PDA

View Full Version : Spartans RISE!



Rasman
2010-02-01, 12:32 AM
So, I thought it might be amusing to build a Spartan of some kind, but I'm having at myself with what to do with him.

He can either be a single fighter that stands out on the battlefield, or he can take leadership out the ass and fight with his men for glory as one.

If you were going to build a level 20 based on a Spartan, what would be your build goal?

Mikeavelli
2010-02-01, 12:38 AM
Create a warrior, specialize with spear and shield, don't wear armor, grab a bunch of tactical feats from the Complete Warrior, and call it a day.

I think a couple other splatbooks have tactical feats too, haven't looked them up in a while.

Leadership might also be helpful.

Ormur
2010-02-01, 01:32 AM
Don't forget all the totalitarian warrior culture, baby killing and slave owning. :smallwink:

vanyell
2010-02-01, 01:32 AM
Create a warrior, specialize with spear and shield, don't wear armor, grab a bunch of tactical feats from the Complete Warrior, and call it a day.

I think a couple other splatbooks have tactical feats too, haven't looked them up in a while.

Leadership might also be helpful.

except in 300, Spartans wore armor. The way I'd run an army of spartans (spartans were decent in one on one combat, but were amazing in groups) is a shield wall, using spears and just about every AoO trick you can find. make them come to you, and let them have it

I probably will be ninja'd on this.

Egiam
2010-02-01, 01:46 AM
Cool idea, but I would suggest not confining yourself to "Spartan", and be more like... "classical mediterranean" .

-Breastplate (DMG has rules for bronze if you feel really realistic today...)
-Some sort of spear
-Short sword
-Light shield for Greek, tower for Roman.
-Javelins

Snikies
2010-02-01, 02:11 AM
Maybe this will help. This is a 20 lvl Spartan build that my friend made. He posted it for review so its worth seeing if your DM will allow you to play it.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136953&highlight=spartan

Gorgondantess
2010-02-01, 02:21 AM
Actually, spartans wore an armor called lamellar: it's essentially thin bronze mesh between padded armor below, and leather armor on the outside, all very tightly compacted. I'd just call it masterwork studded, when it comes to stats.
Then likely extreme shield and shortspear.
As for build, I'd likely take something like barbarian 1/marshal 2/fighter 2/some fitting PrC, for starters. Spartans seem to be a miz of the three base classes: commanders who fight together with their brethren to become more than the sum of their parts, hardened soldiers, but also brutal warriors.

golentan
2010-02-01, 02:52 AM
Take a cyborg, give them super armor with a shield generator, and load them up with firearms.

Had to be said.

Kaiyanwang
2010-02-01, 02:55 AM
Complete Warrior has feats and tactical feats for phalanx fighting. Use those, and add the teamwork benefit for shield walls.

Use weapon group: weapons of the Phalanx and make the weapon focus and similar feats good for spear, short sword and shield.

Make them level 3, officers level 6.

Danin
2010-02-01, 03:09 AM
Phalanx fighting, Shield Wall, Close the Gap (Tactical feat, if someone drops in the shield wall you can move to their position as a swift (Immediate?) action) and a smattering of marshals in the mix and you're set.

Rasman
2010-02-02, 12:07 AM
except in 300, Spartans wore armor. The way I'd run an army of spartans (spartans were decent in one on one combat, but were amazing in groups) is a shield wall, using spears and just about every AoO trick you can find. make them come to you, and let them have it

I probably will be ninja'd on this.

the only problem with "make them come to you" is that I MIGHT end up fighting a caster, but Mage-Killer as a feat would stop that, so I might consider it


Maybe this will help. This is a 20 lvl Spartan build that my friend made. He posted it for review so its worth seeing if your DM will allow you to play it.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136953&highlight=spartan

that's actually pretty awesome and I MIGHT use it because this will be for an Arena sort of thing I'm going with a buddy of mine


Actually, spartans wore an armor called lamellar: it's essentially thin bronze mesh between padded armor below, and leather armor on the outside, all very tightly compacted. I'd just call it masterwork studded, when it comes to stats.
Then likely extreme shield and shortspear.
As for build, I'd likely take something like barbarian 1/marshal 2/fighter 2/some fitting PrC, for starters. Spartans seem to be a miz of the three base classes: commanders who fight together with their brethren to become more than the sum of their parts, hardened soldiers, but also brutal warriors.

that's actually REALLY true, i was partly thinking of putting Knight in there somewhere, but I wasn't sure if it would RP well

actually, Warblade would be fitting too, since Spartans fight for glory and such, my real question is, how many levels of each class should I take?

awa
2010-02-02, 01:17 AM
despite how much attention the Spartans get compared to latter military forces even in the ancient world they were nothing special they were basically just a heavily armored (for the period) professional army when most armies were basically a militia. When other nations started subsidizing their forces and using tactics more complicated then march in a line and stab each other the spartan military force became obsolete (although it took a while for them a while to completely collapse). Spartian armies had huge baggage trains were massively slow had no cavalry or ranged units and really had only one tactical response to any situation get in a shield wall and charge they were not some perfect military force.

Theirs a feat somewhere that lets you use a long spear and shield at the same time i ts in crystal keep but that's all i recall about it. Take that and formation fighting feats. While you might want to take a bronze breast plate its not historically accurate (those are pieces of art real armor rarely survives to end up in a museum) My research of Greek armor described them wearing glued linen armor (this was very thick so i wouldn't use padded armor to represent it although i don't know what would be a good representation)

Edit excuse the rant on the historical accuracy of spartan military dominance their certainly no reason you couldn't build your concept on the 300 model if you choose regardless of its accuracy. its just a game any way

Soranar
2010-02-02, 02:43 AM
Let's see

a night-unkillable (except on a crit) warrior using a shield (not tower, those are roman legions) and a spear

how about this

Race:Human
Alignment: Lawful Good (actually Lawful Crazy imo)

STATS (32 pts buy)
STR 14
DEX 16
CON 14
INT 8
WIS 16
CHA 8

1 Ranger Shield specialization: lightshield, Shield and Pike Style
2 Ranger Armor of the senses
3 Paladin Serenity Aura of Good
4 Paladin Divine Grace,Lay on Hands
5 Paladin Aura of Courage,Divine Health
6 Kensai short haft chosen weapon: Greatspear, chosen weapon +1
7 Kensai Combat Reflexes
8 Kensai
9 Kensai Power Attack, Leap attack
10 Kensai chosen weapon +2
11 Kensai Improved sunder
12 Kensai Combat Brute,
13 Kensai weapon focus: Greatspear
14 Kensai
15 Kensai Weapon specialization: Greatspear, greater weapon focus:Greatspearchosen weapon +3
16 Kensai
17 Kensai Greater weapon specialization: Greatspear
18 Kensai Melee Weapon Mastery – Piercing,Driving Attack
19 Kensai
20 Kensai Improved Critical Greatspear chosen weapon +4


moonwarded ranger variant, 2nd level substitution gives you armor of the senses (you get your Wisdom bonus to AC even while wearing light armor and using a shield)

logic: Spartans were really hard to hit despite not wearing a full-plate and they were trained to survive in the wild at a young age

Shield and Pike Style (use a light shield while using a 2 handed polearm with reach)

Shield specialization/shield ward : get the most out of your shield and even get high touch attack AC (Dex, Wis+ shield is starting to be hard to hit)

logic: should be obvious

immunity to fear and bonuses to saves both help against spellcasters and using senerity greatly reduces your Mad , now you can just pump your Wisdom without wasting it

logic: well Spartans were really stubborn and difficult to deal with, much like a paladin

Kensai is a fighter variant, grants you 1 exotic weapon proficiency for free with which you get scaled bonuses (+X to hit and damage), otherwise it's very similar to fighter and it has flaws that don't affect this build

Honestly at the end I just had too many feats to choose from so this is not optimized but it does respect the flavor. In a real build I'd pick every mageslayer feat and probably use Horizon Walker.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-02-02, 04:40 AM
So you either want D&D's model of a historical spartan, the same for a 300-style Spartan, or you want a Spartan-style character.

1. Historical spartan.

I tentatively agree with Awa on the broad strokes, although I still think Spartans made some professional soldiers look like militia. Plato, an Athenian who wasn't a big fan of Sparta, pretty much goes out of his way in Laches to imply that the Spartans know courage in a way other Greeks simply couldn't. And while Plato's probably full of himself and/or male cow waste products, other, slightly more reputable historical accounts also point to Spartans being a superior group of professional soldiers, if not the most tactically-minded.

- Herodotus' account of the events of Thermopylae point to a level of skill and bravery beyond mere soldiery.
- There are a variety of famous quotes, but this one is my favorite (ripped from wiki): "[Phillip II of Macedon] proclaims claims "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city." The Spartan ephors sent back a one word reply: "If."[17] Subsequently, both Philip and Alexander would avoid Sparta entirely."
- In 272 BC, far after Sparta's zenith, Pyrrhus attempted to take Sparta while its regular army was campaigning elsewhere. A fraction of Sparta's army along with Spartan civilians, including women, outnumbered, fought off an experienced mercenary army led by one of the best tacticians of the Hellenistic age.

All that said, they're probably a bunch of Warrior 3s with improved stat lines, phalanx-related feats, and a regional bonus to morale-based conditions. They're human, and they're very vulnerable to D&D magic (good ol' Fireball has its uses, 'yknow). Not the unstoppable killing machines Frank Miller may have led you to believe. Speaking of which...

2. 300-style Spartans

Level 7+ warblade, relatively unarmored, maybe with some swordsage, crusader, knight, or marshal thrown in. Very cheesy in all senses of the word. If the enemies' arrows will blot out the sun, you'll Iron Heart Surge the sun away first so you can fight in the shade forever.

3. Spartan-themed D&D warrior

Warblade is also appropriate for Spartans whose main power isn't making your fellow players roll their eyes (will negates). If you really just want to be a relatively immobile bulwark of defense, you could go Crusader or Knight or Fighter or Barbarian or some combination; note that getting reach on that spear of yours and grabbing the various crowd control feats is close to a necessity in this case, and in any event makes sense in the context of the D&D world.

Here's the thing. You could build this out in so many ways it makes my mind boggle. All you really have to do to fit the Spartan mold is as follows:

- Be not only brave, but eager to face fights against enormous odds. Sounds pretty standard for a D&D adventurer. The Spartan standby "with this shield or on it," or in other words refusing to flee a battle, is non-standard... aaand you might want to bend this one. Greeks did tend to make use out of false-retreat tactics, and refusing to be routed was in the context of a large-scale battle, defending or conquering for your home.
- Own/carry on you only what you can use to kill someone or to facilitate killing someone. Again, sounds pretty standard for a D&D adventurer. Of course, a Spartan probably isn't in the adventuring game for treasure, which is the standard #1 reason to do it. He's probably in it for reason #2, killing things.
- Sharpen that laconic wit. This is the most important part of playing a Spartan. You could be a bookish batman wizard and still play a Spartan if you make those short, sweet responses at the right times. Wait, there's one thing that's more important in being a true Spartan...
- Calisthenics before battle. That's right, if you're expecting a fight, do those jumping jacks. Doing them OOC as well heightens the realism.

Good luck in your fight against those decadent Athenians and hubristic Persians.

Hallavast
2010-02-02, 05:33 AM
Looks like a lvl 20 Warblade w/sword n board feats and a slew of white raven maneuvers would do the trick. Pump his dex and put him in some light armor. Maybe even go TWF with a shield and pick up some tiger claw stuff. Simple yet effective.

If you ask me how to simulate a RL spartan soldier in D&D...

I'd say about a lvl 3-5 Fighter (not warrior)with light armor and swordnboard. Definitely get phalanx fighting feat. He should have dexterity and constitution over strength as far as attributes go, probably.

Soranar
2010-02-02, 05:48 AM
Well if you really want to go the full historical Spartan.

All spartan warriors were gay/bisexual, the logic was that fighting with your lover would force you to act bravely.

Women were used by their husbands to procreate only (they also shaved their heads and wore fake beards, in the dark, so their husbands could perform).

Otherwise their lives (men and women) were kept apart.

One joke was that a Spartan man could live his whole life without seeing the face of his wife...

All Spartans, men or women, were discarded at birth if judged impure (deformed, malformed, weak, etc) and literally thrown off a cliff. That part the movie got right. Might want to consider a +2 to all physical stats and make spartan humans La +1 or something.

Spartan women were just as crazy as the men. The only difference is that they were encouraged to enjoy sports (typically reserved to men) to make them stronger mothers. And instead of being raised to be killing machines they were raised to make killing machines...

And the sentence "come back with your shield or on it" was made by a woman to her son.

Not exactly a surprise that the typical Spartan woman could take on crappy militia from normal people. Although they did have help from the artisans (non-slave non-warrior males).

Rasman
2010-02-02, 06:23 AM
Let's see

a night-unkillable (except on a crit) warrior using a shield (not tower, those are roman legions) and a spear

how about this

Race:Human
Alignment: Lawful Good (actually Lawful Crazy imo)

STATS (32 pts buy)
STR 14
DEX 16
CON 14
INT 8
WIS 16
CHA 8

1 Ranger Shield specialization: lightshield, Shield and Pike Style
2 Ranger Armor of the senses
3 Paladin Serenity Aura of Good
4 Paladin Divine Grace,Lay on Hands
5 Paladin Aura of Courage,Divine Health
6 Kensai short haft chosen weapon: Greatspear, chosen weapon +1
7 Kensai Combat Reflexes
8 Kensai
9 Kensai Power Attack, Leap attack
10 Kensai chosen weapon +2
11 Kensai Improved sunder
12 Kensai Combat Brute,
13 Kensai weapon focus: Greatspear
14 Kensai
15 Kensai Weapon specialization: Greatspear, greater weapon focus:Greatspearchosen weapon +3
16 Kensai
17 Kensai Greater weapon specialization: Greatspear
18 Kensai Melee Weapon Mastery – Piercing,Driving Attack
19 Kensai
20 Kensai Improved Critical Greatspear chosen weapon +4


moonwarded ranger variant, 2nd level substitution gives you armor of the senses (you get your Wisdom bonus to AC even while wearing light armor and using a shield)

logic: Spartans were really hard to hit despite not wearing a full-plate and they were trained to survive in the wild at a young age

Shield and Pike Style (use a light shield while using a 2 handed polearm with reach)

Shield specialization/shield ward : get the most out of your shield and even get high touch attack AC (Dex, Wis+ shield is starting to be hard to hit)

logic: should be obvious

immunity to fear and bonuses to saves both help against spellcasters and using senerity greatly reduces your Mad , now you can just pump your Wisdom without wasting it

logic: well Spartans were really stubborn and difficult to deal with, much like a paladin

Kensai is a fighter variant, grants you 1 exotic weapon proficiency for free with which you get scaled bonuses (+X to hit and damage), otherwise it's very similar to fighter and it has flaws that don't affect this build

Honestly at the end I just had too many feats to choose from so this is not optimized but it does respect the flavor. In a real build I'd pick every mageslayer feat and probably use Horizon Walker.

wow...that's pretty damn awesome actually, although the Mage-Slayer feats would be awesome in there, I'm a huge fan of those to begin with, because causing casters to have massive headaches is always fun

the only two feats I'm not sure about are Short Haft (The feat where you can attack with the blunt end of a weapon for bludgening damage?) and Combat Brute (know I've seen it, just don't remember it and don't have access to my books atm)

I'd hate to ask for anymore, but...how exactly would you gear him? Obviously with a greatspear and Light Shield, but what other items would you let him have?


So you either want D&D's model of a historical spartan, the same for a 300-style Spartan, or you want a Spartan-style character.

1. Historical spartan.

I tentatively agree with Awa on the broad strokes, although I still think Spartans made some professional soldiers look like militia. Plato, an Athenian who wasn't a big fan of Sparta, pretty much goes out of his way in Laches to imply that the Spartans know courage in a way other Greeks simply couldn't. And while Plato's probably full of himself and/or male cow waste products, other, slightly more reputable historical accounts also point to Spartans being a superior group of professional soldiers, if not the most tactically-minded.

- Herodotus' account of the events of Thermopylae point to a level of skill and bravery beyond mere soldiery.
- There are a variety of famous quotes, but this one is my favorite (ripped from wiki): "[Phillip II of Macedon] proclaims claims "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city." The Spartan ephors sent back a one word reply: "If."[17] Subsequently, both Philip and Alexander would avoid Sparta entirely."
- In 272 BC, far after Sparta's zenith, Pyrrhus attempted to take Sparta while its regular army was campaigning elsewhere. A fraction of Sparta's army along with Spartan civilians, including women, outnumbered, fought off an experienced mercenary army led by one of the best tacticians of the Hellenistic age.

All that said, they're probably a bunch of Warrior 3s with improved stat lines, phalanx-related feats, and a regional bonus to morale-based conditions. They're human, and they're very vulnerable to D&D magic (good ol' Fireball has its uses, 'yknow). Not the unstoppable killing machines Frank Miller may have led you to believe. Speaking of which...

2. 300-style Spartans

Level 7+ warblade, relatively unarmored, maybe with some swordsage, crusader, knight, or marshal thrown in. Very cheesy in all senses of the word. If the enemies' arrows will blot out the sun, you'll Iron Heart Surge the sun away first so you can fight in the shade forever.

3. Spartan-themed D&D warrior

Warblade is also appropriate for Spartans whose main power isn't making your fellow players roll their eyes (will negates). If you really just want to be a relatively immobile bulwark of defense, you could go Crusader or Knight or Fighter or Barbarian or some combination; note that getting reach on that spear of yours and grabbing the various crowd control feats is close to a necessity in this case, and in any event makes sense in the context of the D&D world.

Here's the thing. You could build this out in so many ways it makes my mind boggle. All you really have to do to fit the Spartan mold is as follows:

- Be not only brave, but eager to face fights against enormous odds. Sounds pretty standard for a D&D adventurer. The Spartan standby "with this shield or on it," or in other words refusing to flee a battle, is non-standard... aaand you might want to bend this one. Greeks did tend to make use out of false-retreat tactics, and refusing to be routed was in the context of a large-scale battle, defending or conquering for your home.
- Own/carry on you only what you can use to kill someone or to facilitate killing someone. Again, sounds pretty standard for a D&D adventurer. Of course, a Spartan probably isn't in the adventuring game for treasure, which is the standard #1 reason to do it. He's probably in it for reason #2, killing things.
- Sharpen that laconic wit. This is the most important part of playing a Spartan. You could be a bookish batman wizard and still play a Spartan if you make those short, sweet responses at the right times. Wait, there's one thing that's more important in being a true Spartan...
- Calisthenics before battle. That's right, if you're expecting a fight, do those jumping jacks. Doing them OOC as well heightens the realism.

Good luck in your fight against those decadent Athenians and hubristic Persians.

I guess Spartan is really more of a mentality than a build, because there really are a LOT of ways to do it, make for some really good use of flaws and traits though, those apply in most of the games I play in, so extra feats abound sometimes.

Soranar
2010-02-02, 06:36 AM
Short haft makes you able to hit opponents adjacent to you with a -2 penalty so it turns your weapon into a reach 10 and normal range (like a spiked chain).

Combat brute has 3 options , but 1 is this: make a charge with power attack , if you hit than next turn your power attack does 1.5 damage 1 handed or 3x times damage 2 handed (which you are)

Another option is that if you sunder the guy's shield (and destroy it) you get a free attack on him.

A ring of improved evasion is a must (especially with your saves)

Maybe a way to teleport and fly to catch up to a wizard.

your AC should be really high shield bonus+Wis+light armor + Dex

Matthew
2010-02-02, 06:58 AM
Actually, Spartans wore an armour called lamellar: it's essentially thin bronze mesh between padded armour below, and leather armour on the outside, all very tightly compacted. I'd just call it master-work studded, when it comes to statistics.

I have never heard of this; where did you hear about it? Sounds very made up to me; lamellar armour is nothing like what you are describing. [edit] I have figured out what you mean, I think. You are talking about linothorax, which is an armour chiefly made up of layers of linen, but sometimes had bronze scales stitched onto it, or else leather.

Riffington
2010-02-02, 07:54 AM
Read _Gates of Fire_ (Steven Pressfield). It's a spectacular book, and be great inspiration for your character/campaign. It'll give you the temptation to do Ranger/Warblade - but regardless of class, it's going to help you make your personality/character way more nuanced and interesting.




All spartan warriors were gay/bisexual, the logic was that fighting with your lover would force you to act bravely.


You are thinking of a band of 150 warriors from Thebes, not Sparta. The Spartans were pretty homophobic.

Hallavast
2010-02-02, 08:04 AM
Read _Gates of Fire_ (Steven Pressfield). It's a spectacular book, and be great inspiration for your character/campaign. It'll give you the temptation to do Ranger/Warblade - but regardless of class, it's going to help you make your personality/character way more nuanced and interesting.




You are thinking of a band of 150 warriors from Thebes, not Sparta. The Spartans were pretty homophobic.

:smallconfused: I'd heard differently. While I'm not supporting the claim of "All spartan warriors were homo/bi sexual", I do remember reading (in highschool mythology) that homosexual relationships were not uncommon in Sparta. I specifically remember young boys having such relationships with their teachers. Such relationships were permitted as long as the teacher gave gifts to the boy, and it was understood that it would end when the student achieved manhood.

ForzaFiori
2010-02-02, 08:11 AM
You are thinking of a band of 150 warriors from Thebes, not Sparta. The Spartans were pretty homophobic.

Actually, nearly all greeks during that time period were bisexual. Most young boys had that relation with their teacher, and when the grew up, got a wife (and typically a new boyfriend)

@Soranar: The build is nice, but the historical aspect is a little off. Spartans didn't use the huge, two handed, 16' spears. they used the short spear, and a short sword, along with a large shield. The problem with creating a shortspear and large shield using warrior is that they're both one handed weapons, so if you wanna shield bash, you wind up with -4 penalties.

Matthew
2010-02-02, 08:29 AM
:smallconfused: I'd heard differently. While I'm not supporting the claim of "All spartan warriors were homo/bi sexual", I do remember reading (in highschool mythology) that homosexual relationships were not uncommon in Sparta. I specifically remember young boys having such relationships with their teachers. Such relationships were permitted as long as the teacher gave gifts to the boy, and it was understood that it would end when the student achieved manhood.

Remember when we are talking about Sparta we are talking about hundreds of years of history. The official stance of Sparta (from what I recall) was like Rome, in that homosexuality was deemed immoral, but that is not to say it did not go on, or that in different periods of time it was less or more acceptable. A lot of folks get obsessed with this idea as though it was Greek only, but in fact the Celts, and apparently the Japanese, had exactly the same feature in their societies. Lurid songs were sung about Caesar by his own men alluding to his relationship with certain older men. Achilles and Patroclus have no sexual relationship in Homer, but it was added later. The bottom line is that homosexuality existed in ancient and medieval times, but was tolerated (or encouraged) to different degrees.

Riffington
2010-02-02, 08:42 AM
:smallconfused: I'd heard differently. While I'm not supporting the claim of "All spartan warriors were homo/bi sexual", I do remember reading (in highschool mythology) that homosexual relationships were not uncommon in Sparta. I specifically remember young boys having such relationships with their teachers. Such relationships were permitted as long as the teacher gave gifts to the boy, and it was understood that it would end when the student achieved manhood.

That's Athens. The Spartans made fun of the Athenians for that behavior (and also, didn't have private tutors of that kind anyway - the military training was a different setup).
Now, it's true that >1 century is a long time, and surely there were some points at which the Spartans tolerated homosexuality more or less. But here's the actual evidence:

*Criticism by Philip II of the Spartans for their view that the Sacred Band of Thebes was "disgraceful".
*presence of homosexual acts on many Greek vases, but not on any Spartan vases. (admittedly we have many more Athenian vases than Spartan)
*Xenophon stated that the Spartans were disgusted by the Athenian acceptance of homosexual sex.
*Aristotle claimed that Spartan women had too much political power because the men were so often off at war, and there was no homosexuality to help compensate for that fact (by preserving male political power).

Hallavast
2010-02-02, 08:44 AM
Remember when we are talking about Sparta we are talking about hundreds of years of history. The official stance of Sparta (from what I recall) was like Rome, in that homosexuality was deemed immoral, but that is not to say it did not go on, or that in different periods of time it was less or more acceptable. A lot of folks get obsessed with this idea as though it was Greek only, but in fact the Celts, and apparently the Japanese, had exactly the same feature in their societies. Lurid songs were sung about Caesar by his own men alluding to his relationship with certain older men. Achilles and Patroclus have no sexual relationship in Homer, but it was added later. The bottom line is that homosexuality existed in ancient and medieval times, but was tolerated (or encouraged) to different degrees.

So the question becomes "around the time of Thermopolyae, to what degree was this existence 'tolerated'?"

But at any rate, it is inconsequential to the thread at hand (because it can be assumed that the OP already has the "fluff" in mind for his vision of Spartans. And this obliquely related discussion on ancient sexuality certainly has nothing to do with the "crunchy" part.

I agree to put it to rest.


Tee hee "fluff".

Edit:
That's Athens. . . . You sound very sure of this, but I consider my source fairly credible, and I'm sure I'm not confusing the two city states personally. Further, cursory research through google seems to exactly support my source's claims. Perhaps such a discussion would be better suited in another thread, though?

Riffington
2010-02-02, 08:56 AM
Edit: You sound very sure of this, but I consider my source fairly credible,

I'm absolutely certain it's Athens: Plato talks about it a lot. Can't promise it never *also* happened in Sparta - what's your source for that? (a credible source would be an ancient Greek, of course. It was too easy for the medievals to get the various Greek city-states confused) but I'd be very interested if you have the data to see it.

Matthew
2010-02-02, 09:08 AM
So the question becomes "around the time of Thermopolyae, to what degree was this existence 'tolerated'?"

But at any rate, it is inconsequential to the thread at hand (because it can be assumed that the OP already has the "fluff" in mind for his vision of Spartans. And this obliquely related discussion on ancient sexuality certainly has nothing to do with the "crunchy" part.

I agree to put it to rest.


Tee hee "fluff".

Edit: You sound very sure of this, but I consider my source fairly credible, and I'm sure I'm not confusing the two city states personally. Further, cursory research through google seems to exactly support my source's claims. Perhaps such a discussion would be better suited in another thread, though?



I'm absolutely certain it's Athens: Plato talks about it a lot. Can't promise it never *also* happened in Sparta - what's your source for that? (a credible source would be an ancient Greek, of course. It was too easy for the medievals to get the various Greek city-states confused) but I'd be very interested if you have the data to see it.

Just to finish this line of inquiry off in this thread, here is a link to a Wikipedia article dealing with the subject: Spartan Pederasty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spartan_pederasty). Basically, some ancient sources say that the relationship was sexual, and others say that it was not. My guess would be that some were and some were not, depending on the preferences of the older man...

On Topic: A Spartan hoplite in D20/3e should have a special feat enabling him to use the long spear in one hand, in my opinion. Herodotus tells us that the spears of the Greeks were longer than those of the Persians and this gave them an advantage at Thermopylae, which is something I would like to see simulated somehow. I guess there is a good argument for all Spartans being Fighters as compared to other Greeks as Warriors, but maybe it could be Warrior versus Commoner (or some combination of expert and warrior or something). All depends on how you represent a "typical" warrior, I suppose.

Rasman
2010-02-02, 09:15 AM
So the question becomes "around the time of Thermopolyae, to what degree was this existence 'tolerated'?"

But at any rate, it is inconsequential to the thread at hand (because it can be assumed that the OP already has the "fluff" in mind for his vision of Spartans. And this obliquely related discussion on ancient sexuality certainly has nothing to do with the "crunchy" part.

I agree to put it to rest.


Tee hee "fluff".

Edit: You sound very sure of this, but I consider my source fairly credible, and I'm sure I'm not confusing the two city states personally. Further, cursory research through google seems to exactly support my source's claims. Perhaps such a discussion would be better suited in another thread, though?

lol...I am no less entertained by it, I'm a history major actually, so listening to some of this is GREATLY amusing, because, to my understanding, some of it is spot on, like the Japanese thing (Although I would bet you only know that from watching Samurai Champloo, but I won't hold it against you XD), but there are other parts that I'm just wondering where it's being pulled from, particularly the Athens thing, but that's only because this time period isn't my focus, nor is the region, so the couple of classes I've had on this time period, which specifically dealt with the fall of Rome and the truely weird emperors (like the one that fought Ostriches in the arena) aren't really enough to let me pull that kind of info on it

NOT to say that I wouldn't like to see someone elses interpretation of a build, like the awesomeness Soranar put together (of which I actually really like the Great Spear, even if it isn't historically accurate, because Reach is godly and a life saver, not to mention, based on the 300 trope, they used Reach to stab enemies from behind a crouched ally with a shield in front of them, so I don't see why it wouldn't be accurate)

Roderick_BR
2010-02-02, 09:16 AM
despite how much attention the Spartans get compared to latter military forces even in the ancient world they were nothing special they were basically just a heavily armored (for the period) professional army when most armies were basically a militia. When other nations started subsidizing their forces and using tactics more complicated then march in a line and stab each other the spartan military force became obsolete (although it took a while for them a while to completely collapse). Spartian armies had huge baggage trains were massively slow had no cavalry or ranged units and really had only one tactical response to any situation get in a shield wall and charge they were not some perfect military force.

Theirs a feat somewhere that lets you use a long spear and shield at the same time i ts in crystal keep but that's all i recall about it. Take that and formation fighting feats. While you might want to take a bronze breast plate its not historically accurate (those are pieces of art real armor rarely survives to end up in a museum) My research of Greek armor described them wearing glued linen armor (this was very thick so i wouldn't use padded armor to represent it although i don't know what would be a good representation)

Edit excuse the rant on the historical accuracy of spartan military dominance their certainly no reason you couldn't build your concept on the 300 model if you choose regardless of its accuracy. its just a game any way
Historical accuracy? In my D&D?

Riffington
2010-02-02, 09:18 AM
On Topic: A Spartan hoplite in D20/3e should have a special feat enabling him to use the long spear in one hand, in my opinion. Herodotus tells us that the spears of the Greeks were longer than those of the Persians and this gave them an advantage at Thermopylae, which is something I would like to see simulated somehow. I guess there is a good argument for all Spartans being Fighters as compared to other Greeks as Warriors, but maybe it could be Warrior versus Commoner (or some combination of expert and warrior or something). All depends on how you represent a "typical" warrior, I suppose.

I think they should get to be Rangers, and get that fighting technique instead of the alternate ranger style. (Whereas other Greeks were lucky to have a high percentage of Warriors in their armies)

They were true warriors, but were pretty maneuverable and sneaky. A Spartan child was taught at an early age not only how to fight, but how to forage, survive, and be stealthy. The child would be encouraged to steal sweets - but beaten severely if caught... (the advisability of this parenting technique is subject to some debate).

As to why a PC class for an entire group of people? When you have a bunch of slaves, you have a lot of free time (which most slaveowners use for luxury and idleness. When you actually spend that time to truly train hard and become great... I think that justifies a PC class.

Hallavast
2010-02-02, 09:25 AM
They were true warriors, but were pretty maneuverable and sneaky. A Spartan child was taught at an early age not only how to fight, but how to forage, survive, and be stealthy. The child would be encouraged to steal sweets - but beaten severely if caught... (the advisability of this parenting technique is subject to some debate). Yes! I remember that part, too. AltRangers wouldn't be a bad idea. They do rather fit the "light infantry" approach.



As to why a PC class for an entire group of people? When you have a bunch of slaves, you have a lot of free time (which most slaveowners use for luxury and idleness. When you actually spend that time to truly train hard and become great... I think that justifies a PC class.
Indeed. This is also interesting, because it is speculated that controlling these slaves, the helots, was the main reason for Sparta's strict martial society. After all, what other way is there to subjugate an oppressed populace several times your own population in size?

Matthew
2010-02-02, 09:52 AM
There is a feat somewhere that lets you use a long spear and shield at the same time its in crystal keep but that's all I recall about it. Take that and formation fighting feats.

Oh yeah, I think I recall that feat as well; I think there were some kind of sucktastic drawbacks, though.



While you might want to take a bronze breast plate its not historically accurate (those are pieces of art real armour rarely survives to end up in a museum) My research of Greek armour described them wearing glued linen armor (this was very thick so i wouldn't use padded armour to represent it although i don't know what would be a good representation).

This is both true and false. What happened was that these armies initially fought in bronze plate, but as the centuries wore on a trend towards lighter gear came to the fore. Shields got smaller and armour got lighter.



lol...I am no less entertained by it, I'm a history major actually, so listening to some of this is GREATLY amusing, because, to my understanding, some of it is spot on, like the Japanese thing (Although I would bet you only know that from watching Samurai Champloo, but I won't hold it against you XD), but there are other parts that I'm just wondering where it's being pulled from, particularly the Athens thing, but that's only because this time period isn't my focus, nor is the region, so the couple of classes I've had on this time period, which specifically dealt with the fall of Rome and the truly weird emperors (like the one that fought Ostriches in the arena) aren't really enough to let me pull that kind of info on it

Heh; having been on this website for a good four years, I can say that this subject has come up more than once. I actually discovered that Japanese bit from research into the Geisha when that was a class under discussion. :smallbiggrin:



I think they should get to be Rangers, and get that fighting technique instead of the alternate ranger style. (Whereas other Greeks were lucky to have a high percentage of Warriors in their armies)

They were true warriors, but were pretty manoeuvrable and sneaky. A Spartan child was taught at an early age not only how to fight, but how to forage, survive, and be stealthy. The child would be encouraged to steal sweets - but beaten severely if caught... (the advisability of this parenting technique is subject to some debate).

As to why a PC class for an entire group of people? When you have a bunch of slaves, you have a lot of free time (which most slave owners use for luxury and idleness. When you actually spend that time to truly train hard and become great... I think that justifies a PC class.

I can see that, though I was having a think about the subject and it actually strikes me now that it would just be easier to create a "hoplite" class using the guidance in the PHB for swapping bits and pieces around. Rather than make the Spartans a whole separate class, it might be easier to just give them all "elite" attribute spread (15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10) to represent their physical training and common "Athenian" hoplites a more normal spread (13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8). I know neither of those number spreads are quite right, but I was mainly thinking Spartans would get +2 Strength, +1 Dexterity, +2 Constitution versus Athenians who would get +1 Strength, +0 Dexterity, +1 Constitution.

I guess that undoes some of the fun of "class build", but I reckon you would get more believable D20/3e Hoplites from it. :smallbiggrin:



Basic Hoplite HD 1d8, AC 15(17), HP 5, FA 1(3), D 2-7
Attributes: Strength 13, Dexterity 11, Constitution 13,
Abilities: Weapon Focus (Hoplite),
Skills: Climb 4(5), Jump 4(5), Swim 4(5),
Saves: +3/+0/+0,
Possessions: Bronze Breast Plate Armour, Aspis, Doru, Xiphos,

Veteran Hoplite HD 2d8, AC 15(18), HP 10, FA 3(5), D 2-7
Attributes: Strength 13, Dexterity 11, Constitution 13,
Abilities: Weapon Focus (Hoplite), Shield Specialisation,
Skills: Climb 5(6), Jump 5(6), Swim 5(6),
Saves: +4/+0/+0,
Possessions: Bronze Breast Plate Armour, Aspis, Doru, Xiphos,

Elite Hoplite HD 3d8, AC 15(18), HP 15, FA 3(5), D 2-7
Attributes: Strength 13, Dexterity 11, Constitution 13,
Abilities: Weapon Focus (Hoplite), Shield Specialisation, Block Arrow
Skills: Climb 6(7), Jump 6(7), Swim 6(7),
Saves: +4/+1/+1,
Possessions: Bronze Breast Plate Armour, Aspis, Doru, Xiphos,

Hero Hoplite HD 4d10, AC 15(18), HP 20, FA 4(6), D 4-9
Attributes: Strength 13, Dexterity 11, Constitution 13,
Abilities: Weapon Focus (Hoplite), Shield Specialisation, Block Arrow, Weapon Specialisation (Hoplite)
Skills: Climb 7(8), Jump 7(8), Swim 7(8),
Saves: +5/+1/+1,
Possessions: Bronze Breast Plate Armour, Aspis, Doru, Xiphos,




Basic Spartan Hoplite HD 1d8, AC 15(17), HP 6, FA 1(4), D 3-8
Attributes: Strength 15, Dexterity 13, Constitution 14,
Abilities: Weapon Focus (Hoplite),
Skills: Climb 4(5), Jump 4(5), Swim 4(5), Survival 4(4),
Saves: +4/+1/+0,
Possessions: Bronze Breast Plate Armour, Aspis, Doru, Xiphos,

Veteran Spartan Hoplite HD 2d8, AC 15(18), HP 12, FA 2(5), D 3-8
Attributes: Strength 15, Dexterity 13, Constitution 14,
Abilities: Weapon Focus (Hoplite), Shield Specialisation,
Skills: Climb 5(6), Jump 5(6), Swim 5(6), Survival 5(5)
Saves: +5/+1/+0,
Possessions: Bronze Breast Plate Armour, Aspis, Doru, Xiphos,

Elite Spartan Hoplite HD 3d8, AC 15(18), HP 18, FA 3(6), D 3-8
Attributes: Strength 15, Dexterity 13, Constitution 14,
Abilities: Weapon Focus (Hoplite), Shield Specialisation, Block Arrow
Skills: Climb 6(7), Jump 6(7), Swim 6(7), Survival 6(6)
Saves: +5/+2/+1,
Possessions: Bronze Breast Plate Armour, Aspis, Doru, Xiphos,

Hero Spartan Hoplite HD 4d10, AC 15(18), HP 24, FA 4(6), D 5-10
Attributes: Strength 15, Dexterity 13, Constitution 14,
Abilities: Weapon Focus (Hoplite), Shield Specialisation, Weapon Specialisation (Hoplite)
Skills: Climb 7(8), Jump 7(8), Swim 7(8), Survival 7(7)
Saves: +6/+2/+1,
Possessions: Bronze Breast Plate Armour, Aspis, Doru, Xiphos,


Doru = Exotic Long Spear (can be used one-handed for 1d6 damage)
Xiphos = Short Sword
Aspis = Large Wooden Shield (bronze fronting provides better damage resistance)

jiriku
2010-02-02, 10:02 AM
One of the players in my current weekly game has developed a 20-level Spartan base class, which is posted on the playground. We are currently playtesting it. You can view the thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136953&highlight=spartan), but be sure to look at the last post (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7682217&postcount=35), which contains the playtest version.

Initial playtesting suggests that we have a solid Tier 4 class, highly effective in combat and difficult to harm. He's getting a little frustrated because his character can do little outside of combat apart from intimidating people and smashing things, but the whole point of modern depiction of Spartans is that they focused all their skills on warfare.

Dienekes
2010-02-02, 10:25 AM
Sparta's kinda what I study a lot of.

Anyway here's some historical bits on Sparta and Greece in general to help with the defining of how to play them. First thing's first, they called themselves Lakedaemonians, and were a collection of four main cities and the outlying areas.
Child Exposure (leaving a baby out on a hill to die) was made a state doctrine in Sparta assuredly. However, this was a very common practice in Greece at the time for unwanted pregnancies and so many didn't bat an eyelash at it, it was in some ways the ancient Greek method for abortion.
Slavery, also common all over the world. Spartan slavery of the helots was particularly brutal for the time, but that was not the main concern of why the Greeks didn't particularly like Sparta, it was because the slaves were themselves conquered Greeks. This was considered an insult enslaving Greeks, and would develop into one of Sparta's largest weaknesses (as well as the declining population of the Sparitiate)
The spear (the main weapon) could vary from 9 to 12 feet and was called the dory and was used one-handed. This would probably give it reach in DnD (perhaps a custom weapon or feat allowing you to one hand the greatspear, or if not wanting to bother the normal spear would work)
As to armor the Spartan's used bronze scaled armor seen here http://www.by-the-sword.com/acatalog/Greek_Armour_Scaled_Brass_AH-3987-B.html
This was surprisingly tough and flexible and could possibly withstand a spear thrust (not just the scales but the cloth parts as well)
There is some debate over the use of the muscled cuirass seen here http://1800hart.com/picks/wp-content/Cuirass_Royal_Muscled_Cuirass__Be_AH6071R_2489.jpg (except bronze) some claim that it was for ceremonies only (I don't think there is any documented evidence to determine this that I know of) and other claim that it was only for the commanders of the armies or other high ranking members.
Your shield, the aspis (not called the hoplon we now know) would probably be between the Tower Shield and the Heavy Shield in AC bonus, and possibly with a bonus to AC to an adjacent ally if you wish to homebrew it.

Now how to act like a Spartan would mean a few things.
You must be lawful, most likely lawful neutral.
Always be polite to elders, unless they're slaves. There are numerous stories of this taking place including one interesting one in which an old man went to see the Olympics and could not find a seat, he went from one city states bench to the others asking for a seat and yet no one would move. Finally he went to the Lakedaemonian's side and asked and every man stood up to give him their place.
You must respect women and actually listen to their opinions (a rare quality in ancient Greece and the surrounding areas)
Do not surrender in a battle(During Sparta during it's prominence there is only 1 account of Spartan's surrendering)
Do retreat (they weren't stupid however, if they're losing a battle and can't win the Sparitiate were trained to go find a more advantageous position, Thermopylae being an obvious exception)
Be a mystic, the words of prophets and religious officials mean a lot to the Spartans.
Do not be a barbarian and go raging. This was considered horrible by the Spartans as it would break their ranks and would cause undo amounts of pillaging and raping after battles that was not allowed.
You're goal in life is to die fighting (as that was the only way to get your name recorded after you die) but not stupidly looking for death. If that happens your death is considered void.
You are not allowed to trade with foreigners (I have a feeling this one will be rigorously ignored in any game)
As to the pederasty Matthew seems to have had that covered with his link.

Well I hope that helps.

awa
2010-02-02, 10:46 AM
I strongly disagree that Spartans were light infantry read accounts of battles where they fought peltasts. the peltasts would sit their throwing javelins at the Spartans who would take few casualties becuase of their heavy armor but if they tried to kill the peltasts they would just run away becuase if they broke formation their armor still slowed them down to much and it left them vulnerable becuase the runners didn't have any one guarding their backs they just sort of had to take it slowly taking casualties becuase they couldn't do anything about it.

Spartans draconian eugenics program and lousy economic system always meant they went to war horrible out numbered they as a nation began to lose consistently in the period right before Macedonian dominance becuase tactics had evolved and their cultural system didn't let them evolved with it. Sparta might have been hard to concur but it couldn't send it's entire army out into battle becuase if it did the helots who were brutal oppressed would rebel and wipe them out (it was said that for a spartan to come of age he needed to ambush and murderer a helot peasant to spread fear) The Spartans also had massive baggage trains with something like seven slaves for every spartian

I think making basic historical Spartans fighters is reasonable Spartans were a professional army other greek city states were , millita so they can be warriors nations like Persia used conscripts which is a farmer with a bow those should be commoners, or experts depending on the farmer.

Matthew
2010-02-02, 11:13 AM
The spear (the main weapon) could vary from 9 to 12 feet and was called the dory and was used one-handed. This would probably give it reach in DnD (perhaps a custom weapon or feat allowing you to one hand the great spear, or if not wanting to bother the normal spear would work)

I think that is a rather high estimate; 8-9 feet is the longest I have heard, which I think would fit well with the D20/3e long spear (if one-handed).



As to armour the Spartan's used bronze scaled armour seen here ( http://www.by-the-sword.com/acatalog/Greek_Armour_Scaled_Brass_AH-3987-B.html). This was surprisingly tough and flexible and could possibly withstand a spear thrust (not just the scales but the cloth parts as well). There is some debate over the use of the muscled cuirass seen here (http://1800hart.com/picks/wp-content/Cuirass_Royal_Muscled_Cuirass__Be_AH6071R_2489.jpg here) (except bronze); some claim that it was for ceremonies only (I don't think there is any documented evidence to determine this that I know of) and other claim that it was only for the commanders of the armies or other high ranking members.

Indeed, a very odd subject; linothorax seems to have been fairly common, muscled bronze plate less so, especially as the centuries progress.



Your shield, the aspis (not called the hoplon we now know) would probably be between the Tower Shield and the Heavy Shield in AC bonus, and possibly with a bonus to AC to an adjacent ally if you wish to homebrew it.

I do not think the aspis would be much different from a scutum, viking round shield, or Norman kite shield in terms of armour class. That is to say the "large" or "heavy" designation seems reasonable at the scale of abstraction we are playing at. The bronze fronting might give it better damage resistance, but that is about as far as I would go, otherwise you end up with hundreds of specific variations and D20/3e does not have the mechanical granularity to support that.



Do not surrender in a battle (During Sparta during it's prominence there is only 1 account of Spartan's surrendering).

"Arrows neither distinguish between the brave or the cowardly" or words to that effect. :smallbiggrin:



Well I hope that helps.

Interesting points; thanks!



I strongly disagree that Spartans were light infantry read accounts of battles where they fought peltasts. the peltasts would sit their throwing javelins at the Spartans who would take few casualties because of their heavy armour but if they tried to kill the peltasts they would just run away because if they broke formation their armour still slowed them down to much and it left them vulnerable because the runners didn't have any one guarding their backs they just sort of had to take it slowly taking casualties because they couldn't do anything about it.

Sure, but do not make the mistake of equating heavy armour with heavy foot. Spartans were heavy foot, but their armour could range from none to complete panoply.



I think making basic historical Spartans fighters is reasonable Spartans were a professional army other Greek city states were , millita so they can be warriors nations like Persia used conscripts which is a farmer with a bow those should be commoners, or experts depending on the farmer.

It depends on the power level of the game, I think. I really wish D20/3e had not introduced NPC classes, the warrior/fighter thing is a pain. If fighters regularly appear in a campaign, I think it is reasonable for Spartans to be fighters, but if not, then they should be warriors like most other NPC types.

Dienekes
2010-02-02, 12:57 PM
I strongly disagree that Spartans were light infantry read accounts of battles where they fought peltasts. the peltasts would sit their throwing javelins at the Spartans who would take few casualties becuase of their heavy armor but if they tried to kill the peltasts they would just run away becuase if they broke formation their armor still slowed them down to much and it left them vulnerable becuase the runners didn't have any one guarding their backs they just sort of had to take it slowly taking casualties becuase they couldn't do anything about it.

Difference of tactics. The Spartans were known to be incredibly fast in their armor (they had full panoply races as a sport), however a tight formation vs a skirmish force no matter how light the armor the skirmish force will be faster. The Sparitiates were light to middle weight armored fighters that fought in a heavier slower formation.


Spartans draconian eugenics program and lousy economic system always meant they went to war horrible out numbered they as a nation began to lose consistently in the period right before Macedonian dominance becuase tactics had evolved and their cultural system didn't let them evolved with it. Sparta might have been hard to concur but it couldn't send it's entire army out into battle becuase if it did the helots who were brutal oppressed would rebel and wipe them out (it was said that for a spartan to come of age he needed to ambush and murderer a helot peasant to spread fear) The Spartans also had massive baggage trains with something like seven slaves for every spartian

The Spartan system of life was far from perfect. There was a reason why the Spartan's were always at war with their helots, they were outnumbered 10 to 1 by their slaves (this number may vary I've heard anywhere from 6 to 1 to 12 to 1). It is however, most unfortunate that they didn't leave behind any documentation on their customs all we get is their enemies depiction of them.
Really the Spartan's weren't much more oppressive than other slave holders of the time. As to the going out to murder a helot ritual that is highly debated. It appears to have come from the ritual of the krypteia which has been shown in documents as 3 different things. From Athens we get one of two different variations that of the secret police of young leaders that go out and kill any helot that speaks of rebellion (which is a heartless but reasonable policy) the other popular variation is that it was a ritual that every young Sparitiate in training would have to go through to find and kill a helot, any one will do. This is agreeably terrible, and to the Athenians who wrote about it it was also an extremely effective propaganda piece (not claiming if it was true or not, I don't know I wasn't there. However it was particularly effective at showing the people of Athens just how horrible the Spartans treat conquered fellow Greeks). The third variation is completely different from these two having Krypteia be a ritual were a Spartan in training would be thrown out into the wild or the streets without food or defenses and forced to survive through killing animals and stealing (the stealing would be punished not for stealing but for being caught).

So take your pick of which you believe, personally I think the secret police makes the most sense but that's just me.


I think making basic historical Spartans fighters is reasonable Spartans were a professional army other greek city states were , millita so they can be warriors nations like Persia used conscripts which is a farmer with a bow those should be commoners, or experts depending on the farmer.

Except they also faced professional armies during their period of tactical superiority (the Immortals for instance) which they soundly trounced.

Their problem was not that they weren't the big badasses of the world, when tested they proved they were. What they failed at was flexibility and later changes to the agoge (their ritualized training messes). During their famous defeat by the Sacred Band the agoge was in taters and Sparta was in disarray being unable to cope with the after affects of the Peloponessian War. Sparta was not equipped for ruling an empire and they failed at it miserably, their rule was ham-handed and unfair, pissing off numerous allies (oddly one of the big reasons they were disliked was because they didn't punish Athens enough). It strained their society and their army and completely broke their way of life.
Another major factor was their inability to change their tactics. If something works for you for a hundred + years fairly effectively change does not come naturally. Epaminondas victory was outstanding because his tactical alterations proved the next big tactic (providing a basis in ideology for Philip's own alterations), and there was a reason he was referred to as "The First Man of Greece" by Cicero.
They managed to gain some semblance of their old superiority afterward after lowering the land and wealth necessary to join the agoge and a restructuring of their political system. They were confident enough to stand up to Philip of Macedon (in one of the greatest interactions of all time) and remained the only city state that Philip and Alexander didn't conquer. However when they tried to start a revolt they were soundly defeated, and for the most part that's the end of Sparta (oh they kept going, but really nothing to speak of interest. Hell, when Rome conquered Greece Sparta became a tourist location for people wanting to see these crazy Greeks of lore play act their old traditions. Yep, the warrior state ended up becoming a money making scheme. Somewhere Lykurgos is crying)


I think that is a rather high estimate; 8-9 feet is the longest I have heard, which I think would fit well with the D20/3e long spear (if one-handed).

I'm sure I've heard 12 foot before, but that most were in the 9-10 foot range. Honestly though, 8-9, 9-10, why quibble over a measly foot?


Indeed, a very odd subject; linothorax seems to have been fairly common, muscled bronze plate less so, especially as the centuries progress.

linothorax! Thank you, for the life of me I couldn't think of that word.


I do not think the aspis would be much different from a scutum, viking round shield, or Norman kite shield in terms of armour class. That is to say the "large" or "heavy" designation seems reasonable at the scale of abstraction we are playing at. The bronze fronting might give it better damage resistance, but that is about as far as I would go, otherwise you end up with hundreds of specific variations and D20/3e does not have the mechanical granularity to support that.

I believe the scutum is thought of as the tower shield. The aspis was a meter or more in diameter and the viking round shield only around 80-90 cm. However, there probably is not as big a distinction as I think, I'm not a reenactor or a martial artist.


"Arrows neither distinguish between the brave or the cowardly" or words to that effect. :smallbiggrin:

I believe that'd be it, yeah.

awa
2010-02-02, 06:42 PM
im not saying the immortals were not a professional force but they were only a small portaine of the Persian army the vast majority were conscripts, while all the Spartans were professionals.

Sure they could run fast in their armor but not nearly as fast as an unarmored man that's why im saying ranger levels are not appropriate. Their tactics dont revolve around any kind of quick mobility

Viking shields were actually quite thin and light for their size used more for parrying then just taking blows like a kite shield. I feel tower shields are to big and light shields to small i think (but am not sure) that a in between shield was introduced in some book.

Dienekes
2010-02-02, 08:03 PM
im not saying the immortals were not a professional force but they were only a small portaine of the Persian army the vast majority were conscripts, while all the Spartans were professionals.

And they fought against an army of conscripts with even less professionals than they had and were still pushed back multiple times, and finally defeated when they faced an army they still were far numerically superior than in the way of both the numbers of professional and conscript armies a year later (though not nearly as numerically superior as their Thermopylae travesty).

During their height of prominence the Spartans repeatedly showed that they could handle themselves not just against the conscripts but against professionals as well with outstanding results. However, stagnation got to them as they struggled to find a balance between their ideology their tactics and their empirical necessities, and winded up an utter failure. It could easily be said, if you want a guide how not to gain and rule an empire just look at the Spartans they did about everything wrong.


Sure they could run fast in their armor but not nearly as fast as an unarmored man that's why im saying ranger levels are not appropriate. Their tactics dont revolve around any kind of quick mobility

I believe I said that their tactics didn't revolve around it, however if necessary they were trained to do so. Makes sense for ranger to me.

Matthew
2010-02-03, 10:33 AM
I'm sure I've heard 12 foot before, but that most were in the 9-10 foot range. Honestly though, 8-9, 9-10, why quibble over a measly foot?

Heh; well, there is a lot of debate, but 9' is thought to be rather generous for a spear usable in one hand, so I would not go as far as 10'. Whether it is worth quibbling about depends who you are talking to, I suppose, but the two-handed kontos was 12' or so.



linothorax! Thank you, for the life of me I couldn't think of that word.

Glad to be of service.



I believe the scutum is thought of as the tower shield. The aspis was a meter or more in diameter and the viking round shield only around 80-90 cm. However, there probably is not as big a distinction as I think, I'm not a reenactor or a martial artist.

Nah, lots of people make that mistake, though. The Tower Shield is described as being nearly as tall as the user and to weigh 45 lbs. It is a pavise, essentially, which was astutely recognised in the Green Ronin Roman D20 supplement. The viking shield, scutum, and aspis can all vary in size, but they are pretty much of the same order. There is precious little reason to use a small shield in D20, if another class was created with +3 AC then large shields would become similarly redundant. That is what I mean when I say the system does not have the granularity to represent the protective differences.



Viking shields were actually quite thin and light for their size used more for parrying then just taking blows like a kite shield. I feel tower shields are to big and light shields to small I think (but am not sure) that a in between shield was introduced in some book.

As with most shields, there are numerous variations on the same theme. Some Viking era round shields were thinner than others, some were flat, and others were dished. As I say above, though, when we are talking about a game system that works on the level of abstraction that D20 does, there is about as much point in distinguishing by AC as there is by damage for types of "long sword" (or arming sword, if you prefer).

paddyfool
2010-02-03, 11:27 AM
Hm. For some reason, this thread title made me think someone wanted to stat out undead Spartans... best done as Awakened Skeletons, do you think?

Dienekes
2010-02-03, 11:42 AM
Nah, lots of people make that mistake, though. The Tower Shield is described as being nearly as tall as the user and to weigh 45 lbs. It is a pavise, essentially, which was astutely recognised in the Green Ronin Roman D20 supplement. The viking shield, scutum, and aspis can all vary in size, but they are pretty much of the same order. There is precious little reason to use a small shield in D20, if another class was created with +3 AC then large shields would become similarly redundant. That is what I mean when I say the system does not have the granularity to represent the protective differences.

Really now this is interesting. I only tangentially knew of the pavise and didn't know it was so significant a difference to the scutum. As to the 45 lbs bit I merely assumed the sctutm was actually 45 lbs the same way a greatsword was actually 8 lbs. With this in mind the large shield works well within the system and I thank you for correcting my error.

Matthew
2010-02-03, 02:42 PM
Hm. For some reason, this thread title made me think someone wanted to stat out undead Spartans... best done as Awakened Skeletons, do you think?
Sounds reasonable to me.



Really now this is interesting. I only tangentially knew of the pavise and didn't know it was so significant a difference to the scutum. As to the 45 lbs bit I merely assumed the sctutm was actually 45 lbs the same way a greatsword was actually 8 lbs. With this in mind the large shield works well within the system and I thank you for correcting my error.

Like shields, pavises can come in many sizes and weights, until they get too big for one man to manage, and are effectively mantlets. I reckon 45 lbs. is probably a bit excessive, but it might be at the top of the range. certainly an 8 lb. great sword is not unprecedented, even if it is nearer the extreme end of extant weights. Most D20/3e weapons have weights that are at least possible, if not average, since the revision (in 3.0 the great sword was 15 lbs, as in second edition, which was a step down from 25 lbs of first edition, which was based on some extant ceremonial sword, I understand). Here is the description of the Tower Shield from 3.0 (PHB, p. 106):



Shield, Tower: This massive wooden shield is nearly as tall as the wielder. Basically, it is a portable wall meant to provide cover. It can provide up to total cover, depending on how far you come out from behind it. A tower shield, however, does not provide cover against targeted spells; a spellcaster can cast a spell on you by targeting the shield you are holding. You cannot bash with a tower shield.

...and here it is in 3.5 (PHB, p. 125):



Shield, Tower: This massive wooden shield is nearly as tall as you are. In most situations, it provides the indicated shield bonus to your AC. However, you can instead use it as total cover, though you must give up your attacks to do so. The shield does not, however, provide cover against targeted spells; a spellcaster can cast a spell on you by targeting the shield you are holding. You cannot bash with a tower shield, nor can you use your shield hand for anything else. When employing a tower shield in combat, you take a –2 penalty on attack rolls because of the shield’s encumbrance.

Whoever revised the text had a different idea in mind, I suppose, but one that does not fit. The D20 Arms & Equipment Guide lists the aspis as the same as a heavy steel shield, but with a hardness of 9, rather than 10. Of course, neither that book, nor the PHB/DMG show much in the way of understanding of historical arms and armour. For that we would need to look to something like Codex Martialis, which makes a rather good effort in that respect.