longships for some trade endavours. They might not be very stable in heavy water, crossing the Atlantic and so forth, but for value-dense goods moving along the coasts, or in the Baltic, or to and from the British isles, it makes a lot of sense for some cargo types, but not at all for others. Longships need more crew, to man the oars (trading ships had few oars) which means profit must be split more ways, but then again all those oars help mobility in some situations.

The question of whether slaves are high-value density cargo or medium-value denstiy cargo is unclear to me. But as long as you have a thriving Roman enclave, that's even just tenously connected to the larger Roman empire, there'll be a good demand for that kind of goods. I've got a set of very tentative slave prices to use in my Ärth setting, in some ways similar to yours (10th century, but mildly alternate history), but I don't know that they're particularly good. I think they make sense for RPG purposes, though.

One thing to note is that the Russian rivers, at least, were rarely sailed on longships, even though some older fiction (including Bengtson's otherwise excellent "The Long Ships") depict that. Rather, because of the need to cross over land from one river to another, they used some sort of huge canoes (I think it's covered in GURPS Vikings). But if you're just going to sail one river, and not need to haul your ship overland (logs, borrowed or stolen oxen, lots of sweaty men who get very thirsty, necessitating huge amounts of expensive beer), then a longship or even a rounder cargo ship makes a lot more sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dangerious P. Cats View Post
On a related note I am wondering how the garrison would reinforce itself given the difficulties in getting troops there.
Import troops from elsewhere. The Romans certainly moved barbarian auxiliary troops all over the maps. Sarmatians from West Asia to Britain, for instance. Legions could also be raised one place and then marched to and stationed somewhere else. The idea was that at least the legions would start to self-reinforce with local Romans citizens after some time, but that might have been 150 years rather than 20 years.

I don't know to what extent auxiliaries were expected to self-reinforce. In practice they'd have sons with local women, who might well be raised in their martial traditions and be available for recruitment, but I know little about the legality of all that.
Peter Knutsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
cities, colony, romans, vikings, vikings vs romans

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.