How can nations afford armies?

[Alaric_Prympax]

With just 2,000 archers the sky will be filled with arrows, I don't think that the archers really need to see your mages. The arrows have to go somewhere so even if your mages are invisible I think that they would be hit sooner or later. In a fantasy situation one can always figure out a way around 'normal' circumstances, an example would be to just have one of you mages teleport behind ememy lines and launch a few fireballs. Or just summon an 'x' elemental to take care of the opposing army.

Both sides would take 'magical' effects into the battle and ready defenses, even using non-magical defenses. Another example would be to circumvent the invisibility- just imagine at the begining of the battle a few catapults filled with flour or sometype of powder lauched across the field, with some containers 'exploding' in mid air. If your mages are on the ground they might be invisible but the powder covering them is not, same thing if they are in the air. That is a mundane item being used against a magical effect that is fairly cheap.

Just brainstorming here, thought I'd throw my 2 cps here.

Shark, you are a wealth of information. As a Classicist I glad to see someone else appreciate Ancient Rome as much as I do.

 

[clockworkjoe]

With just 2,000 archers the sky will be filled with arrows, I don't think that the archers really need to see your mages. The arrows have to go somewhere so even if your mages are invisible I think that they would be hit sooner or later. In a fantasy situation one can always figure out a way around 'normal' circumstances, an example would be to just have one of you mages teleport behind ememy lines and launch a few fireballs. Or just summon an 'x' elemental to take care of the opposing army.

But with a few illusions to distract the army and misdirect their attacks..Also the mages attacked from the rear and summoned monsters. More likely than not, the archers would attack the visible monsters that appeared out of nowhere than shooting arrows up into the sky. Besides shooting arrows straight up will make a lot of them come straight back down on your forces Not to mention the mages have protective spells out the wazoo to protect themselves. Mage armor plus shield plus cat's grace == AC higher than 20 easy.

Also mages in big armies will counteract each other, but we're talking about a battle between low level warriors vs high level adventurers.

 

[Alaric_Prympax]

Point well taken except that the archers don't really 'aim', they're shooting emass filling the sky with arrows. And no unit of archers would shoot straight up. In the opening volley the archers would would shoot in an 'arch' (no pun intended there ) with the arrows going high into the air then coming down upon the enemy. It all really comes down to how you run your 'fantasy' game on the battlefield.

Also if the mages cancel out each other then once again we have archers shooting emass against non-mages. I'm just saying that sooner or later they're going to take some damage.

 

[Col_Pladoh]

Hey every body I was having a quick look thru AEG's "War" book the other day and it got me thinking about the possibility of having an army. Well when i got home I did a few quick mental calculations and sum stuff on the calculator and the cost of having an army amazed me and I wondered whether even whole countries could afford this. By my calculations to train and equip 5000 infantry (scale mail,large wood shield,longsword) and 1000 Heavy cavalry (scale mail,large wood shield, scale barding, Heavy lance,longasword,heavy warhorse) would cost approximately 980000 gp!

Now by my understanding this would have been a rather small army in medieval times and this is even without the obligatory Mages or clerics that many ppl have pointed out would be neccessary in a fantasy environment. can some one explain to me how the nations in our fantasy worlds afford armies then? This sort of cost would surely chew up entire treasuries and with such small armies how do nations stand against invading hordes of orcs etc that plague them?

Easy Answers:

the feudal system required military service from all vassals, so that spread the cost of recruiting, training, and maintaining a standing army. All nobles, knights, and gentlemen were warriors. They had to report with retainers, or individually, armored, armed, and ready for battle when called forth by their overlord.

The monarch would keep only a relatively small force of "regulars" for the defense of state forts and his castles, and of course his guards. This force was supported by state revenues and the monarch's own income.

A medieval European army of 20,000 was quite large in most cases.

The cost of warfare was indeed high, and that's why kings sold things--land, titles, etc. made cities free so as to collect taxes, and borrowed money. It is also who some nobles had their land and titles seized.

Cheers,
Gary

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

The real currency of armies is not gold it is food.

Gold mines do not help unless you have excellent trade routes. Funny thing is, those very trade routes are usually the things that start the war, so don't count on them once the fighting begins.

Through most of the most of medieval Europe, it would almost accurate to say there were no professional armies in the sense we think of today.

Armies were "paid" through their obligations to their liege lords. They owed ~40 days service per year. So cash was typically not an issue.

Due to the weather and practicalities of supplying an army in the field over mediocre roads, there were only 6-7 months of "campaign time" per year -- the period when offensives were practical.

Contrary to popular belief, there were very few peasants on the battlefield. That is not how the medieval system worked; it is the knights job to do the fighting. Most footsoldiers were typically yeomen, more or less "middle class" in the rural economy, and mostly responsible for their own equipment and training.

Of course there were mercenaries, too. Many of those would undoubtedly be runaway peasants looking for any means of advancement.


As for D&D, I think that typical "veteran" squads of soldiers will be a random mix of 1st-3rd level warrior/fighters. Surviving a couple battles plus training on the side is going to give a level or two based on reasonable xp rewards.

Run of the mill officers in the army being 3rd-5th level are not unreasonable.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

The real answer to countering magic on the battlefield is to create appropriate spells.

For example, a magical mist that hangs 50' over the battlefield will force Flyers down low enough that they risk detection.

Large scale Faerie Fires.

Summoned "Watchers" that reveal and attack the invisible.

D&D doesn't really have rules for cooperative magic. But some useful largescale effects are perfectly reasonable for a group of a dozen low level spellcasters to create together.

 

[Aaron L]

. In the opening volley the archers would would shoot in an 'arch' (no pun intended there ) with the arrows going high into the air then coming down upon the enemy.

No pun necessary Alaric. Archery gets its name from the fact that men fired arrows to trace an "arch" through the air.

BTW, not only did the Romans have concrete, they had a type of concrete that hardened underwater!

PS. Col_Pladoh said what I said, just better!

 

[med stud]

On army sizes in medieval times:
The Spanish army was feared for it's great size in late 16th and early 17th century. It's size was 16000 soldiers, and it was considered huge. They werent bigger than that until beurocrazies were refined enough to allow for larger armies.

The most common soldiers in wars in medieval Europe was mercenaries; you plan a war, hire mercenaries, fight the war, win or lose, and then you sign off the mercenaries. A good way to get professional soldiers in a cheap way.

The English had their yeomen, which IIRC was obliged to practise archery once a week and be ready to join the king's wars for some time per year. In exchange they got some benefits from the king.

---

On the affording armies part: As many other have pointed out, they couldnt really afford it. The nations who became rich from wars was the country selling weapons to the warring parts, or the merchant houses doing the same thing. Almost all kings and other rulers were broke all of the time.

---

On the adventurers vs army thing: The real danger for the army isnt if the adventurers attack head on on a battle field. It's getting real ugly when high level spell casters start to take out all leaders. Invisible high level mages can take out several high officers per day. They can also destroy enemy moral by using this tactic from RL: When the army is on the march, the mages always take out the platoon marching after the first. Always. After two or three attacks against second platoon, no one will take that spot again. The discipline will break down, and the army gets standing on the spot. That's when the mages strike in the perimeter, further destroying morale.

The mages can also dominate the generals, who then begins to give strange and destructive orders. After revealing this, paranoia will break out. Who is the enemy?

The counter measures against high level adventurers killing armies is either to cut down the number of high levels, or to let high level characters join armies. This is pretty logical; a modern time army without air support will be shred to pieces by aircrafts (like in Afghanistan, for example). Therefore, any serious army who can afford it gets air support. It's expensive as hell, but vital. I think you can apply that logic to a fantasy world too; no mage support = dead army.

 

[Darklance]

BTW, not only did the Romans have concrete, they had a type of concrete that hardened underwater!

Wow! I didn't even know WE had that!

 

[med stud]

I think they re- invented it in the late 1800's. I watched a show (is that the right word?) on Discovery on the Roman concrete.