Conan Rules: Fantasy Setting

Your intepretation of the Conan rules for this setting is interesting. I'm sure it will shake out in the end.

Once again. . . they're not his interpretations of the rules. I think you are confusing me (DAMIEN) and him (KINTIRE) as being the same person. Not trying to be snide, just wanted to make sure that was cleared up.

Also, I don't think kintire is saying that the Muslims were beloved in Western Europe, just that in certain areas, especially of Italy, there weren't such -severe- intolerances that travelers and alien residents would be fully attacked at every turn. I tend to agree. Bigotry would be common, but not outright violence at every turn.
sgt Zim,
as you bring up the subject of sources I would be interested in the sources for your view .
As to why a first hand account can be considered propaganda you give a great example yourself.
"If you think the saracen masters of Sicily were beloved by the people"
and that the turcopoles were beloved by westerners"
Nowhere in any of the posts that I saw was anyone declaring that the Saracens or Turcopoles were beloved merely that they existed as a historical fact (as did a major trade route between Venice and the Muslim world). By inserting a new word and sentiment you are showing that a first person account is not always accurate and yours is merely hours old versus centuries.

Anyway my point is that there were communities of muslims in european cities (almost all on the Med) not large ones and I would think that they kept a low profile : but they did deliver a source of money(taxes) so the local authorities would tolerate them . Especially within the Byzantine empire as the game seems to be set .
But equally, some even may even have some levels of Soldier or suchwise.

Bishop Odo of Bayeaux, for example! He may not have had any other classes...

Pikes had very little place in medieval warfare. They did exist in the ancient world, yes, but they wouldn't return to any kind of regular usage until almost the 15th century -- well after the time of this setting.

I think you are underestimating their usage considerably. Pikes were always in the background as anti cavalry weapons. For example, the Scots used them extensively at Stirling Bridge (1297) Falkirk (1298) and, of course, Bannockburn (1314)

I got rid of the Hyrkanian bow and kept the Shemite bow

I'm operating from memory here, but isn't the Hykanian bow a mounted weapon and the Shemite a foot one?

It's your world!

No, no its not. Happy as I would be to pinch the credit, Damien published first! :p

and that the turcopoles were beloved by westerners, then we have a very different view of the source materials.

Popular? beloved? Who said anything about that? I said "not killed on sight" and "Tolerated". And I didn't say "Westerners" either. I wouldn't recommend that the Saracen PC tour the beautiful Rhine valley, for example. Italy should be fine.

Please inform me how the first person accounts of a christian crusader, writing about other christian crusaders i.e. cannibalizing the dead saracens, falls under the heading of 'propoganda'. On second thought -- don't

No no, I will. Its just a matter of copy pasting from that link I gave you.

The Tafurs were recorded to have resorted to cannibalism at the siege of Ma'arra; this was reported by Raymond of Aguilers, but not by other chroniclers of the First Crusade (France, Victory, p. 315 and note 49). It is tempting to deduce that they were accused of this crime because they were poor warriors, even peasants, despised and feared by the more noble warriors who regarded them of being capable of any depravity

Alternatively, it is possible that the story of cannibalism originated with the Tafurs themselves. If they put it about that they ate the bodies of their dead enemies after battle they would scare their enemies so much that any enemy they met would flee rather than fight them.

In any case, even if it is true, one group of semi autonomous near brigands resorting to cannibalism during a major food shortage does not equate to Crusaders routinely eating their foes.

Suffice to say your reading of the relationships between muslims and christians is something I disagree with

You're the one who asked for the sources... its not my fault if they don't say what you want them to!
Sgt Zim said:
[Considering the absolute antagonism starting with the 1st Crusade (including hungry crusaders eating the roasted buttocks of the muslims they killed), I'm not sure if they would be "accepted into cities without too much trouble". Maybe the odd merchant or two, but even then!
The only thing that "started" with the first crusade was Christian armies taking the offensive for a change. The muslims had been "crusading" into christian lands for almost three hundered years before the first crusade and would continue to push into Europe until the 19th century.
Do not forget that half of spain was under a muslim government, and that their culture influenced all of the southern mediterranean basin.
Regarding Italy (I am italian), the influence of muslim culture was felt much more north than Sicilia, arriving even in Campania (the region where Napoli is located).