Turning 1 Infantry unit into 5 cavalry units

[Saturno]

In my last game my players were accompanied by a infantry unit of 100 men. After a victorious battle against the enemy forces they were successful in routing and retreating the adversary cavalry. But in the end of the game one of the players had the idea of buying as many horses as possible from a neighbor Lord that lives near (and is famous by his horse breeding) so they can better pursuit and hunt the routed enemies.

They basically want to turn the trained infantry unit in at least 2 green cavalry units.

I wonder if it is possible. What you guys think about this?


EDIT: they have 800 gold dragons with them (money the enemy had by blackmailing a hostage's noble family)

[coldwind]

Cavalry is more than just men on horses.

That said, I'd allow it to be done as a House Action for the month, but would require investing the difference (if any) in Power for the house.

[Zorbeltuss]

If they buy 100 horses, than at least the infantry could pursue mounted.

A unit of cavalry implies that they know how to fight as a mounted unit, along with the right facilities for it and so on.

[Saturno]

Cavalry is more than just men on horses.

That said, I'd allow it to be done as a House Action for the month, but would require investing the difference (if any) in Power for the house.

Right, but this is the vision from the macro-view, from the House rules perception... what should I do in-game, when they will be eye-to-eye with the "Lord of the horses" with 800 gold dragons and will certainly try some intrigues to Bargain the animals.

I think that they can buy 1,4 palfrey with 1 gold dragon (being a gold dragon 210 silver stags), but there's also equipment for the rider so lets round that to 1 horse ready to mount per gold dragon. They have enough money to buy it.

With the House Rules the process will be much more expensive and will not have support on the reality of the situation the PCs are, I think.


PS: please forgive my broken english

[Saturno]

If they buy 100 horses, than at least the infantry could pursue mounted.

A unit of cavalry implies that they know how to fight as a mounted unit, along with the right facilities for it and so on.

True, but how to transport that to the rules?

I think that in 100 men only 50% to 75% will know how to mount, and just the 5% top should have the specialty... so maybe as a unit they'll only have Animal Empathy 2, making it much less useful than a full cavalry unit.

Should I let them have 5 units of that frail cavalry or should I limit that too?

[DaimosofRedstone]

You can either
a) keep the infantry, but treat as mounted as far as traveling is concerned.
or
b) Retrain all the Infantry as cavalry. Which unless you use houserules for light cavalry would cost something like 25 power points for the cavalry alone (25-4 for the infantry + 4 for the 4 levels of green).

[Zorbeltuss]

If they buy 100 horses, than at least the infantry could pursue mounted.

A unit of cavalry implies that they know how to fight as a mounted unit, along with the right facilities for it and so on.

True, but how to transport that to the rules?

I think that in 100 men only 50% to 75% will know how to mount, and just the 5% top should have the specialty... so maybe as a unit they'll only have Animal Empathy 2, making it much less useful than a full cavalry unit.

Should I let them have 5 units of that frail cavalry or should I limit that too?

it's a balance issue mostly. Cavalry is arguably the most powerful unit in the game, which is reflected by it's cost. If you want to houserule it, go right ahead, but ask yourself if you want to make it possible to turn a 7 power unit (trained infantry) into two 6 power units (green cavalry), for 800GD, if house wealth is less than 40, then that money is translated into 4 Wealth if put into house coffers, which can be converted into 2 points of power through house actions, which doesn't cover the 5 point gap in power.

[Legate]

"a) keep the infantry, but treat as mounted as far as traveling is concerned. "

This would be the more realistic way of portraying the situation. They would be mounted infantry (ie they would ride to where the fight was then dismount and fight on foot). As was mentioned above Cavalry is more then men on horses; most of your infantry may know how to ride, but not many would be adept at fighting from the saddle. Unless you take them off the line for about 6 months (at least) to have them properly trained then they would qualify as green cavalry.

[Saturno]

You can either
a) keep the infantry, but treat as mounted as far as traveling is concerned.

Good idea!! This is the best solution I think! And so simple! They can move the infantry way faster and keep the structure of the unit.


Thank you all for the answers guys =)

[Pytorb]

Echoing other posters I would treat them as mounted infantry.

One other thing to bear in mind. Just because the neighbouring lord is famed for horse breeding that doesn't automatically mean he has 100 spare adult horses trained to the saddle and ready to go to market at the moment the PCs walk into his hall. Even if he does and he isn't using them for his own military forces that is is a significant chuck of a breeding herd being bought at once. If anything, rather than a discount for bulk buying, I would drive the prices up as a result. Then there are the questions of does he have 100 saddles, sets of tack, etc. to sell.

One, more interesting counter-proposal from the lord might be to allow the PCs to hire the lord's own cavalry forces now, leaving all of their own forces that are unable to ride well behind and buy the horses, saddles, tack, etc. later on. That way the PCs actually get experienced and well equiped cavalry to pursue the enemy forces. As a GM you also have the opportunity to introducing the commander of the cavalry forces as an NPC that they will have to deal with. This could be even more fun if the Lord's preference for the eventual fate of the enemy forces isn't the same as the PCs

[Legate]

The other question is; how many horses does the breeder have that are trained (or capable of being trained) as warhorses? The majority would be, I would think, draught and riding horses.

[DaimosofRedstone]

The other question is; how many horses does the breeder have that are trained (or capable of being trained) as warhorses? The majority would be, I would think, draught and riding horses.

Not necessarily.
The races used for draught, riding and war are different.
Draught horse are heavy set, slow and able to exercise great force over longer times.
Riding horses are bred to be fast.
And war horses are breed to be both.

So he might in fact have nothing BUT horses for war since breeding riding horses with draught or war horses will hardly bring the expected results.

But than again a hundred horses from a single breeder is a VERY big order with horses more often purchased in pairs or dozens at the most.

[Legate]

The other question is; how many horses does the breeder have that are trained (or capable of being trained) as warhorses? The majority would be, I would think, draught and riding horses.

Not necessarily.
The races used for draught, riding and war are different.
Draught horse are heavy set, slow and able to exercise great force over longer times.
Riding horses are bred to be fast.
And war horses are breed to be both.

So he might in fact have nothing BUT horses for war since breeding riding horses with draught or war horses will hardly bring the expected results.

But than again a hundred horses from a single breeder is a VERY big order with horses more often purchased in pairs or dozens at the most.

A distinct possiblity given the political background of Westeros, but you have to remember that a horse needs special training to enter a battle field. Horses are not dumb animals by any means, they will not willing go into dangerous situations unless they are properly trained.

[DaimosofRedstone]

I was just thinking about the economical side of this.
Horses need large tracts of grassy relativly flat land (as in: no cracks to break their legs in) huge amount of food (most comes from the grass they will graze from the land where you hold them but you will also need oats and other 'improved' food stuff if you breed and train for excellence) and a lot of care (guards to keep rustlers away, trainers, horsegrooms, etc.).
A fief trying to bred horses might even need to import foodstuff because they cannot feed their people and their horses with so much land taken up by the horses.
Hmm, i think the horse breeding wealth holding needs work...

[Pytorb]

I was just thinking about the economical side of this.
Horses need large tracts of grassy relativly flat land (as in: no cracks to break their legs in) huge amount of food (most comes from the grass they will graze from the land where you hold them but you will also need oats and other 'improved' food stuff if you breed and train for excellence) and a lot of care (guards to keep rustlers away, trainers, horsegrooms, etc.).
A fief trying to bred horses might even need to import foodstuff because they cannot feed their people and their horses with so much land taken up by the horses.
Hmm, i think the horse breeding wealth holding needs work...

Especially in Westeros's ultra-long winters. How about saying that the less hardy livestock such as Horses, Cattle and Pigs require additional Granaries and Storerooms or the House suffers an additional fortune penalty in Winter?

[Zorbeltuss]

That's the kind of detail that the system doesn't go into, or accommodate, at all, though.

The house chapter doesn't even touch the subject of how winter might affect the fortunes.