Got a Real-World Weapon or Armor Question? Mk. XIV

[Mr Beer]

What about a bombadier beetle kind of deal with fire-breathing, you know, spraying out two substances that combine to ignite?

If it had various glands in the head/neck with nozzle-like exits in the mouth and powerful muscles to compress the gland and rapidly squeeze out the liquid, it could squirt quite some distance I imagine.

[AgentPaper]

What about a bombadier beetle kind of deal with fire-breathing, you know, spraying out two substances that combine to ignite?

If it had various glands in the head/neck with nozzle-like exits in the mouth and powerful muscles to compress the gland and rapidly squeeze out the liquid, it could squirt quite some distance I imagine.

It could also be a combination of the two, using the reactive substances to set the fire off, and then fueling it into an inferno with propane or methane or whatever other substance.

Another idea would be to keep an eternal pilot light going somewhere in it's mouth or belly. Dragons would have an instinctive desire to eat fire whenever it's not lit, allowing them to light (or re-light) their pilot light to allow them to breath fire again. This could even be a plot point, where an injured dragon seeks out a fire to eat so it can fend off it's attackers.

[Mr Beer]

It could also be a combination of the two, using the reactive substances to set the fire off, and then fueling it into an inferno with propane or methane or whatever other substance.

Another idea would be to keep an eternal pilot light going somewhere in it's mouth or belly. Dragons would have an instinctive desire to eat fire whenever it's not lit, allowing them to light (or re-light) their pilot light to allow them to breath fire again. This could even be a plot point, where an injured dragon seeks out a fire to eat so it can fend off it's attackers.

This sounds like our dragon is less of a fire breather and more of a napalm spitter. Which is way more awesome IMO.

[Stephen_E]

This sounds like our dragon is less of a fire breather and more of a napalm spitter. Which is way more awesome IMO.

Way more scary at least.

[spineyrequiem]

Given a technology level of around First-World-War era or slightly later (so 1910-1930), what would you arm a sentient species which had been designed to fly like bats with? And what sort of doctrine would you go for (i.e. would you be trying to shoot while gliding, through a weapon attached to the chest, or would you land and brace it?)

For more information about the race: Harpies stand around 3-4 feet tall (or they would, if they ever stood up straight rather than walking on their wings) and have all of their hand but the first finger and thumb adapted into wings, the membranes of which connect to their short legs. As you might expect from a flying race, their torsos are extremely broad, with strong chest muscles, while their legs are comparatively diminutive, with clawed feet adapted for gripping strongly. They live primarily in mountainous areas and survive off a mixture of subsistence farming, hunting and working for other races, with the occasional bit of trade-caravan looting on the side. They are capable of flying under their own power, but tend to be rather clumsy when trying to gain height, especially if they're carrying a lot of weight. So whatever they're armed with has to be light.

Also, if anyone could try to guesstimate a sensible wingspan for them, that would be wonderful. I thought about ten feet, but that might be a bit small...

[Thiel]

I have to say I can't really see how a creature like that could have the manual dexterity to handle tools, but if we ignore that I'd say go for a short ranged automatic weapon. Given how weight critical you're going to be something like the select fire Steyr Hahn M1912 is probably your best bet. If weight isn't that critical you could go for a submachinegun of some description, like the German MP-18
I doubt you'll be able to carry anything as heavy as a full powered bolt action rifle, and even if you can, your size is going to make handling one rather difficult.
Human beings with both hands to control the weapon are already all but incapable of hitting a target at anything but point blank range while moving, doing so while flying with a gun strapped to your chest is going to be a lot harder.
I can't really say anything about wingspan other than it's going to be huge.

[warty goblin]

Given a technology level of around First-World-War era or slightly later (so 1910-1930), what would you arm a sentient species which had been designed to fly like bats with? And what sort of doctrine would you go for (i.e. would you be trying to shoot while gliding, through a weapon attached to the chest, or would you land and brace it?)

For more information about the race: Harpies stand around 3-4 feet tall (or they would, if they ever stood up straight rather than walking on their wings) and have all of their hand but the first finger and thumb adapted into wings, the membranes of which connect to their short legs. As you might expect from a flying race, their torsos are extremely broad, with strong chest muscles, while their legs are comparatively diminutive, with clawed feet adapted for gripping strongly. They live primarily in mountainous areas and survive off a mixture of subsistence farming, hunting and working for other races, with the occasional bit of trade-caravan looting on the side. They are capable of flying under their own power, but tend to be rather clumsy when trying to gain height, especially if they're carrying a lot of weight. So whatever they're armed with has to be light.

Also, if anyone could try to guesstimate a sensible wingspan for them, that would be wonderful. I thought about ten feet, but that might be a bit small...

I'd think you'd not want to fight from the air in most cases, and instead use flight to make some extremely fast moving light infantry. Thinking being that against somebody with machine guns, flapping around like a bird probably isn't that great a survival strategy, but evading contact and attacking from wherever is least convenient is often a very effective tactic.

I'd go with a scoped rifle, personally. If you can't carry much weight, you want to make your ordinance count, and since it's wise to not fly in too close to the guys with the MG34s (or whatever), you also want to be able to effectively engage at range. The idea being to hit unexpectedly at key enemy positions from a safe distance, then get the hell outa dodge before the ground-pounders can mount an effective retaliation. Particularly useful if the harpies can fly in at night, strike in the half-light, and get away while the enemy will have a hard time getting a shot at a fast moving distant target. The effect on morale of this sort of constant sniping could be pretty bad.

[Mr. Mask]

Well, they might be able to act as early scout planes. Fly around look around, then fly back. Bombing during WWI didn't have much result, so I don't think it's going to be any better with the harpies on attack. If they do act as scouts, they'll probably want to arm themselves with stuff to shoot enemy harpies, so whatever they can effectively fly reasonable scouting distances with.

Now, the problem with flying with WWI tech, is that if they take off anywhere near the enemy, they will be easy to shoot down. They also would need to fly very high and fast to avoid getting shot down after take off. Their flight could give them utility in mountain warfare and urban warfare, as they'd be able to scale high places which would normally be infeasible to reach (if they can claw the heck out of enemies, then they can attack snipers through the windows too).

They might be a good choice for pilots, if they have a natural understanding of the mechanics of flying and can bail out without parachutes.

I didn't fully understand the design of their hands, but it sounded like their ability with guns might be questionable. It also sounds like they wouldn't be able to hold or use a gun while flying. They could try aiming with their bodies and triggering the guns with their feet... I'm not sure that'd work out.

[AgentPaper]

Assuming that they're a legitimately intelligent species and not the "dumb savage" that harpies are usually associated with, I'd expect them to use a number of tactics, with a major focus on air superiority.

First off, since they don't have any hands and arms separate from their wings, they'll probably need to do most of their fighting from the ground, using mostly conventional tactics and weapons, in this case sub-machine guns and/or rifles. They should be able to hold and use the same weapons as any other race without much trouble, though if their hand structure is much different they might have their own specialized versions that are a bit more comfortable for them to use.

However, while at first glance the tactics might look similar, their ability to fly would give them a huge edge in maneuverability and air superiority. Think something along the lines of how a modern military uses helicopters to move troops around, only for the entire army (short of heavy weapons), and far more cheaply. They can also pretty easily drop bombs on their enemies, and would probably be doing that, especially to take out key positions and/or enemy artillery.

I would also expect such a race to have a much better understanding of flight and aerodynamics, and if planes exist in such a world, they almost certainly invented them. Since their tactics have already included air forces from the dawn of time, they should have an easy time of integrating planes into their doctrine. They wouldn't need planes to fly people around, but they would be useful for carrying large loads, such as supplies, equipment, and heavy weapons, further enhancing their aerial mobility.

They probably wouldn't put much stock into fighters for dogfighting, both because they already have such strong air superiority as to make them unecessary, and since they can already do mostly the same job themselves, though once planes start to improve and get faster, they'll likely be forced to start using them as well, probably around the time of WW2-era planes. Depending on how stubborn their leaders are, they might even fall behind and lose their long-held air superiority for a while before they realize they need to use planes too, which would be quite a shock for them.

Edit: A more specialized tactic that they might use, would be to have some elite troops work as "dive-bombers", only with rifles instead of bombs. Basically, what they'd do is fly up high over an enemy, then pull in their wings so they can use their gun, and fire as many aimed shots as they can at the targets below before pulling out of the dive at the last second. This would be incredibly dangerous, since there's the risk both of not pulling out of the dive in time, and of course getting hit by the enemy you're plummeting towards, who will certainly start firing back at you when they realize what's going on.

[Thiel]

I'd go with a scoped rifle, personally. If you can't carry much weight, you want to make your ordinance count, and since it's wise to not fly in too close to the guys with the MG34s (or whatever), you also want to be able to effectively engage at range. The idea being to hit unexpectedly at key enemy positions from a safe distance, then get the hell outa dodge before the ground-pounders can mount an effective retaliation. Particularly useful if the harpies can fly in at night, strike in the half-light, and get away while the enemy will have a hard time getting a shot at a fast moving distant target. The effect on morale of this sort of constant sniping could be pretty bad.

I really don't see how that's going to work. Specifically I can't see how they'd operate a rifle, let alone fly with one. Even if we assume they use carbines instead of full sized rifles (With the associated effect on accuracy) we're still talking about a really awkward 43ish inch long stick that they have to carry from a sling of some sort. Just running around with a rifle carried by its sling without any hands to stabilize it is an invitation to either drop it or get a lot of bruises. Imagine what it's like to fly with.

Assuming that they're a legitimately intelligent species and not the "dumb savage" that harpies are usually associated with, I'd expect them to use a number of tactics, with a major focus on air superiority.

First off, since they don't have any hands and arms separate from their wings, they'll probably need to do most of their fighting from the ground, using mostly conventional tactics and weapons, in this case sub-machine guns and/or rifles. They should be able to hold and use the same weapons as any other race without much trouble, though if their hand structure is much different they might have their own specialized versions that are a bit more comfortable for them to use.

I highly doubt they'll be able to use human weapons as is. They're four feet tall when they stretch and they're going to have arms just as long and they only have two fingers to work with.

However, while at first glance the tactics might look similar, their ability to fly would give them a huge edge in maneuverability

Yes and no. Sure, they're going to be able to move about relatively freely, but they're not going to be able to carry much with them in terms of weapons and ammunition.So while they may be able to initially deploy a lot faster, in the grand scheme of things they're going to be even slower than regular infantry because they're going to be even more tied to the supply train.
[QUOTE=AgentPaper;16900227]and air superiority.[/qoute]
I don't see how they're going to get an edge in air superiority. Sure they can fly, but the only weapons they can realistically use up there is their claws. I imagine a two seater aircraft with either a machine gun or perhaps more useful a semi auto shotgun is going to make short work of any Harpies trying to interfere.

Think something along the lines of how a modern military uses helicopters to move troops around, only for the entire army (short of heavy weapons), and far more cheaply.

That comparison fails once you realise they can't bring any meaningful amount of supplies with them.

They can also pretty easily drop bombs on their enemies, and would probably be doing that, especially to take out key positions and/or enemy artillery.

I would also expect such a race to have a much better understanding of flight and aerodynamics, and if planes exist in such a world, they almost certainly invented them. Since their tactics have already included air forces from the dawn of time, they should have an easy time of integrating planes into their doctrine. They wouldn't need planes to fly people around, but they would be useful for carrying large loads, such as supplies, equipment, and heavy weapons, further enhancing their aerial mobility.

The aircraft of WWI really didn't have that capability. The few aircraft capable of carrying "heavy" loads were huge lumbering beast with several engines. And even then they couldn't carry enough to even compete with mule trains, let alone railroads and trucks.

They probably wouldn't put much stock into fighters for dogfighting, both because they already have such strong air superiority as to make them unecessary, and since they can already do mostly the same job themselves, though once planes start to improve and get faster, they'll likely be forced to start using them as well, probably around the time of WW2-era planes. Depending on how stubborn their leaders are, they might even fall behind and lose their long-held air superiority for a while before they realize they need to use planes too, which would be quite a shock for them.

Since they can't bring any meaningful weapons to an aerial fight without resorting to airplanes themselves I really don't buy it.

[QUOTE=AgentPaper;16900227]Edit: A more specialized tactic that they might use, would be to have some elite troops work as "dive-bombers", only with rifles instead of bombs. Basically, what they'd do is fly up high over an enemy, then pull in their wings so they can use their gun, and fire as many aimed shots as they can at the targets below before pulling out of the dive at the last second. This would be incredibly dangerous, since there's the risk both of not pulling out of the dive in time, and of course getting hit by the enemy you're plummeting towards, who will certainly start firing back at you when they realize what's going on.[QUOTE=AgentPaper;16900227]
Sounds like a good way to waste ammunition for little to no gain. The chances of them actually hitting anything with a bolt action rifle while free falling is going to be microscopical.

[oudeis]

An idea I've been kicking around is that dragons don't actually breath fire. Instead, they can expel a blast of metal sparks similar to what you see when steel is worked with high-speed tools or cut with acetylene torches. They can only do it a few times before they are empty and need to refuel. Some other options that occurred to me recently were superheated jets of air that can ignite common man-made materials, or a stream of elemental fluorine. The belief that they breathe great gouts of fire are based on tales of terrified refugees and survivors who escaped by not staying around long enough to get a good look.

As for the discussion about flight mechanics, anatomy, etc, I'd like to submit this excerpt from A Wizard of Earthsea. I read this several decades ago and I've yet to come across anything nearly as good or that I feel addresses these matters as well as this:

Spoiler

Show

At the entrance of the harbor, a shallow crescent bay, he let the windspell drop and stilled his little boat so it lay rocking on the waves. Then he summoned the dragon: “Usurper of Pendor, come defend your hoard!”

His voice fell short in the sound of breakers beating on the ashen shores; but dragons have keen ears. Presently one flitted up from some roofless ruin of the town like a vast black bat, thin-winged and spinybacked, and circling into the north wind came flying towards Ged. His heart swelled at the sight of the creature that was a myth to his people, and he laughed and shouted, “Go tell the Old One to come, you wind-worm!”

For this was one of the young dragons, spawned there years ago by a she-dragon from the West Reach, who had set her clutch of great leathern eggs, as they say she-dragons will, in some sunny broken room of the tower and had flown away again, leaving the Old Dragon of Pendor to watch the young when they crawled like baneful lizards from the shell.

The young dragon made no answer. He was not large of his kind, maybe the length of a forty-oared ship, and was worm-thin for all the reach of his black membranous wings. He had not got his growth yet, nor his voice, nor any dragon-cunning. Straight at Ged in the small rocking boat he came, opening his long, toothed jaws as he slid down arrowy from the air: so that all Ged had to do was bind his wings and limbs stiff with one sharp spell and send him thus hurtling aside into the sea like a stone falling. And the grey sea closed over him.

Two dragons like the first rose up from the base of the highest tower. Even as the first one they came driving straight at Ged, and even so he caught both, hurled both down, and drowned them; and he had not yet lifted up his wizard's staff.

Now after a little time there came three against him from the island. One of these was much greater, and fire spewed curling from its jaws. Two came flying at him rattling their wings, but the big one came circling from behind, very swift, to burn him and his boat with its breath of fire. No binding spell would catch all three, because two came from north and one from south. In the instant that he saw this, Ged worked a spell of Changing, and between one breath and the next flew up from his boat in dragonform.

Spreading broad wings and reaching talons out, he met the two head on, withering them with fire, and then turned to the third, who was larger than he and armed also with fire. On the wind over the grey waves they doubled, snapped, swooped, lunged, till smoke roiled about them red-lit by the glare of their fiery mouths. Ged flew suddenly upward and the other pursued, below him. In midflight the dragon Ged raised wings, stopped, and stooped as the hawk stoops, talons outstretched downward, striking and bearing the other down by neck and flank. The black wings flurried and black dragon-blood dropped in thick drops into the sea. The Pendor dragon tore free and flew low and lamely to the island, where it hid, crawling into some well or cavern in the ruined town.

At once Ged took his form and place again on the boat, for it was most perilous to keep that dragon-shape longer than need demanded. His hands were black with the scalding wormblood, and he was scorched about the head with fire, but this was no matter now. He waited only till he had his breath back and then called, “Six I have seen, five slain, nine are told of: come out, worms!”

No creature moved nor voice spoke for a long while on the island, but only the waves beat loudly on the shore. Then Ged was aware that the highest tower slowly changed its shape, bulging out on one side as if it grew an arm. He feared dragon-magic, for old dragons are very powerful and guileful in a sorcery like and unlike the sorcery of men: but a moment more and he saw this was no trick of the dragon, but of his own eyes. What he had taken for a part of the tower was the shoulder of the Dragon of Pendor as he uncurled his bulk and lifted himself slowly up.

When he was all afoot his scaled head, spikecrowned and triple-tongued, rose higher than the broken tower's height, and his taloned forefeet rested on the rubble of the town below. His scales were grey-black, catching the daylight like broken stone. Lean as a hound he was and huge as a hill. Ged stared in awe. There was no song or tale could prepare the mind for this sight. Almost he stared into the dragon's eyes and was caught, for one cannot look into a dragon's eyes. He glanced away from the oily green gaze that watched him, and held up before him his staff, that looked now like a splinter, like a twig.

“Eight sons I had, little wizard,” said the great dry voice of the dragon. “Five died, one dies: enough. You will not win my hoard by killing them.”

“I do not want your hoard.”

The yellow smoke hissed from the dragon's nostrils: that was his laughter.

“Would you not like to come ashore and look at it, little wizard? It is worth looking at.”

“No, dragon.” The kinship of dragons is with wind and fire, and they do not fight willingly over the sea. That had been Ged's advantage so far and he kept it; but the strip of seawater between him and the great grey talons did not seem much of an advantage, any more.

It was hard not to look into the green, watching eyes.

“You are a very young wizard,” the dragon said, “I did not know men came so young into their power.” He spoke, as did Ged, in the Old Speech, for that is the tongue of dragons still. Although the use of the Old Speech binds a man to truth, this is not so with dragons. It is their own language, and they can lie in it, twisting the true words to false ends, catching the unwary hearer in a maze of mirrorwords each of which reflects the truth and none of which leads anywhere. So Ged had been warned often, and when the dragon spoke he listened with an untrustful ear, all his doubts ready. But the words seemed plain and clear: “Is it to ask my help that you have come here, little wizard?”

“No, dragon.”

“Yet I could help you. You will need help soon, against that which hunts you in the dark.”

Ged stood dumb.

“What is it that hunts you? Name it to me.”

“If I could name it-” Ged stopped himself.

Yellow smoke curled above the dragon's long head, from the nostrils that were two round pits of fire.

“If you could name it you could master it, maybe, little wizard. Maybe I could tell you its name, when I see it close by. And it will come close, if you wait about my isle. It will come wherever you come. If you do not want it to come close you must run, and run, and keep running from it. And yet it will follow you. Would you like to know its name?”

Ged stood silent again. How the dragon knew of the shadow he bad loosed, he could not guess, nor how it might know the shadow's name. The Archmage bad said that the shadow had no name. Yet dragons have their own wisdom; and they are an older race than man. Few men can guess what a dragon knows and how he knows it, and those few are the Dragonlords. To Ged, only one thing was sure: that, though the dragon might well be speaking truth, though he might indeed be able to tell Ged the nature and name of the shadow-thing and so give him power over it – even so, even if he spoke truth, he did so wholly for his own ends.

“It is very seldom,” the young man said at last, “that dragons ask to do men favors.”

"But it is very common," said the dragon, "for cats to play with mice before they kill them.

“But I did not come here to play, or to be played with. I came to strike a bargain with you.”

Like a sword in sharpness but five times the length of any sword, the point of the dragon's tail arched up scorpionwise over his mailed back, above the tower. Dryly he spoke: “I strike no bargains. I take. What have you to offer that I cannot take from you when I like?”

“Safety. Your safety. Swear that you will never fly eastward of Pendor, and I will swear to leave you unharmed.”

A grating sound came from the dragon's throat like the noise of an avalanche far off, stones falling among mountains. Fire danced along his three-forked tongue. He raised himself up higher, looming over the ruins. “You offer me safety! You threaten me! With what?”

“With your name, Yevaud.”

Ged's voice shook as he spoke the name, yet he spoke it clear and loud. At the sound of it, the old dragon held still, utterly still. A minute went by, and another; and then Ged, standing there in his rocking chip of a boat, smiled. He had staked this venture and his life on a guess drawn from old histories of dragon-lore learned on Roke, a guess that this Dragon of Pendor was the same that had spoiled the west of Osskil in the days of Elfarran and Morred, and had been driven from Osskill by a wizard, Elt, wise in names. The guess had held.

“We are matched, Yevaud. You have the strength: I have your name. Will you bargain?”

Still the dragon made no reply.

Many years bad the dragon sprawled on the island where golden breastplates and emeralds lay scattered among dust and bricks and bones; he had watched his black lizard-brood play among crumbling houses and try their wings from the cliffs; he had slept long in the sun, unwaked by voice or sail. He had grown old. It was hard now to stir, to face this mage-lad, this frail enemy, at the sight of whose staff Yevaud, the old dragon, winced.

“You may choose nine stones from my hoard,” he said at last, his voice hissing and whining in his long jaws. “The best: take your choice. Then go!”

“I do not want your stones, Yevaud.”

“Where is men's greed gone? Men loved bright stones in the old days in the North… I know what it is you want, wizard. I, too, can offer you safety, for I know what can save you. I know what alone can save you. There is a horror follows you. I will tell you its name.”

Ged's heart leaped in him, and he clutched his staff, standing as still as the dragon stood. He fought a moment with sudden, startling hope.

It was not his own life that he bargained for. One mastery, and only one, could he hold over the dragon. He set hope aside and did what he must do.

“That is not what I ask for, Yevaud.”

When he spoke the dragon's name it was as if he held the huge being on a fine, thin leash, tightening it on his throat. He could feel the ancient malice and experience of men in the dragon's gaze that rested on him, he could see the steel talons each as long as a man's forearm, and the stone-hard hide, and the withering fire that lurked in the dragon's throat: and yet always the leash tightened, tightened.

He spoke again: “Yevaud! Swear by your name that you and your sons will never come to the Archipelago.”

Flames broke suddenly bright and loud from the dragon's jaws, and he said, “I swear it by my name!”

Silence lay over the isle then, and Yevaud lowered his great head.

When he raised it again and looked, the wizard was gone, and the sail of the boat was a white fleck on the waves eastward, heading towards the fat bejewelled islands of the inner seas. Then in rage the old Dragon of Pendor rose up breaking the tower with the writhing of his body, and beating his wings that spanned the whole width of the ruined town. But his oath held him, and he did not fly, then or ever, to the Archipelago.

Put that in your 20th level pipe and smoke it.

[fusilier]

Well, they might be able to act as early scout planes. Fly around look around, then fly back. Bombing during WWI didn't have much result, so I don't think it's going to be any better with the harpies on attack. . . .

I wouldn't be so quick to discount their bombing abilities, or for that matter bombing in WW1 -- strategic level bombing was still pretty nascent, but tactical level bombing was common, and it was successful enough that it grew throughout the war, by 1918 both sides were producing armored ground attack aircraft.

If they can carry grenades while flying, then they could probably engage in light bombing fairly well, especially if they support land engagements, where the enemy soldiers have enough targets on the ground to keep them from concentrating all their fire on flying targets.

They might be a good choice for pilots, if they have a natural understanding of the mechanics of flying and can bail out without parachutes.

I was just thinking of this myself. :-)

[Mr. Mask]

Fair enough, on a tactical level it would still be useful, providing their numerous enough or can compete well enough with bombers.


Yeah, I think we're right to think of them as pilots. While they mightn't have the dexterity to be excellent shots, they can probably still make use of a pilot's controls (I'm not certain on that--never played with planes).

Considering parachutes took a while to become popular and reach full effectiveness, they would be preferable as pilots for that reason. Even with good parachutes, being able to choose where you land or potentially wing it back to base would be handy (you would need to be careful with that latter option, in case the enemies who shot you down decide to shoot you down--again).

[Mr Beer]

I think harpies would use rapid fire weapons to fight each other or other ariel fliers and then bombs vs. ground troops.

So an automatic carbine/bandolier of grenades combo would see them able to fight air-to-air, air-to-ground and ground-to-ground if they land for whatever reason.

They would have numerous battlefield uses, especially recon and strategic missions. In a WWI level wartech setting they would be the prototypical special forces as well as the air force if heavier than air flight didn't exist. So RAF/SAS/Paras all rolled up into one.

[AgentPaper]

Yes and no. Sure, they're going to be able to move about relatively freely, but they're not going to be able to carry much with them in terms of weapons and ammunition.So while they may be able to initially deploy a lot faster, in the grand scheme of things they're going to be even slower than regular infantry because they're going to be even more tied to the supply train.

All flying creatures have enough power to carry away their prey. You only need to be able to carry about 50 lbs or equipment to make a capable fighting force. They don't need to stay away from the supply train for weeks on end, just a few days while the fighting is going on. If things drag out, they'd be in more trouble, but flying makes for a great way to run away, too, and the supply train doesn't have to be close to the front, since you can fly a lot further in a day by air than by foot, even ignoring the difference in speed.

I don't see how they're going to get an edge in air superiority. Sure they can fly, but the only weapons they can realistically use up there is their claws. I imagine a two seater aircraft with either a machine gun or perhaps more useful a semi auto shotgun is going to make short work of any Harpies trying to interfere.

Planes back then already had enough trouble shooting each other down, they're not going to stand a chance against natural fliers who can bob, duck, weave, dive, and change direction at a moments notice. And as noted above, the harpy should be able to carry at least a 20lb weapon in addition to it's other supplies, and there's going to be a helluva lot more harpies than fighters, so even if the fighter pilot has the advantage 1v1, he's going to lose when he runs into the platoon of 1000 harpies all carrying SMGs, even without any special anti-air tactics or weapons.

YSounds like a good way to waste ammunition for little to no gain. The chances of them actually hitting anything with a bolt action rifle while free falling is going to be microscopical.

Why? What makes it any harder than hitting someone from 100ft away horizontally, rather than vertically? Certainly it's not a good tactic to use normally, but elite troops trained to be able to make accurate shots from that distance and in those circumstances could be useful at the very least as a weapon of intimidation, to make your enemies fear the skies as well as what's on the ground. And of course it could be used to hit targets of opportunity without taking the time to land and engage normally, or to get high-value targets like officers.


I think I may have been mistaken on the planes thing though. Harpies might make good pilots, but they probably aren't going to be the ones to invent planes, or at least not the first ones to use them, simply because they have less need of them compared to other races. It's the same thing as the Romans who invented the steam engine centuries ago, but never did anything with it beyond making a neat toy because slave labor was so cheap, so why bother?

[warty goblin]

An idea I've been kicking around is that dragons don't actually breath fire. Instead, they can expel a blast of metal sparks similar to what you see when steel is worked with high-speed tools or cut with acetylene torches.

Metal sparks such as you get from a power grinder etc rise to the level of somewhat uncomfortable when sprayed on naked skin. If you're habituated to it, are wearing clothes that cover your flesh, or just plain have tough hide, it's at best an extremely mild irritant.

[Mr. Mask]

Paper: If the harpies are ever airborne as low as 100 feet above enemy infantry, they'll die. The range they would need to be at to be safe from ground fire and anti-air fire would be too high to effectively use rifles (the technical distance would be OK for sniping, but they don't have enough of a stable platform for that).

WWI planes were most effective in their role of scouting. So the main advantage of harpies would be if their numbers allow them to more thoroughly scout the enemy. They can't carry radios on their person, so that's going to mean some extra information lag (plus the amount of extra time it takes them to fly there and back).

[AgentPaper]

Paper: If the harpies are ever airborne as low as 100 feet above enemy infantry, they'll die. The range they would need to be at to be safe from ground fire and anti-air fire would be too high to effectively use rifles (the technical distance would be OK for sniping, but they don't have enough of a stable platform for that).

They'll get shot back at by whoever they're going after as soon as they realize what's going on, but that's exactly why it's a specialist tactic rather than a general one. You do it when you don't think your opponent will be able to respond in time to deal significant damage back to you before you fly off, or when the target is so valuable that the losses are acceptable.

WWI planes were most effective in their role of scouting. So the main advantage of harpies would be if their numbers allow them to more thoroughly scout the enemy. They can't carry radios on their person, so that's going to mean some extra information lag (plus the amount of extra time it takes them to fly there and back).

I don't know why you're assuming that the harpies would be such weaklings. If you try to be perfectly realistic, sure, they would probably have trouble keeping their own weight off the ground, but if you keep things perfectly realistic, then you can't have harpies at all, because they have to use all of their energy for flight and can't spare enough for higher brain functions.

You have to make assumptions to allow harpies to exist, and one of the assumptions I'm making is that they can carry at least 1/4-1/2 of their body weight with them into the air without significant strain. If they can't then they may as well not be able to fly at all, and never would have developed any kind of tool-using capability either, since a spear isn't much use if you have to drop it every time you want to fly up to your perch.

[Mr. Mask]

Unless they remain in cloud cover, they'll be spotted. To remain alive, they'll need to move pretty fast and high. If they descended, they'd be sure to be killed, unless they could reach the WW2 Mosquito bomber's level of speed.

If they were going to dive on targets, they'd be best to use their claws and do it to overtake enemy positions. This couldn't really be done from the sky, but from some high place with a short enough distance that they can blindside their enemies then blast them with claws and SMGs.

From the sky, their best bet is grenades and bombs. They can remain a safe ways up, can kill more people per attack, and don't require special training.


I don't you think they could operate and carry a WWI scouting plane radio over the distances needed. So far, their size and lack of fingers has been a bigger problem than their relative strength.

[GraaEminense]

With the possible exception of specialist dive-bomber-snipers, harpies would do their air-to-air fighting with their claws as their wings are kind of busy. With WW1 tech, that seems like short range SMGs or shotguns would be the best bet: They don´t have a stable firing platform, they dont´t have the use of properly dextrous limbs, and they will have trouble lining up a properly aimed shot.

Claw-held seems most likely, but a belly-mounted claw-operated gun pointing past their head would improve accuracy and look hilarious.

If we assume that their wings have decently dextrous hands I´d think they´d need to differentiate between air force and ground force: The ground force would carry weapons in their claws but use them with their hands for improved accuracy while the air force´s weapons would not be ideal for ground combat.

[Thiel]

All flying creatures have enough power to carry away their prey. You only need to be able to carry about 50 lbs or equipment to make a capable fighting force.

British Army troops were lugging around as much as 70lb of equipment even before you gave them their rifle, helmet and gas mask and they barely had enough supplies to last them two days away from the supply chain.

They don't need to stay away from the supply train for weeks on end, just a few days while the fighting is going on. If things drag out, they'd be in more trouble, but flying makes for a great way to run away, too, and the supply train doesn't have to be close to the front, since you can fly a lot further in a day by air than by foot, even ignoring the difference in speed.

I'm not talking weeks, I'm talking hours, maybe a day or two at most. That's how long a human soldier could last with significantly more equipment and still remain an effective fighting force.

Planes back then already had enough trouble shooting each other down, they're not going to stand a chance against natural fliers who can bob, duck, weave, dive, and change direction at a moments notice.

Birds that big can't bob about like that, so I don't see why a harpy should be able to. On top of that you're not going to be able to retain energy if you do do it, so an aircraft will simply outrun you.

And as noted above, the harpy should be able to carry at least a 20lb weapon in addition to it's other supplies, and there's going to be a helluva lot more harpies than fighters, so even if the fighter pilot has the advantage 1v1, he's going to lose when he runs into the platoon of 1000 harpies all carrying SMGs, even without any special anti-air tactics or weapons.

Quite simply really. He has two fairly steadily mounted machineguns and if harpies are a general problem quite possibly a semi automatic shotgun. You are armed with handheld SMGs and you're bobbing and weaving from the motion of your wings. On top of that the smallest rent in your wing membrane is going to be a major issue, whereas the pilot is "relatively" safely hidden away behind his engine. He may not be able to out turn you, but he is going to outrun you in any kind of manoeuvring fight.

Why? What makes it any harder than hitting someone from 100ft away horizontally, rather than vertically? Certainly it's not a good tactic to use normally, but elite troops trained to be able to make accurate shots from that distance and in those circumstances could be useful at the very least as a weapon of intimidation, to make your enemies fear the skies as well as what's on the ground. And of course it could be used to hit targets of opportunity without taking the time to land and engage normally, or to get high-value targets like officers.

Because you're freefalling. Strafing runs were done at a comparatively shallow angle and with belt fed machineguns which allowed him to walk his fire onto his target. An SMG does not have enough ammunition to do that and unlike the machinegun it's not mounted in a fixed mount so recoil is going to be a major issue. Especially since you're a light airborne creature with nothing to brace against.

[hamishspence]

All flying creatures have enough power to carry away their prey.

Some of the larger eagles kill things too big to carry off - so they fill their crops at the site of the kill.

The prehistoric Haast's eagle killed and ate moas - vastly too big to carry off.

[Stephen_E]

Your Harpies as evolved flyers are probably going to have the instinctive mental computers required to do the math required for accurate bombing, so that is there best tactic. Humans didn't evolve with the requirement for instinctively doing the math for that and thus they had a hell of a time at it. TTBOMK the tactical bombing of WW1 flyers were crap.

As others have pointed out the described build is unlikely to use firearms effectively.
Automatic firearms require far to much ammo for a flyer of the given description and they don't have the steady platform for sniping.

If they had superior low light vision or some form of dark vision their best tatic would be no moon/heavy cloud cover nights where they could come in low enough for high accuracy tactical bombing. With the degree of accuracy they would have it should be able to easily surpass historical strategic WW1 bombing. And if the humans retreated to bunkers then they can drop down take out the sentries and plant satchel charges.

[Mr. Mask]

If you had to name RPGs which impressed you with their authenticity, what would you pick?

[Stephen_E]

If you had to name RPGs which impressed you with their authenticity, what would you pick?

Chivalry and Sourcery.
Medieval setting. Rank mattered. As a Yeoman, paying proper respect to a knight was important if you wanted to live.
Magic was based on the various beliefs in magic of the time.

[Rhynn]

As a Yeoman, paying proper respect to a knight was important if you wanted to live.

Was there actually a time and place in Europe where serfs could be killed by a knight with impunity, much less freemen like yeomen? I don't think even the lord of the land could dispose of a serf as he would (indeed, kicking a serf off his land would have been hard!), much less any other knight of a yeoman (who's giving military service to some lord). There were codes of law that did protect people to perhaps surprising degrees, and at the very least, almost any man or woman would be beholden to some noble, who'd be cross if you killed their people.

If you had to name RPGs which impressed you with their authenticity, what would you pick?

HârnMaster, The Riddle of Steel, Twilight 2013, maybe Aces & Eights.

All strike a great balance of playability and authenticity; or feel thereof - verisimilitude, I suppose. HârnMaster shines in setting (HârnWorld), even though it has some idiosyncracies, and the rest shine in mechanics. TROS has the best ancient hand-to-hand combat rules, TW2013 has the best modern small-arms squad-level tactical combat rules. Aces & Eights just has great and simple Wild West gunfighting rules (simpler than TW2013 and plenty sufficient for the game).

[Stephen_E]

Fair call Rhynn. I was speaking colloquially. Not that you would be executed on the spot but it could be very unpleasant. My understandng is that even a fairly common Knight could probably get away with having his men beat you if you were uppity. In game terms it meant you made sure you did your "sire's" and you needed to tell a higher ranked person to do something you did it in such a way that he could take it as a "suggestion".

Of course the other side of the coin was that the Yeoman or Serjeant would get to do the buying for the knights in the party. It was quite fun so long as the higher ranked players didn't abuse it.

Lois Bujold's "A Curse for Chalion" had a opening scene which emphasied some of the effects that could create.

The system did a decent job of covering why certain weapons were a better choice against heavily armoured fighters than others. The arming sword was indeed an excellent all round weapon but certainly NOT your weapon of choice when taking on full plate armour.

[Mr. Mask]

Acutally, on the topic of the arming sword and plate, which RPGs would you say capture melee combat best?

I believe the main RPGs which get mentioned are TRoS, Harn, and now Sword and Sorcery. TRoS also had a sequel being made, I think.

EDIT: Oh, and I sometimes hear about Savage World.

[Rhynn]

My understandng is that even a fairly common Knight could probably get away with having his men beat you if you were uppity.

That's probably true enough, yeah. And yeah, just the existence of social class is a big departure from D&D. HârnMaster/HârnWorld is similar - if your PC is a serf (masochist!), you have to figure out how it is that he got away from his lands (ran away and joined a temple/joined a mining crew/managed to hide out and live in a town for 5 years)...

Acutally, on the topic of the arming sword and plate, which RPGs would you say capture melee combat best?

The Riddle of Steel, hands down. It's not perfect, but it's very plausible and incredibly playable - my players learned and were smoothly using even the most complicated subsystems (grappling!) in the first session. If I were to run any game focusing on realistic combat and set before 1800 (or in a fantasy setting strongly remiscent of history), I'd use TROS - it'd be perfect for Ancient Greek and Roman history, the Medieval period, feudal Japan, Three Kingdoms China, Renaissance Europe, Golden Age of Piracy...

Burning Wheel is also good, apparently, although I thought scripting seemed like a hassle.

HârnMaster is simple but solid: a knight in mail & quilt with a heaume is a human tank, but still vulnerable (for instance if outnumbered), and combat is dangerous and deadly.

And that's Chivalry & Sorcery. Fun fact, you can see the lineage from D&D to C&S to Hârn when you compare the systems.

[Mr. Mask]

Tried out Blade of the Iron Throne? TRoS successor, by the same company. I was considering getting it.

I'll have to get Harn Master first, I figure.