Number and Composition of Force Bands vs. Castles

[tetramorph]

Why do you suppose both the number of troops and the composition of force is so significantly different between a random encounter with brigands/bandits vs. that of a castle?

Can't wrap my head around why a castle would have no cavalry. I mean, I get that there may be higher-level NPCs that are to be taken as mounted, or that you might even roll up some fantastic mounts. But it is likely you will roll neither. That leaves a castle with one "baron" who is potentially mounted and that is that.

How do you guys read it?

[premmy]

I don't think I have Monsters and Treasure, so I can't look at the exact writeup, but there's an easy answer to one of your questions.

Can't wrap my head around why a castle would have no cavalry.

The garrison of a castle is there to defend it against sieges (and maybe do a bit of policing in the area during peacetime). When you're under siege, horses are not only useless, they're a downright liability.

Suppose an enemy army arrives and lays siege to your stronghold. What will your cavalry do? They can't sally forth and drive away the attackers, because the attackers are prepared for a siege, and have thus brought vastly superior numbers. If your army leaves the protection of your walls, you'll lose, cavalry or no cavalry.

So you settle in while the enemy encircles you, and hope that an ally sends reinforcements before you run out of food and starve to death. And you have a whole bunch of horses in there with you that eat most of your food because their large bodies need sustenance, so you run out of supplies and either surrender or starve - without those horses, your food would have lasted much longer.

And on the rare occasion that your enemy tries to storm the walls or dig a tunnel, your cavalry will be utterly useless, since you can't fight from horseback on top of a wall, or in a tunnel.

[rsdean]

You're looking at this text?

Guards: In addition to those men or monsters accompanying castle residents, there will be a number of men aiding in defense. From 30 to 180 men will man the walls, one-half of whom will be crossbow armed light foot, and the balance will be heavy foot. Those castle residents who are accompanied by men or creatures capable of riding or able to make near equal speed will be mounted on horseback, as will their men be mounted.

[Deleted]

Humans can eat neither hay nor grass, but horses can.

Also, I read this "Castle" as being the holding of a single knight, perhaps with 3-5 knights bachelor under him, perhaps. Something like Clifford's Tower, or perhaps Rochester. A larger castle like Harlech or Chinon would have more defenders.

[premmy]

Aug 19, 2016 10:26:58 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Humans can eat neither hay nor grass, but horses can.

True, but there will be no or very little grass growing inside a castle's walls. Hay can be stored, sure, but the local lord might just not want to bother keeping massive stocks of hay in case of a siege.

[tetramorph]

premmy, I can see what your saying. But what about the good old traditional "sally" or "sortie." I could imagine (and in a fantasy medieval wargames campaign that is almost all that counts) a medieval cavalry sally into the impending orc forces. Imagine it? Heck, I've seen it: Helm's Deep; Pelenor Fields, etc.

rsdean, yes, that is what I am looking at. And cross comparing it to the description of villages on the one hand and encounters with "men" on the other. What do you think? What is your interpretation or approach?

@gronanofsimmerya, I am helped by your interpretation. How might you interpret the different numbers and compositions of troops between village, castle and random encounter with "men"?

Thanks all!

[Deleted]

Aug 20, 2016 7:04:06 GMT -6 premmy said:

Aug 19, 2016 10:26:58 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Humans can eat neither hay nor grass, but horses can.

True, but there will be no or very little grass growing inside a castle's walls. Hay can be stored, sure, but the local lord might just not want to bother keeping massive stocks of hay in case of a siege.

History suggests otherwise. Stables were part of every castle.

[Deleted]

Aug 20, 2016 8:37:44 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

@gronanofsimmerya, I am helped by your interpretation. How might you interpret the different numbers and compositions of troops between village, castle and random encounter with "men"?

Thanks all!

Well, now we're getting into "written by wargamers for wargamers" territory. The stuff in the books I see as sort of a "baseline suggestion," not binding. Sort of "Ah fuggid, this is part of the map I haven't drawn yet". I'd use the numbers as a starting point and might use them unchanged, but if there was some reason to change them I would, based on 45 years of reading medieval history.

Another thing not talked about is the difference between "bandits" and "brigands". Historically, the line between "bandit" and "unemployed mercenary" was a very thin one and depended largely on the last time the lads had a square meal. Bandits who are unemployed mercenaries make excellent recruits as men at arms, though you may want to find bandits from a different area so it's not personal. Brigands, to my mind, are "wolf's heads;" men who have been outlawed, who have a price on their heads, who are literally not afforded the protection of law... it is not a crime to kill a man who has been outlawed, for instance.

My interpretation, vary, mileage, etc.

[tetramorph]

That makes a lot of sense, @gronanofsimmerya. Thanks for the help.

[Starbeard]

Regarding brigands and bandits: what Gronan said. I think different places, times and writers have made more, or fewer, or different distinctions between them, but this is a wargame and all we need to know is that there's a difference between someone performing unlawful military acts (banditry) and someone sentenced to be outside of the law (a brigand). The Norman Kingdom of Sicily was essentially founded by bandit knights through acts of banditry, and they even became papal allies.

Regarding castles, I would also expect a higher percentage of mounts, even if they are simply mounted men-at-arms who will fight on foot once they get to the field. Laying siege to a castle of any size is an incredibly expensive and long winded endeavour, and more often than not would go belly up or be abandoned before the castle was actually taken. Most medieval castles were never actually put under siege for this reason. So if the first rule of a tower is 'make it impregnable ', then that means the enemy will purposely avoid a well built tower; and your defensive garrison suddenly becomes useless as the enemy simply walks around you and goes on pillaging. So the second rule of thumb becomes 'must be able to force the enemy to deal with the tower before it can do anything else '. You do this by having command of the surrounding countryside: a high hill lets you see the enemy trying to sneak by, and horses let you cut them off before they can get past. Plus, during a siege the horses could be eaten. Some early Crusades chronicles tell how desperate a siege in the Latin East became because the knights and men-at-arms finally had to start eating their own horses (thus producing a triple whammy: they lost the symbol of their status as soldiers, they broke the religious & cultural convictions against eating horse flesh, and they could no longer sally out of the castle to disrupt the siege with sorties).

[Deleted]

Also, a castle is not primarily a fortress, it is primarily a strong point to project military force into the surrounding area.

[rsdean]

Sept 2, 2016 19:21:31 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Also, a castle is not primarily a fortress, it is primarily a strong point to project military force into the surrounding area.

Agreed; basically a mounted force.

That said, I think that I read the confusing final clause as intended to mean that the d10 swashbucklers are mounted, but I'd certainly think that a quarter to half of the heavy foot might have horses and be available as part of an intercept/pursuit force. So 1/4 of 15 at the low end up to 1/2 of 90 at the high end. But that's based on general medieval history rather than the rules...