Small Scale Skirmish Rules - Ancient Period

[Captain Darling]

I would endorse the suggestions of; the Song of… and Ravenfeast rule sets.

[Kenntak]

I see there is Advanced Song of Blades and Heroes and Song of Shadows and Dust. I am trying to figure out which would be better suited for small scale ancient skirmishing. There don't seem to be a lot of reviews of the latter.

[rumacara]

Song of Shadows and Dust already have profiles for the roman period like gladiators, roman gangers, civilians, bodyguards and i think celts and germans (probably many more), Advanced Song of Blades and Heroes has profiles for fantasy (orcs, humans, elfs, hobbits, dwarfs, etc). Having said that probablly the easyest for you would be Song of Shadows and Dust.

Ravenfeast is a easy to learn set of rules for Dark Ages but with the advantage of change the profiles on a easy way for several periods plus you can add adicional rules for the chosen period so that you have a greater "feeling" of that said period. Sometimes the simple change of name is enough without changing anything else (instead of bondir viking call it germanic warrior and his characteristics are the same as well as the equipment).

[Rick]

Is Song of Shadows and Dust a standalone set or an expansion of Song of Blades and Heroes where you'd need the original rules to use it?
Also, if it is a standalone set, would it be worth getting advanced SoBaH to give you more troop or mythic options?

[Kenntak]

Rick, Song of Shadows and Dust is a standalone set. Great question about whether it would be worth getting SoBaH to provide more troop or mythic options, I would like to know as well.

[DivisMal]

Is Song of Shadows and Dust a standalone set or an expansion of Song of Blades and Heroes where you'd need the original rules to use it?
Also, if it is a standalone set, would it be worth getting advanced SoBaH to give you more troop or mythic options?

I have both and while ASoBH is Not necessary to play and there is a great squad builder on the Ganesha Games homepage, ASoBH will give you explanations for a lot of new special abilities plus ideas of how to use them.
I don’t like the layout of ASoBH, but the game is pretty good. Possibly the normal SoBH will also suffice your needs if you find it cheaper.

Song of Dust and Shadows is an excellent rule set, but it’s basically Mordheim/Necromunda in Rome, so not really hoplites or legionaires but muggers and thieves.

[Easy E]

It is pretty clear to me how a Hoplite, Peltast, Hastati, etc. would fight in a smaller formation or even 1-on-1. 

However, I am always unsure how a Phalangite on garrison duty went about his business.  Did he forgo the Sarissa?  Did they operate in smaller "Files"* but ultimately the same?  Were they never used as garrison/policing troops, but only in field engagements?  I doubt they fought 1-on-1, but who knows.   

I am not sure there is much to go on for scholarship in that space. 




* = I forgot the correct Macedonian term for the smaller units of the phalanx.

[Pappa Midnight]

“Brethren” by Matthew Sutton-O’Conner are quite a nice set of skirmish rules. There is a basic rule set then lists for Ancients and  Dark Ages. Caters for around 10 minis up to reasonable sized battles.
It is points based and you can build your own factions if you like.
I got it for some Roman/Dacian small scale skirmishing.

Regards
PM

[Rick]

It is pretty clear to me how a Hoplite, Peltast, Hastati, etc. would fight in a smaller formation or even 1-on-1. 

However, I am always unsure how a Phalangite on garrison duty went about his business.  Did he forgo the Sarissa?  Did they operate in smaller "Files"* but ultimately the same?  Were they never used as garrison/policing troops, but only in field engagements?  I doubt they fought 1-on-1, but who knows.   

I am not sure there is much to go on for scholarship in that space. 




* = I forgot the correct Macedonian term for the smaller units of the phalanx.

Why did the macedonian sarissa come in two halves joined by a bronze tube affair? Why were ECW pikemen, like Macedonian Hypaspists, trained to use both the pike (sarissa) and the half pike (spear)? My take has been that, in mass battles, Sarissaphoroi were trained to operate in pike blocks but, in skirmishes operating in small open groups, they would have traded the sarissa for a spear.
Oh and I think the Macedonian's used the fairly standard Greek systems for sub-groups; Dekas for file, several Dekas making up a lochos, several lochoi making up a syntagma.

[AdamPHayes]

Why did the macedonian sarissa come in two halves joined by a bronze tube affair?

They probably weren’t. The one piece of evidence has been discredited by historians. If you have any experience of working with lengths of timber or other materials it would also be a red flag for the practicality of the concept.

But yes you are right. They would know how to use different weapons (they all had swords.) I’d have thought that mundane activities such as garrisoning fortresses is what professionals, such as theuophoroi are for though?

[Rick]

Later perhaps, for Theurophorai, but not during Alexanders conquests, not for the early Succession wars - they are first mentioned around the 250's or 240's, a hundred years or so after he was born. The Macedonian Sarissaphoroi weren't the citizen soldiers of the city-states, soldiering was their day job and they were paid well for a long service term - they were professional soldiers as much as the professional (or mercenary) Theurophoroi.
Which begs the question - were Theurophorai mercenary units? If so they would be the very last troops you'd choose for a long term garrison in a heavily fortified (and expensive) position!

[Rick]

They probably weren’t. The one piece of evidence has been discredited by historians. If you have any experience of working with lengths of timber or other materials it would also be a red flag for the practicality of the concept.

Actually it seems that the several examples of the tube that I mentioned have no clear-cut explanation and the speculation as to whether a sarissa was of one piece, joined halves or existed in both styles in the same army is still very much up in the air and speculation still abounds. I have joined and spliced lengths of wood with glue (usually also using other materials as well it must be said) and find the bond is often as strong as a single length of wood so I find little merit in that argument. Like I said, speculation still abounds.

[rumacara]

Folks, do please stick with the subject of rules.
That discussion may be a subject for another thread.

[Hobgoblin]

I'd agree with everyone who's recommended the Song of Blades family, but if you want something much more detailed, take a look at Mythras (an RPG: it's a descendant of RuneQuest).

Unlike RuneQuest and most RPG systems, combat is very tactical, as you can choose all sorts of 'special effects' when you get a particularly good outcome from the interaction of your dice rolls, character skill levels and opponent equivalents.

Mythras Imperative is a free version, so you can have a look at it and try it out a bit. The various 'combat modules' are little skirmish scenarios designed to familiarise you with the rules.

It's quite complex, but it also gives very vivid and dramatic results (impalements and severed limbs and whatnot); there's little abstraction, so where your armour is and what sort of weapon you're using are very important. And because it descends from RuneQuest, it has a very strong ancient-world flavour.

There are slightly more explicit miniatures rules in the Classic Fantasy supplement, but I think the free Imperative version of that provides the gist.

[Rick]

And it's fairly (quite a lot actually) compatible with the Runequest II/Legend series' supplements (it's slightly different but often just a matter of degree - the basics are almost identical as they derive from the exact same system).