I could not detect any numbers of a taldorian Legion or horse legion. How many soldiers does a typical modern legion comprise? Any idea? Thanks for your info?
Roman ones contained between 4,200-5,200 men. So somewhere in that ballpark, remember a legion is made up of increasingly smaller subdivisions.
|
5k? I think this is too many. Late Roman Legions were often only of a strength of 1-2k men (auxiliaries doubling it) But even in its high times entire rome had not more than 30 full legions. Taldor is much smaller than rome and in the text there is the say of dozens of horse/foot legions. Thats why I guess a legion is just in about 1k man or even fewer, but of course I am not sure.I could not detect any numbers of a taldorian Legion or horse legion. How many soldiers does a typical modern legion comprise? Any idea? Thanks for your info?Roman ones contained between 4,200-5,200 men. So somewhere in that ballpark, remember a legion is made up of increasingly smaller subdivisions.
Of course, with it being Taldor and all, they wouldn't mind you spreading the word abut their legions being ~5k in size ...
Nothing like a little misdirection and false intelligence.
|
5k? I think this is too many. Late Roman Legions were often only of a strength of 1-2k men (auxiliaries doubling it) But even in its high times entire rome had not more than 30 full legions. Taldor is much smaller than rome and in the text there is the say of dozens of horse/foot legions. Thats why I guess a legion is just in about 1k man or even fewer, but of course I am not sure.I could not detect any numbers of a taldorian Legion or horse legion. How many soldiers does a typical modern legion comprise? Any idea? Thanks for your info?Roman ones contained between 4,200-5,200 men. So somewhere in that ballpark, remember a legion is made up of increasingly smaller subdivisions.Of course, with it being Taldor and all, they wouldn't mind you spreading the word abut their legions being ~5k in size ...
Nothing like a little misdirection and false intelligence.
It doesn't matter -- a single company of Chelaxian troops would completely *annihilate* a Taldoran legion, no matter how many thousands of "soldiers" (or whatever you would call them) it consisted of! ;P
|
|
It doesn't matter -- a single company of Chelaxian troops would completely *annihilate* a Taldoran legion, no matter how many thousands of "soldiers" (or whatever you would call them) it consisted of! ;P5k? I think this is too many. Late Roman Legions were often only of a strength of 1-2k men (auxiliaries doubling it) But even in its high times entire rome had not more than 30 full legions. Taldor is much smaller than rome and in the text there is the say of dozens of horse/foot legions. Thats why I guess a legion is just in about 1k man or even fewer, but of course I am not sure.I could not detect any numbers of a taldorian Legion or horse legion. How many soldiers does a typical modern legion comprise? Any idea? Thanks for your info?Roman ones contained between 4,200-5,200 men. So somewhere in that ballpark, remember a legion is made up of increasingly smaller subdivisions.Of course, with it being Taldor and all, they wouldn't mind you spreading the word abut their legions being ~5k in size ...
Nothing like a little misdirection and false intelligence.
Oh, you mean that piddly little group of vagabonds we put out in the field to distract you as we poisoned your water supply and food stores? MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
from Ospreys warrior "Imperial Roman Legionary AD 161-264"
ISBN: 9781841766010
Go to [url=http://www.ospreypublishing.com/store/Imperial-Roman-Legionary-AD-161%E2%80%93284_9781841766010 [/url]
" Throughout our period [AD 161-264] the legion was composed of ten cohorts. Cohorts II-X were built around six centuries each containing 80 men, making a cohort 480 men strong. Cohort I had only five centuries but these were double size, making a complement of 800 legionaries. Uniquely, legio Parthica had six centuries in its first cohort but it is uncertain if these were of double size. With an additional 120 cavalry the legion numbered 5,240 at maximum strength."
I have seen this number in other sources also.
also remember a legion also had a sizable "camp following" that followed it everywhere to supply services and give the legionaries a place to spend their pay and loot.
Kevin
It doesn't matter -- a single company of Chelaxian troops would completely *annihilate* a Taldoran legion, no matter how many thousands of "soldiers" (or whatever you would call them) it consisted of! ;P
A small child with a toy scimitar and a towel on its head could annihilate a Taldane legion. It would just have to shout "I'm the Great Quadiran God Boogee." or something like that, and they'd all die of fright.
|
|
A small child with a toy scimitar and a towel on its head could annihilate a Taldane legion. It would just have to shout "I'm the Great Quadiran God Boogee." or something like that, and they'd all die of fright.It doesn't matter -- a single company of Chelaxian troops would completely *annihilate* a Taldoran legion, no matter how many thousands of "soldiers" (or whatever you would call them) it consisted of! ;P
No, no, we'd pretend to die, thus causing you to lower your guard, allowing us to attack by surprise. Your infernal priests would attempt to turn or dominate this newly risen army of "undead", only to be confused by the fact that their "unstoppable powers" were impotent. As your forces deal with the sense of emasculation, they would fall beneath our boot heels.
Oops ... maybe I just said too much ...
|
Bah, the Chelaxians are too busy being bent over by their Devil overlords to even worry about. Umm, let's see, they have lost almost all of what they once controlled as well and reduced to a vassal state of Hell. I mean really, who can take the Chelaxians seriously? They are too busy whipping and licking each other to be considered a threat.
Even the Chelaxian Empress (grand name for someone who doesn't control any other territories) is nothing more than a slave. Cheliax is the ultimate slave nation, a nation of nothing more than slaves.
|
|
back on topic...
I think the Taldoran Legion would by necessity, follow a different system than the Romans.
The standard Roman Legion, as already stated, consisted of ten Cohorts and six Centuries.
The reason for that particular system makes sense when you look at how they were arranged in a field.
A Cohort was the basic group of major battles. The Cohort was approximately 100 men long, and spread out to 100 yards (1 yard per man) and may have doubled that length during a charge. The Cohort was six centuries deep, thereby getting six cohorts of 100 men each.
The shields of each man in a Cohort were all painted a unique single color, making recognition easy. I do not know if there were unique flourishes added for Centuries, but I doubt there were.
Now, a Century was between 80-100 men. So a full strength Cohort had 600 men, a minimum strength Cohort had 480 men. A full Strength Legion would have 6,000 while a minimum Legion would have 4,800. A good average would have been somewhere around 5,200-5,400 men.
Their tactics were usually a simple volley of javelins, followed by a short sword charge. Cavalry protected the flanks. Auxiliary consisted of light infantry, bowmen and slingers.
I expect that a Taldor Legion would be closer to a Cohort. Their tactics would be extremely different.
|
|
Another reason to consider a Legion more as a Cohort is that it is described that there are full legions of Phalanx and full legions of Cavalry.
I am going to say that for my games, a full strength Legion of Phalanx would be 600 strong, composed of 3 Centuries of medium armored Pikemen and 3 Centuries of light armored Archers.
A full strength Legion of Cavalry will be 600 strong (this is consistent with Renaissance armies), consisting of some 300 light Cavalry, armed with bow and sword, medium armor, and 300 heavy Cavalry, heavily armored knights.
The Cavalry would be employed to protect the flanks, and would deliver the killing blow once the Phalanx had engaged. The heavy Cavalry would either attack the enemy flanks, or attack the commander on the field, or both. The medium Cavalry would protect the flanks and the commander on the field.
So, for me, a full strength Army would be about 1,200 men, consisting of one Legion of Phalanx (300 lightly armored archers, 300 medium armored pikemen) and one Legion of Cavalry (300 medium armored cavalry archers, 300 heavily armored cavalry).
Bringing together different Legions into different combinations would allow versatility. A major battle might be fought with 6 Phalanx Legions and 3 Cavalry Legions for example. Skirmishes may involve 2 Phalanx Legions and 1 Cavalry Legion.
Another thing to consider is that a particular Legion may be, for example, the 875th Phalanx Legion. But that does not mean there are currently at least 875 Legions on the field. Just like the Romans, Legions can be disbanded or dissolved, it's number "retired" if you will.
|
^
Thumbs up for a good summation of the Roman Marian-style legion that came around in the 2nd Century BC. Before that time, such as in the Punic Wars, the Romans had the Manipular legion. Basically, it was three lines (which were subdivided into maniples are further subdivided into centuries), the first line was usually comprised of newer troops (the Hastati), the second line was usually comprised of the more experienced soldiers (the Principes), and the third line was a last-ditch reserve of older soldiers (the Triarii, and equipped with long-spears instead of the shorter pilium of the first two lines). Each line was about a thousand men strong, and add to that up to a twelve-hundred or so skirmishers (the animal-skin clad velites, drawn from the poorer classes of Roman society) and a few hundred cavalry, and you have a formation approaching 4500 men.
For a Taldan version of the manipular legion, the Triarii could be comprised of longbowmen, meant to send their arrows over the heads of the first two lines, in the form of defensive indirect fire. Then again, that would probably limit the offensive capability of those archers.
I would like to see how cavalry and elephants would be adressed. Yes I know the Taldor Companion indicates elephants filling something of a transportaton role, but hey, I wonder if they could or would be used as special shock-troops, maybe for the more elite legions of the Taldan army?
I do like the idea of an all-cavalry legion, BTW. Moreover, given the frequent clashes with the Qadirans, I wonder if the Taldans would consider specialized cavalry like horse-archers? After all, Belesarius had Hunnic and Persian cavalry in his army.
The Romans did not have to worry about area effect magic spells and breath weapons (the fantasy equivalent of machine guns and artillery). concentrating your troops in a tight battle line is asking for a fireball. an inherent part of each legion/unit would have to be some enemy magic suppression unit.
[i] Obscuring mist and Fog cloud [/] work well (like smoke) to allow your troops to close.
I use the Idea of the units standard (eagle or other) enhancing resistance spells or giving a counter-spell effect. This would definitely make the troopers fight to the death to keep it safe.
|
|
The Romans did not have to worry about area effect magic spells and breath weapons (the fantasy equivalent of machine guns and artillery). concentrating your troops in a tight battle line is asking for a fireball.
True...in fact, any battle-line, be it a Taldan legion or an onrushing horde of Quadiran cavalry, would be vulnerable to enemy magic. Anyhow, your standards idea is cool. In the alternative, a enchanted standard could do something like a super-sized version of one of the paladin's auras or a bardic performance.
|
|
The Romans did not have to worry about area effect magic spells and breath weapons (the fantasy equivalent of machine guns and artillery). concentrating your troops in a tight battle line is asking for a fireball. an inherent part of each legion/unit would have to be some enemy magic suppression unit.
[i] Obscuring mist and Fog cloud [/] work well (like smoke) to allow your troops to close.
I use the Idea of the units standard (eagle or other) enhancing resistance spells or giving a counter-spell effect. This would definitely make the troopers fight to the death to keep it safe.
Well, I doubt they have too much to worry about. Unless Pathfinder makes PC classes a much more common thing, the number of Magic Using, Fireball tossing people out there are very few.
IF the formula from the DMG is used, Oppara, the largest city in Taldor, with a population of nearly 110,000, has 124 Wizards (approximately) of level 1-16. Same for Sorcerers. There are 252 each for Clerics, Adepts, Bards, Druid, of levels 1-18, 124 each of Paladins and Rangers of levels 1-15.
Giving a total of 1504 (1.3% of the population people total that can cast a first level spell or better. But about 52 (0.047% of the population) who can cast third level spells. That is still quite powerful, something like 52 cannons on the field of battle, assuming all of your cannons are assigned to one battle. But assuming the 52 cannons are spread between all of the Legions, and you can make some of them show up for war, that number becomes less spectacular.
More likely those few casters who are used in war will be used for divinations, healing exceptionally important people, and providing protection to the commanders. Anyone caught shooting fireballs or more spectacular spells promptly becomes a target for some 1000 soldiers. I don't care how powerful you are, no one has that many hit points.
Now, Pathfinder may change all of that. But until then, or until word from on high comes that PC classes are a more common sight to see, then Fireballs on the battlefield are a rare sight to see.
|
|
I use the Idea of the units standard (eagle or other) enhancing resistance spells or giving a counter-spell effect. This would definitely make the troopers fight to the death to keep it safe.Well, I doubt they have too much to worry about. Unless Pathfinder makes PC classes a much more common thing, the number of Magic Using, Fireball tossing people out there are very few.
Now, Pathfinder may change all of that. But until then, or until word from on high comes that PC classes are a more common sight to see, then Fireballs on the battlefield are a rare sight to see.
Hey Great ideas all of you.
Let me suggest that you should all take a look at the 3.5 D20 Arcanis line ? The coryan empire there is strongly Roman in tone, and there are rules for legionaries, centurions, all sort of feats, AND battle standards ?
Of course, I am biaised in their favour as a long-time fan. But I believe you'd really enjoy that.
|
|
I use the Idea of the units standard (eagle or other) enhancing resistance spells or giving a counter-spell effect. This would definitely make the troopers fight to the death to keep it safe.Well, I doubt they have too much to worry about. Unless Pathfinder makes PC classes a much more common thing, the number of Magic Using, Fireball tossing people out there are very few.
Now, Pathfinder may change all of that. But until then, or until word from on high comes that PC classes are a more common sight to see, then Fireballs on the battlefield are a rare sight to see.
Hey Great ideas all of you.
Let me suggest that you should all take a look at the 3.5 D20 Arcanis line ? The coryan empire there is strongly Roman in tone, and there are rules for legionaries, centurions, all sort of feats, AND battle standards ?
Of course, I am biaised in their favour as a long-time fan. But I believe you'd really enjoy that.
Oh I LOVE it when there is a product out there dealing with the topic at hand! Thanks, will have a look see.
5k? I think this is too many. Late Roman Legions were often only of a strength of 1-2k men (auxiliaries doubling it)But even in its high times entire rome had not more than 30 full legions. Taldor is much smaller than rome and in the text there is the say of dozens of horse/foot legions. Thats why I guess a legion is just in about 1k man or even fewer, but of course I am not sure.
This is largely correct, in that after Diocletian split the empire in two the military underwent a radical change. Legions were reorganized into smaller, more mobile forces that had roughly between 1,000-1,200 men (called limitanei when guarding the frontiers or pseudocomitaenses while on campaign), augmented by auxilia (forces of 500 men).
However, during this period the empire commanded a total force of 500,000 men (at full strength anyway, which was probably close to never). Though this was before the age of nationalism, so it wasn't like the "Roman military" was one, unified force under a potent, all-encompassing centralized authority (hell, there were *two* centralized authorities!).
But as everyone else has stated, prior to this period legions hovered around the 5k mark (give or take).
|
|
5k? I think this is too many. Late Roman Legions were often only of a strength of 1-2k men (auxiliaries doubling it)But even in its high times entire rome had not more than 30 full legions. Taldor is much smaller than rome and in the text there is the say of dozens of horse/foot legions. Thats why I guess a legion is just in about 1k man or even fewer, but of course I am not sure.This is largely correct, in that after Diocletian split the empire in two the military underwent a radical change. Legions were reorganized into smaller, more mobile forces that had roughly between 1,000-1,200 men (called limitanei when guarding the frontiers or pseudocomitaenses while on campaign), augmented by auxilia (forces of 500 men).
However, during this period the empire commanded a total force of 500,000 men (at full strength anyway, which was probably close to never). Though this was before the age of nationalism, so it wasn't like the "Roman military" was one, unified force under a potent, all-encompassing centralized authority (hell, there were *two* centralized authorities!).
But as everyone else has stated, prior to this period legions hovered around the 5k mark (give or take).
Hey, good info there. I've never really looked much at the Empire after it split. Too complicated for my little brain!
But I do gripe about the Byzantium Empire. An artificial construct by historians. They called themselves Romans. It's like historians later saying that the United States really ended after World War 2, and even though we THOUGHT we were Americans, we really weren't. DUH?
But I do gripe about the Byzantium Empire. An artificial construct by historians.
Yup. As I mentioned in that other thread, the "Byzantines" called themselves Rhomaioi (Romans), and the term "Byzantium Empire" did not exist when they did.
In effect, the Roman Empire lasted from its (mythical?) founding in 753 B.C.E. to the fall of Constantinople in 1453 C.E.
|
|
But I do gripe about the Byzantium Empire. An artificial construct by historians.
Yup. As I mentioned in that other thread, the "Byzantines" called themselves Rhomaioi (Romans), and the term "Byzantium Empire" did not exist when they did.
In effect, the Roman Empire lasted from its (mythical?) founding in 753 B.C.E. to the fall of Constantinople in 1453 C.E.
agreed 100% I suppose maybe the US can be divided into three parts. Pre-civil war was the United States. Post Civil War could be Union of American Territories, and after WW2 it would be the American Empire. But don't bother asking us who lived in the age... Historians I suppose need SOMETHING to do.
Umm back on topic. I do wonder however, about the tactic of pikemen forming a box around archers who are in equal numbers. When it gets to melee combat, how is that effective?
It sounds like a variation of the Roman "turtle" formation, but it's not really the same at all.
I do wonder however, about the tactic of pikemen forming a box around archers who are in equal numbers. When it gets to melee combat, how is that effective?
It sounds like a variation of the Roman "turtle" formation, but it's not really the same at all.
Actually, I would have to disagree that it is like the testudo. I would say this is more like the hollow square formation of the Romans or a variation of the hedgehog.
Let's look at two historical examples of the above formations (hollow square and hedgehog):
Hollow Square
Marcus Crassus, in an effort to gain military prestige like his fellow triumvirate members (Pompey Magnus and Julius Caesar), led an ill-fated invasion of Parthia in 53 B.C.E. that resulted in his and his son's deaths and utter annihilation of his legions at the Battle of Carrhae.
During the battle, Crassus's army was surrounded by the highly mobile Parthian horse archers out in the middle of the Syrian desert. Crassus ordered his men into the hollow square formation so as to face the enemy on all fronts. However, the horse archers wore the legionaries down, who were unable to do anything back without breaking formation.
Hedgehog
During the Battle of Falkirk, Sir William Wallace ordered his troops into hedgehog formations which effectively repulsed King Edward I's mounted knights. However, once again, King Edward's archers sat back at a distance and picked them apart.
So in both cases, we see that a hollow square (or any static formation facing outward on all sides) is decent for hand-to-hand defense, but terrible at offense. So if you add archers for offense, it would be pretty effective (but still wholly defensive).
Also, I'm imaging these phalanx soldiers of the Taldan legions as being closer in equipment and tactics to the phalanxes of Alexander's armies, or the later eras' Swiss Pikemen, so they would be devastating at hand-to-hand combat. However, if any one part of the line collapses, it would be over rather quickly, since the lightly armored archers would be quickly chewed up, and the enemy force would suddenly be *behind* the lines of every phalanx unit, where they are the most vulnerable! And given that these phalanx units would have horrible mobility, the entire square would disintegrate in short order.
Of course, busting through that bristling line of pikes while suffering an endless hail of flesh-tearing, steel-tipped arrows would be pretty difficult! (And good luck getting horses to charge into that wall of death.)
|
|
See the suff right above... I hate copying longer quotes :)
I wasn't thinking of it in terms of defense. But defensively, yes it is a very good idea.
This goes well with explaining the loss of Taldoran territory, and still why it exists at all. If their greatest military formation was one of defense, they would have had a harder time conquering. One must first take the territory before one can hold it. Sort of why the tank did not replace the infantry.
I can see it. The early Taldorans used different tactics, more offensive ones. But eventually different military minds came into vogue. After a few devastating losses, a commander found the current formation and survived. That formation then became the standard formation. Conservative military thinking has not accepted change of ideas since then as they have not been completely defeated since then. Regardless that it took 500 years of defensive formations to win the war, it eventually did win.
And it's not the horse you have to get to jump in, it's the rider. The warhorse will go... it's the rider who you have to convince, cause he knows he's a dead man.
|
|
Good job on the historical context, Hank. I can definitely see the Taldan infantry being the anvil, while Taldan cavalry on the flanks or even held behind the lines as a reserve would be the hammer. (BTW, Blackdirge Publishing put out a Hoplite Prestige Class on PDF. I think it would cover the Taldan spearman concept quite well). Plus, since the Byzantines were mentioned, how about having a Taldan version of Byzantine cataphracts: a melee and missile-fire capable force armed with lance, sword and bow. (I know Dragon Magazine #346 had an article on eastern cataphracts).
Also, thumbs up on the Taldan history, Krome.
|
|
Good job on the historical context, Hank. I can definitely see the Taldan infantry being the anvil, while Taldan cavalry on the flanks or even held behind the lines as a reserve would be the hammer. (BTW, Blackdirge Publishing put out a Hoplite Prestige Class on PDF. I think it would cover the Taldan spearman concept quite well). Plus, since the Byzantines were mentioned, how about having a Taldan version of Byzantine cataphracts: a melee and missile-fire capable force armed with lance, sword and bow. (I know Dragon Magazine #346 had an article on eastern cataphracts).
Also, thumbs up on the Taldan history, Krome.
I just bought the darn book and can't stop reading it. I must say, this looks like a GREAT place for an adventure. It's like Ogres and Onions... it has so many layers!
Here are some links to Byzantine resources
byzantium
history fourms
Byzantine-Cavalryman
Byzantine-Infantryman
Byzantines
|
|
I do wonder however, about the tactic of pikemen forming a box around archers who are in equal numbers. When it gets to melee combat, how is that effective?
An interesting question. Perhaps as the box/hedgehog formation advanced, the archers would be using indirect missile fire, in an effort to bring their arrows down maybe fifty yards or so from friendly ranks. Enemy troops on the recieving end would suffer casualties and the disruption of their ranks because of the missile fire. Even if you had enemy troops equipped with shields that could stop an arrow, raising a shield overhead makes it unavailable to stop a spear or pike thrust.
In the alternative, how about something along the lines of the Spanish tercio? A tercio was comprised of about 3000 men: from that, 1500 of them wielded pikes, 1000 wielded swords and javelins, and the remaining 500 were armed with arquebuses. At the start of a battle, the pikemen would form up into squares with the sword and javelin troops inside, while the arquebusiers (and any field artillery), positioned themselves in between the squares to fire on anyone approaching. Of course, instead of arquebusiers, the Taldans would have crossbowmen or longbowmen. The infantry would hold their ground, and after the enemy had weakened themselves with unsuccessful attacks, the Taldan cavalry would sweep in.
Hmmm...perhaps in terms of organization and tactics, we could go with the Byzantines, starting with Justinian's wars and going to about the battle of Manzikert. (Which is about five centuries).
Just some food for thought.
|
|
I just bought the darn book and can't stop reading it. I must say, this looks like a GREAT place for an adventure. It's like Ogres and Onions... it has so many layers!Yeah, I like the Taldor Companion, too. It has a lot of potential.
Yeah, a LOT more than I expected. I really expected them to play up the decadent decaying empire. They did that well enough, but the brought about just enough to tease the imagination into so many other possibilities.
|
|
^
Absolutely. A huge impoverished social class, ruled by a self-absorbed goverment and bureaucracy, with several potential enemies. Definitely ripe for a disaster, such a Galt-inspired revolution. Plus, there's the conflict with the church of Sarenae. Plus, there is the problems with pirates on some of the rivers. In fact, I'm thinking about playing a rogue character who has aspirations of joining the Lion Blades.
Now, back to the Taldan legions!
|
|
^
Absolutely. A huge impoverished social class, ruled by a self-absorbed goverment and bureaucracy, with several potential enemies. Definitely ripe for a disaster, such a Galt-inspired revolution. Plus, there's the conflict with the church of Sarenae. Plus, there is the problems with pirates on some of the rivers. In fact, I'm thinking about playing a rogue character who has aspirations of joining the Lion Blades.Now, back to the Taldan legions!
Honestly, I have been thinking of a Taldan Legion scenario that would be fun. A top secret espionage mission, special forces style, into a nearby border town for a hit and run, gather some info, snatch and grab a potential informant, and return. What could possibly go wrong?
|
|
Honestly, I have been thinking of a Taldan Legion scenario that would be fun. A top secret espionage mission, special forces style, into a nearby border town for a hit and run, gather some info, snatch and grab a potential informant, and return. What could possibly go wrong?everything? :D
Verily, this is the truth! :D
|
|
A small child with a toy scimitar and a towel on its head could annihilate a Taldane legion. It would just have to shout "I'm the Great Quadiran God Boogee." or something like that, and they'd all die of fright.It doesn't matter -- a single company of Chelaxian troops would completely *annihilate* a Taldoran legion, no matter how many thousands of "soldiers" (or whatever you would call them) it consisted of! ;P
No, no, we'd pretend to die, thus causing you to lower your guard, allowing us to attack by surprise. Your infernal priests would attempt to turn or dominate this newly risen army of "undead", only to be confused by the fact that their "unstoppable powers" were impotent. As your forces deal with the sense of emasculation, they would fall beneath our boot heels.
Oops ... maybe I just said too much ...
No, we'd first send in the devils to finish those few who did not actually die of fright! ;P
|
|
Bah, the Chelaxians are too busy being bent over by their Devil overlords to even worry about. Umm, let's see, they have lost almost all of what they once controlled as well and reduced to a vassal state of Hell. I mean really, who can take the Chelaxians seriously? They are too busy whipping and licking each other to be considered a threat.
Even the Chelaxian Empress (grand name for someone who doesn't control any other territories) is nothing more than a slave. Cheliax is the ultimate slave nation, a nation of nothing more than slaves.
Slaves? Where? Oh, you mean those Taldorian souls we have captured. Yes, you could say that there's a whole nation of them, because Taldorians make such poor soldiers and being mindless slaves is the only thing they barely manage, which makes conquering and enslaving them so easy. Chelaxians themselves are not slaves -- we only have a few Geas-spells on us to ensure our undying loyalty to Almighty Asmodeus and Her Infernal Majestrix, and, naturally, personal Erinyes secretaries who are... well, pleasant to have around (*especially* with anything that had to do with whips and lips and all). ;)
|
|
No, we'd first send in the devils to finish those few who did not actually die of fright! ;PA small child with a toy scimitar and a towel on its head could annihilate a Taldane legion. It would just have to shout "I'm the Great Quadiran God Boogee." or something like that, and they'd all die of fright.It doesn't matter -- a single company of Chelaxian troops would completely *annihilate* a Taldoran legion, no matter how many thousands of "soldiers" (or whatever you would call them) it consisted of! ;P
No, no, we'd pretend to die, thus causing you to lower your guard, allowing us to attack by surprise. Your infernal priests would attempt to turn or dominate this newly risen army of "undead", only to be confused by the fact that their "unstoppable powers" were impotent. As your forces deal with the sense of emasculation, they would fall beneath our boot heels.
Oops ... maybe I just said too much ...
lol silly Chelaxian... YOU don't send in the devils... the DEVILS send YOU in... lol I think you have it mixed up who controls whom.