Blood on the Sands **NEW** Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears...

[Furt]

Glad to see you're still working on it Frank. We got a bit side tracked by Dr De'Ath's Little Lead Adventures on Mars and Texas, but shall return to Rome soon hopefully to continue our campaign.

No probs Nick - look like you are all having too much fun on Mars and with Comanches.

[rumacara]

Hello Frank

Keep it coming mate.
The interested people list is increasing.

Cheers

Rui

[Eithriall]

Thank you for your welcome Furt and many thanks for your time and your answers.  

Hope not to be annoying with my remarks/questions but i like this historical period and as you're doing your best to do the best game ever on gladiatorial combats (and share the evolution of your project), i'm particularly interested.

So, show must go on :

I am aware of course of the Latin names for gladiator weapons/shields and equipment [...]What I have done is included the Latin term when no better English option exists ie gladius, sica, scutum, parma.

I understand your choice for the latin terms, i was asking because i like the immersive (and accurate) approach of foreign language even if i'm aware that most of players don't speak latin (and i'm not so good at it). As the design of the game is so immersive, i probably and unconsciously want all the game following this idea.
  

The terms heavy and light are really game terms only and help to differentiate a difference in the types of gladiators. No room existed for three "classes" of gladiators in the rules [...].

Ok, i understand but in the golden age of gladiatorial combats (the technical era – I et II centuries AD), most of the pairings were the result of this classification : parmularii vs scutarii (and with some mirror combats too).

Murmillo vs Threax or Hoplomachus or Retiarius / Secutor vs Retiarius  / etc...

But as it is a game, there's no need to force players with historical pairings which would reduced the combat possibilities (and the fun !). As i've already said, it's finally just to be more immersive and historically accurate.

Most deaths result in the decision from the crowd/editor to spare the gladiator when asking for missio. In my own campaign game (currently at 6 turns and a total of 24 individual bouts) only 3 gladiators have been killed outright by their opponent in the arena and on average only 1 in 4 gladiators have been sentenced to die by the crowd.

So my firt impressions were wrong and i'm very happy to be wrong.    What you've said sounds very good to me because, as we speak of the technical era,  not so much fighters die in the arena (for sure less than 20% -  perhaps 10% to 15% according to some sources). There's no need to be statistically realistic (yes i know, it's a game) but you're right when saying :

I think these results are close to historically accurate

. And they are fully acceptable for a game.

Tirones (novice gladiators) were the most in danger on their first combat because as their formation hasn't cost so much at this particular moment, they were more easily sacrificiable by the editor. As they've not won combat their price was still low (they were, for sure, unknown).
 
It's very important to explain for neophyte about gladiatorial combat that an editor (the one who organize the munera – the combats) rent gladiators to a lanista (the one who rules a ludus – buying and training gladiators) and when a gladiator dies, the editor have to pay the fully price of the figher to the lanista (knowing that gladiators were higly-rated when they were celebrities).
As an editor, if you kill a tiro, you will pay 4.000 sesterces.
Kill a primus palus and you will pay 15.000 sesterces or more...(some stars cost about 100.000 sesterces or more).

As a term of comparison, in the debut of the empire era a common adult slave cost 2.000 sesterces (it could be less but it could be more if the slave's got some qualifications) and a roman legionary earns 900 sesterces/year.

If a gladiator falls prone even, and his opponent delivers a decent enough attack, the match will be called and missio must be asked for.

I like that and i agree !   This seems to be historically accurate. A Gladiator can't hit an opponent falling prone and he'll be stop by the referee if he does.

About the "damnatio ad gladium" -

"I have ran with "to fight until dead as a gladiator" and interpreted it to mean the gladiator will fight as normal, but will never be spared (granted missio). It is purely a Trait to spice up the game and may well not be how they functioned historically".

You can keep the terms "Damnatio ad gladium" because this is not so clear.
There are different expressions existing like "damnatio ad ferrum" (condemned to iron) and "damnatio ad gladium" (condemned to gladius)....so directly killed by the sword of a gladiator or with a enacment of combat against a gladiator. "Damnatio ad ludum gladiatorium" could only be a sentence to become a gladiator and train and fight as well (and perhaps with the possibility to gain your liberty with the rudis) when "damnatio ad gladium" only means death.
And last but not least "damnatio ad gladium" sounds pretty cool when pronounced...  

In all my research of this stuff I have found conflicting evidence of which hand the retiarius actually held his net. I actually think he would hold his trident in the armored hand (left) and hold the net in the right hand. Miniatures from different ranges show the trident in different hands.

For the Retiarius, manica and galerus cover the arm and shoulder the fighter present to his opponent when in guard position (as it is his only armor defense). Dont forget Retiarus manage 3 things at the same time : reta (net), fascina (trident) and pugio (dagger). His second arm is unprotected to be free of movement and very fast, so the Retiarus can manage his stuff as he will or need.
For a right-handed man : pugio in left hand (side protected by manica in guard position), trident hold in both hands with the net in right hand at the same time.



And the link to the source site of this image : http://historianet.fi/verkkotaistelija

"do you think the need for custom dice might put some people off ?"

NO !! It's a great idea and part of the gameplay and identity of the game. And for the kill-joys there is still D6...

A shield has a weapon length, just like a gladius or spear. It is used simply by declaring an attack with it, just like any other weapon. At the moment there is no penalty to attack or damage with a shield, but I am considering implementing that a wound delivered by shields will not "bleed".
In much of the documentation and video of reenactments, shields are used quite offensively, so I refrained from penalizing them in attack. It seems likely that gladiators were schooled to use their shields in attack as well as defence.

Yes, some sources show that shields were used to attack (not only defend) and shields may stun or pushback opponents...a strong hit could even make fall someone on the ground.
 

New questions :

- All weapons are designed for contact (pugio, sica, gladius – shorter than the legio's type) excepted  Hoplomachus spear and Retiarius trident and i've dont' seen information about the range of these polearm weapons ?

- I don't know your plans about the campain system and the experience won by survivors but the Table of Italica speaks about 5 existing gladiator categories : from the lower n°5 (novice – tirones) to the upper n°1 (primus palus). Could it be an interesting information ?

- I've seen the hit location table is the same for all gladiators and that's odd to me because when a fighter tries to break the defense of his opponent, he will try (most of the time) to place attack and hit the uncovered body parts. So dont you think hit location should be different between armaturae ?
(Yes i know, parmularii & scutarii again...). And it's very clear if you watch some fights done by experimental archeologists.


....i'm not sure i'm done yet with this thread...  

[Dr Mathias]

We've already had quite a debate about which weapon was on which arm of the retiarius- so much so I made a template for both options 

[Eithriall]

Retiarius is not forced to hold the trident in only one defined hand. If you are right-handed, the image in my pravious post makes sense.

And by the way, you did a very nice job Mr Mathias.            

[Dr Mathias]

Retiarius is not forced to hold the trident in only one defined hand.

And by the way, you did a very nice job Mr Mathias.            

Thanks, it was pretty fun. And, I've forgotten how I did it

[Eithriall]

If a gladiator is left handed, Scaeva, how does this effect his equipment and the hit location table? I would imagine him standing exactly mirrored to the normal table, but that would put the regular layout of armor on the wrong side. Does that then switch around as well, or would the rules of the arena not allow this. I'm curious to the historical president on this.

According to sources, gladiators were trained to fight right-handers but left-handed fighters are attested more than once. It should be disconcerting and very difficult to confront a left-handed man when not prepared to such fight.  

[Furt]

Hello Frank

Keep it coming mate.
The interested people list is increasing.

Cheers

Rui

Thanks Rui - I'm trying mate.

Wow Eithriall - what a post! I'm a little dizzy after reading all that!     

I'd just like to explain, Eithriall, to ease your thoughts a little, that I have done my utmost to take information from historical sources and tried to implement it into Blood on the Sands in some way, to best capture the flavour of actual gladiatorial combat. I have long been fascinated by this disturbing but alluring combat sport, and have read a lot of books and watched a lot historical re-enactors, so I think you just have to trust me when I say I have put a lot of time (years actually) and research into the game. I was very disappointed by other gladiator games, when obvious elements of gladiatorial combat did not feature in their rules, so decided finally to make the game that I always wanted to play.

Now to your queries and new questions:

But as it is a game, there's no need to force players with historical pairings which would reduced the combat possibilities (and the fun !). As i've already said, it's finally just to be more immersive and historically accurate.

I do actually enforce a classic pairing when possible. When playing the campaign game it becomes very difficult to maintain these pairings historically, so exemptions have to be made, but you will never see two Thraex or Retarii for example fight in a match.

It's very important to explain for neophyte about gladiatorial combat that an editor (the one who organize the munera – the combats) rent gladiators to a lanista (the one who rules a ludus – buying and training gladiators) and when a gladiator dies, the editor have to pay the fully price of the figher to the lanista (knowing that gladiators were higly-rated when they were celebrities).
As an editor, if you kill a tiro, you will pay 4.000 sesterces.
Kill a primus palus and you will pay 15.000 sesterces or more...(some stars cost about 100.000 sesterces or more).

This all features in the campaign game, but was the most difficult to rule on. In game terms, paying a player to lose a gladiator can come across as rewarding him for losing, and feels a little odd at times.

All weapons are designed for contact (pugio, sica, gladius – shorter than the legio's type) excepted  Hoplomachus spear and Retiarius trident and i've dont' seen information about the range of these polearm weapons ?

All weapons (including unarmed, nets and shields) have a "Length" stat. Opponent's weapons Lengths are compared, with the longer weapon gaining a bonus to attack in combat. For example a trident versus a gladius rewards the trident wielding gladiator a 2 dice bonus. If both gladiators wield gladii neither gain a bonus, as the weapons are of equal length.

I don't know your plans about the campain system and the experience won by survivors but the Table of Italica speaks about 5 existing gladiator categories : from the lower n°5 (novice – tirones) to the upper n°1 (primus palus). Could it be an interesting information ?

The levels of experience, from highest to lowest are: Primus Palus - Secundus Palus - Tertius Palus - Quartus Palus - Tiro. A brand new slave, yet to be trained as a gladiator, I have labelled a Novicius, while a Tiro becomes a gladiator, yet to have fight in hte arena.

I've seen the hit location table is the same for all gladiators and that's odd to me because when a fighter tries to break the defense of his opponent, he will try (most of the time) to place attack and hit the uncovered body parts. So dont you think hit location should be different between armaturae ?

Hit location has been one of the most contentious elements of the game for me. What appears like a very simple thing, when gladiators are concerned, is very complex. Tied closely to this is armour placement of course. I opted for a generic table that distributes hits on mostly "covered" locations more often. So a gladiator's presented "shield arm" and leading leg will be struck, statistically more often than other parts of his body, with the unprotected torso the least struck. You may influence this random location by use of the "Aimed Blow" attack. The retiarius is of course the most vulnerable, but more than makes up for it in other ways, as playtesters can contest to. I do not see the need for individual hit locations for the varied armaturae and believe the system works quite well. For example, when striking a murmillo, most attacks still contact the scutum, doing little more than bruising usually. Less frequently attacks fall on his manica (weapon hand) or even his back leg, which are usually more telling.

According to sources, gladiators were trained to fight right-handers but left-handed fighters are attested more than once. It should be disconcerting and very difficult to confront a left-handed man when not prepared to such fight.

Scaeva enjoy a healthy bonus (re-rolling all "1"s) when fighting a right-handed opponent. The hit-location does not change although, so as not to over complicate things.

I hope I am convincing you Eithriall, that Blood on the Sands is a game about "actual" gladiatorial combat. But keep the questions coming...

We've already had quite a debate about which weapon was on which arm of the retiarius- so much so I made a template for both options 

Oh yes we have!     

[Elbows]

While I'm no expert, when I stumbled into the BOTS playtest I was already scratching up notes to make my own gladiator game (because none of the ones I'd played had delivered what I wanted).  Needless to say that effort was abandoned when I started playing BOTS.  While writing up notes for my own game I had purchased about four books, read countless websites, etc.  I had established quite a decent knowledge of the gladiator lifestyle, the handling of the games etc.

So far, Furt's effort hits the sweet spot on almost all of what I had read (and I've found no major conflicting issues).  It's a game which will appeal to gamers and to historical nuts. 

[Furt]

So far, Furt's effort hits the sweet spot on almost all of what I had read (and I've found no major conflicting issues).  It's a game which will appeal to gamers and to historical nuts. 

Your cheque is in the mail Elbows. 

But seriously, Elbows has been a major player in the playtesting area and has brutally put BotS through her paces. If anyone could tell you it plays OK, he could.

[Elbows]

Pfftt you act like dozens of PM's "what the hell does this mean!?" or "how the hell does that work!?" is too much...

[Malamute]

Your cheque is in the mail Elbows. 

Where's my cheque

 

[Poiter50]

Mama does it for the love? 

Where's my cheque

 

[Furt]

Where's my cheque

 

Yup - owe you one too mate, but God forbid, what is Dr. Mathias going to expect!?!?!?! 

Mama does it for the love? 

Mama Malamute? 

[Malamute]

Mama does it for the love?  

He's right, for the love of a good woman, But don't tell my wife