[Low-Tech] Windlass and cranequin
 

Would the authors of Low-Tech be kind enough to share with me any sources employed to write the section on mechanical devices used to span crossbows?

I'm engaged in trying to write a consistent rule system for crossbows to use in my own campaigns and some of the assumptions made in this chapter seem to clash with my own (admittedly imperfect) understanding of the subject.

For example, I have trouble finding historical examples of 1.125 lbs. or 2 lbs. cranequins. The smallest I can recall are 3 lbs. or so. Also, the prices for cranequins, what are they based on? Payne-Gallway considered cranequins a far more expensive method of spanning crossbows than windlasses and therefore unsuitable for issue to common soldiers. Has this view been discredited?

In addition, I would love it if the authors could point me toward historical artifacts or authentic replicas of period windlasses, weighted and tested. Does the weight of the windlass given in Low-Tech include the stirrup necessary for the crossbow? Do they weight of the steel bows?

Re: [Low-Tech] Windlass and cranequin
 

If you have sources for that information, you should feel free to use it. I used the libraries available to me (including a university library) and a lot of Web searches; I didn't find any place that provided such information. But it's a GURPS meta-rule that reality trumps game rules.

Bill Stoddard

Re: [Low-Tech] Windlass and cranequin
 

Beyond Payne-Gallway, George Stevens, Hardy & Strickland and what little appears in Williams' "The Knight and the Blast Furnace" (most penetration data), I have none.

On the other hand, even with judicious web searches, I have been unable to find any historical 1-2 lbs. cranequins. Since Low-Tech lists such devices, I assume that you have found them. Could you direct me to the websites in question?

Since I'm using actual poundage to stat the bows, I'll have to rework the ST multipliers into something else and it would help to have clearer descriptions of the devices, maybe a researcher's estimate of how long it takes to crank.

Re: [Low-Tech] Windlass and cranequin
 

The formula for a windlass is 4s * (BL for rated bow ST) / (BL for wielder). If we assume that a crossbow with a rated ST of 10 is an 80 lb bow, which is at least believable, just go with 'poundage/BL seconds'. I have no idea why the weight of a windlass would vary significantly with its strength ratio in the first place, you adjust the strength ratio by just changing the ratio of shaft radius to arm radius. You need stronger structure (and cord) for a stronger bow, but the weight increase shouldn't be very large and in any case is only dependent on the draw weight of the bow.

Re: [Low-Tech] Windlass and cranequin
 

I take it that you did not understand the clause I didn't find any place that provided such information? I made a guess. If you have actual weights that are heavier, please feel free to use them.

Bill Stoddard

Re: [Low-Tech] Windlass and cranequin
 

Payne-Gallwey's 'The Crossbow' was cited numerous times in playtest comments. I can only say that I am suprised if you did not read it.

In any event, if the stats for cranequins are not a deliberate nod to some new scholarship challenging Payne-Gallwey's work and of which I was unaware, they are simply not accurate. All authorities I have read agree that cranequins were heavier than the weights given in Low-Tech and while historians unaccountably neglect to give GURPS $ Costs, it may be safely said that cranequins are more expensive to construct than windlasses.

Re: [Low-Tech] Windlass and cranequin
 

I did indeed read it, but I don't recall seeing a figure for the weight of a cranequin. Can you cite a page number?

Bill Stoddard

Re: [Low-Tech] Windlass and cranequin
 

These insistent questions would fit well in a game designer's nightmare...
I can't help it, right now I am picturing some GURPS author who gets stalked by an angry GURPS player, who obsessively asks "WHERE could you find a historical 2 lbs cranequin? DID YOU PERSONALLY WEIGH some historical cranequins?"

I think that everybody already understood that was your point. Since you appear to be so expert on cranequins, I think you could have said it straight in the first post... "I think cranequins in Low Tech are too light, they should weight more according to Payne-Gallwey"...

Re: [Low-Tech] Windlass and cranequin
 

Failing finding an authentic one, finding a replica that was that light would have been better than guessing. I found two replicas online, one was ~4 lbs, the other ~6 lbs.

There's a couple museums with dimensions but no weights. A politely worded e-mail might convince one of them to weigh an actual historical sample, but maybe not, I'm not sure how busy they usually are.

Re: [Low-Tech] Windlass and cranequin
 

Page 131 for a good description and speculation about cost, p. 138 and p. 142 for very good illustrations and p. 164 for a statement that a 1.5 lbs. goat's foot lever was light compared to cranequins or windlasses.

In addition, replicas have been made of many of the cranequins that Payne-Gallwey describes and these weight between 3-6 lbs.

Blackmore's 'Hunting Weapons from the Middle Ages to the Twentieth Century', also cited in playtest comments, has the same 3-6 lbs. weight range.

Re: [Low-Tech] Windlass and cranequin
 

Payne-Gallwey is an Edwardian author. Hence I did not consider it improbable that the authors had found more modern scholarship discrediting some of his views.

Re: [Low-Tech] Windlass and cranequin
 

I had considered making the time to span a function of BL, but I was not certain whether it was plausible that cocking devices made to take advantage of massive BL were common.

At least for cranequins, I figure that they have a rated MinST and being stronger than that will yield a very limited benefit.