Are some of the basic elements of medieval combat too weak in D&D?

[S'mon]

Hey, the wall of spears worked in the movie Braveheart. (Of course it was a recreation of a battle on a bridge re-enacted as a standard open field conflict. But hey, what the hell.)

Yeah, the Scots Schiltrons worked fine vs knights. Not so great vs longbows.

 

[Switchblade]

Hmm. This would be a very different sort of shield wall than the sort I'm used to (in which, almost by definition, the shields overlap or touch).

What era was this a demonstration of?

I think it was a saxon shield wall but it was a long time ago (12 years I think). The shields did overlap, the horse just knocked them aside, it wasn't going full pace by any stretch but it had the strenght to knock a hole in the line then the line after it it more sort of pushed through.

 

[Choranzanus]

I've read a lot of medieval military historians, they all say what I said above - cavalry did not charge head on into formed spear/pike/shield line. Not even heavy armoured cavalry. Maybe Polish hussars were an exception, but it sounds like they were equipped to strike effectively before reaching the line, not go into the line. Also, cavalry charges were at a trot, not at a gallop; which would be fatal as one fallen horse would cause a pile-up. They were a much more controlled affair and could be broken off if the enemy line didn't break before contact.

First, it is not lost to me that knights have some flexibility. They do not have to carry the charge through or attack at maximum speed, especially if enemies are not recoiling.

Second, knights were certainly equipped to attack spearmen. Their lances are about 4 metres long, less if they were poorly trained. This is good enough for most spears, just like hussar can attack pikemen. There was a tendency to make lance as long as possible, as advantages of a long lance are readily seen even if you are going knight vs knight. In later years however, lances have become shorter, probably reflecting decreased training.

Third, they were certainly trained to attack fully formed infantry formations. The knights usualy started the battle (if there were no missile troops) and only then infantry was deployed. In a way, their very purpose was to break formation.

Fourth, if we accepted that knights could not attack infantry formation we would have a real hard time explaining why cavalry dominated the medieval battlefield and why medieval strategists regarded infantry why such an obvious disdain.

I am curious what your historians can say about deployment of knights in battle. I am not however surprised by your statement; realistic estimation of knight effectiveness is rare, especially in books that are not themselves dedicated to knights. Many books mention that medieval tactics was rigid and inflexible, but fail to say why this was so.

Of course, some allowances must be made for differences in knight effectiveness. Knights dominated in Europe for almost 500 years and would differ somewhat by country and period. There is also more room for training being of importance, more so than with infantry.

 

[Switchblade]

Yeah, I was thinking of the Saxon shieldwall where the shields overlap closely, you can't break through it without knocking the whole wall down. This is an immobile formation, so very inflexible, but no horse is going through it.

The shield only overlaps the shield on the right and is overlaped in turn by the shield on the left. Any pressure on the shield is spread between the shield hit and the one on the right. That makes it efficient but not unbreakable.

I don't remember if the shields were overlapping as much as they should have been (maybe the didn't want the horse or reenactors getting injured) but the demonstration did show how the shield wall did stand up to a charge. The horses would go through the front line but after that they would be in trouble.

I didn't bring this up to argue that shieldwalls weren't effective, just to say a trained horse will charge a shield wall

I'm guessing a properly trained warhorse will do so far more readily than the horse the reenactors used.

 

[mmadsen]

They were taught to charge head on. If you look at battles where knights were defeated, and all of them are famous, you will notice that willingnes of knights to attack head on, despite common sense, was important part of their failure.

Let me repeat myself:

The charge is a game of chicken; whoever flinches first loses. If the pikemen are professional and don't run at the sight of charging knights, they can hold their ground. If they lose their composure, they get run down.​

 

[Umbran]

Yeah, I was thinking of the Saxon shieldwall where the shields overlap closely, you can't break through it without knocking the whole wall down. This is an immobile formation, so very inflexible, but no horse is going through it.

Dude, there's only a man behind the shield - a biped perhaps a fifth the mass of the quadruped horse. A man can hold back a man. A line of men can hold back a line of men. A man, or even a few men, is unlikely to stop a charging horse dead. And a line of men isn't going to stop a wall of charging cavalry.

 

[Korgoth]

Dude, there's only a man behind the shield - a biped perhaps a fifth the mass of the quadruped horse. A man can hold back a man. A line of men can hold back a line of men. A man, or even a few men, is unlikely to stop a charging horse dead. And a line of men isn't going to stop a wall of charging cavalry.

I think you're right about that but isn't the spear indispensible to the shieldwall anyway? Obviously a speeding horse could theoretically plow through the shields, but could it possibly survive the point of impact? Plus there are the back ranks to consider.

That sounds like it would be suicide for cavalry.

EDIT: i.e. It's not the line of men that stops the cavalry charge, but the whole formation.

 

[garyh]

While the medieval combat history lesson is all really interesting (it is, really, no sarcasm there!), I think it actually serves to illustrate why these tactics (and thus the importance of the equipment they rely on) don't really apply to D&D. You don't have a shield and spear wall, you have one guy in plate, shield, and sword, a second guy in leather armor with a dagger, a third in chain with a mace, and a fourth in robes with a staff. And if you're the group charging, that's still what you have, but on horseback.

EDIT: I'd be curious to see if there were any medieval tactics for small group combat. I can't imagine there were, and even if so, the small group still wouldn't reflect a standard D&D group, but it'd be a closer analogy at least.

 

[mmadsen]

Dude, there's only a man behind the shield - a biped perhaps a fifth the mass of the quadruped horse. A man can hold back a man. A line of men can hold back a line of men. A man, or even a few men, is unlikely to stop a charging horse dead. And a line of men isn't going to stop a wall of charging cavalry.

We're not talking about a rugby scrum or (American) football line of scrimmage, but with one team replaced by horses. The men forming the shield wall are spearmen, and it's that hedge of spear points that holds off the horses.

Horses won't voluntarily charge a hedge of spear points. Trained war horses are definitely willing to do things that ordinary horses will not do -- like run over and trample soldiers -- but charging into spears seems extreme -- and counterproductive.

On the other hand, if you're a spearman, and the horses charging at you just keep charging, do you stand your ground and trust your spear to keep you from getting trampled? Or do you bolt away and let some other sap absorb the charge to the best of his ability?

 

[S'mon]

Dude, there's only a man behind the shield - a biped perhaps a fifth the mass of the quadruped horse. A man can hold back a man. A line of men can hold back a line of men. A man, or even a few men, is unlikely to stop a charging horse dead. And a line of men isn't going to stop a wall of charging cavalry.

It's maybe 7-10 men deep, typically. Anyway, like I said in practice horses don't/didn't actually charge into formed shield walls, or schiltrons, or pike formations.