Feigling said
Ok, I looked through a few apps. There is some cleaning up to do, I'm afraid.First, the 'game vs. story' thing, I personally prefer story. A lot of people make the mistake of assuming that when two armies face off, it's all or nothing - just you and your troops versus the enemy and their troops over a crucial point that without, the whole campaign falls apart - NCR vs. Legion, if you'll forgive the New Vegas reference.But the Greek states united against the Persians. France, England and Germany united during the crusades. The 'Auld Alliance' gave Scotland several crucial French-funded advantages during its fight against England. Some people side with the underdog whilst others side with the favourite, for varying reasons - loyalty, fear, religion, mutual advantage, etc. It won't ever be 1v1 out there.Also remember armies don't just contain soldiers. They need blacksmiths, town guards, trainers, medics, messengers, scouts and at least a dozen more classes of non-combatant.That said, numbers depend on culture and wealth. If you are a warlike, tribal nation, you will likely have more troops per civillian than a more peaceful, but far richer nation, but they will also be worse off.If any of you play Warhammer 40k - both nerdy and unrealistic, I know - imagine I said "Orks vs Eldar - who wins?"You could guess, but the answer will always be 'it depends'. Where are they fighting? How many of each type is there? What equipment do they have? And so on and so forth. Everyone knows a Screaming Banshee would dominate a lone Ork Boy in combat, but what about a Nob? Or a Warlord? Or 50 Boyz?To add even more consideration, remember an army doesn't just fight - it trains, it protects and it studies. Your men need holidays occasionally, and maybe you could spare a squad or two to go help that explorer. Perhaps you want to recruit more troops - you'll need soldiers to do that. And if your soldier isn't there for the fight, he misses it. Very rarely will the whole army fight another whole army. There may be skirmishes, quick deathmatches that mean nothing to the war as a whole, but will add up over time. They'll need to take positions, make friends and keep a steady supply of food and water close at hand before they even think about fighting.Also, races. No general 'they're all beautiful' races. Every race should have its stunners and its dogs. They can have similiar features, but think about it like this - Caucasians have wide eyes and pale skin, Eastern Asians have darker skin and thinner eyes. Both races have their attractive people and ugly people, but they have similiar aesthetic traits to other Caucasians and Asians. An ugly Asian will still have the darker skin as an attractive Asian, just like a pretty Caucasian shares her wider eyes with her ugly sister. But not all Asians are beautiful, nor are they all ugly. Same with Caucasians. Same with Hispanics and Africans and Middle-eastern people. So too, then, should your races have variety in their looks.As for wings - flight + ranged weapon = an unstoppable army. Give an angel a crossbow and you have the fantasy equivalent of a bomber with no AA to take it down. The only way to beat it is to have another flying creature to counter it. Have something that limits them e.g. flight is short ranged, flight doesn't go very high, they can't carry weapons while flying, so on and so forth, to make flying creatures a bit less OP.
We started a whole discussion about qualities never mentioned or intended. The only time I've written beautiful was due to a subjective slip in describing their wings, but it seems that just because they're angel-like, they are supposedly graceful and perfect. Having features commonly referred to an exotic fashion doesn't make them necessarily attractive; red haired people with green eyes are today referred to as cool, beautiful, whilst in medieval ages they were hunted down, or deeply despised.
Now, if you read the history, you may understand that the race is restricted to the sole Aeonas Kingdom, incredibly lowering ethnic differences and the DNA pool variations. For this reason they're faces look fairly similar one to another.
About wings, I am obviously not an expert on the matter, so analyzing flight, wings complexion and other descriptive measures to validate their presence is rightly impossible to me. However I implied more times that by being magical beings, their origins and mana supported automatically flight, through a specific apparate.
Obviously, something that flies, unless it has an incredible strength and such, can't possibly take with him anything more than a bow and some arrows, or a short sword and a parma, with little to none armor. If i have to explicitly say that an angel that wears an armor can't do anything more than glide, please say so.
On magic I've expressed my opinion. Now, since it's not allowed, and I'm not given to know why it is not allowed by the GM itself, I'll go trash in the bin around 10 hours I've spent designing my faction, because apparently too Mary Sue, too unrealistic, too magical.
