Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVI

[Epimethee]

Don't get me wrong Mr Beer, I like the tactics you give here and I think they are the only way to go. But most are easily avoidable by taking the enemy seriously.

The customs of the locals may also be something to consider. I'm not sure that a culture of horse riding nomads could adapt to a modern guerrilla quickly enough not to be subjugated. Tactically it make sense but a warrior is seldom separated from his cultural and social background. (I don't want to go too much in real world politic but that's no accident if the so called citizens started the modern form of insurrection around the beginning of XIX century in the future United States, France and Spain, as if the new conception of the political subject had something to do with that...) If Ragesia act quickly, they would be able to use those social structures before they are totally crumbling.
That's another reason to go after the empires: they are even less likely to be able to change their tactics.

That's why, as much as I like what Kader said from a tactical standpoint, I think it is too strategically complicated for a lot of the local powers.

Here I think it is also where the new subjects come in play. As soon as they have them, Ragesia would be wise to use its power scarcely. Destroy a town or a fortress here, submit a city there...
Most of the conquering should be done by the locals. Ragesia should only commit his troops in huge number, in the most strategically important places and that's something the locals enable. Even vastly superior, the troops of Ragesia, and his peoples, are an invaluable resource.
That's also why I was thinking of separating the Ragesian fro the main population. They would be wise to play the ever-present but unreachable power.

As I said, I would use strongholds to materialize my power as Ragesia. No ruler in the world as described seem to need to shake hands and kiss babies to win the next election. Ragesia could rule from above, coupling the impressive view of the fortress with the new technologies that better the life of the peoples and a potentially huge propaganda machine.

As an aside, the propaganda machine should not be underestimated: thousand and thousand of pages could be made in a few hours of work, with pictures and even colors, not to mention the cinema and the working principle of the radio, as the first station was built in 1914.
Oh, I wasn't thinking of wireless communication! Even more reasons to build your power upon a net of fortresses.

I like the way you see it also Brother Oni, and I think by modern standards it would be a good way to play it. But we are talking about "traditional" societies were the power is less individualized than in the modern world. As much as you need at some point the general goodwill of the population, that's not what define the legitimacy of your claim of power.
I think at first HUMINT would be less necessary than a kind of prestige campaign akin to what roman could do on a larger scale: Give them material goods, new roads, better commercial opportunities in a large area of peace and you don't need to mix with the population.
Protectorates are good, as you need the previous ruling class to administrate your new territories as much as the soldiers. As long as locals could gain power, that's usually easy to come by. Here a few weddings and promotions are in order, but I think at first they should be rare and really special: maybe the royals families or some heroes but nothing less than that. (Discounting some romantic scenario, classic, inevitable, but not the point here.)
The aim is to shape the myth of artesian superiority, to give something for the local to look at from below, at least for the duration of the war of conquest and the first steps of the administration of the new empire.

Fighting should be guerrilla-style, in broken terrain (no mechanised support for the Ragesians) or covered with forests or bad weather (no air support) or preferably both.

Quite right, but not possible on the scale of a continent. I think even Ragesia would expect a few remote parts, mountains or jungle, to be too difficult to attack. That's not a problem as long as most of the continent is conquered. As noted wisely by Kader, the guerrillas would stand mostly alone.
Without support, and notably also without organization, they are closer to small groups of bandits or isolated tribes. Organizing is important here: scattered groups around the world would be at most local problems and it would be difficult for them to even communicate.

Also by this point Ragesia would be able to use efficient counter-guerilla tactics in the most important parts of the world.

Focus attacks on supplies, especially fuel. But don't neglect the value of killing or maiming one enemy, if they cannot be replaced. That includes every enemy because of the lack of backups. Kill enough cooks and clerks and they have to take someone off the front line to feed people and maintain records.

I like that but... First that's why all Ragesian army should be huge and use locals to go on the remote parts of the world. They only need at first to broke the old powers, they don't need to plant their flag on every mountain. Take the cities, take the strategic points, let the grunt do the legwork. The glory they earn is free for you.

Then attacks on civilians are a two edged sword. As I said, it's another reason why ragesian would be wise to stay together in strongholds most of the time.
Then such actions could have political implications, depending also of the way Ragesia fight and see honor and the rules of war. It could be used to give them a casus belli, it could boost their moral, it could also be integrated to their propaganda machine. A lot of things are dependent of context, but I'm not sure every local would support such action.

Leave partisan groups behind with hidden caches of supplies.

Traditional strongholds are virtually useless against artillery and airpower. Go underground, Vietcong style. Don't forget to create airlocks, because no-one wants their underground fortress filled up with chlorine gas.

That's right, but that's also assuming a degree of operational acumen that I'm not sure the locals posses. Only the dwarves would have the technical ability at first to go underground.

Leverage talents that cannot be countered with WWI tech. For example, can any of the native races see in the dark? Good because night vision goggles don't exist in WWI. Send in your night raiders to cause mayhem - set fire to a fuel dump as a distraction while the other team raids a command tent in order to murder some irreplaceable officers for example.

I would argue that projectors and electric lightning should prevent that easily.

By this point, what most locals could aim for is the respect of the new power. Then we could go on the delicate subject of the relationship between the colonized and the colonial power. Something not to be taken lightly...

[The Jack]

One big question though; The gnomes have steam, but are they industrial? how modern are their guns, because people have been using steam for mining since about 1600 , it was around 1700 for it to become a frequent mining tool and occasional wheel turner, and 1800 for the stuff to be common/used in transport. Firearm tech advanced hugely during this time. They could be using later muskets or precusion caps.


The dwarves, having early guns, are overestimated by most people here. Early guns were in many ways worse than crossbows, their main advantage being that they were absolutely terrifying and cause enemy soldiers to panic. They were inaccurate, short ranged, failed to penetrate good armour, were really slow to load, and would fail in bad weather. WW1 bolt actions could shoot tens of times before an early gun could get off another shot, and are in comparison, terrifyingly accurate. As great a craftsman dwarves are, they'd need to machine the parts for a bolt action and it's ammo, and that's a few hundred years ahead. Maybe with magic someone can copy and paste...

[SleepyShadow]

In that case, they would most likely look for a casus belli and not blitz an island out of the blue. How about this scenario: assuming a common language, a Ragesian diplomatic party rocks up to the island nation and begs for help, claiming that they're refugees and need substantial amounts of land.

If the island nation agrees, Ragesians start landing and fortifying. They start integrating with the natives (all those lonely uniformed ladies with martial prowess... hoo boy ), and if possible infiltrate and take over the island nation by cultural domination.

If the island nation refuses or they cannot communicate or relationships break down, deliver a notification of war ideally in a way that demonstrates their technological superiority (eg by air drop). If there's no common language, this could be in pictogram form.
The campaign should start by shock and awe (eg a walking artillery barrage stopping just short of the city gates) with minimal casualties. If they refuse to subjugate after that, then capture the island.

One of the bonuses of having a mostly female military should be that the population would be spared some of the worst excesses of warfare (ie raping), but that depends on troop discipline, what orders are in effect and the Ragesian culture.
Having an all female military to prevent the worst excesses of war was the primary reason for the formation of the Fish Speakers in the Dune setting, although I'm not qualified to say whether that's realistic or not. That said, there were Female Engagement Teams on the ground in Afghanistan for both winning hearts and minds and for HUMINT (human intelligence) purposes.

Edit: Somebody mentioned running the scenario more like Civilisation than Total War; I personally think running it more like Crusader Kings would be more optimal.

This is a fantastic idea! Ken Kosuta would definitely be more pliable with pity than Thalos, and with a government easier to puppet if need be. Heck, Ken Kosuta is passively hostile toward most of the other countries already; they might just let Ragesia do their thing and ride the gravy train as far as it will take them. As for Ragesian troop discipline and culture, the basic idea is that they won't do anything they wouldn't want to happen to their own POWs. They don't want to encourage the enemy to do anything unseemly.

Don't get me wrong Mr Beer, I like the tactics you give here and I think they are the only way to go. But most are easily avoidable by taking the enemy seriously.

The customs of the locals may also be something to consider. I'm not sure that a culture of horse riding nomads could adapt to a modern guerrilla quickly enough not to be subjugated. Tactically it make sense but a warrior is seldom separated from his cultural and social background. (I don't want to go too much in real world politic but that's no accident if the so called citizens started the modern form of insurrection around the beginning of XIX century in the future United States, France and Spain, as if the new conception of the political subject had something to do with that...) If Ragesia act quickly, they would be able to use those social structures before they are totally crumbling.
That's another reason to go after the empires: they are even less likely to be able to change their tactics.

That's why, as much as I like what Kader said from a tactical standpoint, I think it is too strategically complicated for a lot of the local powers.

Here I think it is also where the new subjects come in play. As soon as they have them, Ragesia would be wise to use its power scarcely. Destroy a town or a fortress here, submit a city there...
Most of the conquering should be done by the locals. Ragesia should only commit his troops in huge number, in the most strategically important places and that's something the locals enable. Even vastly superior, the troops of Ragesia, and his peoples, are an invaluable resource.
That's also why I was thinking of separating the Ragesian fro the main population. They would be wise to play the ever-present but unreachable power.

As I said, I would use strongholds to materialize my power as Ragesia. No ruler in the world as described seem to need to shake hands and kiss babies to win the next election. Ragesia could rule from above, coupling the impressive view of the fortress with the new technologies that better the life of the peoples and a potentially huge propaganda machine.

As an aside, the propaganda machine should not be underestimated: thousand and thousand of pages could be made in a few hours of work, with pictures and even colors, not to mention the cinema and the working principle of the radio, as the first station was built in 1914.
Oh, I wasn't thinking of wireless communication! Even more reasons to build your power upon a net of fortresses.

I like the way you see it also Brother Oni, and I think by modern standards it would be a good way to play it. But we are talking about "traditional" societies were the power is less individualized than in the modern world. As much as you need at some point the general goodwill of the population, that's not what define the legitimacy of your claim of power.
I think at first HUMINT would be less necessary than a kind of prestige campaign akin to what roman could do on a larger scale: Give them material goods, new roads, better commercial opportunities in a large area of peace and you don't need to mix with the population.
Protectorates are good, as you need the previous ruling class to administrate your new territories as much as the soldiers. As long as locals could gain power, that's usually easy to come by. Here a few weddings and promotions are in order, but I think at first they should be rare and really special: maybe the royals families or some heroes but nothing less than that. (Discounting some romantic scenario, classic, inevitable, but not the point here.)
The aim is to shape the myth of artesian superiority, to give something for the local to look at from below, at least for the duration of the war of conquest and the first steps of the administration of the new empire.

Taking the enemy seriously is definitely a problem the Ragesians have had in the past, but they've learned from their mistakes. Also, you're absolutely right; not even the friendliest of countries in this scenario are democracies. Kissing babies is not required.

So after taking an island, focusing on the empires would be recommended because they're slower to change? I suppose that makes sense.

I hadn't thought of it before, but it's funny to think that propaganda, wireless communication, and promises of better lives for the subjugated people could be just as important to the war effort as dreadnaughts and biplanes.

One big question though; The gnomes have steam, but are they industrial? how modern are their guns, because people have been using steam for mining since about 1600 and for powering stuff, 1700 for it to become a frequent mining tool and occasional wheel turner, and 1800 for the stuff to be common/used in transport. Firearm tech advanced hugely during this time. They could be using later muskets or precusion caps.


The dwarves, having early guns, are overestimated by most people here. Early guns were in many ways worse than crossbows, their main advantage being that they were absolutely terrifying and cause enemy soldiers to panic. They were inaccurate, short ranged, failed to penetrate good armour, were really slow to load, and would fail in bad weather. WW1 bolt actions could shoot tens of times before an early gun could get off another shot, and are in comparison, terrifyingly accurate. As great a craftsman dwarves are, they'd need to machine the parts for a bolt action and it's ammo, and that's a few hundred years ahead. Maybe with magic someone can copy and paste...

The gnomes haven't been been focused on firearms or other weapons of war. Since they share borders with the two (current) world powers, they feel quite safe thinking that if one made a move on Meltis, the other would come to keep the invaders out. So the gnomes mainly focus on using steam for mining, powering machinery, and impressive looking gizmos and flimflam machines.

As for the dwarves, they use the arquebus guns for shock tactics. Fire a single volley to terrify the enemy, cause a rout and maybe kill a few (the short range isn't an issue since most of the dwarves' battles occur in tunnels and underground), then move in with polearms and battleaxes to mop up remaining enemy troops.

[Epimethee]

Good point about the gnomes, The Jack.

About the dwarves, I think the underground cities are the most important problem, and the reason it would be the tougher adversary to submit. All the possibilities of asymmetric warfare are multiplied by a setting that prohibit any kind of bombardment.

Even then, as can be shown by the shocktruppen and the British tactics of late WWI, the Ragesians would have refined means of assault: coordinated suppressive fire, combat engineer, mines and other explosives devices...

But again, all this is really dependent of the strategical landscape, here in the sense of the political breaking point of the locals. As said by many, a show of force may be enough to submit a lot of places and Ragesia would be well advised to fight mostly those wars first and proceed to a ragesification as soon as possible. This is more or less inevitable, as Ragesia is the far more dominant cultural and technological powers so the locals would mostly be drawn into their orbit.
This process could be really interesting, as it would be varied across the world and reflecting the relationship between Ragesia and the other more or less submitted powers.

Take the case of the dwarves: Ragesia could be well with taking only the coastal part of the land, forcing the dwarves to deal with them for everything related to commerce. Ragesia would never attack the core cities but use this to slowly increase its cultural power. The dwarves could play it like the maoris: by staying mostly strong and trying to assert their specificities, they could be able to keep their cultural identity. The could also choose the path of Japan: change to the new ways as soon as possible and roughly willingly. But they are worst options: the case of Imperial China, unable to admit the change provoked by the European powers and brutally changed for the worst may be interesting to consider.

It really depend of each society: in the non-greece part of the world, I may be tempted to use a kind of chamber to support the sense of local politics, like an administrative senate with limited powers.
If the non-vikings have something close to the Althing, I would also play with that.
As said before, the cultural weight of Ragesia would be amazing and education would be a true interest for a lot of locals. As much as a mean of indoctrination, this could also be a way to balance the ideology of Ragesia with the realities of a political expansion, if you take a page out of the paternalist justification of some of the European powers.

I really think that in this case the social changes provoked by the arrival of Ragesia are the most interesting part to play as the war would mostly be the background where they assert their superiority.

[Epimethee]

@SleepyShadow: European metals tools were present in Polynesia before the europeans, as were pipes in Africa. The effect of a power so wildly superior are disrupting not only on the military side of things but also on a cultural and social point of view. Also traditional economy could be totally changed in a matter of a few generations, with huge consequences for every society. The big guns make the impact clearer but that's like the proverbial iceberg!

And about empire you have two cases: as illustrated by the Aztecs, an empire may lay upon fragile alliances easy to destroy. As shown by imperial Japan, you may have a relatively centralized society.
But the more a society is administered, the slower some of the necessary changes would come, as they depend of this administration. As such, it is easier to identify where to put the pressure and to make the empire break, if military power is not a problem.

Finally, I think the war is mostly for the Ragesian to lose.

[Brother Oni]

I like the way you see it also Brother Oni, and I think by modern standards it would be a good way to play it. But we are talking about "traditional" societies were the power is less individualized than in the modern world. As much as you need at some point the general goodwill of the population, that's not what define the legitimacy of your claim of power.

I was thinking more about the Ragesians keeping some semblance of the moral high ground and assuaging their own guilt / justifying a conquest to their own people.

Speaking about the not-Japanese in particular and assuming they're similar to the real Edo period, if I were to co-op their chain of command into legitimising Ragesian rule, I'd aim for the post of Shogun - that would grant you the control of the ruling caste. If I wanted to work it the other way and start from the peasants upwards to force the ruling caste to change, I'd get the Emperor to marry a Ragesian and therefore any descendants would have his divine right to rule (with a couple of quiet political manoeuverings to ensure that the half Ragesian ends up the heir apparent).

If I were being particularly sneaky about it, I'd see whether the Ragesian religion could be inserted into the not-Japanese religion. While I wouldn't go for the straight copy/paste/re-label of the Romans, selling the Ragesians as the long returned children of a deity (I'm thinking either Susano-no-miko or maybe Fujin/Raijin) would help their acceptability to the not-Japanese. In the real Far East, there was a push to help national pride by associating people of a country with a particular spirit animal - for example, the Chinese were the descendants of dragons, while the Mongolians were the Children of the Wolf (I forget who the other countries were).

Alternately, copy the Mongols again and simply execute all of the ruling caste and tell the common folk and the administrators "Carry on as normal, except you pay your taxes to us now".

This is a fantastic idea! Ken Kosuta would definitely be more pliable with pity than Thalos, and with a government easier to puppet if need be. Heck, Ken Kosuta is passively hostile toward most of the other countries already; they might just let Ragesia do their thing and ride the gravy train as far as it will take them. As for Ragesian troop discipline and culture, the basic idea is that they won't do anything they wouldn't want to happen to their own POWs. They don't want to encourage the enemy to do anything unseemly.

As Epimethee said, the improvements offered by the Ragesians would help immensely.

Given good discipline and a focus on duty and civic purpose, the Ragesians would fit right with in the not-Japanese. Depending on exactly which time period of feudal Japan (Sengoku or early Edo at the latest), you'd have a good mix of professional soldiers that would be easily trained in Ragesian warfare (samurai deppo units fought as independent skirmishers) and less trained soldiers that could be easily led (ashigaru).

[The Jack]

I need to know more about grenade launchers. Specifically, what kind of damage they can do to a point, what kind of force can they offload in a shrapnel, especially in comparison to bullets. I'm not using a very accurate system for modeling such things. but it'd be of interest.

40x53
40x46
35x32 (chinese, i believe these are supposed to be penetrative)


Are launched grenades comparable to thrown grenades compared to power? I've got this absolutely puzzling bastard of a system. M20 (an absolute mess of a book) believes that
Frag grenades are 12 dice
40x53's are 8
40x43 are 6
And there's nothing for the chinese grenade, but there was a gun that did exploding rounds (6)
In addition, I'm not even sure if I'm supposed to treat the 8/6 like an explosion, or if I'm supposed to treat the 8/6 as a direct hit and the 12 as an additional explosion. What sounds right?
Rocket launchers are listed as 12-16 under firearms and 10-15 under explosives... but the book was written by a thousand freelancers and clearly edited by morons so I don't think that's really an argument. All explosives are written to loose a die every 10' from the source and get cut off at some point (IE, the frag goes down to 9, a concusion grenade goes from 8 to 5...) M20 was largely written by idiots... but I'm not sure if there are any other oWoD books that've tried to do explosives.

For comparison, bullets are (4 dice- 9mm, 7 dice- 5.56, 12 dice for 30.06*, 16 dice for .50bmg )

(sometimes, they list 30.06 for 8 dice, I think it's because they think all rifles are the same, or maybe it's to go with the 1-5 armour system. I don't agree with it either way)

[Gnoman]

At a quick check of relevant manuals, the ammunition for the M203 is effectively the same as a basic frag grenade. Dual purpose rounds can penetrate 2" of steel.

I'm not finding detailed information on the Russan and Chinese grenades, but the Russian ones have a very similar mass and explosive charge, and the Chinese ones have less.



All come in a variety of types for different targets, some optimized for area effect and others for penetration.



You might want to consider consulting GURPS even if you don't want to change systems. SJG puts a great deal of work into getting their stats right, and it is very useful as a guide to relative performance.

[Mr Beer]

You might want to consider consulting GURPS even if you don't want to change systems. SJG puts a great deal of work into getting their stats right, and it is very useful as a guide to relative performance.

This

GURPS 4e High Tech and supplements thereof will be useful to this project, as well as potentially Ultra Tech.

[snowblizz]

Edit: Somebody mentioned running the scenario more like Civilisation than Total War; I personally think running it more like Crusader Kings would be more optimal.

Godawfully tedious and you have to struggle with understand what the point of duchies is. And then the kings die in disease with 2 month intervals and you lose control of your kingdom. If I was a Ragesian (SP?) I'd rather just kill them all and let whoever they pray to sort them out.

[Carl]

Thing is, we're talking about characters that can take more than a tripod. They're bigger, can spread out more, and absorb more shock. Stop thinking in terms of normal humans. All I need is data.
(also, there's one power in the setting which protects by allowing the target to treat offending energy as less than it is.)

second, can't you just make something heavier to negate the recoil?


Last; Are grenade launchers truly greater in destructive force than cannons? Ignore that they're wider spreading; On a point, do they inflict more force?

Given that it's a matriarchal society and nearly all the military are female, any attempt to charm the lonely ladies may well turn into a death by snu snu situation.

That said, getting your hands on their equipment is of limited use if you can't make the ammunition and while you can muddle your way around small arms, any motorised vehicles would be of limited use and definitely ships and aircraft would be off limits without specialised training.



In that case, they would most likely look for a casus belli and not blitz an island out of the blue. How about this scenario: assuming a common language, a Ragesian diplomatic party rocks up to the island nation and begs for help, claiming that they're refugees and need substantial amounts of land.

If the island nation agrees, Ragesians start landing and fortifying. They start integrating with the natives (all those lonely uniformed ladies with martial prowess... hoo boy ), and if possible infiltrate and take over the island nation by cultural domination.

If the island nation refuses or they cannot communicate or relationships break down, deliver a notification of war ideally in a way that demonstrates their technological superiority (eg by air drop). If there's no common language, this could be in pictogram form.
The campaign should start by shock and awe (eg a walking artillery barrage stopping just short of the city gates) with minimal casualties. If they refuse to subjugate after that, then capture the island.

One of the bonuses of having a mostly female military should be that the population would be spared some of the worst excesses of warfare (ie raping), but that depends on troop discipline, what orders are in effect and the Ragesian culture.
Having an all female military to prevent the worst excesses of war was the primary reason for the formation of the Fish Speakers in the Dune setting, although I'm not qualified to say whether that's realistic or not. That said, there were Female Engagement Teams on the ground in Afghanistan for both winning hearts and minds and for HUMINT (human intelligence) purposes.

Edit: Somebody mentioned running the scenario more like Civilisation than Total War; I personally think running it more like Crusader Kings would be more optimal.

Not sure when i'll get to finish this but let me cover somthing important.

There's really two forms of recoil. Apparent recoil, (proper technical term), and what for the purposes of this discussion i'm going to call Absolute Recoil, (not sure on the precise technical term). For basically all handheld firearms when you see recoil discussed what people are talking about is apparent recoil. The thing about apparent recoil is that for normal humans it can cause problems with keeping the gun on target or even causing physical damage long before absolut recoil is an issue. the shoulder can only handle so much force and a good grip can only compensate for so much force. Apparent recoil is absolutely 100% effected by the weight of the weapon. I don;t want to turn this into science 101 again, but the short version is that the but pad is often compressible, your flesh is always compressible and your bones and joints can flex too. As a result every time you fire a round the weapon is throw backwards against your shoulder and is effectively able to recoil several millimeters each time. It's over this recoil distance that the momentum imparted to the gun by the round is transferred to the shooter. The faster the rewarward velocity the less time it'[s transferred over and the higher the force felt by the shooter.And as we established in a previous science 101 more mass for the same momentum equal less velocity. So a heavier weapon imparts the transfer of momentum more slowly. However there's a limit, the weapon needs to transfer it;s momentum and reset back to the rest position before the next round is fired./ If it dosen;t the next round will just make the rearwards velocity higher and because it never resets reduce the distance it has to move rearwards ultimately undoing the benefit of the extra mass on apparent recoil.

Absolute recoil is really an expression of the law of conservation of momentum. You can spread the transfer of momentum out, but you can't prevent it. The reason a normal firearm doesn't throw you backwards is that the peak force from apparent recoil isn't enough to mess with your center of gravity, (apply enough force at the shoulder at it will knock you over backwards no matter how strong or agile or quick you are), and also that your feet are in contact with the ground, and the same flexing and transfer of momentum from you to the ground beneath your feet happens as happened between the gun and your body.

But there are limits, too much force and your center of gravity will be pushed off balance and your feet will lose contact with the floor no matter how you move them, and too much momentum and even if you couldn't lose contact with the ground you won't be able to transfer the momentum because you can't generate enough friction with the ground to apply the necessary level of force, and even if you could you'd still go flying backwards as the ground under your feet tore apart under the stress.

You see a tripod isn't there just to support the weight, it also gives the weapon a low wide base with features that dig into the ground allowing it to transfer the momentum force more easily and without tearing up the ground in the process. Full blown automatic cannon on their own independent bases will usually be positioned just a few feet off the ground, and are a couple of meters across that weigh several hundred KG's and need stakes, (sort of giant tent pegs), driven multiple feet into the earth.

This isn;t a problem brute strength, durability, opr healing factor can overcome, you either have to break the law of conservation of momentum or seriously upscale your wielder, which runs into all kinds of issues with places they can;t go.


Regarding grenade effects. Wikipedia claims that a HEDP 40mm NATO grenade will penetrate 2 inches of steel, (50mm), and has a lethal fragmentation radius of 5 meters, (about 18ft), and can cause injuries much further away than that, (it lists the absolute upper injury limit as 130m, but the guaranteed injury radius isn't listed). Based on an incident involving one of the mythbusters camera's and a grenade experiment it can probably inflict death or injury in those radius's through standard infantry body armour. The MK19 grenade machine gun AFAIK is virtually identical in impact effects to the standard underbarrel kind, it just uses a higher muzzle velocity round that couldn't be fired safely out of a normal grenade launcher.

Also there are semi-automatic multi-shot grenade launchers in the under barrel ammunition type that can be safely fired so you don't have to go to a full on Mk19 to get rapid fire. ANd there's also the frag-12, you can fire that out of a full auto-shotgun no problem and it;s still got a kill radius of 2.7m, (9ft).

[SleepyShadow]

I was thinking more about the Ragesians keeping some semblance of the moral high ground and assuaging their own guilt / justifying a conquest to their own people.

Speaking about the not-Japanese in particular and assuming they're similar to the real Edo period, if I were to co-op their chain of command into legitimising Ragesian rule, I'd aim for the post of Shogun - that would grant you the control of the ruling caste. If I wanted to work it the other way and start from the peasants upwards to force the ruling caste to change, I'd get the Emperor to marry a Ragesian and therefore any descendants would have his divine right to rule (with a couple of quiet political manoeuverings to ensure that the half Ragesian ends up the heir apparent).

If I were being particularly sneaky about it, I'd see whether the Ragesian religion could be inserted into the not-Japanese religion. While I wouldn't go for the straight copy/paste/re-label of the Romans, selling the Ragesians as the long returned children of a deity (I'm thinking either Susano-no-miko or maybe Fujin/Raijin) would help their acceptability to the not-Japanese. In the real Far East, there was a push to help national pride by associating people of a country with a particular spirit animal - for example, the Chinese were the descendants of dragons, while the Mongolians were the Children of the Wolf (I forget who the other countries were).

Alternately, copy the Mongols again and simply execute all of the ruling caste and tell the common folk and the administrators "Carry on as normal, except you pay your taxes to us now".



As Epimethee said, the improvements offered by the Ragesians would help immensely.

Given good discipline and a focus on duty and civic purpose, the Ragesians would fit right with in the not-Japanese. Depending on exactly which time period of feudal Japan (Sengoku or early Edo at the latest), you'd have a good mix of professional soldiers that would be easily trained in Ragesian warfare (samurai deppo units fought as independent skirmishers) and less trained soldiers that could be easily led (ashigaru).

This is a fantastic plan. It wouldn't even be too hard to fit Ragesian beliefs in with Not-Japan. The Ragesians already view their empress as a divine being, so some clever propaganda could go a long way to integrating the two peoples. Very sneaky indeed, and I love it!

You guys have all been such a big help setting up the next few steps of my campaign. Thank you so much!

[Mr Beer]

Don't get me wrong Mr Beer, I like the tactics you give here and I think they are the only way to go. But most are easily avoidable by taking the enemy seriously.

Yeah I think the locals are screwed, at least initially. It's just a laundry list of do-s and don't-s, as someone put it above, there is no readily apparent hard counter to the Ragesians.

[Epimethee]

@Mr Beer: Totally agree with you. It would be interesting to come back in the setting maybe a century after the Invasion to look at the new face of the world. Between a kind of globalization (closer to the XIX century phenomenon), the technological changes and the new educated elites, it would be very interesting, think Ghandi or Senghor as inspirations. The main difference would be the hegemony of a single colonial power on a more or less unified world.

I was thinking more about the Ragesians keeping some semblance of the moral high ground and assuaging their own guilt / justifying a conquest to their own people.

That's a good point. As I said, I would take a leaf from the colonial playbook and infantilize the local societies. I won't dwell to deep on a subject that may verge on the political. I seem more concerned with the social than the technological questions, I need to be careful as I'm often on the fringes. But still, I would point to you the theory of "martial races", a kind of pseudo-darwinian theory popularized by Lord Frederick Roberts, supreme commander of the British forces between 1885 and 1893. The impact of such theories on the Sikh or on the French "tirailleur sénégalais" are huge, as they mostly reshaped the way those populations saw themselves and integrated them with a kind of positive mythology in the system of the empire.
For further reading, look at the work of Gajendra Singh, from the university of Oxford, or "Warrior Saints: Four Century of Sikh Military History" by Amandeep Singh Madra and Parmjit Singh. The works on French Senegalese forces are obviously mostly in French, but if you are interested, tell me!

Speaking about the not-Japanese in particular and assuming they're similar to the real Edo period, if I were to co-op their chain of command into legitimising Ragesian rule, I'd aim for the post of Shogun - that would grant you the control of the ruling caste. If I wanted to work it the other way and start from the peasants upwards to force the ruling caste to change, I'd get the Emperor to marry a Ragesian and therefore any descendants would have his divine right to rule (with a couple of quiet political manoeuverings to ensure that the half Ragesian ends up the heir apparent).

Exactly that! I just finished the Heike Monogatari and was particularly interested in the way the legitimacy of the emperor is always preserved, at least on paper. That's really a huge propaganda tool and you are spot-on!

If I were being particularly sneaky about it, I'd see whether the Ragesian religion could be inserted into the not-Japanese religion. While I wouldn't go for the straight copy/paste/re-label of the Romans, selling the Ragesians as the long returned children of a deity (I'm thinking either Susano-no-miko or maybe Fujin/Raijin) would help their acceptability to the not-Japanese. In the real Far East, there was a push to help national pride by associating people of a country with a particular spirit animal - for example, the Chinese were the descendants of dragons, while the Mongolians were the Children of the Wolf (I forget who the other countries were).

Interestingly, you can also find the opposite phenomenon, where the colonized use the mythical landscape of the settler. I have a book written by some French Canadian Hurons, a native american population. They use fringe theories to describe themselves as the descendant of arthurian knights exiled in America, thus legitimizing their cultural identity inside the frame of Occidental narratives.
That's really interesting anthropologically.

[Edit: as a less contentious example, think about the Irish or Scandinavian myths. Irish myth are the most interesting as they include various links, roman an greek myths, the flood and so on. you find the same in the mayan Popol Vuh, written in the colonial period and who include something close to the biblical cosmogony. The cultural power of the newly arrived is important enough to reframe the local customs.
Another good example of this phenomenon could be seen in the little anthropological movie "Les Maîtres Fous" by Jean Rouch, a French ethnographist highly influential not only by his scientific work. The "Nouvelle Vague" (Goddard, Truffaut, Resnais and son on) was also influenced by his camera. The movie is easily available on youtube but really impressive as it show a ritual celebration were people are possessed by spirits. What is in this case interesting is that some spirits are called the Governor, the Capitain's wife, the Locomotive Engineer, and that the ritual use the the same kind of ceremonial frame that the more organized parade of the colonial military. What its mean is best left for another place (start here maybe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_maîtres_fous but it may help to think of some clever ways to show the same kind of dynamics in a fantastic setting]

Given good discipline and a focus on duty and civic purpose, the Ragesians would fit right with in the not-Japanese. Depending on exactly which time period of feudal Japan (Sengoku or early Edo at the latest), you'd have a good mix of professional soldiers that would be easily trained in Ragesian warfare (samurai deppo units fought as independent skirmishers) and less trained soldiers that could be easily led (ashigaru).

Well done again! One thing also that would help immensely is the different mean of control. Think only what it could mean for the drill of the troops to be able to use the educative tools of early 20th century: standardization, visual guides, mass productions, printed administration, individual files... As much as it would lead to tensions, in the least urbanized places, it would be in places like non-japan like putting suddenly the dial of the local power to to eleven.

[Brother Oni]

This is a fantastic plan. It wouldn't even be too hard to fit Ragesian beliefs in with Not-Japan. The Ragesians already view their empress as a divine being, so some clever propaganda could go a long way to integrating the two peoples. Very sneaky indeed, and I love it!

Depending on the dominant physical characteristics of the Ragesians, it could help cement the link (since you mentioned they had German tech, I was working under the impression that they tended towards tall blondes with blue eyes). There's a hypothesis that the Japanese depiction of oni as tall hulking humanoids with a shock of white hair originally derived from superstitious Japanese peasants meeting shipwrecked Russian sailors. Given that Fuujin and Raijin are both normally depicted as oni, it's nearly too perfect to ignore.

As a side note, the name for the not-Japan island, Ken Kosuta, has been bugging me. I thought it might be a Lot5R reference as they tend to mash kana together until they get something sounding vaguely Japanese-y, but that's struck out and the only other reference I can find is to a thread made by you.
Kosuta is normally the katakana romanisation for 'Costa' and 'ken' can mean 'sword' or 'fist' depending on the character... wait 'Sword Coast'?

If I may make a suggestion - 'Kosuta no ken' flows better and means basically the same as the English term (Coast of Swords or Sword(s) of the Coast). A more accurate translation is 'Ken no Kosuta' (Sword's coast), although doesn't roll off the tongue as well.

Edit: This is probably a bit too deep, but it does lead to the evocative term Ken-jin for the not-Japanese to refer to themselves - literally 'Sword people' or 'Blade people'. If that doesn't immediately paint an image of a martial people and culture, I don't know what will.

That's a good point. As I said, I would take a leaf from the colonial playbook and infantilize the local societies. I won't dwell to deep on a subject that may verge on the political. I seem more concerned with the social than the technological questions, I need to be careful as I'm often on the fringes. But still, I would point to you the theory of "martial races", a kind of pseudo-darwinian theory popularized by Lord Frederick Roberts, supreme commander of the British forces between 1885 and 1893. The impact of such theories on the Sikh or on the French "tirailleur sénégalais" are huge, as they mostly reshaped the way those populations saw themselves and integrated them with a kind of positive mythology in the system of the empire.
For further reading, look at the work of Gajendra Singh, from the university of Oxford, or "Warrior Saints: Four Century of Sikh Military History" by Amandeep Singh Madra and Parmjit Singh. The works on French Senegalese forces are obviously mostly in French, but if you are interested, tell me!

I'm aware of the British 'martial races' theory (the British Army still has the Gurkhas through careful finagling of them not being classed mercenaries, although we've given the Sikh Regiment back to the Indian Army), although my knowledge of non-English sources is very lacking. I'll look up the references you've mentioned - thank you!

Well done again! One thing also that would help immensely is the different mean of control. Think only what it could mean for the drill of the troops to be able to use the educative tools of early 20th century: standardization, visual guides, mass productions, printed administration, individual files... As much as it would lead to tensions, in the least urbanized places, it would be in places like non-japan like putting suddenly the dial of the local power to to eleven.

German advisors training the Japanese military during the rapid modernisation of the late 19th/ early 20th Century Meiji period is how it went in real life as well. From reading up on Jakob Meckel, it looks like reinforcing unswerving loyalty to a divine ruler is a common training tool throughout the ages.

One point to mention is that Japanese tend to be surprisingly superstitious - the rural not-Japanese would likely oppose any invaders (including the more urban not-Japanese) on a matter of principle. However using propaganda tools like "The Daughters of Raijin have returned to help lead the great Ken Kosuta Empire to domination over the world" with the Emperor legitimising them would get them on board very quickly.

[The Jack]

I think it's weird where you put not-japan/Not-mongolia. I mean, I'm disappointed with the lack of china and how japan's dispraportionately used to represent the far east in general (as cultural exports go, the japanese are genius) but it's kinda weird how you put not-mongolia at very south and then not-japan next to the vikings and the dwarves in the north east. I realise that you've got a very pulpy take on things, but neighbours influence eachother, Especially in weapons, armour and tactics...

If it turns out the dwarves are chinese... Well it'd be interesting.


I need to see the scenario where, after the Ragesians invade, the not-soviet union rises from the sea, destroys the Ragesians with overwhelming might, and falls back into the sea.

[Brother Oni]

I mean, I'm disappointed with the lack of china and how japan's dispraportionately used to represent the far east in general...

Ignoring the effects of Lafcadio Hearn and weeaboos for now, with the exception of the Okinawans who only see themselves as Japanese on a good day, Japan is mostly a mono-culture, which is reinforced by their ethnic homogeneity and their cultural stagnation during the Edo period. While there are linguistic differences (some of the rural accents get REALLY unintelligible to a Standard Japanese speaker) and region specific festivals, Japan is broadly the same - 'Ware Ware Nihonjin' (We Japanese) the most acceptable way of putting it these days; 'Ichioku Isshin' (One hundred million hearts as one) has the same message of unity but with negative connotations with WW2 Imperial Japanese propaganda, much like certain German phrases.

China however is a vast melting pot of cultures and peoples; the Southern Chinese are different from the Northern Chinese, physically, linguistically and culturally and at the far edges of China, you have a much more broad definition of 'Chinese'.
This isn't even getting into the ethnic groups, both recognised and unrecognised, who have their own customs and language. You then have to pick the period, which defines the predominant culture and aesthetic of the time - for example, the Qing Dynasty hair queue is very specific and isn't representative of more famous Chinese periods like The Three Kingdoms or Warring States.

While I'd also like China to be more represented (and no, you can't use the Mongols to represent the Ming Dynasty), you'd have to be very specific, while Japan is an easy pick to represent the Far East.

[SleepyShadow]

@Brother Oni: The Ragesians tend to be blonde or platinum blonde, and the vast majority of them are over six feet tall. They consider someone to be short if they're under 5'11".

Also, I apologize for the cringe worthy name of Not-Japan. This campaign setting is about twelve years old and has gone through a lot of collaboration over the years. Most of the names have remained untouched for legacy purposes, but I've done my best to fix the painful stereotyping a lot of the countries suffered from in previous iterations. I'm definitely changing the name to "Kosuta no Ken", and having the locals refer to themselves as "Ken-jin" is brilliant.

@The Jack: The placement of Not-Japan and Not-Mongolia has to do with where groups of players have explored in the past more than anything else. Early groups honed in on exploring the "Mysterious East" while getting them to go far enough south to hit Al-Hassan was like pulling teeth. Only recently did Not-Mongolia and Not-Greece make it onto the map.

As for the dwarves, they aren't Chinese but they're almost the soviets you want. They refer to their country as "The People's Republic of Goltrand", and their governing body is made up of an equal number of representatives from each of the four guilds (Military, Merchant, Laborer, and Priesthood). I apologize for the lack of Not-China, but I wouldn't be opposed to putting it on the map if one of my player groups bothered to sail into the western ocean.

[Epimethee]

One thing to add: be careful not to tie yourself too much to one nation: As great as what we say for not-Japan may be, Ragesia would need other tools for other nations. Also tying itself too much to one nation may be counter-productive in the long run.

I was under the impression that for a long time Japan was under the influence of continental culture, as the emperor referred to the emperor of China in his mandate, and as is apparent in the buddhism (even modified by local customs) the tales of monk traveling to and from China and further and so on... That's not to contradict what you say, Brother Oni, Japan was really insular after the XVI century, and the sense of identity is and was strong, and it can't be compared with the melting pot of China. It is still worth mentioning.

Also I spoke of propaganda in the broader and technical sense of the term. The content would be relevant with more cultural informations but I think the sheer weight of the media would be enough to blow the mind of most peoples. We tend to forget the impact of magazines, photos and posters in the early XXth century. Of course, the standard of education would be different but, if you think of Georgian England and the engraving of Cruishank or Gillray, you would see that the pictures are always a huge draw for the population. Then imagine what impact photography would have...
I have a few magazine from WWI, written to the French population and it make for an interesting read. That's not as sophisticated that the later stuff of 1930-40 but that's still impressive. From satirical pieces on German cuisine to photoreportages in the frontlines, and even articles about elegance in time of war or the life of domestics animals, every aspect of society is covered.
Nothing a preindustrial society product can match this cultural impact.

Finally, I was thinking about the way Swiss army was important in the making of the modern Swiss confederation. The federal army was only implemented after the Sonderbund War in 1848, which led to the first draft of the actual Constitution (it is updated every few years). The Swiss Army was then a place where people from every part of the country would meet and was really instrumental in reinforcing the links between the different part of the country. Ragesia would be wise to use something alike, using the war of conquest to mix the local peoples, to create new links, or new settlements.
Maybe the roman policies of displacing legions around the empire would also be a good comparison.

[The Jack]

How does a speargun compare to a crossbow in damage potential? Both on land and under water. I heard bows/crossbows work better under water than you'd think.

[Brother Oni]

I was under the impression that for a long time Japan was under the influence of continental culture, as the emperor referred to the emperor of China in his mandate, and as is apparent in the buddhism (even modified by local customs) the tales of monk traveling to and from China and further and so on... That's not to contradict what you say, Brother Oni, Japan was really insular after the XVI century, and the sense of identity is and was strong, and it can't be compared with the melting pot of China. It is still worth mentioning.

While true, Japan started separating around about the Heian period and the regular Japanese missions to China stopped around about the 9th Century. After that, aside from the odd import (notably a flavour of Buddism), Japan developed mostly by itself and their isolationist views weren't helped by the two Mongol invasions in the 13th Century. It wasn't until the Portuguese (and later the Dutch) who brought guns and Christianity during the Sengoku civil war during the 16th Century that Japan really opened up, only to promptly slam shut again with the Edo.

After that it was only at cannon point, courtesy of Admiral Perry in the 19th Century, that they opened their doors again.

Given that the not-Japanese in this setting are late Sengoku/early Edo, they would be the cultural equivalent of Japan after about 500-ish years of limited outside influences. This is the main cause of why, among many other things, Japanese warfare and martial techniques are so damn weird when looking at the wider context of the world; they've been developing in their own micro-environment for centuries.

As an example from personal experience, I cannot figure out how they get a consistent draw during their archery, since they thumb draw to somewhere behind the ear with apparently no anchor or reference points.

How does a speargun compare to a crossbow in damage potential? Both on land and under water. I heard bows/crossbows work better under water than you'd think.

What depth are you shooting at? Compressed air spearguns performance trails off rapidly the deeper you get.

What type of crossbow? Modern pulley or medieval? What's the draw weight? Are they shooting target tips or broadheads?

What are the spearguns/crossbows shooting at? Paper target, something soft and squishy or armoured? If armoured, what type?

Looking up some numbers, a high performing rubber band spearguns has bands of 18mm thickness, with no other technical data. Standard factory setting for a speargun is 20 bar pressure and the longer the barrel, the more power you get due to the longer power stroke, with lengths of from 40-110cm. I can't find a spear weight (they're sold by width, length and material with no mention of whether they're hollow or the wall thickness), so I can't calculate the power generated.
Underwater range for a speargun seems to cap out at about 8 metres with no data on air distance, although anedotally, they seem to be only effective out to ~10m as they start to tumble.
From this video by my favourite German, Joerg Sprave, spearguns would be lethal to unarmoured people at home defence distances (<5m). He indicates the spears seem to be completely solid, so when I get more time, I may go back and crunch some numbers.

From eyeballing it, a crossbow will pretty much outperform a speargun in pretty much every scenario - even when they're tagging whales for study purposes, they use a (low powered) crossbow. A ~150lb modern pulley bow would most likely be lethal out to ~180 yards and that's rather light draw by hunting standards.

[The Jack]

Question is more or less "what's the best thing to shoot weresharks with". Modern crossbows are the contender here. We can use many a different draw weight, and we can do the same with spearguns; but what's the generally better weapon of war if you were going to wage it underwater.

The fight can be taken to land too. But we're talking thick hides/ strong scales. Armour that would be considered natural.


I suppose I should be adding in underwater flechete rifles. I understand they're less accurate out of water; are the rounds as powerful as their surface equivalents?


Also, how protective is modern chain armour, in comparison to the older stuff.

[Carl]

Question is more or less "what's the best thing to shoot weresharks with". Modern crossbows are the contender here. We can use many a different draw weight, and we can do the same with spearguns; but what's the generally better weapon of war if you were going to wage it underwater.

The fight can be taken to land too. But we're talking thick hides/ strong scales. Armour that would be considered natural.


I suppose I should be adding in underwater flechete rifles. I understand they're less accurate out of water; are the rounds as powerful as their surface equivalents?


Also, how protective is modern chain armour, in comparison to the older stuff.

Use Depth charges or mini torpedoes. The former can even be created using modified mortar bombs from a man portable mortar. There's really no good reason to go into the water after them if you just want to kill them, the sea has even less collateral to worry about than land.

[The Jack]

Use Depth charges or mini torpedoes. The former can even be created using modified mortar bombs from a man portable mortar. There's really no good reason to go into the water after them if you just want to kill them, the sea has even less collateral to worry about than land.

Agreed, but let's say you're protecting an oil rig, an underwater research station, an unquestionably-civilian ship, or you're needing to recover something delicate from the ocean floor.

[gkathellar]

Agreed, but let's say you're protecting an oil rig, an underwater research station, an unquestionably-civilian ship, or you're needing to recover something delicate from the ocean floor.

I'd go with man-portable harpoons/spear guns. Not only are they generally good aquatic weapons, but they're probably your best bet in terms of immobilizing the enemy, which is critical in general but will be especially important underwater where having fins is kind of a big deal. Nothing is going to swim well (or walk, or fly, or anything else really) with a giant hunk of metal sticking through it, especially not if the hunk of metal has some kind of tether that can be tied to solid fixtures of the environment. In addition, a harpoon or spear could have a steel head for piercing the target, while incorporating silver into the shaft to maximize effectiveness once the first wounds have been dealt (silver is very subject to corrosion, so the launcher itself could protect the metal until it was fired).

Also this might sound weird, but you might want to look into the material weaknesses of dentine (like the stuff in your teeth). A variant of the material makes up a shark's rough outer layer of scales, so you could probably technobabble your way into some kind of skin-melting tooth-decay bomb.

Re: monster fighting in general, I think you may want to look at, on the one hand, the kinds of nonlethal methods used by law enforcement, and on the other hand, the ways humans fight big animals or even vehicles. Humans are pretty fragile, so killing us is usually the quickest way to stop us, and that biases our weapons design. But when you're dealing with something big and/or durable, it could easily be more expedient to focus on disabling the target, or to design weapons with the assumption that you will be engaging the target over a protracted period.

[The Jack]

The dentine idea sounds nice but
A: They regenerate. (they also can't bleed to death, and they can shapeshift, so the capture suggestion's off the table. Long drawn out combat is for a thousand reasons a bad idea. )
B: Why go through the trouble to poison the teeth when it's easier to poison the bastards dead?


Also silver's supposed to be pretty good for corrosion, isn't it?

[Mr Beer]

Bangsticks are well known tech, easy to use. They're one shot though so maybe not great vs. schools of weresharks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powerhead_(firearm)

Load one of these bad boys up with a silver rifle bullet or a 10 gauge shotgun shell packed with silver deerslugs. Should do the job.

[The Jack]

Already got em down. I just want to know what's stronger (relative to weight and such) crossbows or spearguns.

Mostly because, though I've already got stats for crossbows from the core book, there's nothing for spearguns.
I really appreciate all the extra suggestions, but I just wanna know what to shoot things with.


Also, weresharks don't do big groups that much. They're more based on the larger breeds.

[gkathellar]

Also silver's supposed to be pretty good for corrosion, isn't it?

I could have sworn it was used so little in electronics due to its tendency to corrode, but on looking it up I appear to have been imagining that.

Incidentally, how would your werecreatures react to silver-based explosives? Because those are apparently a thing.

[Brother Oni]

Mostly because, though I've already got stats for crossbows from the core book, there's nothing for spearguns.
I really appreciate all the extra suggestions, but I just wanna know what to shoot things with.

I've given you the lethality of spearguns from that video - that Cressi Sioux 50 cm rubber band speargun went through 22cm of 20% ballistic gel with ~12.5 cm to spare. The Cressi SL Star 55cm Pneumatic one sent the whole 75cm spear through the entire block.
For reference, the FBI minimum standard for lethality is 12" (30.5cm) penetration into 10% ballistic gel. While it sounds like spearguns are better than pistols, bear in mind that a spearguns maximum range is ~10m at best (a spear isn't particularly aerodynamic), whereas pistols are lethal up to much greater distances, even if their effective range is about the same.

Both spearguns weigh about 3lbs, with the pneumatic being harder to load, heavier, more compact and with reduced power at depth.

It sounds more like to me that you're less interested in suggestions and more interested in "I want this to work in my game, help me justify it".

In any case, any reason why all your human soldiers aren't using upgraded ADS Amphibious rifles? The main disadvantage of spearguns is the single shot, whereas any soldier worth their salt can use a rifle in pretty much any conditions. The ADS uses smaller cartridges as supersonic munitions break up faster underwater, so they use slower, less powerful cartridges which give better range underwater.