Racial Army Gear

[hcobb]

I'm getting tired of generating strange results like blowguns and nunchucks for army sergeants, but I do want some regularity for army gear. They do issue weapons rather than asking troops to bring something random from home, right?

So what are the weapons used by different races?

Humans would have rank troops with shield, spear and sword.
Dwarves are axes, shield and crossbow.
Elves get bow, spear and sword.
Halflings are sling and dagger.

How about wolf riding goblins?
Are orcs regimented or random?
Do reptile people just fight with clubs?
How about gargoyle troopers?
Centaurs?

[TippetsTX]

Centaurs - Lances, horse bow or javelin, and a bastard sword for close combat.

Reptile men - anything big; heavy crossbows, bastard or greatswords, great hammers and battle axes.

[Skarg]

There may be stereotypes, but hopefully they aren't always true.

In our original TFT campaigns, it varied by nation and by different units and types of troops, which were often given wargame stats and counters usually with symbols showing equipment type, which were then used to resolve battles when they occurred between major forces in the campaign.

Some armies had assigned weapons but some irregulars did not, and they often had mixes even when they were assigned.

Our reptile man nations tended to be very respectably equipped, usually with heavy polearms, two-handed swords, battleaxes and crossbows, since the minimum adult reptile man ST was 14.

Of course, with the new rules, there is the pesky matter of no rules for gaining talents for recruits except by supposedly spending 500XP per point, which would be even more of a problem than in original TFT.

[hcobb]

Originally Posted by Skarg

Of course, with the new rules, there is the pesky matter of no rules for gaining talents for recruits except by supposedly spending 500XP per point, which would be even more of a problem than in original TFT.

The job progressions only make sense if you get around 10 XP per job roll.

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by hcobb

The job progressions only make sense if you get around 10 XP per job roll.

Maybe (not sure what your actual reasoning is) if you decide the bizarre 500XP per talent point (and no other way to learn more talents except "during character creation") but 100XP per attribute makes sense, and applies to NPCs. I'd make many other conclusions or house rules before trying to bend the rest of my game world to support those weird conditions.

[hcobb]

ITL p58: Army/police officer Above, plus Strategist, Engineer, Diplomacy – or 5 years as sergeant

I.e. five years of job exp should make them equally qualified.

Five years at 500 XP per year = 2.5k XP or five skill points.

Diplomacy (1) + Strategist (2) + Engineer (2) = five skill points.

All the other examples I've studied also work within the limit of 10 XP per job roll.

[Skarg]

Originally Posted by hcobb

ITL p58: Army/police officer Above, plus Strategist, Engineer, Diplomacy – or 5 years as sergeant

I.e. five years of job exp should make them equally qualified.

Five years at 500 XP per year = 2.5k XP or five skill points.

Diplomacy (1) + Strategist (2) + Engineer (2) = five skill points.

All the other examples I've studied also work within the limit of 10 XP per job roll.

1) I read "or five years as sergeant" as an indication that you can get promoted after five years as sergeant, regardless of whether your abilities went up, down, or sideways during that time. That would certainly match many real-world organization promotion policies.

So what this also implies to me is the opposite, i.e. "You need 5 years as sergeant to get promoted to this job, UNLESS you happen to have Strategist, Engineer, and Diplomacy already!"


2) SJ has posted he was never into the economics bits, so this like many of your other posts with conclusions on other economic conclusions seem backwards to me. And you're so ironic/mysterious about them, that I can't tell quite what you mean by them, but it seems like mostly (from your house rule solutions and the way you tend to be pointing out very bizarre conclusions) I feel like you're also at cross-purposes to your own probable intent.

That is, why warp the setting to match obscure implications of the least-well-tested corners of the rules?


3) The job table is only slightly altered from original ITL, which was based on its rules and assumptions, and was weird about the number of talent requirements even then (and qualifications for combat rolls are not determined by wasting excessive points in extra redundant weapon talents, even if they didn't cost XP) and I am sure SJ did not do much/any math anything like what you're suggesting.