De_Bellis_Multitudinis_Version_3.0.pdf

DE BELLIS MULTITUDINIS

Wargames Rules for Ancient and Medieval Battle

3000 BC to 1500 AD

Phil Barker and Richard Bodley Scott

WARGAMES RESEARCH GROUP

Version 3.0

JULY 2000

No part of this publication may he reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in

any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or

otherwise, without prior permission in writing from the copyright holder.

The Keep, Le Marchant Barracks, London Road, Devizes, Wiltshire SN10 2ER

Printed in England by Mexiprint .51883

VERSION 3, JULY 2000

WARGAMES RESEARCH GROUP

DE BELLIS MULTITUDINIS

INTRODUCTION

This rule set is an extension of our very successful "De Bellis Antiquitatis", more familiarly known as DBA. It chiefly

differs in being intended as a direct competitor for current mainstream wargames rules for the ancient and medieval period,

such as our own WRG 7th edition, and to satisfy those players who like uncomplicated, rules, but enjoy a table covered with

figures. It is accordingly designed to be suitable for battles with armies of several hundred figures, played on full size tables

and lasting two or three hours, and to provide more detailed period flavour than DBA. Special effort has been made to

ensure suitability for 25mm figures to tempt some of the older hands' favourite armies out of retirement. This Version 3.0

contains further revisions resulting from massive electronic and other feedback from players across the world, to improve

play balance, prevent misunderstandings and penalise gamesmanship. It has a radically new terrain system requiring a real

general's skill in exploiting the features provided by nature rather than ingenuity in tailoring battlefields.

DBM retains the basic troop types, mechanisms and simplicity of DBA, and DBA players will find they adapt readily. As

with DBA, our intent is to provide the simplest possible set of wargames rules that retain the feel and generalship

requirements of ancient or medieval battle. The rule mechanisms used start from the premise that the results of command

decisions can be shown rather than the minutiae of how orders were communicated and interpreted, that differences

between troops of the same class and era were relatively unimportant, and that most shooting regardless of theoretical

weapon range was at very short distances. No order writing or record keeping is necessary and time consuming reaction

tests are dispensed with. The resulting system is much faster moving than before and more interesting to spectators. It

emphasises the talents of the general rather than those of the accountant, requires much less effort, and, despite the

increased use of simple dicing procedures, keener tactical awareness. The simple rule mechanisms produce effects which

are more subtle than may be immediately apparent on first reading, and are the fruit of much detailed development work.

They should not be tampered with.

A points value system has been introduced, to facilitate the battles against unhistorical opponents which now tend to be

deplored, but which are almost inevitable with large army games against strangers, and to enable players to adapt their

existing armies. Unlike in previous large scale rule sets, no special rules are needed to simulate scouting, forced marches,

accidental encounters or attacks on a marching force, since they will occur naturally as a consequence of players pressing

ahead with march moves during the early part of the game, sending detachments in front or laying ambushes.

We see DBM as complementary to and emphatically not a replacement for DBA. Each has its own advantages. Some

players will inevitably be tempted to introduce some of the features of DBM into their DBA games, especially the points

value system. We strongly advise against this. All those we consider appropriate have been included in the current version

of DBA, and others would reduce the value of DBA as an introductory, fast play and campaign battle set.

Conversely, DBA is an excellent introduction to DBM. Those players not already familiar with the system should consider

playing a few DBA games first as a training exercise. DBA is now so widespread that willing opponents with a set of rules

and a pair of armies should not be hard to find.

CONTENTS

DESIGN PHILOSOPHY

REPRESENTATIONAL SCALES

TROOP DEFINITIONS

ORGANISING AN ARMY

PREPARING FOR BATTLE

FIGHTING THE BATTLE

TACTICAL ADVICE

MISCELLANEOUS

DIAGRAMS

INDEX

Page l

DESIGN PHILOSOPHY

DBM and DBA differ from previous rule sets in two major respects, the command and movement system and the combat

system.

The command system is simple and arbitrary, but produces results very similar to those from more detailed systems

incorporating written orders, transmission by messenger and interpretation by recipients. In one respect it is markedly

more realistic, since it produces visible battle lines rather than the "firework display" of independent units found with

other rule sets. We have concluded that we must be doing something right, even if we are not entirely sure what it is!

The passage of time, terrain and battle bring a progressive visible deterioration in organisation which players must devote

attention to repairing. Keeping a barbarian or feudal army under control calls for real skill.

The traditional functional division into units is dispensed with. Movement and combat is by elements, each consisting of

a fixed number of figures. Elements can be moved individually, or be combined into and move as temporary groups,

which can be part units, a full unit, or more than a unit. An element does not represent a unit, but the smallest sub-unit or

body capable of operating independently. Units may still exist in that several regular elements may have the same dress

or shield emblem and one of them include a standard and officers, but they have no function other than as a possibly

convenient group. Elements always fight individually, but are supported by neighbours.

Troops are primarily classified by their method of fighting instead of by weapons and armour. Finer grading within each

type reflects perceived efficiency rather than unit prestige or title. Our principal concern has been to reflect relationships

between historically opposed types, and not to speculate unduly on the relative effectiveness of anachronistic opponents.

Combat differs from previous rule sets in almost abolishing the artificial distinction between the traditional combat

phases of shooting and melee. That the bases of opposed elements are in contact does not necessarily imply that they are

exchanging hand-strokes, although this may be so, but that they are closely engaged at the distance preferred by the

tactically dominant troop type. If it still worries you, remember that base depths are over-scale. For example, the four

ranks of close order infantry represented by an element of spearmen may occupy only 4 paces depth in real life, but the

element base depth represents 30 paces in 15mm scale. There is room for a little space between enemies. Similarly,

multi-element depth formations include space behind the supporting ranks once they have closed up for combat. Moving

troops often only occupy the first few mm of their base, so may not have as far to move when turning as it may seem,

and can wheel out of line with adjacent troops without having to clear the front of their neighbours' base first.

When spearmen are in contact with spearmen, they are indeed fighting hand-to-hand. However, when horse archers or

foot skirmishers with javelins are in contact with an element of spearmen, this represents them being a few paces apart. If

the spearmen give ground, this is because of the effect of their opponents' shooting. If the horsemen or skirmishers flee,

this is because the spearmen have charged to relieve the pressure and temporarily chased them out of reach. Even in

hand-to-hand combat, missile weapons played a part. A shower of hand-hurled javelins often immediately preceded hand

strokes or was kept up during it by rear ranks shooting overhead. Often, some individuals in the front rank would hurl

their spears, while others kept them in their hand to thrust.

Too much attention is often paid to maximum rather than normal ranges. Horse archers attacking infantry spearmen could

sit still on their horses 200 paces away and shoot, but did not. Why should they? They could and did instead in turn

gallop by the infantry 10 paces away and be equally safe from being caught. The closer the range shot from, the easier it

is to hit the target, the more likely that hits will penetrate armour and the more injury inflicted after penetration. What of

horse archers attacking horse javelinmen? Surely they would gain by their longer maximum range? So they might, had

the desperate javelinmen not immediately galloped to close the range. After two or three hurried shots, the bowman either

continued the combat on inferior terms since he could not use shield and bow together, or galloped away to open the

range and was often pursued straight off the battlefield or shot in the back. Shooting at longer ranges was not decisive,

serving only to fix attention or impose caution, so is invisibly subsumed in various enemy proximity rules. Even with

those troops who did shoot in large bodies at long range in artillery fashion, theoretical maximum ranges may be

deceptive. A crossbow cocked up at 45° reaches further than a longbow. However, when the front end is raised, the target

disappears behind it. We assume that the effect of early gunpowder weapons derived at least as much from their

propensity to frighten men and animals by noise, flash and smoke as from the casualties caused.

We do not evaluate the results of combat in terms of casualties received and inflicted, but in terms of the element's

immediate reaction. A real ancient general would not know that a body of men had just received a certain number of

casualties. He would be able to see that it was forcing the enemy back, or losing ground, or scattering to the rear

hysterical with fear. We accordingly give you this information and this only. The local effects of fatigue and morale are

taken into account in combat results and their effect on troops to the side and rear. Their wider effects are simulated by

the demoralisation rules. For instance, destruction of an element in combat simulates the flight of survivors, while the

consequent destruction of elements close behind simulates the fate of troops carried away by their flight. With the

passage of time the collective morale of a command may reach breaking point and the whole command start to crumble.

Finally the whole army may seek safety in flight.

Page 2

REPRESENTATIONAL SCALES

FIGURE AND MODEL SCALE

This is expressed as the height in millimetres of a figure representing a man 1.83 metres or 6 feet tall. Naval elements use

models of reduced scale. This can be rationalised as them being seen at a distance by men on shore.

25mm, 15mm, 6mm and 2mm scales are all in use and all are fully compatible with these rules:

♦

25mm is the traditional scale, is best for detailed painting, but has somewhat fallen out of favour lately. We hope

that these rules will inspire players to dig out their old armies and give them some exercise. This scale is especially

suitable for public demonstration games, where visibility can be a problem for spectators.

♦

15mm is currently the most popular scale and is still large enough for detailed painting and for players to easily

recognise the types comprising their opponent's army.

6mm and 2mm provide the ultimate in visual realism, but at the cost of increasing difficulty in painting and

recognising troop types.

GROUND SCALE

This is the relationship between the distances measured on the table and those they represent on a real battlefield. It

♦

varies according to the figure and model scale used.

All distances in the text are quoted in multiples of paces (p), each of 0.75 metres or 2.5 feet. This is because the length of

a man's stride has remained fairly constant throughout history, while such units as cubits, yards and metres come and go.

Measure distances on the table with a 300 p card strip marked at 50 p intervals.

♦

25mm figures: 50 paces in battle = 40mm measured on the table.

♦

15mm or 6mm: 50 paces in battle = 25mm (or 1 inch) measured on the table.

2mm: 50 paces in battle = 20mm measured on the table.

♦

TROOP REPRESENTATION AND DEPICTION

Each element represents, not a unit, but the smallest sub-unit or body capable of independent action. It consists of a

rectangular base, to which are fixed several figures according to its troop type and the model scale. Elements vary in cost,

and represent the number of men who would occupy that frontage, typically a nominal full strength of 128 to 256 riders

or foot formed in a 4 man deep block, or sometimes in wedges or rhomboids, or a lesser number of more specialised

troops usually formed in a single rank, such as up to 16 elephants, 25 chariots with or without runners, 6 heavy artillery

pieces, 30 light bolt-shooters, 25 war wagons, 2 to 5 galleys or ships or 8 to 20 boats, depending on individual size. An

element of Hordes represents up to 1,000 men in a deep mass. Note that the first elephant element of an army can

represent as few as 4 elephants, this reflecting the disproportionate effect of even a few elephants on enemy horses or on

the morale of men unused to them.

Figures must accurately depict the troops they represent. The only exception to this is that generals, officers, standard

bearers and musicians represent the majority type comprising their element.

TIME SCALE

Play is in alternate bounds. These do not represent fixed arbitrary divisions of time, but instead reflect initiatives and

responses by the two sides. However, dividing known battle durations by the number of discrete phases that can be

identified produces consistent enough results for us to define a pair of bounds as equivalent to 15 minutes in real life.

Except in the case of march movement out of contact, which is assumed to be continuous and to have been during the

preceding enemy bound as well as your own current bound, move distances are not a function of time available and

theoretical speeds. Instead they are based on typical tactical initiatives and counter-initiatives in real battles.

Troops contacted by enemy are assumed often to have countercharged even though not moved. Whether they did so in

good time must be judged by the result of the ensuing combat.

PLAYING AREA

An ideal playing area is 2.7m (108") x 1.5m (60") [a standard table tennis table] if using 25mm figures, or 1.8m (72") x

1.2m (48") if using smaller figures. If competition organisers use 1.8m x 1.2m tables for 25mm games, armies should not

exceed 350AP, and all dimensions specified in paces (p) in Terrain Choosing [P.12-13] should be reduced to 5/8 normal.

DICE

All dice used are the normal 1 to 6 type. One die is used for each general for all purposes. Those for irregular or ally

generals must each be a different colour. Those for other regular generals of the same army must all be the same colour.

Page 3

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: