How many soldiers would this fort have?

[Kafana]

I have a fort that's on a peninsula overlooking a bay that's mostly frozen during winter.

The fort has four major structures within it's wall, as well as a small hamlet in front of it's walls (around 15-20 houses, an inn and a bakery that doubles as a simple shop). The fort has docks, and the primary reason for it's existance is to regulate the bay, as well as help clear the ice at the start of spring, so that the much larger town in the bay can continue transporting goods via ships.

Now, what would the population of the fort be? The hamlet in front should have around fifty regular peasants that mostly fish, do some minor hunting, as well as double as militia should the need arise. The fort owns two ships that are built for deep sea fishing, scouting and ice clearing.

So, basically the fort isn't that large, nor is it a major strategic point. How many regular soldiers (counting the sailors on the two ships) should it have, and how would they be organized?

[Yora]

Given the information, there doesn't seem to be any need for soldiers at all.

[Arc_knight25]

I think the DMG or DMG2 will have a section on Population. I'd say something around the 15-20 mark would be reasonable for a fort that size.

[Kafana]

I forgot to mention one thing - while it isn't a major strategic point, the other shore of the bay belongs to a different kingdom, and during summer the easiest place to land in the kingdom that has this fort (at least as far as this bay is concerned) is right at the foot of the fort. Note that the other kingdom is mostly dwarven, who don't tend to produce large or even moderate quantities of ships.

[Flickerdart]

15 soldiers in a 50-peasant village in the middle of nowhere? Way overkill.

How large is the larger town in the bay?

[Kafana]

It's a pretty large town, around 4000 in population, not counting the nearby villages and hamlets.

[Mers15]

I'm not an expert on forts, but I think it would completely depend on whether or not they were expecting trouble. If the fort is guarding something important, or if they got raided with some frequency by people on ships, then I would guess 15-20 soldiers. If this is just a village/fort in the middle of nowhere, then the militia you mentioned would probably be completely sufficient. Especially in colder climates, a village wouldn't want to support 15-20 soldiers with their resources unless there was some explicit need for the soldiers.

[Mers15]

Whoa. Ninja'd. Thrice.

If the town has around 4000 people, then I would guess more than 15-20 soldiers, especially if the people felt a need for protection.

[BowStreetRunner]

The answer to your question has nothing whatsoever to do with the size of the hamlet. There are plenty of examples from history of large settlements with little in the way of armed presence, contrasted with large military encampments next to tiny settlements.

The questions you need to ask yourself are:

How strategic is the location? You have already mentioned the risk of a landing being high, but if there is a line of easily defensible forts on a ridge several miles inland that will make this location far less strategic than if an army that landed here would suddenly be able to attack any part of the kingdom directly from this point.
What sort of opposition would be expected in case of an attack? If your enemy would not be able to land more than a few hundred troops at once, you don't need an equal sized force to defend effectively. But if you are expecting they have thousands of troops that could be landed there at once, you may need a stronger fortification.
What sort of overall resources can the kingdom afford? No matter what the strategic situation, the fact is troops and forts cost money. There is a reason why most feudal societies had almost no standing armies. On the other hand, a rich kingdom will be able to garrison and maintain their forts much more easily.
How many troops would it take to reasonably hold that position until help could arrive? The garrison doesn't have to hold their position unaided forever. It is simply a question of how long would they have to hold out until help arrived. A nearby castle with a large number of ready troops would reduce the need to garrison the fort heavily. If they are a long way from help however, they will need to be able to defend their position longer.

[Flickerdart]

If the large town that dominates shipping is on the foreign side of the shore, that means any amount of soldiers in the fort would need to be fed locally, since it doesn't behoove them to send supplies through a potentially rival power. The wealth of the kingdom doesn't terribly matter in this case, because there's only so many soldiers 50 peasants could feed while still presumably paying taxes to their lord.

[Fouredged Sword]

Pure Guesswork here, but my thinking is as follows.

Is the town supporting the fort, or is the fort protecting the town?

Meaning that there are two ways this could be set up.

A - The town needed protection, so they built a fort and staff it with guards. The Town economy must support the military economy, so this means that the maximum likely military is 10% of the population, with a stipulated draft if the town actually comes under attack. 10-20% of the guard will be non-combat, and the total population will likely be more like 2.5% of the total population unless the port is a important trade location.

So for a city of 4000, 100-400 people in the fort, with 10-80 support staff and 90-320 soldiers.

B - A large power decided to build a fort somewhere, and a town followed the economic infusion and safety created by the military presence. The Military economy supplements the town economy, bringing in wealth from outside.
This allows for a much larger military, up to say 25% of the local population. More troops means more people move into the area to support them with goods and services, so I peg 3-1 as the minimum with a tendency to become more like 5 or 6-1 as the fort ages and the economy balances. Again, 10-20% of the fort is support staff.

So for a city of 4000, 500-1000 people in the fort. 50-200 support staff with 450-800 soldiers.

Given enough time, the city would balance all the way back to an A situation, but with slightly richer locals due to the wealth the fort brings to the area rather than the fort taxing the area.

Hope this helps. :smallbiggrin:

[cerin616]

If the large town that dominates shipping is on the foreign side of the shore, that means any amount of soldiers in the fort would need to be fed locally, since it doesn't behoove them to send supplies through a potentially rival power. The wealth of the kingdom doesn't terribly matter in this case, because there's only so many soldiers 50 peasants could feed while still presumably paying taxes to their lord.

Unless the sell their food to the soldiers and use that to pay their taxes.
That's pretty much how small fishing towns end up becoming larger towns and then cities.

realistically that peninsula is a pretty decent strategic hold. It extends out into the water giving a certain "area of vision" to warn against sea landings. It prevents a direct landing for an enemy army to set up an encampment.

If it were my nations i would make it medium priority, but then again with only a fishing village to provide food to them, there would be the challenge of feeding those soldiers.

[Flickerdart]

Unless the sell their food to the soldiers and use that to pay their taxes.
Peasants don't pay taxes with money. They pay taxes with the goods they produce. Then their lord sells the surplus to merchants, rakes in the dough, and uses it to, among other things, pay his men, whom he also feeds with the food from step 1.

[cerin616]

They are never at all capable of offering gold instead of goods?
Seems a bit impractical.

But I don't claim to be an expert on serfdom.

[Flickerdart]

They are never at all capable of offering gold instead of goods?
Seems a bit impractical.

But I don't claim to be an expert on serfdom.
Feudal economy was mostly barter. A peasant would likely never even see a gold coin in his entire life. What little coinage exists in a village would only come from travellers staying at an inn (which this village doesn't have) or the rare affluent peasants taking surplus goods to a town market. In a village of 50, there might be one or two guys successful enough for that.

Their liege collecting gold from them wouldn't make sense, as there are two points of loss - first they'd have to sell their food for money, and then the liege would need to buy that food back from merchants with that money. It's much more efficient for everyone involved to just take the turnips in the first place.

[cerin616]

Feudal economy was mostly barter. A peasant would likely never even see a gold coin in his entire life.

Fair Enough.

[Shining Wrath]

My take:

This is a point worth defending for strategic reasons. You can land here and invade the kingdom and assault an important town. However, another important question is the defensibility of the point. It doesn't matter how strategic a place is - if you can't defend it you don't try to defend it. Real-world example: in WWII, the British plan was to let the German invading forces (if they made it across the Channel in the first place, which the Royal Navy intended to have something to say about) advance to London, because there was no defensible point in SE England.

So, if there is a supply of fresh water within the fort and sufficient storage for food such that a large garrison can hold out against a siege, then there might be several hundred troops here, and that is enough to hold out against an army. OTOH, if there is a lack of water, or the terrain is such that the walls can readily be undermined (D&D castle builder nightmare #1: dwarven sappers) then the garrison will be token, sufficient to operate a couple of siege engines and force the enemy to spend a few hours storming the place.

[TheDarkDM]

As has been said, it sounds like the hamlet sprung up around the fort and not the other way around, and that the fort is in place to guard a local trade route, secure the border, and serve as a symbol of the kingdom's power both to the serfs in the region and to the neighboring kingdom. If that is the case, I'd ballpark it around 200 soldiers, 20 of whom are sergeants in charge of nine regulars, with maybe 4 - 8 junior officers and 2 senior officers. That lets you set a 30 man watch on eight hour rotation in addition to the four patrols of 10 men and two crews of 30 for the ships should the need arise. That gives you a 10 man buffer before you account for the command staff, and they can be put to use as you see fit, perhaps as a detachment that watches over the hamlet. I'd also quarter 5-ish scouts in the fort whose sole duty is to ride for help should the fort come under attack, four of whom accompany the patrols while the rest remain inside the fort.

Of course, if you also want the fort to be equipped with siege engines there should probably be a 5 - 10 man engineering/maintenance/firing crew with its own senior officer.