Post/Author/DateTime	Post
NeueRegel 08-05-07, 01:47 AM	No foreplay. 3.5 Is the greek shield portrayed in the movie a 3.5 large shield, or is it a 3.5 tower shield? Bash, AC, Cover from a "sundrenching of arrows"... Your interpretations. 3.5 core, no prestige stuff. Or, "just Hollywood"? Neue
Legdiwena 08-05-07, 01:50 AM	Haven't seen movie, but weren't hop;ite shields traditionally a large shield?
Watchman 08-05-07, 02:01 AM	Large. Tower Shields would be on the scale of the Persian spara and the big Medieval pavise "body shields", huge-ass rectangular things you could quite literally form walls with. Shock infantry normally didn't want anything to do with something that clumsy and cumbersome, but for spearmen whose main job was to form a hard defensive crust and projectile-absorbing barrier in front of a mass of missile troops (composite-bow archers in the Persian sparabara system, crossbowmen in Medieval Italy) and just hold the line there it was the best thing since sliced cheese.
risner 08-05-07, 11:38 AM	No foreplay. 3.5 Is the greek shield portrayed in the movie a 3.5 large shield, or is it a 3.5 tower shield? Bash, AC, Cover from a "sundrenching of arrows"... Your interpretations. 3.5 core, no prestige stuff. Or, "just Hollywood"? Neue Would not be a Tower shield. What is portrayed in the Movie can not be done in core 3.5, so you would need either prestige or something. Also, the spears were normal Spears but were being used one handed and not two handed as required. 100% "just hollywood".
natzero 08-05-07, 11:50 AM	actually the spartans did fight with 8 foot spears with bronze tips and they used them in one hand. granted they didnt last TOO long, which is why they switch to the short sword. as for the shield the "hoplon" i believe it was called was massive. it really covered from thigh to neck approx 3-3 1/2 feet in diameter. it also wasnt as heavy one one would believe (plus with the arm strap it was more easily held) the shield were hard wood with a bronze coating.
Thunder Dragonbane 08-05-07, 11:57 AM	Spears were frequently used in the fasion shown in the film. Especially by the spartans, however there is no way using the RAW to play that type of character conviently. The spears would have to be made as exotic weapons with reach that could also be used in close combat. The shields were large round shields, most likely made from wood with a bronze facing on them.
natzero 08-05-07, 12:04 PM	i guess you could let a pc play with a large spear in one hand but lets say after 1+ con mod rounds he would be fatigued and thats not even mentioning the fact that its like a -4 attk or sumthin and that one would need to be proficient
GSonic7 08-05-07, 03:52 PM	I still don't get how they managed to survive so long. Their AC was at most, what, like 18? Fighting things with BaB 1-2, maybe 3 or 4 max, and then +2-3 strength, potentially +4, means anywhere from +3 to +8, so therefore more than 1/4 of all attacks would hit. On a succesful hit, say an average of 5 damage. That means that they are dead after 5 hits. There are 300 of them, so that means that with say, 16 rounds of fighting each day (that seems like too little, but is easy for math), and assume each gets attacked once each round, killing one every 4 rounds, then that means each day, quite a large chunk will be taken out. But I guess that is what happened, because there weren't too many left for that last battle. Okay, I'm done with my mathy-rambling.
Paul_profession_baker 08-05-07, 04:07 PM	actually the spartans did fight with 8 foot spears with bronze tips and they used them in one hand. granted they didnt last TOO long, which is why they switch to the short sword. Their also was an extra bronze tip on the other end of the spear. This tip was bigger and heavier. It was designed to help use the spear in one hand (think of the lever principle) and for killing the people under them. After the initial collision, the ground was covered with wounded or dead soldiers. Quickly killing the enemies on the ground was quite easy and offered better footing. To do so, the only needed to give a backward and downward thrust. Those spears where really wicked.... I still don't get how they managed to survive so long. Their AC was at most, what, like 18? Fighting things with BaB 1-2, maybe 3 or 4 max, and then +2-3 strength, potentially +4, means anywhere from +3 to +8, so therefore more than 1/4 of all attacks would hit. On a succesful hit, say an average of 5 damage. That means that they are dead after 5 hits. There are 300 of them, so that means that with say, 16 rounds of fighting each day (that seems like too little, but is easy for math), and assume each gets attacked once each round, killing one every 4 rounds, then that means each day, quite a large chunk will be taken out. But I guess that is what happened, because there weren't too many left for that last battle. Okay, I'm done with my mathy-rambling. I don't think the D&D mechanics are a realistic model for historical battles. Come one, usually one good shot can kill a man (and trust me, soldiers can make pretty good shots). I think D&D is more like action movies, the heros never tend to receive a good hit: always minor injuries. Well until the end of the film....
Wharin 08-05-07, 05:09 PM	I still don't get how they managed to survive so long. Their AC was at most, what, like 18? Fighting things with BaB 1-2, maybe 3 or 4 max, and then +2-3 strength, potentially +4, means anywhere from +3 to +8, so therefore more than 1/4 of all attacks would hit. On a succesful hit, say an average of 5 damage. That means that they are dead after 5 hits. There are 300 of them, so that means that with say, 16 rounds of fighting each day (that seems like too little, but is easy for math), and assume each gets attacked once each round, killing one every 4 rounds, then that means each day, quite a large chunk will be taken out. But I guess that is what happened, because there weren't too many left for that last battle. Okay, I'm done with my mathy-rambling. Well, there could be a number of things helping them. I would imagine that they have close to every single Shield AC boosting feat out there, plus the fact that they could have been fighting defensively, they might have "masterwork" shields using those new rules in the newest edition of Dragon, boosting their AC even further. The Persian army facing them were most likely fatigued and/or demoralized. Dilios arguably had levels in a class that was analogous to a Bard, and I am sure they would have a feat or two somewhere that grants something similar to DR. All in all you have an army, who POSSIBLY could only hit these guy on a natural 20 (Troops such as the Immortals had a somewhat better chance). And even though they greatly outnumber the Spartans, they positioned themselves (or maybe better said, let themselves get positioned) in such a way where they could only hit with their forward men, and little else. I'd say that D&D rules, depending on how you stated out the troops, could give you something approaching "accuracy" of Hollywood.
Watchman 08-05-07, 05:45 PM	Nah, fuhgeddabout that. The D&D shield rules already are so abysmal the just about single most cost-effective close-order soldier - an unarmoured spearman with a big shield - is essentially nonviable, which of course patently was not the case IRL. The figgen Anglo-Saxon peasant militia in their darn shirts had no trouble checking William's knights and armoured mercenary spearmen at Hastings for example. Nevermind now the way the rules are severely skewed to favour individual mighty warriors, who as we all know IRL tend to get trod over by a bunch of Joe Schmoes with good teamwork and solid basic tactics. Or as some Sengoku Jidai samurai warlord put it, you can buy a hundred spears for the price of one high-quality sword... and on the battlefield, those spears utterly defeat that lone sword. Not so in D&D obviously. The characteristic Classical Greek round "hoplite" shield was incidentally called aspis - "hoplon" means something like "arms", the full panoply of a warrior (in modern medical terminology hoplophobia is the fear of weapons). Thick wood, faced with a thin layer of bronze, about a meter diameter; quite heavy and rather on the clumsy side, but as period commentators observe, it protected the next man to the left at least as much as its bearer. The way it was held along the arm also made it very well suited for acting as a component of the hoplites' primary offensive maneuver, which in D&D terms could be termed a kind of Bull Rush done en masse - the shields in fact often buckled severely or outright developed cracks when two phalanxes smashed together like that. The heavy butt ferrule of the spears was called sauroter, "lizard killer", by the Greeks. It was invariably made of bronze, as one of its main functions was to allow the spear to be thrust upright or simply rested on the ground without exposing the wooden shaft to damage or dampness - bronze, as we all know, does not rust and is generally fairly durable. Due to its size and weight it no doubt also had a counterweight function. While not specifically designed to be used as a weapon (they were round in profile and tended to flare out into a kind of disk before tapering to a sort-of point), they were sharp and heavy enough to serve as a backup spearhead in a pinch (shaft-weapons having a general unfortunate tendency to get their shafts broken sooner or later in heavy combat), as was obviously useful for finishing off wounded enemies underfoot without having to try to turn the spear around in the crush of the phalanx. The design was copied wholesale into the Macedonian sarissa pike, and aside from being blunt and hence not quite as offensively useful the "apples" of Persian spears had basically the same role (then again their shorter spears would have been much easier to change grips with, rendering part of the offensive funtion moot). In one form or another similar devices featured in most well-made fighting-spears (and for that matter, most other staff-weapons) everywhere. Outright backup spearheads are also known to have been used, but these were unsurprisingly usually of iron or steel like the primary one and most common in cavalry weapons although "double tipped" long infantry weapons aren't unheard-of either. Cavalry lances, after all, had an even greater tendency to snap than most shaft-weapons due to the great stresses they were exposed to in charges.
BlackHalfDragon 08-05-07, 05:54 PM	I don't think the D&D mechanics are a realistic model for historical battles. Come one, usually one good shot can kill a man (and trust me, soldiers can make pretty good shots). I think D&D is more like action movies, the heros never tend to receive a good hit: always minor injuries. Well until the end of the film.... actually a soldier shoots 2000 bullets to kill one soldier on average... sniper is 5 kills per 6 bullets
Watchman 08-05-07, 06:08 PM	It probably helps that the sniper aims while the common grunts tend to just pump bullets in the foe's general direction (a trait not particularly helped by automatic weapons; I'm positive the Afghani and Iraqi guerillas would be like ten times as lethal if they had the semi-auto SKS instead of the full-auto-capable AK as the standard small arm...) - when they can actually work up the nerve to directly fire on another human being in the first place, that is. Add in the suppressive fire of machine-guns (an ammo hog if there ever was one) and it's hardly a miracle the averages look like that.
Norsesmithy 08-05-07, 08:25 PM	It isn't that the soldier can't aim, or forget to aim, it is that you are trained to fire somewhat indiscriminately to deny your foes the safe use of an area (fitting with the American, and to a point, Western, doctrine that it is better to expend material than soldiers). Bullets fired in that situation are not intended to kill the enemy, but rather to allow your soldiers to move around safely. And the Guerrillas would't be more effective armed with anything else, their mode of combat seem more remeniscent of tribesmen waving spears in the air before running into a melee, and the real soldiers tend to kill the attention attracting fools long before they get to the "try to kill your opponents" part of that sequence. An SKS wouldn't change this at all. Now you get the battle of Falluja, where aimed fire dominated, (mainly because of the abundance of cover, and the fact that cover severly reduces the use of the area denial mode of fighting) the round expended to kill ratios were so low (and the number of enemy head wounds so high) that the UN sent people in to determine whether or not we had just rounded everyone up and executed them. Sorry for the ramble. The point is, the solution to the problem has to be a training one, the weapon isn't nearly as big a factor as the way the people use it, and are trained to use it. Given an average terrorist (or rebel or whatever), he would probably continue to fight in this manner, even if you gave him a Mosin Nagnat, because it is what he was "trained" to do.
Watchman 08-05-07, 08:56 PM	Oh, I'd say the option of full auto is what makes all the difference. With it the untrained wonks have the option of just blazing away in the target's general direction, and feeling like they're accomplishing something. Without it they'd actually be forced to try to aim, and might actually end up hitting someone on something more than pure luck. They might actually also pick up on how to do the whole thing properly and become decent shots while at it. At which point you'd be getting the Original British Afghanistan Experience, which by all accounts was rather miserable.
crashlogic 08-05-07, 11:24 PM	Well the shield is a large shield. Originally, monkey grip was the feat meant to allow you to fight with a spear one handed. Now it lets you fight with a large shortspear, which denies you reach but lets you make an adjacent attack. I suppose to be realistic, it makes some sense to make the spear a reach weapon, since historically, much of the spear work was done by second or third rankers. So one spear attack as part of a charge to collision, and the rear ranks then stab and stab. In individual combat, I should think the eight footer would be used at distance, poking and prodding the enemy at bay, but if the enemy closed, it was time for the xyston.
Legdiwena 08-06-07, 12:16 AM	Can't believe you mentioned accuracy and Hollywood in same sentence, lol.
1 ton ghost 08-06-07, 01:02 AM	firstly, there were liberties taken, and though the movie kicked ass, it wasn't terribly realistic. it's a screenplay. suspension of disbelief and all that; look at the director's last movie (dawn of the dead '04), how many ppl were going, "that's not how zombies are, they can't be fast, etc." i know when i see zombies at walmart and at work i often wonder to myself... anyway, the shields: probably heavy shields. historically was most likely: regular spears, shortswords. bronze breastplates historically. no ranged units i noticed. surely javelins, something? a few skirmishers i'd wager, but who knows. trying to apply D&D mechanics to real life (or movies) is pretty hard. doesn't synch up, but try as you might, you're still gonna' have loop holes. i guess Heroes of Battle may help if you want to go 300: archer volly, morale, etc. judging by the gore, i think Cleave was in play, Phalnax Fighting, Endurance for sure. it'll never be as pure as the film but the committment is admirable. gl
Nephlite 08-06-07, 01:15 AM	firstly, there were liberties taken, and though the movie kicked ass, it wasn't terribly realistic. it's a screenplay. suspension of disbelief and all that; look at the director's last movie (dawn of the dead '04), how many ppl were going, "that's not how zombies are, they can't be fast, etc." i know when i see zombies at walmart and at work i often wonder to myself... 9/10, Zombies movies are Ghouls in disguise. a. They kill you and make more (ghoulsw do this) b. Being bitten can paralyze you (happen in one or two zombie movies) c. They aren't slow (maybe lazy since sometimes walk slow when not seeing anyone). anyway, the shields: probably heavy shields. historically was most likely: regular spears, shortswords. bronze breastplates historically. no ranged units i noticed. surely javelins, something? a few skirmishers i'd wager, but who knows. Well, Let us say Breastplate + Heavy Shield + 3 Dex=20 AC. Use Arcana Unearthed Level based AC boost and we get more. Enemies: mostly slaves (level 1 commoners?) Average hit +3 maybe. Chance to hit 25% the Spartans. and the other warriors (who were decent). +4 to +6. Chance to hit 30 to 40% the Spartans. Assuming few guys same level (I'd say Spartans were around level 7 or 8) yeah, it could happen. Remember, they had a protection by the mountains that lowered amount of soldiers that could come at them. Remember: in the end they did lose (historically because eventually, the persians figured out arrows can kill them because if Spartans left the area to attack archers they would be attacked from every soldier instead of sa few at a time).
MrCustomer 08-06-07, 01:27 AM	I still don't get how they managed to survive so long. Their AC was at most, what, like 18? Fighting things with BaB 1-2, maybe 3 or 4 max, and then +2-3 strength, potentially +4, means anywhere from +3 to +8, so therefore more than 1/4 of all attacks would hit. On a succesful hit, say an average of 5 damage. That means that they are dead after 5 hits. There are 300 of them, so that means that with say, 16 rounds of fighting each day (that seems like too little, but is easy for math), and assume each gets attacked once each round, killing one every 4 rounds, then that means each day, quite a large chunk will be taken out. But I guess that is what happened, because there weren't too many left for that last battle. Okay, I'm done with my mathy-rambling. The Spartans were legendary fighters, these 300 were hand chosen from the best of the Spartan army to come with the king. The persian armies were drafted troops. Think Level 10 Fighters holding the superior ground vs level 1 grunt fighters.
JadeSpider9643 08-06-07, 04:45 AM	Persians...proabably lvl 1 commoners most with less than the elite npc array, but we'll use the elite array anyway. 15 str 14 dex 13 con 12/10/8 mental-who-cares-they're-gonna-die-not-talk with such a large army you can be sure they're not issued quality gear, no MW items for the slave/fodder. Leather armor and a short sword...TOPS. And since they're commoners, they're not even proficient with that shortsword. So instead lets say they're all using a 1d6 simple weapon that they're proficient with. (MORE than generous i'd say) Feats....hmm again these are commoner slaves, but they're human, 2 feats a piece, let's say that they each spent one of their feats on something useful pre-slavery to a commoner, probably a skill feat or something, and we'll give them all toughness for their 2nd feat. I mean i doubt every slave was thrown into the army, we'll assume just the tough ones were used as fodder. So this gives the persians a generous d4+4(8)HP, 14 AC, +2 to hit for 1d6+2 damage. Now then what were the spartans? Fighters to be sure. NOT barbarians, these guys were GOOD, not "Battle crazy". Most certainly higher level, probably at least lvl 10+. Lets try it at lvl 10. These are the chosen elite, an elite array doesn't do them justice. I'm gonna try this as a starting average... 17 STR +1=18 17 DEX +1=18 18 CON 13 INT 8 WIS (c'mon they did good, but this was not a smart idea) 255 CHA (these guys redefined "moxy") ....Ok fine..10 CHA gear..and I know this isn't entirely historicaly accurate, but I'm going for a D&D equivelant and mechanicly functional here... Large Shields, hide armor and Longspears (argueably used 1-handed with powerful build, but we'll blow a feat on Monkey grip and take the -2) feats: 3 from levels, 1 for human, 6 from fighter lvl 1 - monkey grip human-power attack fighter1-Cleave fighter2-Weapon focus(longspear) lvl 3-Combat Expertise fighter4-Great cleave lvl 6-Combat Reflexes Fighter6-Improved Trip Fighter8-Weapon specialization(longspear) lvl 9-Expert Tactician Fighter10-Formation Expert So we get 10d10+40(100)HP, Using combat expertise at full gives AC 24, to hit: +10/+5 bab, +4str, +1 weapon focus, +2 formation expert, -5 combat expertise, -2 monkey grip...totals +10/+5 for 1d6 +4(str) +2(weapon spec) +2(formation expert), or 1d6+8 damage with 10ft reach and upto 5 AoOs per round (with +2 to attack and damage on anything that survives an AoO thanks to expert tactician) All in all, that's not too unreasonable really. With this setup(and i think i was being quite generous in favor of the persians) the Persians couldn't touch the Spartans except on a natural 20. so on average (and only in long battles like this can you actually expect the averages to have a chance to play out) 1 in 20 persian attacks actually hit a spartan. for 1d6+2 damage, out of their average 100hp (and surely they were above average, max 140hp). But not every persian is gonna get a chance to attack. with reach and lots of AoOs and cleave and enough base damage to drop a persian on a minimum damage roll, the spartans will easily carve up the persians faster than they can approach. (espically if cleaves are allowed on AoOs)
NeueRegel 08-06-07, 08:15 AM	I think that we have different ideas of what the various spears in 3.5 are. I wish that the PHB had included measurements like the old AD&D edition books included. But, a "longspear" in 3.5 in my understanding is what used to be named the "Awl Pike". Certainly way and far above the "spear" shown in 300. Conversely (or is that Inversely?) I think a shortspear is about the length of a long sword, maybe just over a metre. Shorter than those portrayed in 300. The spears portrayed in the movie I think were about the length of the wielders, a human, at about 6 feet? Mayhaps a minute longer? Anywho, back to our scheduled programme... Neue
NeueRegel 08-06-07, 08:25 AM	Oh, and yeah... We play 3.5 core, so I almost forgot the Greatspear... I've seen it in E-tools and whatnot. I think of that as a longspear with an African broadbladed head, or a fantasy dragonlance in artwork. Certainly probably nothing that ever existed. A sword blade on a very long haft, lol. Neue
Watchman 08-06-07, 08:52 AM	The fact is nonetheless that the Greeks at the time used the "universal standard" leght for a long infantry spear, 2.5 meters (8-9') or so. Judging by the pictorial sources I've seen of them (like those wall-reliefs) the Persians were using the step shorter model of about 2 meters or bit less (ca. 6-7'). Anyway, Leonidas' Threehundred were specifically a royal bodyguard formation (both of the kings of Sparta presumably had one), so it's probably safe to assume they were a cut above the standard Spartan homoioi. Although as the latter wouldn't in D&D terms actually have more than a level or two over normal soldiery (they got their arses handed to them way too often for that), that's not really saying too much. The Persians weren't in the habit of dragging untrained peasants across half the known world and giving them weapons for the purpose of getting them killed; that would have been quite nonsensical in far too many ways, and unlike the ancient Mesopotamian city-states Persia had no need to use battle casualties to reduce excess population (they usually established colonies instead). The empire had a proper professional standing army expanded with provincial levies (who could pretty much by default be assumed to be skilled with a bow, javelin and sling as all were common "peasant weapons" in that part of the world), mercenaries, allies, and the landed nobility of the empire which provided much of the cavalry as well as the rank and file of the Immortals (although their Persian name apparently actually means "Companions"...). This was, after all, not some bunch of amateurs but the well-oiled military machine that toppled Neo-Babylon and conquered nigh everything from Egypt and Lydia to the gates of India within a single generation, and then held it together in the face of endemic satrapal and popular revolts, the occasional outright civil war, and a slew of minor external invasions. ...actually, when it comes to it the Persian military was by far a more professional and capable bunch than the rather amateurish Greeks with their "cult of symmetry". As much is suggested (besides now the fact the Persians could even project such vast armies so far beyond their core regions) by the way the Greek hoplite-centered system started failing almost the second it was out of a fairly specific set of geographical circumstances, or the fact the Greeks themselves modified it into a proper combined-arms model rather fast when they started fighting each other seriously.
Llathos 08-06-07, 08:59 AM	This guy makes a good point about managing your expectations in D&D levels and how well d20 can be mapped to real life. I think more than a few of the points apply well to this thread: http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/d&d-calibrating.html
Watchman 08-06-07, 09:04 AM	"A sword blade on a very long haft" sounds like some of the bigger two-handed cavalry spears devised. Those could have a meter of tip, described in many sources as "sword-like" (but then again a lot of perfectly normal spearheads could also pass for short swords without a difficulty), on some three meters of shaft... The Greek term for such was kontos, "barge pole" or something to that effect. Quite popular east of the Mediterranean and on the steppes for quite a while from at least Hellenic times onwards, and also the shape which Japanese cavalry spears soon developed after the archery was largely relegated to mass infantry formations in the wake of the Mongol invasions. Period accounts claim that on a charge the thrust of such a spear could penetrate several layers of metal armour, and one Roman writer recounts an elite Sassanid cataphract was able to run through two legionaries at once...
Watchman 08-06-07, 09:20 AM	This guy makes a good point about managing your expectations in D&D levels and how well d20 can be mapped to real life. I think more than a few of the points apply well to this thread: http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/d&d-calibrating.htmlNot really, by what I can see. And what he says about the levels is just nonsense. Perfectly common soldiery of them bygone days for example was trained to do quite enough stuff that you'll basically have to give them several Fighter levels just to get together the necessary Feats - for example Sassanid infantry archers, besides being pretty hot with their bows in general, are recorded to have been trained to shoot backwards on the run - the somewhat demanding Shot On The Run Feat in other words, on top of other archery-related ones. And these guys were common infantry. Support troops at that. It gets worse if you start talking about cavalry, especially the double-role kind trained for both horse-archery (or javelin-throwing) and hand-to-hand combat. Some of the cavalry swords alone were large enough to be Bastard Swords in D&D terms, and yes, they were used one-handed... More to they point, 1st-level rank-and-file soldiery would pre rather useless for protecting nigh anything in a D&D world, except perhaps the wine cellar from the village drunk (not to mention a lot of them had a "day job" to take care of on the side, such as farming). Even the CR 1 humanoid chaff - Orcs, Gnolls etc. - can likely cream them most of the time.
natzero 08-06-07, 11:22 AM	ok applying dnd rules to the ancients is humorous but not particularly possible. we cant assume that a small city state with only 10,000 citizens at its max (approx) could have an army of lvl 10 fighters. Thats crazy, although we can assume that the reason Thermopylae played out as it did was for interesting but simple reasons. The Spartans trained there entire lives, they went so far by the laws of Lycurgus, that they had slaves do all non military based work. And left the women to run the city state in their absence. They fought against other greeks by the season, and waged war all year long (not just in warm months like the rest of the greeks) They waged a war on their slaves every year to keep them in line. They were so good at fighting other greeks (who themselves > the persians) that Xerxes's army was liek fodder Persians- generally were not in army by choice, were taken over and in such a case there is morale and resentment issues. Carried a light wood shield, a 6 foot spear (wooden tip on most some bronze perhaps or maybe iron), light leather armor, and a skinny and narrow short sword. (believe it was egyptian in origin could be wrong) Spartans- highly trained and disciplined. Ready to die for any other of their allies, knew that even if they did not care they were putting their friends (and sometimes lovers) in harms way if they did not fight. Carried an 8' spear with bronze on both sides, heavy wooden shield covered in bronze, a heavy (17 lb) bronze helm, bronze breastplate (could easily turn the spear and swords of Persians), armored shin guards and gauntlets, sandals :D , and a straight rather broad short sword (which they used more for stabbing than slashing liek in 300) Also contrary to popular believe we have to remember the spartans were not the only greeks there. At Leonidas's command were approx 7000 greeks from all over the Peloponnesus and Boeotia. These other greeks were all about as well armed as the spartans and very good although obviously not as good as the spartans. Now after Ephialtes (misspelled i think) gave them up to Xerses leonidas dismissed all the greeks except his 300 (and slaves), although 1200 Thebans and Thespians would not leave his side. So the 1500 of them (maybe assuming all 300 still lived) were killed on the final day. 300 was an awesome movie but it was based on something that was based on something that was true. Frank Miller wanted to tell a story and he did a great job. thanks for listening :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant: :rant:
InkBlot 08-06-07, 12:04 PM	I'm convinced the spartans, as presented in the movie, were Crusaders. Crusaders don't die.
Watchman 08-06-07, 12:40 PM	Actually, Thermopylae went as it did for by far simpler reasons - the Greek hoplite was at the time the foremost close-order shock-infantry combatant around the region (a quality derived chiefly from his particular combination of war gear and tactical doctrine), and in the fortified narrow chokepoint of the pass the more maneuverable and versatile Persian troops lost all of their advantages. Basically the Greeks were forcing the invaders to fight on terms that greatly favoured their particular field of specialty. Which said once Xerxes realized throwing mass infantry assaults against them was futile, the Persians seem to have settled to treating the whole affair as basically a siege - maintaining pressure on the defenders with hit-and-run probing attacks while trying to find a way to outflank the chokepoint. As a side note I understand the brunt of the fighting there on the Persian side was carried out by Medes, a recent addition to the Empire not considered very loyal and presumably therefore expendable. Media actually lay right next to the old Persian heartlands at the western end of the Iranian plateau (roughly the Iraq-Iran-Turkey border region these days), and the people were closely related to the Persians proper, but had managed to put up a startlingly stubborn and lenghty fight against Imperial encroachment. Indeed before Persia rose into an empire under Cyrus the Great it was for a while a vassal-state of the Median kingdom. As for the war gear involved, please do note that period Greek vase-paintings often show Persian soldiery with arms every bit the equals of those of the Greeks save for the helmets - scale-reinforced linen cuirasses, kopis swords and such proliferate among the warriors of both sides displayed. Properly deployed in enough numbers the sparabara heavy infantry were the match of the hoplites, as the repulse of the Athenian centre at Marathon demonstrates; it's just that there was usually more of the Greek heavy infantry than their Persian peers, due to the specialized nature of hoplite warfare. The Persians were after all the heirs to the Mesopotamian heavy-infantry traditions, on top of which they could draw on all manner of warlike highland folk for aggressive light infantry. The Greeks didn't pick their battlefields as carefully as they did just for fun after all. They knew perfectly well - also from defeats in Asia Minor - that they had to play their hand carefully, else the Persians would run rings around them and roll up the vulnerable flanks of the phalanx line.
Holy_Beholder 08-06-07, 12:47 PM	Certainly probably nothing that ever existed. A sword blade on a very long haft, lol. You mean besides the naginata? And yes, D&D is horrible for doing realism. And for the spartan being elite warriors, they were good, and they trained, but so did other Greeks. There was one city state that were ridiculously good at the sling, it was said that they would not give their children bread until they could hit it with a sling. Of course, D&D made the sling suck, and be simple(try to use one, it isn't. Bows are much easier) As for the long spear, it says its 10 feet, which is a pike(9ft+ is a pike) although you would think that with the spear, which would be 8 feet realistically, you would still have reach(if you are standing at the edge of your square, and they are in the middle, its only 7.5 feet. Assuming that you can extend your arm one ft while still holding balance, that gives you a spear which you hold with 1.5 feet behind the hand, and 6.5 in front. Since spears had a counterweight, that would be completely plausible). Unless people thought you held them in the middle. As for the short spear, 6 feet is realistic, which probably shouldn't have reach, although by virtue of being 5.5 feet longer than the dagger, which does, it probably should. Also, back to the movie, yes Spartans had range, there were javelin throwers, archers, and slingers.
Matthew_ 08-06-07, 01:53 PM	Where does D&D define the Long Spear as being 10' long?
crashlogic 08-06-07, 02:52 PM	A sarisssa was not blunt. Nor was the butt spike on the end of the eight-footer.
Matthew_ 08-06-07, 02:57 PM	As far as I am aware, the Hoplite Spear (the eight to nine footer) did indeed have a butt spike. I cannot think of a source that says otherwise. What do you have in mind?
crashlogic 08-06-07, 02:59 PM	As far as I am aware, the Hoplite Spear (the eight to nine footer) did indeed have a butt spike. I cannot think of a source that says otherwise. What do you have in mind? Sorry, My band. there was a butt spike on the end of the eight foot greek spear. I mean it was not blunt, not that is was not present. It was a confusing post.
Watchman 08-06-07, 03:09 PM	You mean besides the naginata?The naginata is actually an example of "close" polearms totaling around 2 meters in lenght, as it needed to be easily manageable in one-on-one combat. Comparatively bladed Chinese weapons could however have very long shafts for fighting chariots and later cavalry. And yes, D&D is horrible for doing realism. And for the spartan being elite warriors, they were good, and they trained, but so did other Greeks.Although the difference was that the Spartan homoioi were a full-time warrior class, whereas the other Greek hoplites were part-time militiamen with "day jobs" to take care of. Unsurprisingly this did result in the Spartan hoplites being on the whole better trained and more confident, which duly reflected in their performance and duly earned them a fearsome reputation - only too useful for securing a psychological advantage against the citizen-soldiers of the other poleis. Which said Spartan armies were anything but immune to bloody defeats even in straight fights, and if for example caught in the flank or rear by cavalry their phalanx collapsed just as readily as everyone else's. Indeed there was one instance in the 500s BC or so where a Thessalian cavalry force all but massacred a large Spartan expeditionary force for virtually no casualties in return... There was one city state that were ridiculously good at the sling, it was said that they would not give their children bread until they could hit it with a sling.That sounds like the Balearic tribesmen, who were famous for their skill as slingers and so sought after as mercenaries Roman recruitement eventually began to depopulate the isnalds. Could be Rhodians too though - I don't know too much about those guys, but they were also famed slingers. But the poleis of Hellas proper rather looked down on all ranged weapons and delegated their use to the lower ranks of the society or mercenaries, the exception being the later peltastai who were basically hoplites (or in Macedonian-influenced areas, phalangites) trained to fight as javelin-armed light infantry.
Matthew_ 08-06-07, 03:10 PM	Sorry, My band. there was a butt spike on the end of the eight foot greek spear. I mean it was not blunt, not that is was not present. It was a confusing post. Ah right, okay, no problem.
Holy_Beholder 08-06-07, 03:30 PM	Where does D&D define the Long Spear as being 10' long? Read the weapon description in the PHB.
RobbyPants 08-06-07, 03:42 PM	I still don't get how they managed to survive so long. Their AC was at most, what, like 18? Fighting things with BaB 1-2, maybe 3 or 4 max, and then +2-3 strength, potentially +4, means anywhere from +3 to +8, so therefore more than 1/4 of all attacks would hit. On a succesful hit, say an average of 5 damage. That means that they are dead after 5 hits. There are 300 of them, so that means that with say, 16 rounds of fighting each day (that seems like too little, but is easy for math), and assume each gets attacked once each round, killing one every 4 rounds, then that means each day, quite a large chunk will be taken out. But I guess that is what happened, because there weren't too many left for that last battle. Okay, I'm done with my mathy-rambling. They probably were using the defense variant (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/defenseBonus.htm) from Unearthed Arcana, where you get a level-based armor AC bonus. This bonus doesn't stack with armor, but it does with shields. That, and they're all high level. :P
Matthew_ 08-06-07, 03:54 PM	Read the weapon description in the PHB. You mean this? Longspear: A longspear has reach. You can strike opponents 10 feet away with it, but you can’t use it against an adjacent foe. If you use a ready action to set a longspear against a charge, you deal double damage on a successful hit against a charging character. Not the same thing as the length of the Weapon. By the same logic, Daggers are 5' Long because you can strike an opponent 5' away.
Watchman 08-06-07, 03:56 PM	Read the weapon description in the PHB.The one that just explains the stuff about 10' Reach and the bit about readying against a charge, without so much as mentioning what the weapon is or is not like...?
Holy_Beholder 08-06-07, 11:32 PM	I must have seen it on the boards somewhere then.
Holy_Beholder 08-06-07, 11:33 PM	I must have seen it on the boards. Either that or its because I have the 3.0 PHB(3.5 for the rest though)
Matthew_ 08-07-07, 12:31 AM	I must have seen it on the boards. Either that or its because I have the 3.0 PHB(3.5 for the rest though) Probably on the Boards or perhaps in some supplement I am overlooking, but not in 3.0 PHB, which says pretty much the exact same thing as the 3.5 PHB. You could extrapolate the approximate length of the Long Spear by comparing the illustration with those of the other Weapons in the PHB, but I wouldn't trust any of them to tell me anything useful in terms of verisimillitude.
Serge_P 08-07-07, 10:00 AM	All the Spartans had the shieldmate (SP?) feat from Complete Warrior.
Matthew_ 08-07-07, 11:13 AM	Nah, Shield Mate sucks. You want Shield Specialisation (PHB 2) or Shield Wall (HoB).
baby_kamikaize_kobold 08-07-07, 09:02 PM	9/10, Zombies movies are Ghouls in disguise. a. They kill you and make more (ghoulsw do this) b. Being bitten can paralyze you (happen in one or two zombie movies) c. They aren't slow (maybe lazy since sometimes walk slow when not seeing anyone). Well, Let us say Breastplate + Heavy Shield + 3 Dex=20 AC. Use Arcana Unearthed Level based AC boost and we get more. Your right about the ghouls faking zombies unless they were people pretending to be ghouls pretending to be zombies :D the class defense from unearthed arcana? that dosen't stack with armor. it is suppose to be like th d20 modernclass defense and that doesn't stack either
The_Unseen_Illusion 08-07-07, 11:08 PM	When I first saw this movie last night, my jaw dropped as everything I knew about D&D went out the window. "OMG, the Spartans only have 13-15 AC!!!" "You can't bash with a tower shield!!!" "Spartans are around lvl 10, so they have superior attack bonus, but their HP is diminished in one arrow!!!" "A spear can't kill in one hit!!!" "There was no tactical advantage in using a shield bash for that attack!!!" Well, the list goes on. And that's when I realized it: D&D can only go so far. Warfare and D&D are different no matter how you look at it. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.