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="Dr. Strangemonkey" data-source="post: 493220" data-attributes="member: 6533">Allow me to clarify on my Meso-American comment.The architecture and art I was reffering to was from the post-Aztec pre-great plagues period.  Apparently the initial missionaries managed to organize the cultures that had been recently liberated from Aztec rule into building these incredible school/theatre/church structures with decorated with art that was an odd adaptation of 16th century styles with new world motifs.  The plays and ceremonies that were performed in these buildings were supposed to be of unheard of opulence and they are so huge that the Pope used one as the setting for one of his recent visits.If you get the chance I highly suggest looking them up.  I was impressed at how much energy those in flux cultures had.  Would have been really cool to see how they would have influenced history if small pox hadn't effectively eliminated their viability.On another note,  this is a great thread and the observations on naval warfare are dead on.   The only affective non-gunpowder naval weapon I can think of are Greek Fire tubes.  Which are probably just stupid to use in any sort of weather and noone except the Byzantines had mastered.But if Constantinople doesn't fall....Privateers and blockades might work.  Privateers would definitely be better than blockades.   The knights of Rhodes drove the Turks crazy with four oared ships and a galleon. Shore raiding and marine invasions are a lot more viable.  During the middle ages noone really comes up with a method to prevent an army from landing.  After firearms it becomes a lot more complicated.On the Agincourt thing I did find a prof who said the English may have had more men actually fighting on the line than the French, who approached in waves which were very poorly suited to the English formation.Shakespeare's history is always a little spotty on details and numbers or even the character of Richard III, depending on your sympathies, but the French certainly saw the battle as horrible disaster.</blockquote>

Verification