Roman Gladius

[Thresher]

-- That might be how the SCA fights, as they do not fear death and dismemberment, but historical accounts of Roman battles didn't always end up looking like phalanx pushes.

Wouldnt know, I dont attend those events, though I have made armour and weapons for a metal weapons society in my country and those guys are bloody nuts. In any case with re-enactments, (which I dont bother with much) its just a modern day interpretation by some very not ancient people. While they are undoubtably fun for all involved no one takes them as being actual history.

As for examples of the 'scrum' I'd use the battle of AD60 vs Bodicea as evidence of how to compress an enemy's skirmish formation to the point where it was useless. Also the battle of Argentoratium in AD357 where the german infantry was halted and pushed back until it broke.
Of course, after the enemy broke and ran it turned into individual scrimmage of combats between individuals.

-- In any case, it's probably a mistake to assume the Roman legionnaires were perfectly drilled automotons. There's plenty of evidence that they used the cut as well as the thrust with their gladius; but the thrust is certainly the one emphasized by Vegetius and some accounts by Tacitus.

I never assume anything, assumption is the mother of all f**kups in my job.
I didnt say they where perfectly drilled automatons, I just said they where well disciplined veterans, read the rest of my post where I do mention the gladius was used to slash. Of which it was quite capable of in close confines mostly focused on causing piercing and lacerations to the lower body and abdomen.

As a weapon, in D20.
Figure same as a shortsword and make it Piercing/Slashing damage type?

 

[Abisashi]

rkanodia: I looked at Formation Expert for my leionnaire, but it takes a BAB of +6; Phalanx fighting (also from CW) works well, and you could use Formation Expert for super-elite soldiers.

To expand on that:
***Leveling Legionnaires***
Hp: +5 per level
BaB: +1 per level
skills: +1 to each skill


2nd:
Title: Veteran
Feat: Dodge
Equipment: Masterwork Gladius(+1 Atk)
Fortitude: +1

3rd
Feat: Endurance
Reflex and Will: +1
Equipment: Banded Mail (lorica segmentata, or the closest thing, I think)

4th
Title: Elite
Feat: Weapon Specialization (Short Sword) (+2 dam)
Strength: +1 (to 12) - +1 to attack and damage.
Fortitude: +1
Equipment: Masterwork Lorica Segmentata, Heavy Wooden Shield

5th
Nothing special

6th
Feat: Formation Expert (+1 AC when in formation, + other stuff)(CW)
Feat: Power Critical (better at confirming criticals)(CW)
All Saves: +1


In a higher magic campaign, 5th and 6th level legionaires recieve:
5th
Equipment: Gladius +1 (+1 attack and damage)

6th
Equipment: Lorica Segmentata[i/] +1, Heavy Wooden Shield +1


***EDIT***
If using humble minion's excellent feats (see below), then the 3rd level feat should be Legionary Training and Advanced Legionary Training should replace Power Critical at 6th level.

 

[humble minion]

I seem to remember that legions used differing equipment and tactics in different time periods. Early Republican armies used three long lines of spearmen, around the start of the Empire these had been replaced by the classic legionary with gladius, scutum, lorica segmenta and three pilums (pila?), and towards the twilight of the empire (with the development of the stirrup and the crisis in Roman manpower) these too had been largely replaced by cavalry. And no doubt there were all sorts of halfway developmental stages between these three extremes. So it's pretty hard to say categorically what 'standard legionaries' carried or how they fought, when any two legionaries could be separated by half a continent and half a millennium of military thought.

I think rkanodia has the right idea, anyway. Some sort of tactical feat like those from the Complete Warrior would seem to be the way to go. At the risk of having this thread banished to House Rules, how about...

Legionary Training
Prerequisites: BAB +3, proficient with medium armour, all martial weapons and shields, Phalanx Fighting.
Benefit:
You gain the use of the following combat manouevres:
Testudo - when fighting using the full defense option with a large shield and shortsword and with similarly equipped allies on either side also using the full defense option, you gain the benefits of cover (+4 to AC, +2 to Reflex saves) in addition to the normal benefits of fighting defensively.
Pilum Training - You may make a ranged Sunder attempt against an opponents shield (only) using a javelin. If this attack hits and succeeds in causing damage after Hardness is taken into account, the javelin has embedded itself in the shield. Your opponent suffers the a penalty to attacks, saves and checks as if he were non-proficient in the use of the shield and an additional penalty of -1 due to the weight of the javelin. This penalty lasts until the shield is discarded or the javelin is removed. Removing a javelin from a shield is a full-round action that provokes an attack of opportunity.
Hardened - you gain a +2 bonus to Fortitude saves made to avoid fatigue from exertion or forced marches.

Advanced Legionary Training
Prerequisites: BAB +6, proficient with medium armour, all martial weapons and shields, Phalanx Fighting, Legionary Training, Weapon Focus (shortsword)
Benefit:
You gain the use of the following combat manoevres:
Close formation - You may enter a square occupied by an ally who is part of a shield wall and who also has the Legionary Training feat. The two of you may fight as normal from that square. You count as being part of the shield wall.
Pilum charge - if you have a javelin in hand at the start of your turn and you use the charge action, you may make an extra ranged attack with your javelin at the start of your charge, draw your shortsword as a free action, and then attack with your shortsword as usual at the end of your charge.
Gladius Expertise - You gain a +1 bonus on all rolls to confirm a critical hit with a shortsword.

Edit: Whoa, in the time it took me to write this, there's been about 10 more replies to this thread! Sorry if I'm repeating someone here...

 

[Abisashi]

darklone said:

Pilums did not bend. Tests have shown that they either break or stay straight.

About the reason why the Romans used shortswords instead of longer ones... They didn't. Later Roman soldiers used spatha, essentially longswords.

Out of curiosity, whose tests? I've heard that before, but I generally hear that they were intended to bend.

As you said, later romans used longer swords... but see Kriegs diagram on the first page; it is possible that each time the gladius was shortened it was to facilitate mass production, but it would seem to me that a shorter sword would be preferable when fighting in a phalanx*. As someone else said, longer swords saw more use again in the cavalry, later in roman history.

*well, actualy I'm pretty sure that phalanx more specifically refers to the greek/macedonian fighting style with pikes, but regardless, its common usage now refers to a group fighting in formation with large shields and swords, as far as I can tell.

 

[Steverooo]

Gladius & Pilum

Gladii were originally made of bronze (as was Roman armor), but Tragan's column notes that his men, at least, were equipped with better gear. The transition apparently occurred betwwen 2 BC to 2 AD, although we don't know exactly for sure.

Pilums did not bend. Tests have shown that they either break or stay straight.

"When Marius fought against the Cimbri, he ordered that of the two nails or pins (pero/nai) by which the head was fastened to the staff, one should be of iron and the other of wood. The consequence was, that, when the pilum struck the shields of the enemy, the wooden nail broke, and as the iron head was thus bent, the spear, owing to the twist in the metal part, still held to the shield and so dragged along the ground" (Plut. Mar. 25).

 

[humble minion]

*well, actualy I'm pretty sure that phalanx more specifically refers to the greek/macedonian fighting style with pikes

And while we're at it, simulating in D&D that fighting formation, the phalanx as used by the hoplites, is real tricky. I know, i've tried to do it for a d20 product that never ended up seeing the light of day....

 

[S'mon]

Ways to make the gladius cool:

The problem is that the power of the gladius lies in the tactics of its wielders, not its inherent power. One possibility would be to allow Roman legionaries additional feats only available with the gladius, eg:

Weapon Specialisation (gladius) - to reflect constant training.
Improved Critical (gladius) - the Roman fighting style with the underarm stab made for wounds of maximum lethality, compared to the slashing longsword. The word 'butchery' comes to mind.

You could let Roman N/PCs get these feats at 1st level, rather than 4th & 8th.

Improved AC in formation - due to close packed shields, not gladius.

However really the main power of the gladius was that it let soldiers fight on a front of about 3' rather than the 5'-10' of most of their opponents. D&D3e doesn't model this, but if you want to run a mass battle with Romans getting a fair deal it's worth remembering.

 

[Abisashi]

Complete Warrior deals with an actual phalanx (pg 124), assuming that weapons give up to 10' reach max. I have been told, however, that pikes were as much as 30' long... can't decide whether I believe that, so if one of you guys has a reliable source talking about this, that'd be great. If they were longer, just extrapolate from the Set for a Charge tactic.

On the pilum-volley thing touched on by clark411, a modified arrow volley (see pg 124 of the CW)would work, just say if they fail their reflex save by an amount equal to or less than the AC of the shield, then it is treated as having been hit by a pilum... oh and shields should apply their AC bonus to the save (an should for arrows too, IMHO). If there are 2 legionnaires throwing at that square (see Advanced Legionnaire Training by humble minion.), then raise the DC by 2, as well as the range in which the shield is hit; if the target misses his save by his shield's AC or less, then up to 2 pilums may stick (if he misses by his shield's AC +2, then only 1 can get stuck.)

With a little work, I think D&D can simulate most tactics well enough to give the right feel and results - at least as well as it already handles the rest of combat.

 

[Darklone]

darklone said:
Out of curiosity, whose tests? I've heard that before, but I generally hear that they were intended to bend.

As you said, later romans used longer swords... but see Kriegs diagram on the first page; it is possible that each time the gladius was shortened it was to facilitate mass production, but it would seem to me that a shorter sword would be preferable when fighting in a phalanx*. As someone else said, longer swords saw more use again in the cavalry, later in roman history.

*well, actualy I'm pretty sure that phalanx more specifically refers to the greek/macedonian fighting style with pikes, but regardless, its common usage now refers to a group fighting in formation with large shields and swords, as far as I can tell.

I know about the quotes that say pilums bend... And I was not yet able to reproduce/find scientific publications concerning the topic. I (material scientist) just happen to know a lot of smiths and archaeologists who like to test things and a group not personally known to me but to the smith with whom I work recrafted a lot of pilums with comparable methods and steel properties ... as the spears did not bend, they tried a lot of different steel alloys and temperature treatments (modern and old ones) and they never managed to throw a spear and make it bend.
A historian they knew tried to prove that the abovementioned quotes about bending spears came from Roman writers home at Rome, not in the field

I can't show you books or publications from him though, guess he's still at it.

You're right about the phalanx, Roman formations are more shieldwalls... the common usage used by D&D I think
The historians I know get crazy when they read it used for Romans

 

[Tzeentch]

Some points:
Caesars battle descriptions in his "Gallic war (sp?)" say more than once that the infantry fought with the pilii in melee till the cavalry came. The gladii were the last resort when the formation broke or was dissolved.

-- Most sources say that the pilum was a melee weapon of last resort. They certainly would have been crappy weapons in a close fight.
-- The instance in the Gallic War that I recall was that the Germans were upon the Romans so quickly that they didn't have time to throw their pilum.
-- I'd be interested to see the reference though, I don't have a translation of the Gallic War available.

Gladii were made from steel, not iron. It was not necessarily high quality steel, but the Romans had a huge industry compared to their neighbours and were able to equip more soldiers with more weapons.

-- Oops. Yes, by medieval standards quite crappy steel though. I was thinking of their armor most likely.

Pilum not bending directly contradicts pretty much all first-hand accounts of actual pilum use. If modern recreations don't bend, that probably just means they screwed up the construction.

"The Gauls were much hampered in action because a single spear often pierced more than one of their overlapping shields and pinned them togetherl and, as the iron bent, they could not pull it out. With their left arms thus encumbered it was impossible for them to fight properly, and many, after repeated attempts to jerk their arms free, preferred to drop the shields and fight unprotected." - Caeser, The Gallic War

Has anyone read the results of the pilum reconstructions that Napolean funded?

As for how many Pilae a Roman Legionary carried, and/or which forms of Hasta, neither you nor I know. We weren't there! The Lacus Curtius disagrees with you, however. It states that a heavy footman carried two pila and a lance, as well as a gladius and Pugio (dagger), into battle. He would have carried spares with his gear.

-- Another counterpoint, Josephus in The Jewish War claims the legionnaires carried a single pilum (presumably with more on their mule or as part of the legion armory). It probably varied between legions, regions and so on.