Pyrrhus failed because he couldn't sustain the losses he took, even though the Romans lost more. He only had one army, the Romans could replace theirs entirely, time and again.

The idea that it was entirely because of the Roman "system" is overblown. You have four million people, with around half a million you can put into the field in extremis, and you are fighting at home. Your opponent has 30,000 men, with no reserves, and he is separated from his home base by the sea and distance. Who do you think is going to win an extended campaign?

Quote from: Kiero;1082157The idea that it was entirely because of the Roman "system" is overblown. You have four million people, with around half a million you can put into the field in extremis, and you are fighting at home. Your opponent has 30,000 men, with no reserves, and he is separated from his home base by the sea and distance. Who do you think is going to win an extended campaign?

I think this is very silly. The Persians had a lot more than 4 million and they still lost vs Alexander. It's the logistics and the training system that let you make use of that population base.

Quote from: S'mon;1082160I think this is very silly. The Persians had a lot more than 4 million and they still lost vs Alexander. It's the logistics and the training system that let you make use of that population base.

The Persians had a patchwork of conquered peoples, most of whom they could barely trust when they mobilised them. The Seleukids discovered the same problem when they tried to levy troops from the same place.

They didn't have a relatively homogeneous and geographically proximate people who shared the same languages and customs and were committed to the same system, as the Romans did. Even aside from the Social Wars a Marsi tribesman and yeoman farmer from Latium still had much more in common than a Gedrosian herder and Ionian tradesman.

Quote from: Kiero;1082157Pyrrhus failed because he couldn't sustain the losses he took, even though the Romans lost more. He only had one army, the Romans could replace theirs entirely, time and again.

The idea that it was entirely because of the Roman "system" is overblown. You have four million people, with around half a million you can put into the field in extremis, and you are fighting at home. Your opponent has 30,000 men, with no reserves, and he is separated from his home base by the sea and distance. Who do you think is going to win an extended campaign?

Greetings!

Kiero, can you read? Did you bother to read what I said? I said Pyrrhus suffered *Unacceptable Casualties*, hence we have a "Pyrrhic Victory" in homage to his tough fighting, but ultimate failure. What are you even trying to argue with me about? Stop strawmanning me, sir. I have not made the arguments you seem to have wanted me to. In point of fact, I have never contradicted any historical point you have made, and nothing I said is inaccurate in any way for anyone that has been seriously educated in the field of ancient history. Like S'mon so eloquetly said, your arguments have become silly, Kiero.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1082170Greetings!

Kiero, can you read? Did you bother to read what I said? I said Pyrrhus suffered *Unacceptable Casualties*, hence we have a "Pyrrhic Victory" in homage to his tough fighting, but ultimate failure. What are you even trying to argue with me about? Stop strawmanning me, sir. I have not made the arguments you seem to have wanted me to. In point of fact, I have never contradicted any historical point you have made, and nothing I said is inaccurate in any way for anyone that has been seriously educated in the field of ancient history. Like S'mon so eloquetly said, your arguments have become silly, Kiero.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

You keep puffing up the Romans and claiming it was their wonderful system, while ignoring all the examples I've raised that show it was ancillary to the resources they had at their disposal. For someone sneering at my "education" in ancient history, you've produced nothing more than soundbites and homilies, generalisations which don't show a great deal of depth in the topic.

The Roman system wouldn't have worked for the Makedonians or Seleukids or Carthaginians or Ptolemaioi or any of the other major powers of their age. Because theirs was a population comprising a tiny elite with their own invented/imported class of settler-soldiers (leveraged with the addition of lots of mercenaries), imposed over the top of a large mass of foreign subjects with little genuine allegiance to them.

Quote from: Kiero;1082169committed to the same system

Indeed.

Quote from: Kiero;1082171The Roman system wouldn't have worked for the Makedonians or Seleukids or Carthaginians or Ptolemaioi or any of the other major powers of their age.

I guess that explains why the Roman Empire was such a disastrous failure - their system just didn't work in foreign lands. :rolleyes:

All you're saying is that the Roman system didn't work for people who didn't have the Roman system. It's a complete tautology. The Roman genius was precisely in turning conquered peoples into loyal subjects and allies. And that certainly includes the peoples of Italy early on, just as much as Germans or Levantines later.

Rome didn't 'just happen' to have more resources than Pyrrhus or Hannibal. They had a fully developed cultural-economic-logistical-military system that could put huge armies in the field - repeatedly.  For a lot of the period the size of the Italian population wasn't even anything special compared to eg Greece, or North Africa - which was very different back then and much more fertile.

So...  Who, in D&D style dungeon games use Phalanxes?  Honest question.  Just because I haven't encountered them does NOT mean they don't happen.  So I'm genuinely curious as to who does.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1082245So...  Who, in D&D style dungeon games use Phalanxes?  Honest question.  Just because I haven't encountered them does NOT mean they don't happen.  So I'm genuinely curious as to who does.

They show up a bit in old-school D&D. When I'm running new-school the mechanics (eg individual init) don't really make them feasible. I statted them as Throngs in 4e but never used in play.

Even in 5e we do use polearms with reach & attacking in 2 ranks, but not what I'd call a Phalanx.

Quote from: S'mon;1082271They show up a bit in old-school D&D. When I'm running new-school the mechanics (eg individual init) don't really make them feasible. I statted them as Throngs in 4e but never used in play.

Even in 5e we do use polearms with reach & attacking in 2 ranks, but not what I'd call a Phalanx.

Greetings!

Well, if the group is traveling through wilderness and getting attacked by savage warbands of Centaurs, or being hunted by ferocious packs of Tyrannosaurs, having a dozen or so soldiers equipped as a Phalanx can be crucial to survival. Likewise, having a half dozen or so spearmen as you march into the caverns of the Underworld, fighting hordes of Quaggoth and Hook Horrors can make a big difference in seeing a new dawn.

My groups are always traveling with a half dozen or more spearmen and a half dozen trained war-dogs. It's like the American Express Card. "Don't Leave Home Without Them."

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK;1082277Greetings!
Well, if the group is traveling through wilderness and getting attacked by savage warbands of Centaurs, or being hunted by ferocious packs of Tyrannosaurs, having a dozen or so soldiers equipped as a Phalanx can be crucial to survival. Likewise, having a half dozen or so spearmen as you march into the caverns of the Underworld, fighting hordes of Quaggoth and Hook Horrors can make a big difference in seeing a new dawn.

My groups are always traveling with a half dozen or more spearmen and a half dozen trained war-dogs. It's like the American Express Card. "Don't Leave Home Without Them."

here there are not a lot of war pets, or familiars, in my D&D groups. D&D groups that I run games for like ranged weapons, and reach weapons like spears. When D&D 3e first came out, I was one of the first players to adopt the reach weapon feats to see if I could make an awesome fighter. What I found was 3e had watered down the damage reach weapons did so much that they were not really effective, as they historically in fact, are.

My 6th level fighter that died in a cavern complex holding off a horde of Derro in a Forgotten Realms Campaign so the rest of the party could escape...

CHARACTER NAME - Kishara
RACE - Human
CLASS Amazon Fighter
LEVEL 4      Experience:  7000 exp
==== STATS ===================
Str: 16 (+3) Dex: 18 (+4)
Int: 14 (+2) Con: 12 (+1)
Wis: 12 (+1) Cha: 10
==== COMBAT =========================
AC:    18 (10+ wearing chain shirt armor+ dex bonus) 22 vs. AoO
HP:  35
Current HP: 35

Ashanka Melee Attack Bonus:  +11 (Base Ftr +4 and Spear +2 and
+3 Str Mod and +1 Wpn Focus +1 Wpn Specialiazation)

Melee Attack Bonus:  +9 (Base Ftr +4 and +3 Str Mod and
+1 Wpn Focus + 1 Wpn Specialization)

Ranged Attack Bonus: +8 (Base Ftr +4 +Dex Mod )
Speed: 30 feet
==== SAVES  =========================
Fortitude: +5 (+1 Con Bonus + 4 ftr lvl)
Reflex: +5 (+4 Dex Bonus + 1ftr lvl )
Will: +3 ( +2 Int Bonus + 1 ftr lvl )
==== SKILLS =========================
Name - Ranks - Mod
Climb - 2
Jump - 2
Knowledge (nature) - 4
Craft - (create spears & arrows) - 4
Knowledge (legend lore) - 4
Profession (Hunter/Gatherer) - 4
Swim - 2
Ride - 3
Search - 1
Heal - 3
Handle Animal - 1

==== FEATS =====================
Expertise - 1 - Defensive & offensive attacks
Dodge - 1 - +1 AC vs. one specified attacker
Mobility - 1 +4 AC vs. attacks of opportunity
Spring Attack - 1 Allows movement of up to 30' before and or after an
attack so long as the movement is not more than 30' No AoO for
defender...
Whirlwind Attack -1 Allows multiple attacks on targets in close
proximity
during a melee round...
Weapon Specialization Feat - ShortSpear - +1 with Shortspear
Bonus Amazonian Feat - Weaponfocus - Spear +1 with shortspears...
Bonus Amazonian Feat -  Feint - Executing fancy footwork and using
deception, you are able to fool an opponent as to the true nature of
your attack, dodge, and parry abilities. +1 to Attack, and +1 AC Dodge
bonus against 1 target...

==== WEAPONS ===================
Weapon          Attack Bonus    Damage
Ashanka ( +2 Spear) +11  1d8+5 critx3 20ft. 5 lb. large, piercing weapon
Thrusting Spear +9  1d8+3 critx3 20ft. 5 lb. large, piercing weapon
Shortbow         +8  1d6 crit x3 60 ft. 2lb. medium piercing weapon
Dagger          +7  1d4+3  crit (19-20 x2) 20 ft. 1 lb. tiny piercing

==== SPECIAL ABILITIES =====================
Ashanka The Spear... 19 charges left...
==== SPELLS =====================
None
==== LANGUAGES =====================
Common
Elven
Nuetral
Amazon
Cormyran

EQUIPMENT: ====================
high soft leather boots
Chainshirt armor
Grey cloak
Leather skirt
Spear Quarrel to hold x3 shortspears
Shortspear x1
+2 Shortspear x1 "Ashanka"
Shortbow x1
1 Quarrel  w/ 24 Elkhorn Arrows (Masterwork arrows, +1 to hit)

--- The following quarrels are all strapped to Smokestack, the
horse---
1 Quarrel w/ 10 Elkhoof Arrows (crushing , 1d12 base damage, +1 to
hit)
1 Quarrel w/ 10 earth Arrows (Masterwork arrows, +1d6 fire damage to
evil)
1 Quarrel w/11 arrows
1 Quarel w/20 arrows
1 Quarrel w/20 arrows

---Backpack---
1 Sembian Firewine Potion
1 Fountwater Potion
1 Neutralize Poison Potion
4 Vials of holy water
flint & steel
bone sewing needles (x8 various sizes & styles)
thread
small roll of twine
4 flasks of oil
4 torches
1 bone dagger
1 bedroll
2 small leather sacks
1 leather spell component pouch
2 leather waterskins
1  Rope (100' of dwarven cave-delving rope)
1  Spade (with dwarven prybar, all metal)
1 Smokestick (see p114 PHB)
1  Thunderstone (genuine dwarven, see p114 PHB)
10 arrowheads made of amethyst and ruby.

1       Scroll Case (polished yew)
        1  Traveller's recommendation (to bearer, Arabelian Notary)
        1  Map of Cormyr and Storm Horns
        1  Map of Arabel
        1  Map of Hornshield
        4  Blank sheets
        2  Yazbid's patented "no dipper" pre-dipped pens

1       Belt Bag (leather, large)
        10 Pitons (durable steel)
        1  Piton Hammer (durable oak w/metal head)
        4  Chalk sticks (white x3, orange x1)
        1  Sunrod (see p114 PHB)
        12 Caltrops 1d2 damage...

1938 GP - 1500 in small gemstones

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1082245So...  Who, in D&D style dungeon games use Phalanxes?  Honest question.  Just because I haven't encountered them does NOT mean they don't happen.  So I'm genuinely curious as to who does.

I had a large group of friends who all played 3.5e Living Arcanis at cons and filled entire 6 man tables. Given its Roman setting we decided at one point to all make Legionnaires and use their tactics (at least to the degree six men could) to pretty good effect (a lot of the opponents in the mods were intended for mixed parties and ganking the casters; they didn't deal well with a wall of tower shields).

In another game, my sorcerer employed men-at-arms who fought in defensive phalanx style. Their job was to create a shell of cover and distance around my sorcerer so I could blast away with my spells with impunity.

As for spear-use; if they're not mobile cover, the men-at-arms I employ most often across characters are halberdiers. In tight quarters they form up and use them like spears, but also have the flexibility of tripping and using their axe head and armor-piercing spike when those are the better tactical options. It helps that the system we're using accounts for the degree to which full-plate harness obviates the need for a shield as additional protection. A formation of halberdiers in full plate harness is one of the most effective infantry forces you'll see on the field of battle.

Quote from: Chris24601;1082356A formation of halberdiers in full plate harness is one of the most effective infantry forces you'll see on the field of battle.

With Polearm Master and Sentinel, it works out pretty well in D&D 5e too.

So some have, thank you.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1082548So some have, thank you.

No problem.

And to be fair, spears, and even moreso halberds, are NOT weapons you just carry around everywhere, even in the libertine and adventurer-friendly Free Cities Republic. Spears are weapons of war or implements for hunting big game like boars. Neither use has a place inside the city walls. There my men-at-arms/bodyguards wear much less conspicuous brigandine (generally just a coat/vest over a lighter foundation... basically the equivalent of a kevlar or stab vest) and wear messers.

They use messers because, while it's not a big deal in the Free Cities, the nearby kingdom of Ironhold allows only nobility to carry a sword (and limits plate armor and military weapons to units under the direct command of a nobleman), so if you plan on traveling there, you're better off equipping and training your men with single-bladed full tang "long knives" and avoiding the unnecessary trouble (not that you want men on the march to be doing so in full plate and lugging a halberd anyway... that stuff goes in the wagon until you're proximate to where you expect to use it).

Spears have their place and death traps like dungeons are one of those places, but they're not an "everyplace" weapon the way a sword (or messer) is. If I could only pick one weapon for my warrior-type PCs I'd always pick the best sword/messer I could get away with carrying just about anywhere, but if I can have more than one, a spear/halberd would be an easy second choice (and primary in use).