Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zaruthustran" data-source="post: 492290" data-attributes="member: 1457">Field artilleryWow! Great thread.I retract my earlier statement about castle design, as it's true that the trebuchet is a mighty machine of war. But it's freakin huge and takes days to construct. Cannon, on the other hand, are relatively light, manouverable, and are able to be set up and fired in a matter of minutes.Cannon allowed the creation of quick, mobile armies that carried their artillery with them. You can't very well haul a fully-functional trebuchet around, but you can easily haul cannon.  Also: with cannon, you can have decisive artillery at non-siege battles.  Without cannon, if two armies met in the field it was pretty much soldier vs. soldier, with artillery playing a minor role. Yes, mobile artillery was around before the cannon but such primitive weapons as scorpion and light catapults just didn't have the same effect as cannon.So take out cannon and what changes?Well, battles would still tend to be centered on long sieges instead of engagements in the open field. Warships would be mainly troop transports. You could not, for instance, shell a seaside town into oblivion (it's impossible to mount a trebuchet on a sea-faring ship, and only a trebuchet has a chance at quickly destroying castle walls).The heavy crossbow would dominate long-range battle as the unskilled range weapon of choice.The shield wall, and heavy armor, would still be relatively effective.Argh--work calls.-z</blockquote>

Verification