Slitherine

The most obvious answer is: someone with a spear.

However, is it just 'Defensive Spearmen' and 'Offensive Spearmen' who are spearmen, or does this include any not classed as "spearmen" but who have light spears, such as medium foot with light spear?

It seems more historical if the former, but if the latter, then my Slavs will be much better at defending against Lancers!

Thanks for any replies - I did do a search, but couldn't find this one before.

The former. See p.130.

Paul

Thanks for that!

I'm still finding my way around the rules, a recent convert from DBM. A forum like this, with helpful people like you, makes it much easier to pick up the rules.

Druid wrote:The most obvious answer is: someone with a spear.

Hi Druid, nice nickname.

IMHO, your answer to yourself is mostly correct but a little wrong. To me, it is someone who fights in a moderatly dense to dense formation (sheild wall, phalanx, whatever you want to call it) who rely heavily on the support of their formation.

For example, Viking Freemen (Bondi in DBM terms) formations are overwealmingly armed with longspears, swords and axes. Not everyone has a spear, most of them have at least a hand axe and every single one of them has a sword and knows how to use it. Most importantly they ALL have a big roundshield, and know how to form a shieldwall of overlapping densely packed shields.

When they get into action the difference in fighting style between a Undrilled Hoplite and an Undrilled Freeman formation would be dramatically different, BUT the effect in the game is the same, in the sense that if formation is broken (they get disrupted) then they are in a bit of pain... their fighting capability (or defensiveness) is reduced. If their formation is badly broken (they get fragmented) then people who are used to mano-mano fighting (swordsmen) are going to butcher them.

So, as said earlier - see P130, but remember that things are a little more abstract. Just because they are called 'spearmen' doesn't mean they necessarily have a spear .

Ian

The other night at the club Ethan made the point that spearman could easily have been termed shieldwall. Not quite perfect either but represents a lot of their POAs more clearly.

hazelbark wrote:The other night at the club Ethan made the point that spearman could easily have been termed shieldwall. Not quite perfect either but represents a lot of their POAs more clearly.

good call. it's why arab conquest swordsmen are off.sp if i remember the blurb correctly.

Druid wrote:Thanks for that!

I'm still finding my way around the rules, a recent convert from DBM. A forum like this, with helpful people like you, makes it much easier to pick up the rules.

Well as Phil Barker said in the DBMM Yahoo group: "All god's chillun got spears, the distinguishing feature of 'Spear' is large shields." In another thread his explanation for why Roman legions were not 'Spear' was that thrown weapons were the characteristic of 'Blade'.