Donate to the Lead Adventure Forum to keep it alive!
If you are actually playing a "historical" battle you not only need the actual historic characters but the historical tactics and overriding national characteristics too.I recently saw an "Agincourt" refight where the French player dismounted most of his noble cavalry and advanced behind a screen of infantry and crossbowmen. When asked about this the player said something to the effect of ".....well I can't win if we play it properly". I would dispute that this game was "Agincourt" despite having the correctly named and painted characters. It takes more than that to make a game "historic". Unless you are looking to closely recreate a very specific event in history having the right names on the army lists is irrelevant.
Overall, I prefer to put 'my own dudes' in my lists, envisaging my battles as part of the larger historical narrative, where untold nameless men played their role. mine are just some of those nameless dudes.
Then what do you do with them? Refight Agincourt? And then.... refight it again?
You can't. Not only do we as individuals have 600 years of military innovation stored mentally, but every medieval historian, armchair general and his dog Spot, have dissected the battle in print too. Oddly the French usually win the re-fights.
...All of this got me thinking on the subject of ''your dudes'' and I was wondering how everyone else felt? Do you prefer historical battles with ''real life'' combatants or fictional characters and a looser feel?
...because Longbows are totally underpowered in the current meta, I'm telling you! I have posted a blogpost in which I explain in excruciating detail and based on the findings of many youtube videos why they should do 5 points of damage rather than 3!!!