Wicker Man! (And Woman, I suppose)

[Soterion]

So for a story I'm trying to come up with a naturally occurring substance that one could use to fire-proof wicker. Any thoughts from the Craftspeople in the Playground?

[Haruki-kun]

Water? H2O

[golentan]

You might consider treating it with Safflower Oil. The smoke point is over 500 degrees fahrenheit, lay it on thick enough and it will keep oxygen from reaching from hitting the wicker and combusting. If you can't refine the Safflower oil, olive oil is pretty good too.

[Irbis]

Concrete? :smallconfused:

You migh also want distilled heavy diesel fuel, heavy oils, up to (and including) asphalt. They burn really badly, provided there are no softening additives, and cover surfaces well.

Warning - benzine is not a good substitute for them :smalltongue:

[Quincunx]

Would pitch qualify? That would be a waterproofing agent and plausible low-tech lining of the wicker.

[thubby]

mud is easy and works well enough.

[Soterion]

So the reason I'm asking is because I'm trying to develop a science fantasy race based on bees. My race, the Azzuzzazi, are humanoid but can fly. Technologically, they're roughly Renaissance period, so they need armor they can wear that is simultaneously light and strong. Leather is out because they don't have domesticated animals. Any kind of metal is out. Wood might work, if it were thin enough.

Obviously, different cultures on their world might use different styles of armor. I'm thinking cloth (a la the Aztecs), paper/lacquer armor, and almost definitely wicker. The problem is that all these materials are hellaciously flammable. So I'm looking for a naturally occurring substance which the Azzuzzazi can use an analogue of to coat their armor, to prevent themselves from getting roasted alive by a flaming arrow.

Mud might work, but then you're getting into terra cotta, which gets heavy. I like the idea of some kind of flame retardant plant oil, though.

Any thoughts?

[thubby]

So the reason I'm asking is because I'm trying to develop a science fantasy race based on bees. My race, the Azzuzzazi, are humanoid but can fly. Technologically, they're roughly Renaissance period, so they need armor they can wear that is simultaneously light and strong. Leather is out because they don't have domesticated animals. Any kind of metal is out. Wood might work, if it were thin enough.

Obviously, different cultures on their world might use different styles of armor. I'm thinking cloth (a la the Aztecs), paper/lacquer armor, and almost definitely wicker. The problem is that all these materials are hellaciously flammable. So I'm looking for a naturally occurring substance which the Azzuzzazi can use an analogue of to coat their armor, to prevent themselves from getting roasted alive by a flaming arrow.

Mud might work, but then you're getting into terra cotta, which gets heavy. I like the idea of some kind of flame retardant plant oil, though.

Any thoughts?

you could just ignore it.
especially with wicker. if it's on fire, they can just rip off the offending section.

you could have them use chitin armor for that matter. being bees and all, their shedding and/or dead would provide plenty of the stuff.

[Flickerdart]

Why would they want to resist an AC bonus against ninjas?

[The Demented One]

Bees. My god.

[golentan]

Rennaissance era technology? Late or Early? Late rennaisance you want to ignore armor completely.

As I see it, their ability to fly is more tactically advantageous than armor: You can outflank areas and seize strategic materials. It's very, very difficult to fortify against a flying foe at that point: charges will smash any construction they're mounted to, underground fortifications can be sapped, and artillery and weaponry lack the range to reach a flying foe.

I think you're looking at combat being more about maneuvering, height, and archery than armor, and should ignore the difficulties. In siege wars, if they can do a deep enough moat you're looking more at tunnel fighting in deep fortifications isolated from the surrounding terrain, at which point armor is more important, but the close quarters means you can ignore flight and, for the most part, muskets. Go full plate.

[Soterion]

I've actually put some thought into the best way to defend against a flying enemy. The Azzuzzazi will be fighting their fellow Azzuzzazi (since they're one of two intelligent species on the planet, the other being a race of peaceful sedentaries) so that means that they can arrange their citadel-colonies in such a fashion as to maximize the advantage flight gives the defenders while minimizing the advantage that it gives attackers.

Traditional castles are right out. Simply fly over the walls and you have the run of the place. Therefore we need to extend the castle wall into three dimensions. We don't want the enemy to be able to get a foothold on top of our defensive structure (we want to maintain the high ground), so we're looking at a modified cone or dome shape. There should be no flat, horizontal surfaces anywhere on the external structure.

Entryways are the traditional weak points of any defensive structure. Since our defenders can fly, the entryways can be anywhere; ideally, they should be where they are most inconvenient for the attackers. This means that they should be high up, to deny attackers the ability to use siege engines against them, and should not be adjacent to any surface the attackers can land on (where they could then assemble a siege engine or similar device).

The ideal location, therefore, is on the underside of some surface. During peacetime, our defenders can simply fly in. With a retractable portcullis, during war the entryway becomes virtually impregnable. In addition, the surface surrounding the entryway can be punctuated by murder-holes, so that should the attackers manage to cling upside down on the entry-adjacent surface, boiling pitch, water, and flaming oil can be poured down on them.

Therefore, the fortification should ideally have a shape similar to the towers seen below:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2b/Ivanvelikiy.jpg

Although the actual structure would probably be have a larger diameter, the long vertical sides and cupola atop show the basic principles of flight-based defense. Entryways would be on the underside curve of the cupola. There should be no place where the enemy can gain access, unlike a traditional human castle. Arrow slits can be placed around the perimeter, and the apex can be converted into a narrow tower complete with a garrison, who can rain murderous fire down on any foes foolish enough to land on the top of the cupola.

To protect against ground-based siege weaponry, a low wall should be erected some distance from the main citadel. This wall need not be very high, but it should be thick and solidly made. This will prevent the approach of heavy siege weaponry such as mangonels, scorpions, and trebuchets. As long as the wall is out of range of the main citadel, the defenders can sally forth to destroy the siege engines at their leisure.

A network of smaller towers should be erected surrounding the main structure, enabling defenders inside the towers to snipe at attackers clinging to the outside of the main structure. These towers can be connected to the main structure with underground tunnels. These tunnels should incorporate numerous doglegs and switchbacks to prevent bombardment by siege weaponry and also to prevent sapping.

[golentan]

Again, though, what's to keep the enemy from simply flying above ad dropping a powder charge above the cupola? Or suspending from above by rope? How do you prevent team lifting of supplies? If each soldier can lift 40 lbs, it only takes a formation of about 20 to bring cannon to play. How are you building things more than a few stories high with renaissance technology? What happens when they do bring siege crews against such a tall structure?

[thubby]

there's also the matter of who these castles were made to protect against.
if the other bee tribe is a new enemy, its very likely the fortresses would be built more to keep out land based enemies.

[Soterion]

Golentan, good points. However, while it's true that gunpowder eventually rendered heavy fortifications obsolete, the key word in that phrase is eventually. Gunpowder was first introduced onto European battlefields circa 1280, yet governments were still constructing heavy fortifications well into the 1800s (see: Fort Sumter). Vauban was radically reshaping--but not scrapping--the notion of the fortification by the beginning of the 18th century, so much so that his fortifications were still being used in the Napoleonic Wars one hundred years later.

One of the reasons for this is that gunpowder is a low explosive. It's not good for demolition, because it ignites too slowly. It was only after the development of TNT at the end of the 19th century that fortifications began to be phased out; their death knell was sounded by the development of massive artillery by manufacturers such as Krupp which were capable of flinging an explosive-filled shell the size of a man over a mile. So you would still expect to see fortresses hang on well into the "modern era" of any planet that developed them.

I dislike conworlds where every civilization is at the same level. It seems unlikely, and worse, boring. So my beefolk have a wide variety of "technological levels". Those in the Barbaric North barely can work iron, while those in the south are beginning to experiment with steam and lighter-than-air craft, which can be used as mobile artillery platforms. Obviously, this negates the efficacy of fortifications, and most of the Azzuzzazi living in the south no longer live in the Citadel-Colony itself, but instead in the surrounding city, just as by the 19th century most people no longer lived in walled towns, even if the walls remain.

[Krade]

To the original question I present this answer (in the form of a question:smalltongue:):

If you are already making up an entire world, why can't you just make up some naturally occurring substance to accomplish what you need?

[Soterion]

http://i948.photobucket.com/albums/ad326/finn_de_siecle/bees.png

OMGWTF

(defend the queen! which one's the queen? i am no you're not)

[thubby]

To the original question I present this answer (in the form of a question:smalltongue:):

If you are already making up an entire world, why can't you just make up some naturally occurring substance to accomplish what you need?

even in fictional worlds you want to avoid changing more than you absolutely must or you are very likely to screw up everything.

[Soterion]

thubby, yes, that's more or less why I wanted to find some sort of naturally occurring substance. If you just make everything up, there's the temptation to plug in whatever you need to make the setting "work". Call it phlebotinum or Magicwax or whatever. I like to develop the setting as logically as possible with as few inventions as I can so that it percolates in my brain and gives me story ideas.

Also, the Azzuzzazi (roughly "the people") live on 83 Leonis Ae, which is the fifth planet orbiting the orange subgiant star Apidar, known to humans as 83 Leonis A. To the other intelligent species living on Leonis Ae, the Thithix (roughly "the people"), the star is known as Jemej.

[Fifty-Eyed Fred]

Golentan, good points. However, while it's true that gunpowder eventually rendered heavy fortifications obsolete, the key word in that phrase is eventually. Gunpowder was first introduced onto European battlefields circa 1280, yet governments were still constructing heavy fortifications well into the 1800s (see: Fort Sumter). Vauban was radically reshaping--but not scrapping--the notion of the fortification by the beginning of the 18th century, so much so that his fortifications were still being used in the Napoleonic Wars one hundred years later.

One of the reasons for this is that gunpowder is a low explosive. It's not good for demolition, because it ignites too slowly. It was only after the development of TNT at the end of the 19th century that fortifications began to be phased out; their death knell was sounded by the development of massive artillery by manufacturers such as Krupp which were capable of flinging an explosive-filled shell the size of a man over a mile. So you would still expect to see fortresses hang on well into the "modern era" of any planet that developed them.


I'd like to take issue with this. Yes, fortifications were not rendered completely obsolete until then, but my country has several good examples of what happens when a 17th-century force with gunpowder is hell-bent upon destroying any strongholds of an enemy force, specifically during the Civil War. So while fortifications were still defensible, they could certainly still be destroyed by gunpowder; it just happens that in most cases of the early Modern era, it was judged to be more expedient to take the fortification for yourself than to destroy it utterly.

I really like the concept of a Renaissance Bee civilisation though. :smallcool:

[Eldan]

Bees, eh?

Okay. I'd like to make a suggestion first: most bees are solitary and live in the ground, in burrows. So how about you actually make your bee strongholds underground?

Second, bees naturally collect various plant oils, so the idea of fireproofing armour that way works well enough. However, how often do fire based weapons actually come into play in the renaissance? It's not like they have flamethrowers.

[WarBrute]

http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r291/WarBrute/Notthebees.jpg

NOT THE BEES!!!!


(You brought this on yourself)

[Yora]

http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/metalgear/images/thumb/b/bc/The_Pain.jpg/200px-The_Pain.jpg

But if you want to make armor made of thickly packed wicker, I don't think there's any real threat of it catching fire and burning you to death. Some scorch marks, yes. But unless you're doused in flaming liquid, a short blast of flames shouldn't make it to start burning. And if you are, I don't think the wicker will make things worse.

[Soterion]

So here's a picture I drew of an Azzuzzazi soldier. I'm going to ink it and add more detail in Inkscape.

http://i948.photobucket.com/albums/ad326/finn_de_siecle/img001-1.jpg

Note the bee-stinger bayonet on the musket.