Dacians

Mithradates
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 10:06 pm

Dacians

Postby Mithradates » Thu Dec 08, 2016 10:17 pm

First game on Sunday, we are trying out Dacians against Early Imperials in a small game.

While there is no Dacian list I am 'creating' one based on Gallic troop types. Warriors and Skirmishers are fine but will need to vary the list for falx chappies and Sarmatian heavy cavalry.

Falx wielders - propose same cost as normal warriors after swapping shield and throwing spear for a 2HCW. No defensive values? Sarmatian heavy cavalry - bit stuck here but proposing to use points for Sassanid Clibararii with added heavy armour and barding.

Does this seem OK?

Thanks

Garry

User avatar
A Lot of Gaul
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 11:32 am

Re: Dacians

Postby A Lot of Gaul » Fri Dec 09, 2016 12:13 am

Hi Garry,

For what it's worth, your Dacian units sound quite reasonable to me. Based on the existing lists, it does look as if falx-bearing warriors would have no Defense value if shieldless, or D - 6 with shields. Personally, I would probably go with the latter, given that in their list, the Vikings with two-handed axes still retain their shields.

I think that the Sarmatian cataphracts would be pretty much identical to the Sassanid ones. So with +1 for horse barding, they should cost 28 points per base. Sound about right to you?

Cheers,
Scott
VENTOSA VIRI RESTABIT

Mithradates
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 10:06 pm

Re: Dacians

Postby Mithradates » Fri Dec 09, 2016 2:49 am

That's what I thought. Thanks.

Interesting question with the falx nutters, did they even carry a shield? Swap throwing spear for a falx - arguable they keep the shield. Of course when they charge shieldless they have no defence value as they are unarmoured - whether from pila or sword is immaterial!

Will be interested to see how the game plays out. 500 points is a start but to be fair to the game parameters probably need 1000 to make a go of it.

Garry

User avatar
A Lot of Gaul
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 11:32 am

Re: Dacians

Postby A Lot of Gaul » Fri Dec 09, 2016 12:19 pm

The visual evidence appears to be rather ambiguous. Online images of Dacian warriors from Trajan's Column show them carrying shields and wielding their falxes (sicae) with one hand. OTOH, the Adamklissi Monument depicts the Dacian Bastarnae as shieldless and wielding two-handed falxes.

Without getting bogged down in a lot of detail, the literary evidence appears to be similarly ambiguous. IMHO you could justifiably rate your falxmen as shielded with one-handed 'swords,' shieldless with 'two-handed axes,' or some combination of the two. It will be interesting to see how Martin chooses to interpret them!

Cheers,
Scott
VENTOSA VIRI RESTABIT

Eds
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 7:53 pm

Re: Dacians

Postby Eds » Sat Dec 10, 2016 12:38 am

Scott,

On your comment on Vikings with Shield and 2HW, note the last sentence on page 24.

The Vikings can have both, but cannot employ the shield in any phase that they employ the 2HW. You decide at the beginning of each phase.

As such, against shooting the Vikings will have D6 (assuming no Light Armour). However, in any combat phase they decide to employ the 2HW (*), their D is worsened by 1, so they will have no D in this instance.

(*) There may well be combat phases where the Vikings decide to not use the 2HW, such as when their opponents have no armour, and want the benefit of their shield instead.

Re Dacian / Basternae falxmen, I recall that their are illustrations showing warriors both shielded and unshielded, but I cannot recall any contemporary reliefs showing a shield in use by a warrior using a falx, that is to say a weapon that could be wielded two handed. Several illustration show warriors with shields in the same scene as unshielded falxmen, but you can either not see their weapon or the "falx" in question is a short single handed weapon, not much more than a large knife really. As such, I would suggest that falxmen carry a 2HW and have no D (i.e. unarmoured). Other warriors would, of course, be "typical barbarians", with a hand weapon/spear and shield.
Eds

User avatar
A Lot of Gaul
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 11:32 am

Re: Dacians

Postby A Lot of Gaul » Sat Dec 10, 2016 1:02 pm

Ed,

Thanks for the reminder about the rule for Vikings with two-handed axes! You are also absolutely correct about the lack of illustrations depicting Dacians wielding two-handed falxes while also bearing shields. Technically, the one-handed, curved-edge Dacian weapon shown on Trajan's column is known as a sica (sickle), and was used by a wide variety of ancient peoples. So as you say, most Dacian warriors could be fielded with shields and wielding swords and/or spears, with falxmen handled in the same way as Vikings bearing shields and two-handed axes. Sound good to you, Garry?

Cheers,
Scott
VENTOSA VIRI RESTABIT

Mithradates
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 10:06 pm

Re: Dacians

Postby Mithradates » Sat Dec 10, 2016 8:57 pm

Scott

I was thinking along those lines - will try it out in our game today. Not sure how the Dacians will fare against Early Romans - within 500 points I elected to go with some Minor Chieftains to boost the Warbands rather than Sarmatian cavalry. Running Bastarnae cavalry instead.

Found this reference on the web which may be of interest - sica and falx (rhompaia). I think Decebalus committed suicide with his sica - falx would have been overkill (forgive the pun).

http://www.academia.edu/1143674/Thracia ... nal_weapon

Cheers

Garry


Return to “Army Lists”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest