WildWeazel
Going Dutch
Yeah, they look fine as they are. The helmet isn't necessary. A cloak would be cool tho.
Yes, Bullroarer could ride a horse. Thus I don't think pony cavalry would be beyond the pale. Seeing as ponies are smaller than horses, and all.PCHighway said:Pony's aren't exactly war-horses, if you know what I mean. So I'd say it would hurt the history side of things, and we don't need it.
In fact, IIRC, wasn't there some mention that Bullroarer Took was so tall he could ride a horse into battle? Which made him special?
Not a bad idea. The only problem is - was the Bullroarer a scout? Or the strongest unit in the army? If he was the strongest unit in the army (which I believe he was) then that kind of nixes the whole 'weak attack/defence pony-archer' idea. Also, the unit's cost would have to represent the fact that it is so strong. Besides, simply because the Bullroarer could ride a horse, does not make him a pony-archer, right?Mithadan said:We could just call pur pony archers "Bullroarers," then, instead of having bullroarers in addition to pony archers.
Well, we're already mucking with the facts by considering more than one Bullroarer. The only thing going for my suggestion is that the name "bullroarer" sounds a heck of a lot more Middle-Earthy and hobbitsey than "pony archer" does. Everything else about the name would be flat out innacurate. Is that something we can swallow or not?zxe said:Not a bad idea. The only problem is - was the Bullroarer a scout? Or the strongest unit in the army? If he was the strongest unit in the army (which I believe he was) then that kind of nixes the whole 'weak attack/defence pony-archer' idea. Also, the unit's cost would have to represent the fact that it is so strong. Besides, simply because the Bullroarer could ride a horse, does not make him a pony-archer, right?