![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Personally I think that with the state of the world in the Twilight setting, it's unlikely that the events leading to the gun buyback in Australia would have occured and most firearms owners would still have their legitimately purchased items.
As for more handguns in the urban areas, I would disagree. I don't think the government, even with the state of the world, would condone more handguns simply because it would take some time (or something truly drastic) to convince them to allow the public to have a concealable weapon. Most urban firearms owners in Australia had rifles or shotguns because generally it was a lot harder to qualify for a handgun. The other thing to consider with this is that while many rural folk had a rifle or two and a shotgun, many urban firearms owners had many more than this - in New South Wales it wasn't at all unusual for an individual to own from 5-20rifles and shotguns. Queensland and New South Wales had very few limits on ownership and the vast majority of unlicenced firearms in the rest of Australia came from these two states. Queensland in particular did a booming trade in guns for marijuana with Papua New Guineans fighting against the Indonesian occupation forces in Western New Guinea (the Indonesians formerly called it Irian Jaya) up until the mid-1990s (i.e. the gun buyback time). It's also worth noting that Queensland and Tasmania allowed the ownership of various semi-auto military style rifles such as the AR-15, SKS, M1 Carbine, civilian versions of the G3, HK33 & M14 and also the L1A1. This may have also been true for some other states like Victoria but Queensland & Tasmania are the only ones I'm sure of. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Even though NSW allowed semi-auto military weapons, it did not allow crossbows and inflicted very harsh penalties upon those found with so much as a bolt or string in their possession...
Bows on the other hand were totally uncontrolled. ![]()
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives. Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect" Mors ante pudorem |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Okay, nice segway into Australian Firearms ownership... AND it's not completely off topic, but let's try and ease this thread back onto the topic of Mercenaries in the post Twilight War world.
I don't want to derail the thread. Having said that, how did you guys have the authorities treat groups of players who were running around tooled up like panzergrenadiers? As a threat? As a new source of draftees? As a God send? All of the above? I see the PACT authorities under the influence of the Soviets being much more inflexible when it comes to dealing with their ex-soldiers. You are either deserters to be shot or you are stragglers who better try and look happy to be back under the banner of the Red Army. Also, if some ex-NATO guys rolled up on some PACT loyalists, I doubt very much if the Comrades are going to listen to the part about how you're not in the enemy army anymore. Maybe if the Soviet commander has already seen to it that his Commissar's been fragged, he might be more reasonable. In Communist/Soviet controlled areas, I'm expecting the Commissars to be doing a lot of dumb totalitarian things... not just taking all the spare parts, lubricant, refined fuel and working vehicles, but maybe even "requisitioning" 1/2 the village's ammo supply "to support the glorious People's Red Army!" Or worse, demanding that the locals use more and more of their food crop to distill more and more fuel for the authorities vehicles... perhaps bringing the area to the edge of famine. And what about your players? how have your players reacted when the ran across another group of heavily armed "detached" soldiers? Do they seem them as kindred spirits or do they see them as marauders? How do they approach each other? Do they even try to talk or do they just start shooting? A. Scott Glancy, President TCCorp, dba Pagan Publishing |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
In my experience players tend to shoot first and strip the bodies later....
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives. Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect" Mors ante pudorem |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
There is yet another thing, that ran through my mind: In some way or another, trade works. There are even encounters in the rules, where the characters may run into an armed party of traders or merchants.
Let me explain: In my view of the world of T2k most of the waepon bearing folks would certainly wear some kind of cammies (Logically - wearing cammies helps not being spotted!). If you spot a group of uncertain origin, I don't think, that you can identify them by the colours of their "uniforms" - depending on the distance, off course. Even regular soldiers would certainly wear a mix of different cammie-patterns. So, if a trading party is on it's way, it will be guarded by people, that would certainly look like soldiers or militiamen (Well, or like marauders. I don't think, you could defenitely spot the difference!). What do you think: How would be dealed with armed guards in a trading party? Are these persons accepted as mercenaries or would they be seen as civilians, who just try to defend their lifes and goods? A part of those guards could easily be mercenaries! Would they be hunted down and treated like partisans or similar groups? This has not really something to do with legal matters, but IMO it would be part of the reality in Europe. How do you treat this "problem"?
__________________
I'm from Germany ... PM me, if I was not correct. I don't want to upset anyone! "IT'S A FREAKIN GAME, PEOPLE!"; Weswood, 5-12-2012 |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Personally I would classify soldiers - especially foreign ones - who have been employed as caravan guards as mercenaries - they are selling their soldiering skills for benefits (not neccessarily money of course, payment could be in the form of food, water, somewhere to sleep). Given the state that central Europe is in by the year 2000 I think it's quite possible that merchants could employ soldiers from a number of different nationalities as escorts (including former adversaries). Personally, I don't think convoy guards are automatically going to be treated as hostiles (unless the entire merchant convoy is being treated with hostility, e.g. by a marauder group trying to steal their trade goods). In my opinion armed civilians escorting the convoy would come under the same sort of classification as local militia. Again, I think reaction to them is going to be governed by the reaction to the convoy itself.
__________________
Author of the unofficial and strictly non canon Alternative Survivor’s Guide to the United Kingdom |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Thoughts:
Settlements, merchants, any entity that doesn't want to be preyed upon by people with guns, are going to want to acquire armed security of some kind. Europe in 2000 will be lousy with armed men (and women), many of whom have been abandoned and left to their own devices by their respective national military commands (eg. "Good luck. You're on your own," or left behind by OMEGA). These soldiers are going to need to eat. Their options for gainful employment in the post-apocalyptic world are limited. Many will be tempted to take what they want/need by gunpoint. Others will seek legitimate employment by selling their martial skills on the free market (or whatever passes for it, locally). The former are your classic marauder; the latter are mercenaries, in the spirit of international law, if not in the letter. Whether this freelance security works for gold, fuel, ammo, medical supplies, food, or any combination thereof, these security troops would likely be considered by just about everyone- employers, neighbors, foes, maybe even themselves- as mercenaries. This is essentially the premise of Kurosawa's classic, Seven Samurai. The seven titular ronin defend a village from bandits in exchange for rice. You'd probably also see mercenaries periodically turning into marauders and vice versa. This was commonplace in 14th century Europe, especially in France during the 100 Years War. Once a "Free Company", as the English called them (Condottieri, in Italian) had fulfilled its contract, or if it became dissatisfied with the terms, it often turned to banditry to support itself until the next contract could be secured (in France, demobilized mercs were called Écorcheurs- literally, "scorchers"). Free Companies would routinely ransom entire villages until paid off to leave. Villages that couldn't or wouldn't pay would be pillaged- the classic protection racket. I can also see a group of marauders who once preyed upon a settlement being coopted by it, becoming its de facto defense force. Questions: Is a US 5th ID soldier serving in the Krakow ORMO a merc? Is a US 8th ID soldier working as a convoy guard for a Latvian soldier-merchant a merc? Is a NATO soldier serving in an anti-communist militia defending the Free City of Gdansk during a Soviet siege a merc? -
__________________
Author of Twilight 2000 adventure modules, Rook's Gambit and The Poisoned Chalice, the campaign sourcebook, Korean Peninsula, the gear-book, Baltic Boats, and the co-author of Tara Romaneasca, a campaign sourcebook for Romania, all available for purchase on DriveThruRPG: https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...--Rooks-Gambit https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...ula-Sourcebook https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...nia-Sourcebook https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...liate_id=61048 https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/...-waters-module Last edited by Raellus; 07-27-2021 at 06:51 PM. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I agree with what many wrote.
Mercenaries in T2k are paid in food, room, ammo, replacement parts, access to doctors and Gold (if I remember correctly this austrian Major of this polish Margrave demanded to be paid in Gold and the Margrave- who was described as paranoid or megalomaniac-distrusted him) And to switch back and forth between Merc and Marauder: I disagree. Once you crossed to border to lawlessness (beating people up, raping, shooting in cold blood) it will be very difficult to rein yourself in and behave like nice guys again. |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
For as long as there have been soldiers there have been men and women who have done terrible, abhorrent things in war and have gone on to live quiet, peaceful lives. No doubt in many cases with the difficulties brought up by PTSD in the years and decades afterwards, but it happens. Post WWII Soviet Union had literally millions of ex-soldiers who had raped and murdered civilians in abundance during the march across Germany to Berlin, and most of them probably never raised a hand in anger again.
__________________
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
My father lived and worked in Uganda around the late 80's (iirc). Their was lots of violence around the country at the time. He said that if a military unit was in the area, then the peop!e who had the money would hire a group of the soldiers from the unit to protect themselves and their property from the rest of the soldiers who didn't get hired as protection. The others would go shooting the place up, stealing, burning and raping. And these were the government soldiers brought in to fight the rebels.
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
I think that in T2k the distinction between mercenary and marauder will be dictated by when the person last ate. Some mercenaries may maintain discipline but when people are hungry and armed then anyone, either mercenary or a still serving soldier in an organised army, may resort to "marauder" tactics to get food, robbing and killing people as necessary. |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I think a lot of Vietnam vets might disagree.
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|