Why the atlatl became forgotten

[David Scott]

Ancient Origins has published an article on Hunting Instruments Dating Back 1,900 Years Discovered in Mexican Cave. As one of the items is an atlatl, they linked to a great video on atlatls - Why the atlatl became forgotten (no mention of +1D6 damage and +10m range though) :

 

[AndrewTBP]

Forgotten? By whom? Australia hasn't forgotten it, we call it a Woomera. The big missile range in South Australia is named after it. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woomera%2C_South_Australia

[Shiningbrow]

16 hours ago, David Scott said:

(no mention of +1D6 damage and +10m range though) :

It's unbelievable just how inept modern historians have become!

Homer would never have overlooked this!

 

"Achilles, vexed by Agamemnon's overweening attitude, told his men that they would be leaving the war, taking their trained warriors, all with Bladesharp to at least 5 points, and his personal SwordTrance. Odysseus, in an attempt to resolve the situation, cast Charisma and a quick CleverTongue he picked up from a certain Spell Trading he conducted some seasons ago".

[David Scott]

5 hours ago, AndrewTBP said:

Forgotten? By whom?

Forgotten as a weapon, not as a place

[Darius West]

I wonder how an atlatl performs when used from the saddle?  

[Joerg]

2 hours ago, Darius West said:

I wonder how an atlatl performs when used from the saddle?  

From my limited experience with such a device, nocking an atlatl arrow (and keeping it nocked) is a bit fiddlier than nocking an arrow on a bow string. But that's on foot.

[Rodney Dangerduck]

8 hours ago, Darius West said:

I wonder how an atlatl performs when used from the saddle?  

One interesting point they make in the video is that the atlatl has a lower rate of fire than a bow, plus a lower "muzzle velocity".  Therefore, it is less effective against rapidly moving targets, which you are more likely to encounter while mounted.

[Sid Vicarious]

13 hours ago, David Scott said:

Forgotten as a weapon, not as a place

I saw woomeras used competitively at the Yuendumu Sports Day in the early 1980s, at Yuendumu, NT, Australia. The range increase was impressive, and skilled users did not suffer much in the way of accuracy. 

[Darius West]

14 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

One interesting point they make in the video is that the atlatl has a lower rate of fire than a bow, plus a lower "muzzle velocity".  Therefore, it is less effective against rapidly moving targets, which you are more likely to encounter while mounted.

I agree and would have thought tat was obvious. Lets face it, if you are moving, so is the target effectively. 

I am curious about how much the accuracy falls off, and whether it maintains or even improves range and force of impact if supported by a running horse underneath the atlatl user.  I am thinking about the possibility of a small Praxian warrior society that uses atlatls with javelins, and gets a minor charge boost to DB. (shrug)

[Squaredeal Sten]

8 hours ago, Darius West said:

I agree and would have thought tat was obvious. Lets face it, if you are moving, so is the target effectively. 

I am curious about how much the accuracy falls off, and whether it maintains or even improves range and force of impact if supported by a running horse underneath the atlatl user.  I am thinking about the possibility of a small Praxian warrior society that uses atlatls with javelins, and gets a minor charge boost to DB. (shrug)

Based on the RQG ratings of men as speed 8 maximum  and horses as speed 12, I think such a boost would be very very minor.  After all bow shooters get no boost at all for their mounts.  I am inclined to think it is not worth adding co.plexity to the rules. Do you ache to calculate the cosine of the angle between the vector of movement of the mount and the vector of the shot, and multiply by the square of the difference in speeds times some factor?

[g33k]

59 minutes ago, Squaredeal Sten said:

... Do you ache to calculate the cosine of the angle between the vector of movement of the mount and the vector of the shot, and multiply by the square of the difference in speeds times some factor?

<handwaves>
You'd do that all once, up-front, during the game-design step.

Then (depending on what you've found) give the weapon a +1 or +2 damage boost, or step it up a die-type, or whatever.

[Rodney Dangerduck]

49 minutes ago, g33k said:

<handwaves>
You'd do that all once, up-front, during the game-design step.

Then (depending on what you've found) give the weapon a +1 or +2 damage boost, or step it up a die-type, or whatever.

This bonus is in the weeds.

Given that casting Mobility on your horse does not increase your impact bonus with a lance, (remember, it should go as mass times velocity squared), there's no call to add +1 to a missile weapon.

[Squaredeal Sten]

I suspect that the original Lance rule was based on two states: Charging vs not charging.  And differences in charge speed are ignored as miniscule.  It's not the speed of the Lance, it's the muscle behind the Lance.

And I think similarly, with the bow or atlatl any differences in the shooter's speed (or the target's speed)  are miniscule compared with the speed the launcher  gives to the projectile.

That's my take on it.

 

Edited February 1 by Squaredeal Sten
s

[g33k]

6 hours ago, Rodney Dangerduck said:

...

Given that casting Mobility on your horse does not increase your impact bonus with a lance, (remember, it should go as mass times velocity squared), there's no call to add +1 to a missile weapon.

This is (a) a fair point, and (b) out of step with these effete, modern, grubbing-for-every-bonus times we live in.

😉

More seriously, I've only seen this "velocity of the mount" argument relatively recently; I don't think gamers were addressing this question back in the 70's & early 80's tho I'd be glad if someone could cite any evidence to the contrary.

It was tested by the mythbusters team, and confirmed (their crossbow achieved 2" more penetration shot from a moving Jeep).
So for max simulation accuracy, "Mobility" should indeed up the damage of missile weapons!

[Kloster]

6 hours ago, g33k said:

So for max simulation accuracy, "Mobility" should indeed up the damage of missile weapons!

And substract when firing backwards!!!

Not sure I want this kind of added complexity (and I love complex, detailed games). Even Car Wars and Gurps don't go thus far.

[g33k]

6 hours ago, Kloster said:

And substract when firing backwards!!!

Not sure I want this kind of added complexity (and I love complex, detailed games). Even Car Wars and Gurps don't go thus far.

Not sure that *I* want it, either.
But I'm absolutely certain that there are folks who do want it... 

I note that (in principle) it's not so very different from the RQ rule whereby mounted/charging lancers get their mount's damage-bonus.

[Nevun]

Thinking about the Atlatl, it's not something I'd make generally available to my players.

The ability to make your spears go further and hit harder sounds dead on like a cult secret - something that is taught in a heroquest and only available to that one specific sub-cult or clan. Or learned from Dragonnewts.