Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 6989003" data-attributes="member: 16814">Case in point.  Depends is not an answer, it's an equivocation that needs further explanation, which you didn't provide.  To call depends an answer renders the concept of answering a question irrelevant -- so long as I type a word I can claim I've answered.Preemptory google searches on the topic indicate that 10th century Byzantine archers were expected to have a quiver of 40 arrows and a quiver of 60 arrows on hand.  English order of battles from Henry V's Battle of Agincourt show that an English Longbowman carried 2 sheaves (24 arrows each sheaf) in their quiver and another 1 or 2 sheaves worth tucked into their belt for a total of 60-75 arrows.  (Although the typical English archer would only carry 24 to 48, that was also when they had a very well rehearsed resupply from stores, which wasn't present at Agincourt and may account for the differences.)  The Mongols rode with 2-3 quivers of 60 arrows each, with one quiver holding specialty arrows like signal arrows or incendiary arrows.  They also carried 2 bows.So, historically, carrying many arrows is something archers did -- I think because most archers realized that their lives pretty much depended on having ammo.  So reference to what some artist thinks a fantasy archer should look like is far less convincing to me than what can be easily accomplished and, indeed, was historically accomplished re: carrying a lot of ammo.If you'd like to call following the example of the greatest historical archer archetypes (the Mongels and the English Longbowmen at Agincourt) cheese, go ahead, I won't mind.</blockquote>

Verification