Asshuri - some things I find odd in the Shem sourcebook

[Lagavulin]

I like the concept of the asshuri (forgive spelling if I get it wrong but I am am posting from work), however there are a couple of points I find a little odd.

Firstly the "half at home half mercenarys" business. Almost all the significant cities in the book send half their asshuri away on mercenary service and replace them with mercenarys (mostly asshuri I presume from elseswhere ? To my mind there is a flaw in the logic here. Effectively there is an exchange of troops between the cities - why?

If the Asshuri are hired out and other troop trypes brought in - free companys, then this becomes easier to understand. so are the mercenaries hired on a regular basis by the cities asshuri or not ? If they are Asshuri then why when the city has perfectly good asshuri of its own ?

Second - the basic description of the Asshuri is as medium/heavy cavalry. I envisage them as assyrian or Babylonian, front ranks charging with spears, rear ranks firing over head and then supporting. However in the section of the book dealing with warfare it talks about massed bodies of spearmen as the key part of Meadow shemite warfare. Who are these people ? Militia ? Dismounted Asshuri ? Again, I am struggling with the logic if they are Asshuri - training and equipping an elite cavalry forceand then expecting them to fight dismounted as infantry for most battles is an odd concept.

Or are the ashuri mounted infantry and not cavalry ?

If I have an Asshuri character what is he - an infantryman, a cavalryman or something in between ?

 

[VincentDarlage]

REH describes them as horsemen. "After these rolled a horde that seemed to encompass all the desert. Thousands on thousands of the war-like Sons of Shem: ranks of horsemen in scale-mail corselets and cylindrical helmets - the asshuri of Nippr, Shumir and Eruk and their sister cities..."

Presuming these cities are not willing to leave themselves defenceless, then only a portion of the asshuri are sent away. I don't remember if Shannon Kalvar decided the 50/50 split for Free Companies, or if I did it for the original Road of Kings (its not handy at the moment).

If Shannon came up with the idea for Free Companies, then I kept it to keep the books internally consistent (I made sure Atlaia in Return to the Road of Kings was consistent with Tales of the Black Kingdoms for the same reason). If I did it, then I am sure I took the idea from whatever historical army I was researching, as I am not apt to just make up things like that.

I don't think the city states trade armies - Argos buys them, Stygia uses mercenaries, etc. Perhaps they are sent out to smaller cities that do not have their own asshuri units. Caravans are also apt to hire them, I should think. It also provides an adventure hook for players who want to be an asshuri, but also do not want to have to stay at home and guard their city.

Since the asshuri are the elite soldiers, it follows that non-elite soldiers can also be found. I will probably add to this post after I get home and can access my research. Good questions, though.

 

[Lagavulin]

Vincent - thanks for the comments. I did enjoy the book and found most of it pretty useful.

I read the same quote you just used recently (Black Colossus?) and it backed up the view I held from Free Companies and Road of Kings about Asshuri being cavalry. I just can't get that to gel with the section on Shemite warfare in the Shem book. There is that one section there that clearly talks about massed infantry formations and infatry in heavy chariots as a key facet of Shemite warfare and yet we get no mention of infantry anywhere else.

Given the Gods and the general description of the Shemites then Assyrian or Babylonian is what springs to my mind, maybe with touch of Phoenician for the Pelishtim to cover the trading aspects. Although some of the cultural aspects are earlier - Akkadian or Sumerian, that feels a little too primitive.

If you are looking at a Babylonian or Assyrian model then the infantry would probably be close formation spearmen with rear rank archers. They did have chariot type vehicles for carrying infantry into combat as well so that fits with your description. They also made use of 2 wheeled 4 horse chariot with 3/4 crew for smashing into the enemy. The Asshuri cavalry sounds just right as well. As does the vicious reputation of the troops, the Assyrians where widely regarded as brutal opponents even in a brutal age; enemies where known to break just at the thought of facing them in open combat. Add some skirmishers recruited from peasants a few mercenaries and vassal troops, including horse archer nomads and you have an Assyrian/Babylonian army from 800-550 BC (ish).

Each major city hiring out part of it's Asshuri also makes sense and as you say is consistent with early material. The problem comes with the sections on each major city where it reads as if most of these same cities also hire mercenary Assuhuri. My own view on this would to be regard any troops hired by a major city as non-asshuri (nomads, free company, light troops). Maybe even infantry units made up of failed Ashuri candidates. Of course for a major campaign they might hire extra Asshuri but in that case I doubt there own would be allowed to serve abroad at the same time.

Apologies if I am being fussy here but this is the one aspect of an otherwise excellent work that I felt lacked internal logic and consistency. Any guidance on what you actually envisaged will be appreciated

 

[windman]

I've been delving into the Shem book a lot as of late, and I'm thinking of playing an Asshuri player soon, so I'm keen to hear Vincent's further responses.

I don't have the same historically relevant knowledge as you two do on the subject, but as a player I hope the Asshuri are more than just cavalry.

I got the feeling that all Asshuri are expected to be competent cavalry, just as all Shemites are expected to be competent archers. But I imagine that within a large force of Asshuri there will be groups that specialize in infantry, cavalry, and mounted archers.

From a role-playing perspective at least it would be nice to have an Asshuri character with some variety of choices in training.

I also thought from what I read, that the rest of the home army would be non-Asshuri mercenaries, Shemite or not.

 

[Lagavulin]

I think the core problem is that we only get information about the Asshuri and the rest of Shemite military gets ignored.

Vincent's work is very good so I don't want this to sound critical, but one place where the Conan range, and a lot of RP games in general fall down is when trying to present "realistic" military units. Rarely do I see a role playing supplement that represents armies that I recognise as viable and with a solid historical basis.

Admittedly I am fussy about this - I have been a wargamer longer than a roleplayer and have spent thousands of hours researching, painting and collecting ancient/medieval armies over the last 30 years. So when I run across this sort of thing it grates on my nerves.

The Aquilonia supplement did something similar but in reverse- lots of talk about Bossonian longbowmen and Gunderland pikemen, then talk about the weakness of Aquilonian infantry, in what actually looks like a perfectly balanced late medieval army.

 

[VincentDarlage]

Vincent's work is very good so I don't want this to sound critical, but one place where the Conan range, and a lot of RP games in general fall down is when trying to present "realistic" military units. Rarely do I see a role playing supplement that represents armies that I recognise as viable and with a solid historical basis.

I do check out the best books from the library I can find on the subject, but I am not a military historian. I am far more interested in the overall culture, and spend a lot of time researching that. You should consider writing up what you would consider a "realistic" Shemite military system and submit it to Signs and Portents.

Since the Conan game doesn't focus on wargaming or mass combat, I just tried to provide an overview for roleplaying needs. Most players are likely to be more interested in playing an asshuri as opposed to playing a non-elite unit - but the Infantry, Chariot, and Archer formation paragraphs do touch on the non-asshuri soldiers a bit. Most non-asshuri would be militia.

 

[VincentDarlage]

but as a player I hope the Asshuri are more than just cavalry. From a role-playing perspective at least it would be nice to have an Asshuri character with some variety of choices in training.

As a GM, I would say that is just fine.

 

[Lagavulin]

Vincent - If I can get some free time I might do as you suggest, I could certainly come up with something historically based with Asshuri as crack troops.

Once again let me stress that I do admire your work and don't intend anything I have said as critical of the fine material you have produced, - the Shem sourcebook has provided the inspiration for my next campaign.

I do understand that you are limited in the detail you can provide on any one aspect of the game. you are right to get concnetrate on the overall cultural feel at the expense of other things. We can fill in the rest ourselves.

 

[VincentDarlage]

...the infantry would probably be close formation spearmen with rear rank archers. They did have chariot type vehicles for carrying infantry into combat as well so that fits with your description. They also made use of 2 wheeled 4 horse chariot with 3/4 crew for smashing into the enemy. The Asshuri cavalry sounds just right as well. As does the vicious reputation of the troops, the Assyrians where widely regarded as brutal opponents even in a brutal age; enemies where known to break just at the thought of facing them in open combat. Add some skirmishers recruited from peasants a few mercenaries and vassal troops, including horse archer nomads and you have an Assyrian/Babylonian army from 800-550 BC (ish).

Each major city hiring out part of it's Asshuri also makes sense and as you say is consistent with early material. The problem comes with the sections on each major city where it reads as if most of these same cities also hire mercenary Assuhuri. My own view on this would to be regard any troops hired by a major city as non-asshuri (nomads, free company, light troops). Maybe even infantry units made up of failed Ashuri candidates. Of course for a major campaign they might hire extra Asshuri but in that case I doubt there own would be allowed to serve abroad at the same time.

There you go! Sounds about right.