TL3+1 Mechanical Artillery

[whswhs]

GURPS Low-Tech actually has several suggestions that you might start out from: the gunner's quadrant on p. 48 could be adapted to use with an engine, I think; the steel crossbow on p. 74 could probably be scaled up as a dart or rock thrower; there's also going to be a discussion of Roman experiments with pneumatic artillery in LTC2.

Bill Stoddard

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Polydamas

Well, calculus and Newtonian kinematics (with mathematical ideas like energy, force, and so on) are modern by definition.

Assuming TL 5 is modern.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Assuming TL 5 is modern.

Calculus is TL4. Check the dates for Newton and Leibniz. Probably the most important TL5 development was various forms of symbolic logic. Though non-Euclidean geometry laid the ground for relativity.

Bill Stoddard

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Polydamas

Icelander, what do you mean by a substitute for cannon? I think the trifecta of cheap cannon, truck carriages, and sturdy ships drove European warships in one direction. A TL 4-5 society without those might develop warships in another! Indian and Chinese naval warfare at TL 4 might be a profitable area for research ...

Well, Realms warship technology is extremely anachronistic, in terms of real history. Without, as you say, cheap and plentiful cannon, galleys made for ramming are still a viable warship design.

On the other hand, the possibilities of controlling the wind or summoning friendly elementals to propel ships mean that sailing ships can be both faster and more maneueverable than in reality. Provided, that is, that there is enough magic to call upon (meaning that less than 1% of ships will be able to rely upon such big ticket magical propulsion methods).

The occasional ship's mage will be powerful enough to rain down Explosive Fireballs and other anti-material spells on the opposition. This means that tough hulls and gunwales are a worthwhile investment and that sails may be a dangerous weakness. On the other hand, most merchant ships will have a minor adept as the ship's mage, barely powerful enough to make shipboard life easier with a few cantrips and unable to affect a naval battle in any way. Even pirates and warships are more likely to have a wizard who exhausts his might on an attack spell or two than they are to have someone who can function as full-blown artillery on his own.

So, what I guess I mean with 'substitute' for cannon is something that can be used from a range to at least have a chance of damaging enemy vessels or kill some of their crew. Smaller pieces that can be used to suppress enemy wizards and larger ones that can be aimed at the mast in the hope of crippling the opposing vessel.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by whswhs

the gunner's quadrant on p. 48 could be adapted to use with an engine, I think;

Certainly. Once I've found some engine which has enough range to make it worthwhile.

Originally Posted by whswhs

the steel crossbow on p. 74 could probably be scaled up as a dart or rock thrower;

In terms of rules, why would anyone want to do that?

According to the artillery chapter, the TL2 iron cheiroballista is far more efficient than the TL4 crossbow steel siege crossbow.

Originally Posted by whswhs

there's also going to be a discussion of Roman experiments with pneumatic artillery in LTC2.

Bill Stoddard

That should be interesting.

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Assuming TL 5 is modern.

I'm a historian, so yes, the last 300 years are Modern. Back to either 1350 or 1450 you sometimes attach the label "Early Modern" since calling the whole period "Renaissance" is out of fashion.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by whswhs

Calculus is TL4. Check the dates for Newton and Leibniz.

Actually, check the dates for TL 4. Though given when the Principia was published, and the time required for a technology to come into widespread use, I'd still call it TL 5.

[teviet]

Originally Posted by Polydamas

I'm a historian, so yes, the last 300 years are Modern. Back to either 1350 or 1450 you sometimes attach the label "Early Modern" since calling the whole period "Renaissance" is out of fashion.

To a physicists, "modern physics" is relativity and quantum mechanics, while "classical physics" is Newtonian mechanics, electrodynamics, and thermodynamics up to 1905.

TeV

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Icelander

In terms of rules, why would anyone want to do that?

According to the artillery chapter, the TL2 iron cheiroballista is far more efficient than the TL4 crossbow steel siege crossbow.

I'm not surprised; it stored energy in coiled sinew, which seems to have been a highly efficient elastic medium, especially for the weight.

It doesn't appear to me that steel had much of an advantage in terms of power for weight. Rather, the payoff seems to have been that steel was denser, and thus let you store power in a smaller (but heavier) volume. The statistics can probably be found in Vogel's Life's Devices; I don't have that to hand at this exact moment, but I'll try to remember to check.

Bill Stoddard

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by teviet

To a physicists, "modern physics" is relativity and quantum mechanics, while "classical physics" is Newtonian mechanics, electrodynamics, and thermodynamics up to 1905.

Yes, which I is why I found the statement odd. A siege engine that needs relativity or quantum mechanics to be understood?