@ Fern Your writing's fine! Don't worry about an
atrocious reply because it's not. Just do what you do best and write, write, write. Doesn't matter if it's 12 paragraphs or just 2. There are stories waiting to be told and an entire world rife with conflicts and politics worth exploring! As always, don't hesitate in challenging yourself as a writer, but don't stress out on one upping another writer's skill or content. I hope you enjoy your weeklong escapades.
@ Everyone - I just wanted to clarify that invitation letters have been delivered to each character regarding the next evening's dinner banquet so don't hesitate to include their reception and delivery.
Posting wise. I don't, by any means, expect posts to exceed or match the introduction so don't feel pressured to post or write a bajillion paragraphs. If you think you could offer a different perspective to the unfolding conflicts, post or write away!
I also wanted to say thank you to Peik, Aristo, and especially Nevis for clarifying plate armor mobility and I stand corrected! It's incredible how versatile plate armor knights were and also emphasizes just how wrong some historical sources are. Some years ago, a cocky former friend once claimed that chainmail could not be worn in conjunction with plate armor given that it'd be too damn heavy and likely negate mobility. I can say for certainty how much an imbecile he was and just how effective chain mail - plate armor truly was! I did read somewhere that bodkin tipped, longbow arrows couldn't penetrate full plate, but I would like confirmations as to their effectiveness.
Regarding plate armor, Nevis, you're right in the sense that fire arms were solely the reason for the decline in plate armor owed to a user's increased danger. Trained and well equipped mercenaries could afford themselves armor, experience, and training not granted towards most other feudal levies and yes their presence made a huuuuge difference on the battlefield. That they contributed to the decline of plate armor isn't actually true per say but the fact that they changed how others
fought their wars! As time went on and nations began to professionalize their armies, they did emulate the way certain mercenary groups fought and trained so there's that too. Yes, Feudalism was already declining, but wearing plate armor was still very much effective up until gunsmiths initiated greater firearm refinements.
As gunsmiths refined firearm potency so did production costs and as they took an increasing role on the battlefield, it became much cheaper to train equip, and utilize firearm wielding conscripts than it was to craft increasingly obsolete armor and weapons to select few landowning knights. I'll reemphasize in that the point to firearms wasn't
necessarily accuracy, but in the economics of production and training. Training became much easier and superseded the years of training required for bows (crossbows, composite, and longbows alike). Application wise, firearms were remarkably successful in punching through plate armor and made wearing full plate very dangerous.
The decline in Feudalism itself can be attributed to the Crusades, but also the rise in Absolute Monarchies owed in part to the fact that Monarchs consolidated their power through centralizing and reorganizing administration towards their effective rule. The Crusades and their effects
did diminished certain ranks within many aristocratic hierarchies while allowing others to seize land and authority back towards their respective domain. On the other hand, it's in fact argued that the Hundred Years War effectively diminished the French Monarchy's grip on the nobility. Most of the Ancien Regime's goals prior to the French Revolution involved recentralizing the aristocratic ranks and administration, thereby attributing to France's delayed industrialization and in some respects feudalistic ways. The French, of course, were super ceded by the Russians, whom further delayed industrialization and serfdom until sometime in the late 19th century!
These seizures and the rise in absolute monarchies allowed for more effective law drafting methods and application/policing while also refining taxation. This in turn changed life and as you stated, allowed for greater education, which in turn yielded more merchants, which in turn spurred for greater exploitation of resources and infrastructural development. Bear in mind, commoners didn't owe their allegiances to their local noblemen or knights, they fought for
the state. This was huge because instead of petty regional squabbles, people began to fight for their country as
a whole. In much later conflicts, men from differing regions fought together instead of company or regimental confinement towards respective regions!
I'd also like to point out that the desire to repeat the Late Republican/Western Roman Empire also brought about feudalistic decline given that instead of each commoner supplying their own arms,
the state supplied the weapons, arms, and training. You all probably already know this, but the rise in professional armies and long conscripted service, owed in part to changing draft and service laws. Centralizing the state's taxes levied for a budget to supply arms, training, drill instructors, officers, and armor for a country's army. Some centuries down the line, we certainly see War Colleges and Military Academies appearing, where select individuals studied and refined war deployments, geography, tactics, strategy, logistics, and military theory, but I'm certain this more widespread during the 18th century and onwards.
We can also attribute the Church's Decline as another reason for the rise in absolute monarchies and feudalism's decline along with the religious reformations that brought the rise of Protestantism.
Now I think I've already drafted another historical, classroom lecture and as such, would like to inform all of you that not only is another post on the way, but that if any of you need writing introduction assistance, I would be more than happy to collaborate to bring all of your characters into the mix!
@ Romaneck and Skulls - Don't know if you remember interacting with Mr. D, but I'll quote him for old time's sake
.
On Tue Mar 29, 2011 7:32 pm, Mr. D said
"Hey Mr D you could totally reply to your own RP."
"Hurr, no I'd rather sit around and waste my time looking at pictures of cats on the internet."
Again don't feel any posting pressure, everyone, and just have fun introducing your characters! Just remember these words and heed them well:
Conqvist knows ...
