PDA

View Full Version : DM Help How to equip Griffon Air Cavalry



Lord Torath
2016-03-28, 01:30 PM
My PCs are going to be going up against a small keep with about a dozen griffon riders. So, neglecting specific rule-sets, what kinds of weapons make sense for griffon riders? Assume they will generally be used against ground troops, but may occasionally face flying opposition.

MrZJunior
2016-03-28, 01:43 PM
I would go with bows and javelins, maybe lead darts or bullets.

They should probably have a Lance and sword as backup.

Lalliman
2016-03-28, 01:45 PM
Ranged weapons combine well with flight, but realistically speaking, can you imagine how hard it'd be to fire a bow from the back of a moving griffon? So with that in mind, my first instinct is "bombs", but of course those may not be common in the setting.

If bombs are excluded, I'd simply go for lances or other polearms to make fly-by attacks with. A few javelins may be good to hit things at range.

eru001
2016-03-28, 01:49 PM
just like with aircraft they will probably carry different weapons for different targets. When going up against ground troops, a burlap sack full of fist sized rocks would be a reasonably effective cheap weapon, fly over the enemy formation, dump it out, and a dozen or so guys get hit it the heads with terminal velocity rocks.

More effective would be bottles of high proof alchohol with burning rags tied to them (Molotov cocktails), vials of alchemists fire, if gunpowder exists just make bombs.

Wasp nests could also be fun to drop on the enemy. Barrels of pitch with lit fuzes. The limiting factor is just how much weight the griffons can carry.

against other areal units, If the riders have access to magic, it would probably be the best way to hit a moving target from a moving target in three dimensions, if no magic is available, volume of fire is key, (that's why fighters used machine guns prior to the introduction of air to air missiles, and still are equipped with MG's today) so that could mean depending on tech, repeating crossbows, primitive lightweight organ guns, pukle guns etc.

thrown, weighted, nets may also be effective at tangling up the wings of enemy flying creatures (which then cause them to splat on the ground), but no garuntees there in terms of ease of use.

Of course if you plan on getting up close and personal with enemy fliers. Slashing weapons and lances are your best bets. And parachutes or scrolls of feather fall or equivalent.

MrZJunior
2016-03-28, 01:55 PM
Ranged weapons combine well with flight, but realistically speaking, can you imagine how hard it'd be to fire a bow from the back of a moving griffon? So with that in mind, my first instinct is "bombs", but of course those may not be common in the setting.

If bombs are excluded, I'd simply go for lances or other polearms to make fly-by attacks with. A few javelins may be good to hit things at range.

Would it be that much harder than shooting from a moving horse?

Vitruviansquid
2016-03-28, 01:57 PM
Get some barding for the griffons and the rider needs a sword in case something puts his griffon out of commission but he survives to have to fight his way out of a jam.

A griffon is basically a combination of two ridiculously vicious predators, a lion and an eagle. The griffon itself is the weapon, and the rider only directs it.

cobaltstarfire
2016-03-28, 02:13 PM
Would it be that much harder than shooting from a moving horse?

I think it should be about the same personally.

I had a conversation similar to this in the previous real world weapons thread (only with herons rather than gryphons), and the general thought was that shooting from the back of a large flying object likely isn't any harder than shooting off the back of a horse.

Though if you want to take into account wind, it may be harder. It was pointed out to me that as you get even a little bit higher the wind very quickly starts blowing faster and that will mess with projectiles.


My herons had bows/xbows/javelins based on rider preference and what they expected to deal with. Along with dropping bags of rocks, oil (with fire, or magically combustible), and very heavy caltrop-like objects. Nets can work too. There was also talk of animals flying in tandem to carry larger loads (most likely more things to drop).


Alchemists fire and Tanglefoot bags, along with nets full of hooks sound like "nice" things to drop on opponents.

Airk
2016-03-28, 02:15 PM
Would it be that much harder than shooting from a moving horse?

I'd expect the big feathery wings flapping on each side to make it at least a bit more challenging, yes.

MrZJunior
2016-03-28, 02:24 PM
I'd expect the big feathery wings flapping on each side to make it at least a bit more challenging, yes.

If you sit up on or near its neck you could shoot to either side of its head unobstructed.

JHShadon
2016-03-28, 02:27 PM
Go Warcraft style and give them Lightning Hammers.

cobaltstarfire
2016-03-28, 02:53 PM
I'd expect the big feathery wings flapping on each side to make it at least a bit more challenging, yes.

Because a bird/dragon/gryphon can never not flap its wings.

Airk
2016-03-28, 02:57 PM
Because a bird/dragon/gryphon can never not flap its wings.

In which case, it will be holding them out level and interfering with any shot in a downward direction from someone sitting on its back? I don't think folding them in for a dive bomb is going to help either.

Lalliman
2016-03-28, 02:59 PM
Would it be that much harder than shooting from a moving horse?
Have you ever ridden a horse? I imagine that alone makes shooting pretty difficult. Then add two wings blocking your path, and you're left with two gaps to shoot from on the sides of the griffon's head (as Airk and MrZ said). So not only do you need the griffon to fly at a very specific angle to hit anyone, but if you're using a bow, there's also a ton of additional clumsiness involved in switching sides. That's what I'm getting at. Of course, using a crossbow fixes half the problem, and most systems handwave the difficulty of firing a ranged weapon on horseback to begin with, so I wouldn't call you crazy for ignoring it and just giving them bows. But I find it difficult to imagine.

cobaltstarfire
2016-03-28, 03:21 PM
In which case, it will be holding them out level and interfering with any shot in a downward direction from someone sitting on its back? I don't think folding them in for a dive bomb is going to help either.

You're working on the assumption that they rider will be sitting in such a way that the wings will be in the way, which doesn't have to be the case.

Dive bombing to throw javelins and arrows was actually discussed as a valid tactic in the real world weapons thread when I was talking to them about heron riders.

edit: Also the bows and such don't have to be used against grounded opponents. I don't know what the OP's plan is going to be, but most folks who have brought up bows/xbows have talked in context of air to air combat.

eru001
2016-03-28, 03:32 PM
Would it be that much harder than shooting from a moving horse?

Short answer, Yes and incredibly so.

Long Answer: While shooting a target from horseback is difficult it is not something that is too difficult to be learned with some effort. The key difference between shooting a target from horseback versus shooting a target from a flying mount would be:

Differences in windspeed due to altitude

differences in your speed, flying animals generally travel at much greater velocities than horses

Much colder air, which means that either you need to wear thick heavy gloves, or your fingers will be frozen, this does not lend itself well to operating a bow. (or a firearm for that matter)

Three dimensional maneuvering. Attempting to engage an enemy with unguided munitions, while moving in three dimensions is hard, doing so while the target is also moving in three dimensions is nearly impossible unless you have a weapon with a high volume of fire, (such as a machine gun). if you read up on fighter pilots in WWI you will see that prior to the introduction of machine guns, air to air kills were accomplished almost entirely by dumb luck, and the occasional suicidal ramming incident.

cobaltstarfire
2016-03-28, 03:51 PM
Much colder air, which means that either you need to wear thick heavy gloves, or your fingers will be frozen, this does not lend itself well to operating a bow. (or a firearm for that matter)



Do you really think that gryphon riders who are actively attacking things near the ground are going to be at that high of an altitude regularly? (I already mentioned up thread that yeah it's been pointed out that shooting things at high altitude is next to pointless because the wind speed picks up quickly and would thoroughly mess up the shot)


They can wear archery gloves (which are a thing) They could be a mix between archery gloves, and the thin leather gloves used for TIG welding. Which are just fine for protection from wind, some cold, and hot of course (though wouldn't be useful at high altitude).

All the 3D maneuvering is hard stuff? I don't really buy it. Have the gryphon riders, ride from a very young age and it probably won't be hard for them to grasp at all. It's not hard to think and be aware of things in 3D.

eru001
2016-03-28, 07:35 PM
Do you really think that gryphon riders who are actively attacking things near the ground are going to be at that high of an altitude regularly? (I already mentioned up thread that yeah it's been pointed out that shooting things at high altitude is next to pointless because the wind speed picks up quickly and would thoroughly mess up the shot)


All the 3D maneuvering is hard stuff? I don't really buy it. Have the gryphon riders, ride from a very young age and it probably won't be hard for them to grasp at all. It's not hard to think and be aware of things in 3D.

Yes I do think they are going to approach altitudes at which the combined factors of wind chill and altitude cause significant temperature issues.

I am aware that archery gloves are a thing, they are also not the warmest of things

3D maneuvering is difficult but not impossible to do. 3d maneuvering combined with accurate marksmanship against other targets also maneuvering in three dimensions? That I do believe would be prohibitively difficult, and the reason for this belief is the accounts of pilots from the first world war prior to the introduction of the interrupter gear (the thing that let them fire MG's forwards without hitting the prop) who would routinely bring pistols, and rifles (which are much more accurate and easy to use than bows) and were generally not successful to any meaningful degree.

Having the riders do the "live in the saddle" thing from a young age might work, but it has it's own drawbacks for an established nation. It certainly is not trivial to pull off. Also the population may balk at the idea of sending large numbers of small children to live in close proximity to magical monsters known for their high levels of strength and ferocity.

The Great Wyrm
2016-03-28, 11:17 PM
These things:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flechette#Air-dropped_flechette
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fliegerpfeile_der_Schweizer_Armee.jpg

BWR
2016-03-29, 01:02 AM
Thyatis' Retebius Air Fleet uses griffons and sphinxes for their elite ranger cavalry (by which I assume they mean more like heavy cavalry since no more detailed description of equipment and role was given). No specific equipment packs were listed but it likely includes heavier weapons, heavier armor and barding and more ranged firepower.
The riders are, however, often issued with bumber-chutes and breathing gear. The former is a magical umbrella-like item enchanted with Feather Fall, and the latter is a goggle and mask set enchanted with Create Air (so they can see at high speeds and breathe at high altitudes).

Templarkommando
2016-03-29, 01:30 AM
It kind of depends on what role you're going for. If you're trying to destroy an enemy camp, it might be useful to fill a clay pot with pitch/greek fire and drop it on the camp - this also works for terrorizing cities and so forth. Another option is to have some kind of ordnance to take out enemy formations. Empty a bag of sharp things over a formation of soldiers could be quite useful. If you're going for airsuperiority, ranged weapons or melee weapons (lances especially for mounted combat) are a good bet. These are also helpful if your riders are dragoons - meaning that they use their mount to get to the fight as quickly as possible and then fight on foot.

TeChameleon
2016-03-29, 02:20 AM
Magic Missile and similar would probably be the ideal; we had griffin air cav in my main game (actually, my main character founded an order of griffin-riding mages >.>), but the riders were almost entirely magic users, and the griffins themselves were Rimefire Griffins, so they had a breath weapon as well as their flyby attacks and whatnot.

If you don't want to go the magic-user route, another option aside from the ones already mentioned would be to give the riders some form of strength-enhancing gear (Gauntlets of Ogre Power, Belt of (whatever) Giant Strength, etc.) and give them something akin to the cartoon version of a zanbato (https://c1.staticflickr.com/7/6211/6335212797_b80526599d_b.jpg). Then they make flying guillotine attacks while the griffins do flybys to shred things with their beaks and talons (and claws, I guess, technically >.>). It's maybe not the most practical, but it would certainly look intimidating, especially after the first time both a lead-from-the-front commander and his horse got bisected...

MrZJunior
2016-03-29, 07:42 AM
Yes I do think they are going to approach altitudes at which the combined factors of wind chill and altitude cause significant temperature issues.


Why? If they are to be used mostly against ground targets what purpose is there to going so high?

Admiral Squish
2016-03-29, 08:12 AM
Why? If they are to be used mostly against ground targets what purpose is there to going so high?

You don't have to get all that high up for things to start getting cold enough to be uncomfortable/performance-impairing for an archer. And generally speaking, the higher you are, the harder it is for your very valuable air unit to catch an arrow in a vulnerable spot.

Elvenoutrider
2016-03-29, 10:00 AM
In my campaign they were used for rearguard attacks with elite troops or flanking maneuvers. They flew over the battlefield bombarding siege engines and storehouses with alchemist fire. When they saw a unit moving unsupported by spear men, they charged with lances to scatter and destroy them, then finally when their army was putting ladders up to climb the walls the air cavalry landed their flying mounts, dismounted and fought in a Melee alongside the griphons to clear the walls for the climbing troops

Storm_Of_Snow
2016-03-29, 10:56 AM
Definitely some kind of melee weapon for the rider, but the Griffon can make their own attacks, so a lance is probably not required unless the rider desires one - I'd go with a bow. I guess there's also the possibility of mounting some thing heavier on the saddle - say, a spring loaded harpoon or cluster of bolts/sling bullets, either under the wings or down the side of the mount's neck.

Nets could also be useful, and could potentially be carried under the creatures belly.

Aerial combat's probably just the mounts slashing at each other with their talons in passing, and the riders maybe getting a lucky hit on their opponents mount.

Ikitavi
2016-03-29, 11:33 AM
The role of Griffon cavalry is most akin to the lightest of cavalry roles. They are scouts and counter scouts. They can not carry much weight unless seriously magically enhanced. I would worry about their endurance if AD&D had realistic mechanics for it.

I would equip them with enlarged range Message amulets so they can communicate with each other. And/or signalling mirrors.

You would never hit an unbroken ground unit with Griffon cav unless you literally had no other choice. You would use them against the classic targets of light cavalry, units that are retreating, supply wagons, other light units like scouts, and very unwieldy units like siege units.

Air superiority is probably the most important consideration, unless the typical opponent has pretty much no air capability at all. That probably means either lances, or missile weapons with poisons specific to the mounts targeted. Maybe harpoons.

For harrying supplies and siege, whatever the best fire weapon they have access to.

Remember that when they target an unengaged unit, that unit can put shields up or otherwise significantly increase its AC. Unless the Griffon is diving and dropping bundles of javelins, it really is unlikely to do much bombardment damage. The platform is too unstable, and you have to fire off your line of movement, and use a short bow.

Okay, there is ONE other target of consideration that light cavalry doesn't deal with. Griffon cavalry can take castle gates. They can take and hold parts of a castle while the rest of the army moves up. Which means intense melee fighting, fighting with hard cover and concealment. That is the only time I would argue it is worth having them armed to the teeth. They are just SO useful in scouting that every pound of missile weapons just means that much less time flying and finding the enemy and communicating their location and disposition.

Admiral Squish
2016-03-29, 11:34 AM
A useful tactic in mounted airborne combat would also be to pluck/knock the rider off their mount.

I suspect crossbows would be better than bows. For one, it takes a lot less training to give a rider a crossbow, and for another, you can aim more carefully without having to hold the bow drawn. Plus, you could probably wear gloves to keep warm without problem with a crossbow.

One important thing to consider, though. Gryphons are most likely tamed, not domesticated, and they're dangerous, predatory animals. Which means there is going to be a limit on how far you can push one before it bites off something important. You'd want to stick to things that are generally in line with its instincts. Complicated tactics, like training the gryphon to drop things on command, probably would be a bit much.

I suspect gryphons in combat would be used mostly for scouting. They're mobile, and largely untouchable once you get high enough, so you could fly overhead and scout out enemy formations and movements. They could also make precision strikes, raining crossbow bolts on vulnerable enemy positions, and flanking around the cover offered by shield walls and siege weapons. Perhaps most devastating, though, would be the ability to whittle away and demoralize enemy forces with precision strikes. Any time a unit breaks away from arrow/pike cover, the gryphons descend, snatch, and lift 'em up. Then you go back to scouting while your faithful steed gets a snack and the leftovers rain down on the enemy forces.

eru001
2016-03-29, 01:17 PM
Why? If they are to be used mostly against ground targets what purpose is there to going so high?

an arrow fired from the ground can only fly upwards a certain distance, a bomb/rock/pointy implement dropped from an air unit will fall to the ground regardless of height. why should I unnecessarily place myself within range of enemy weapons when I could place myself out of their range and still strike at them.

Also, in the case of air to air combat, if my griffon should at any point become temporarily disabled I have a better chance of fixing the problem and not splatting on the ground, where as at mid to low altitude I am more likely to splat before trying to resolve the issue. (fighter aircraft work similarly, It is possible to get out of a high altitude stall and regain control in time to avoid crashing, low altitude stalls, while slightly rarer, almost always result in crashes.)

Lord Torath
2016-03-29, 02:19 PM
Caltrops would be a great "drop" weapon as well.

I'm currently leaning toward the following:
Net
Javelin/Harpoon
Spear
Sword
Leather+2
And probably a Light Crossbow.

There are only a dozen of these, as this is a minor lord (an earl maybe? I need to look up the ranks of nobility) far from the capitol. He's probably got around a 100-150 troops other than the griffon riders, including cavalry (which means training the griffons not to go into a feeding frenzy when they smell horses).

Xuc Xac
2016-03-29, 02:30 PM
In a high fantasy setting that treats horses like motorcycles with legs, then a griffon is basically an attack helicopter and you can do anything you want without worrying about wings being in the way, or the rider's saddle restricting the griffon's movements, or anything else. But in a grittier world, things would be different. For a start, let's not mention "realism", because that's just ridiculous, but let's say we want to worry about the biomechanics or the situation. For the sake of argument, we'll say that we're making a fantasy movie with a huge budget and a director that cares that things look "right" so the CGI animators in charge of the griffons actually took the time and effort to worry about where the bones and joints are instead of making lion-bird shaped balloons that they can cut and paste into a scene.

Making something move like a real creature instead of a plastic toy isn't easy. When they animated the warg riders in the Lord of the Rings movies, they tried to make them like big wolves and it looked ridiculously awkward. Predators don't have the spine to support a rider. A tiger is a big powerful animal, but if a grown man tried sitting on its back, its belly would scrape along the ground because its back is too flexible. There's a reason that humans have only used dogs for pulling sleds and only herbivores with solid backs can carry riders or heavy burdens. (This is also why halfing riding dogs are stupid. Dogs can't carry loads on their backs and the size excuse doesn't hold up either. Halfings can ride a horse as well as a human child could and human adults ride elephants all the time.) The wargs looked so un-wolfy because they have stiff backs. They were essentially animated with sheep skeletons.

A griffon is a giant eagle with a lion butt, so all the flying parts will be the same as an eagle but bigger. Not only because it's a bigger creature, but also proportionally bigger and meatier because it has to have the strength to lift the heavy load of its lion end. The wings would have to be much longer and larger than an eagle's compared to its head and torso, which means that its chest will also be much bigger to support the muscles to flap them. For stability, we'll say that the "lion" end is actually slimmer than a real lion's hindquarters but still equipped with feline ripping claws, maybe something like a cheetah but with the coloration of a lion. The tail and lion legs would probably need some kind of flight feathers (the long stiff ones on a bird's wings and tail) to aid in steering. We don't want to obscure the leonine shape too much back there, so we'll just give them a line of flight feathers along the back of their legs sort of like the fins on a mid-20th century car.

How is this thing going to carry a rider? The best way would be the same way an eagle carries a fish: in its talons. A rider could sit in a sort of basket carried by the griffon. I would put leads on their talons that could be attached to the basket too, just to ensure that the griffon doesn't let go. This would be slow and unaerodynamic but it's fine if you're just patrolling around the castle instead of traveling long distances. Then the rider could scout the positions of enemy troops on the ground or drop loads of flechettes on massed groups of enemies. For longer distance travel, you could use a more aerodynamic harness like the ones that attach to a hang glider but that's not a good position to fight from.

If you want a more glorious "mounted on the top" position for the rider, it will be more restrictive. The griffon will need a saddle. All the real animals that people ride have legs that only move forward and backward. They don't need to spread their limbs to the side and move their shoulder blades across their back. A griffon needs to spread and flap its wings, which means you can't put a saddle between its shoulders or on its back. The lion part can't take a load either. It's strongest muscles and bone structure are optimized for ripping from front to back, not supporting weight. The only place to sit will be on its neck in front of the shoulders. We don't want to put a bunch of straps around the griffon's body that would interfere with flapping its wings, but the rider needs something to keep him in place. I would imagine something like a falcon hood (but with eye holes so the griffon can still see) that has attached reins and stirrups and small saddle to hold the rider on the neck. If the griffon's neck is as big as a horse's torso, this is really quite a sizable beast! It will have to be in order to fly with the weight of a grown person on its neck. That's a lot of extra weight that will throw off its balance. It won't be able to fly normally and will have to flap a lot harder to maintain a higher angle of attack. You don't want to launch off the battlements of the castle and do a nosedive, so the griffon is going to be flying with its rear legs down to compensate and hold its head up. It won't be doing any gentle soaring because it will have to constantly correct for the extra weight pulling down on the front. Imagine the kind of flapping that a bird does when trying to gain altitude or brake for a landing. It would have to do that all the time while carrying a rider.

Griffon breeders would prioritize stamina above all else in order to get more usable flight time out of them, but in any case, this would be a combat only flight mode. It would be very tiring and strenuous. Now that I think of it, it's very analogous to the maintenance time of fighter aircraft: several hours of maintenance per hour of flying or per few minutes of fighting. Griffons with riders would attack like a super cavalry. One impressive terrifying highly mobile charge and then retreat to rest, re-arm, and re-group. What kind of weapons could they use for their attack runs?

I'm going to discount magic immediately. A wizard rider probably can't even cast spells from that position. It's a rougher ride than a galloping horse. Because of the structure of its back, a horse doesn't move much differently when carrying a rider and it's body plan is optimized for stable running. The griffon, on the other hand, is constantly fighting to hold the rider's weight up. Aiming would be extremely difficult and would come down to blind luck more than skill (natural 20) or just aiming at really large targets like large infantry formations. Auto-success spells like magic missile would work, but a few magic missiles into a besieging army is fairly pointless. If your wizards have more powerful spells available, then what do they need the griffon for? Let them cast a fly spell and skip the whole messy bird-lion deal.

So, mundane weapons for aerial knights to use. As I mentioned above, dropping flechettes would be good. You could have the griffon carry crates full of flechettes by a swiveling handle. You fly over the enemy troops, pull a rope to flip your flechette crate over to dump its contents, then fly back to get another full load. The rider dropping them individually would be as pointless as sending the wizard out to cast magic missile. Trying to use a bow or crossbow would also be equally ineffective. Even if you hit someone with every shot, it wouldn't be a high enough volume of fire to do much to an army. You'd certainly look much cooler than the other archers, but you'd be much less of a threat than a group of regular archers with longbows.

Melee weapons are also pointless, because you can't get close enough to use them. The rider should have a short sword or something in case he needs to abandon griffon, but anything bigger would just be more weight and get in the way. Unlike horse cavalry, you can't ride by enemies to attack them. The wings will keep you from reaching anything to the side, so you can't ride through infantry and cut off heads with a saber. You can't use a lance because you would have to aim too far down. The griffon isn't going to sit there and hover while you try to poke infantry in their shoulders. That's how you get a griffon full of pikes and halberds. You can't swoop by and use a lance because it will either break on the first hit (if you're lucky, the broken end won't stab your griffon) or you'll have to let it go. If it sticks into an enemy and you don't let go, your griffon will fly right into it. It might be your weapon, but physics doesn't care who it belongs to. The force will be the same as if the guy on the ground swung it and broke it over your griffon's wing. With luck, it will just sting and the griffon won't be knocked off balance or suffer a broken wing bone, either of which could crash you.

Psychological terror weapons would be good. Some Molotov cocktails won't really do a lot of damage, but it's a really horrifying way to get injured or killed, so the enemies that aren't hit will be demoralized. You could also drop severed heads from the first wave of invaders that tried scaling the castle walls to demoralize them too. Or drop a bloated horse carcass into the middle of their encampment from a great height.

That's about all you can do while defending a castle from a siege. On an open battlefield where your troops are going out to meet the enemy instead of just holding the castle walls, you have more support roles you can fill. Griffon riders could intercept and break up enemy cavalry charges. Not by actually hitting them, but by swooping down and screeching to terrify the horses. That's generally how cavalry worked against infantry formations. They charge in and look big and scary so the formation panics and breaks up and becomes easy pickings for your own formations that hold together. Griffons could do that to infantry and cavalry. They are more terrifying than a cavalry charge and they are fast enough to intercept cavalry and outflank infantry. Horses are fast, but infantry can usually see them coming and get set for them if they have the discipline to stand firm while watching the cavalry thundering down on them. Griffons could swoop down and then suddenly be behind them where they aren't prepared. Panic will be much easier to inspire when the guys who thought they were in the back suddenly find out they're in the front and there's a big monster that can rip them in half.

Griffons could also be useful as troop transport helicopters. They don't actually do much fighting, but they deliver your foot knights quickly and directly to where they can deal serious damage. For example, they could swoop down by the siege engines, the riders hop off, slaughter the engine crews, then get extracted to retreat back to the castle to rest while the attackers draw straws to see who has to be the new target on the siege engines. If the attackers assign more of their forces to protecting the siege engines to stop you from doing that again, that's also a win for you because that means less army actually attacking you.

Griffon riders wouldn't be doing much actual "rolling to hit" unless there were opposing aerial cavalry or flying monsters. Then they would get into upside-down dogfights where they try to outmaneuver their opponents to get under them so the rider can stab upwards with a lance or a regular dogfight where you try to get on top of them so the griffon can strike at the enemy rider from above and behind.

NRSASD
2016-03-29, 03:47 PM
So I posed this question to my raptor biologist girlfriend, who promptly replied with "Griffons don't have eagle tail feathers, so how do they steer...?" After a long discussion about how a regiment of galloping griffons that leap at their opponents and glide over obstacles is technically more realistic, we came up with a few tactics you might find useful.

Disclaimer: We're assuming the rider is strapped in astride the griffon's neck and no magic is involved.

Griffon vs Air:

In the air, the griffon itself is going to be the nastiest thing aloft besides a magic-wielding rider. Due to its compact and muscular form, it can out-grapple or melee anything airborne its size and smaller, and take advantage of the blindspots present on larger beasts. While the griffon rakes and gouges its foe, the rider would probably be best served keeping an eye on the surroundings and use a long sword to handle any potential threats small enough for the griffon to ignore.

Anything lighter than the heaviest of bows or crossbows are going to be ineffective due to the winds at higher altitudes and air resistance. Throwing weapons are going to have terribly short ranges, and all missile weapons are going to be woefully inaccurate unless you're going straight at your adversary. The heavier classes of crossbow cannot be reloaded while mounted, as you need something to brace against, but you could have a winch powered crossbow with a hideously long reload time. All this being said, a short recurve composite bow, like what the steppe nomads of central Asia used, is probably the way to go. It hits hard enough to compensate for the wind conditions, is small enough to not burden the griffon, and has short enough limbs it can be used efficiently while mounted (unlike a longbow).

Trying to lance a rival aerial creature with a charge (like cavalry on ground) is going to be nigh impossible. All the opponent has to do is drop briefly in altitude and the charge is wasted as the lance passes harmlessly overhead. However, the lance still has a role in air-to-air combat: ambushes. If the griffon can surprise its opponent, a diving griffon with a lance is pretty much guaranteed to kill its foe in one hit, no questions asked. The rider would have to release the lance immediately or be ripped off the griffon, but basically nothing living can survive with 8 feet of wood and steel wedged through its spinal column. This would be exactly like a cavalry charge, where all of the momentum of horse and rider are focused into the lance point, but the momentum of a griffon and rider diving would be far greater than any horse.

Griffon vs Ground:

As many have already stated, dropping things is the least risky and probably most effective methods of engaging ground troops. Rocks, darts, flechettes, nets, alchemist fire, wasp nests, acid vials, holy/unholy water, disease-ridden corpses, prisoners, gas weapons, the list goes on. You are limited only by what's available, your creativity, and your ethical standards.

Diving against ground targets is a huge no. You will most assuredly kill whatever you're diving on, but you will also likely kill the griffon too. If it's diving at a target, it wants to hit the target with the highest possible velocity. Unfortunately, that leaves absolutely no time to pull up, so you and your griffon will promptly hit the ground fractions of a second later.

However, swooping against ground targets is feasible. Pulling off shallow dives (think bald eagles fishing from a river) will pack a lot of punch without the downsides of killing your griffon. The griffon would get the chance to snatch and grab at anyone in range on the ground, spook horses, and generally cause chaos. Using a lance would be ill-advised, since the targets are beneath your griffon, making them very hard to hit due to the bad angle. If you did manage to hit someone, there's a very real chance the lance could get stuck in the target or the ground, which ends with either a. the griffon colliding with the lance or b. the rider unintentionally polevaulting from the griffon's back. Releasing the lance doesn't mitigate the risks of a. unfortunately. This is where a rider's missile weapons would be most effective, since the wind penalties would be less and the targets are abundant. The big downside here is that it exposes your griffon to attack from missile weapons and polearms.



As always, feel free to take anything you like. Or throw it all out. This is about a game, so never let reality get in the way of your fun!

Edit: Where did the lord source this griffons from? Are they domestic, or wild caught? It may be important because wild caught animals tend to revert to their instincts in stressful situations.

Lvl 2 Expert
2016-03-29, 03:56 PM
It probably depends mostly on their carrying capacity and the enemies ability to field air units.

High capacity, little air enemies: throw ****. Well, not literally **** maybe, although that works well enough if you're into biological weapons, but like figurative ****.

Low capacity, little air enemies: ranged weapons, information. As in: if they can report to the main force that they're being flanked, that's worth way more than them getting in a few attacks on that flanking army.

High capacity, many air enemies: anything they can get their hands on, and loads of armor.

Low capacity, many air enemies: travel light, train for speed, get some heavy hitting stuff for when you absolutely have to help your ground forces out against enemy fliers.

Tvtyrant
2016-03-29, 04:17 PM
Lassos tied to the harness. The ancient Celts famously broke up spear and shield walls by lassoing individuals in them from their chariots and then dragging them through the formation, which would work even better from the air. Nab a guy in the front, fly along the formation and then cut the rope. Have a dozen guys do this right before the walls meet and the enemy formation will be so broken it won't be able to hold the line.

If using open formations I would suggest putting casters on the griffons, as they can protect their mount from incoming fireballs and torch enemies, while an archer is going to be burnt up.

VoxRationis
2016-03-29, 04:55 PM
I've actually considered this for one of my campaign settings. The limited cargo capacity is a huge restriction here, as others have mentioned. You can't bard them well enough to charge in an offensive role against massed opponents, or to withstand arrow fire. You can drop things from beyond range of retaliation, but that assumes that the griffon can be trained to drop things. Furthermore, limits on cargo capacity will make sure that every bomb will have to count, so dropping from a great height might be unproductive.

I'm not sure arrows will be unusable. Wings are a problem, but most aerial predators already know a "fold wings for the strike" maneuver, and once the wings are no longer flapping, you won't bounce quite so much and you won't have to worry about shooting the griffon. You could use arrows to either ward off pursuing air cavalry or to punctuate one's own charge (say by firing forward, adding some momentum of one's charge to the arrow's momentum). Wind is a significant factor, so the arrows should probably be lead-weighted to help mitigate that. Archery won't be easy, but I could see it being used in certain circumstances.

I'm going to have to agree with the light cavalry analogy posited by others on this thread. I'll also add a different role to it, though. One of the big issues about air cav is that it will be invariably outnumbered by ground forces by a huge margin. It takes so much more energy to fly a person, mount, and armament than it does to walk it overland that a griffon will have cripplingly large energy requirements. Thus, for every griffon and rider you field, you could use the same land to feed many infantry or several traditional cavalrymen. A commander of an aerial cavalry wing won't have the forces to deal with the real meat of an enemy army. What they can do, however, is attack, or threaten to attack, commanders, artillery, and other vital but "squishy" parts of the enemy army. A wing of aerial cavalry has the ability to bypass most of an enemy army in a way which even the fleetest light cav cannot. It can disperse and reform quickly, turn to evade unexpected resistance, and simply fly over most of the enemy. Thus, aerial cavalry will be used to either counter enemy air cav or to initiate precision strikes on vulnerable parts of enemy formations They could also be used, perhaps, to concentrate fire on heavy forces like elephants, killing or panicking them before the main forces of the battle engage. The dive-bomb shot would work particularly well in such a case, adding penetrative force which might be lacking in standard archery.

As for equipment, I'd ignore armor (the odds of the rider, rather than the griffon, being targeted are low in most scenarios, and the griffon can't be barded without being weighed down too much), give only a small holdout melee weapon, and mostly rely on the griffon itself for melee. Ranged power should come from a heavy bow or crossbow firing weighted arrows or bolts. Flechettes, fire pots, or bombs could work, but will be limited to precision dive-bombing, because the griffons won't have the capacity to carpet-bomb significant sections of the enemy army.

Incanur
2016-03-29, 05:19 PM
I go for the tried-and-true composite bow in my own fantasy universe. A reasonably close range, which historical warrior typically wanted for mounted archery anyways, griffonback archery should work fine. Accuracy at longer distances would be a challenge, especially for mere baseline humans.

Note that the whole notion a flying winged creature capable of bearing a human rider already gets us beyond the limits of known biology and/or physics. With this in mind, my griffons start out as stronger and tougher than any known animal.

eru001
2016-03-29, 05:40 PM
You can drop things from beyond range of retaliation, but that assumes that the griffon can be trained to drop things.


You don't have to train the griffon to drop things. Tie them to the griffon, securing them with a release knot, the rider is then responsible for pulling the string and releasing the payload at the right time.

Lycanthrope13
2016-03-29, 05:55 PM
Might sound redundant with what everyone else has said, but probably the lightest armament you can find. Quilted or hide armor would provide lightweight protection and probably some warmth at altitude. Darts would probably be the main weapon, dropped on to infantry formations or thrown at aerial opponents. Each rider would probably have saddlebags full of darts and splash weapons. There probably wouldn't be much melee. You can't attack through your mount's wings, and you would have to reach beyond your mount's wing and the wing of your opponent's mount to strike another rider. An aerial melee would require maneuvering under your opponent and striking their mount from below. Piercing weapons would be the only way to go because swinging a weapon would cause your body weight to shift; not a good idea when you're 200' above the ground. Each rider would probably carry a light blade in case his mount is downed, or if he needs to cut himself free of his saddle. I also love the idea of lassos attached to the saddle. So final tally:

Quilted/Hide armor
Darts (x50)
Alchemist's fire (x10)
Choking powder (x10)
Tanglefoot bag (x10)
Lasso (x2)
Lance/Ranseur
Short sword
Buckler (maybe?)

Telok
2016-03-29, 08:06 PM
I'd actually suggest two rather unusual weapons. A spiked ball on a long rope, and silk scarves with poisoned hooks.

Take an iron ball with several nasty spikes or blades and about thirty feet of rope. Lower it down and just fly above your target. It works against aerial and ground foes, can be dropped in an emergency, it's cheap (always a bonus), and it keeps the griffon out of pike and lance range.

The scarves are for aerial combat. Fold them into thick leather bags with a safe end sticking out (big poisoned fish hooks). When the griffon is attacked, run away. If the enemy chases you just pull the scarf out of the bag and throw it in the air behind you. It will take a fair bit of experimentation to get the right ratios of scarf area, hooks, and weight. Safe for the griffon, dangerous for the guy chasing you.

Coidzor
2016-03-29, 11:00 PM
My PCs are going to be going up against a small keep with about a dozen griffon riders. So, neglecting specific rule-sets, what kinds of weapons make sense for griffon riders? Assume they will generally be used against ground troops, but may occasionally face flying opposition.

A backup net for binding opponent griffons' wings and/or their riders or capturing terrestrial foes, especially if it's the kind that two griffon riders would work together to use to scoop something up or snare it.

A lance or sword for aerial melee combat and for times when they need to dismount.

A missile weapon, likely their primary armament. Whether this is a composite bow, a form of rocket launcher, or a firearm is, well, setting and rules dependent.

Maybe some form of specialty javelin for crippling an opponent griffon's wings.

Bombs, grenades, or other appropriate munitions for dropping on infantry.

rrgg
2016-03-29, 11:43 PM
Against ground targets you could use pretty much anything. At 100m up even rocks are going to do a lot of damage to whatever they land on, meanwhile weapons on the ground will be unable to hit the griffon or unlikely to hit with enough force to cause major injury. The biggest threat would probably be anything else in the air, for that you'd probably need some sort of bow, crossbow, or firearm.