Roman Legionnaires in ACKS: An Equipment and Pay Review
While working on a forthcoming paper critiquing the economic assumptions of ACKS (fairly good, but subtly incorrect in interesting ways), I noticed a discrepancy in the pay assigned to ACKS soldiers and the price of wheat.
Per this useful source, and the excellent worldbuilding blog maintained by a professor of classical history here, during the Principate, a modius of wheat, purchased in the Roman provinces, might cost around 8 asses, or half of a denarius (prices in Italy could easily be double that). Meanwhile (time of Augustus), Roman legionaries were being paid 225 denarii per year, allowing them to purchase some 37.5 modii of wheat per month (assuming no skimming by their centurion, and no deductions for gear; we know the first was common and the second was standard). Our contemporary non-Roman sources indicate substantial corruption supplementing legionnaires’ pay, but this is impossible to quantify.
An ACKS bushel of wheat costs 0.5gp. Light Infantry A (3 javelins, shield, shortsword, and leather armor) earn 6gp per month, Heavy Infantry C (spear, shield, sword, and chain armor) earn 9gp per month, and Heavy Infantry A (spear, shield, sword, and banded armor) earn 12gp per month. That is, 12, 18, and 24 bushels of wheat, not counting maintenance cost of their gear (counted separately in the cost of a unit).
Four modii almost exactly make one bushel. The Roman legionnaire was earning no more than 9.4 bushels per month, less than ACKS Light Infantry! Yet Roman legionaries were definitely “heavy” infantry, with auxiliary infantry earning 1/3rd as much pay! In my forthcoming work on the economy of small farms, I cannot find a way to reconcile these very different assumptions. While the Roman solider does receive a 3,000 denarii lump-sum pension, this is after 25 years of service, making this only a fractional pay increase even before compound interest reduces the net present value of this sum. The Praetorian Guard, however, received pay roughly triple that of the common legionnaire, bringing them roughly into line with ACKS Heavy Infantry A. Perhaps the common Roman is paid in a patriotic glow that the men of the Auran Empire are sadly undesirous of?
Nature of Roman Armor
This misadventure also highlights that none of the ACKS troop types is equivalent to Principate legionnaires. The Principate armed its legionnaires with 2 javelins, a shortsword, a shield, and a heavy helm (the Imperial Gallic helm is on the borderline between heavy and light helms, I’ll round up). So far, this sounds like Light Infantry A! The real rub is the armor. While some might consider the iconic lorica segmentata (never called that by the Romans; their name for it has been lost) to be “banded plate”, I argue that it cannot be seriously considered to give AC 5.
For reference, a Dark Ages Viking wearing a chain-mail byrnie, covering the neck with an aventail, the entire chest, including the armpits, the whole of the arms in mail sleeves, and lengthy mail skirting around the hips and down to the knees, with a light helmet, has AC 4. That is, this is the heaviest armor an ACKS Jutlandic barbarian, based clearly on Vikings, can wear. AC 5 calls to mind the splinted mail of the 13th century, with head-to-toe protection and splinted plates over some areas, likely combined with a “crusader” great helm. AC 6 plate is late 14th century plate armor with mail gussets, and the Gothic armor of the late 15th and 16th century is AC 7 (tier 2 masterwork plate armor).
By contrast, the lorica segmentata covers the chest and shoulders. Oh, and a few strips of studded leather dangling over the gonads. Likewise, we know from archeological findings that the lorica hamata (mail) was much more common during the Principate, and did not cover the arms, neck, or hips, while the lorica squamata (scale) was less common than mail but still more common than the rare segmentata, and again had similar coverage.
Thus, I believe that Roman legionnaires should be modeled in ACKS as wearing armor that grants AC 3, plus a shield.
Roman Gear
The kit of the legionnaire is as follows: two javelins for 2/6 stone, one shortsword for 1/6, one shield for 1 stone, AC 3 armor for 3 stone, a dagger for 1/6 stone, a heavy helm for 1 stone, a week’s rations for 1 stone, a large sack for 1/6, a mess kit for 1/6, their share of their file’s tent for 3/6 stone, an entrenching tool for 1 stone, and a full waterskin for 1 stone, and a tinderbox for 1/6 stone, and a stake for constructing the camp for 1 stone, total weight 10 4/6 stone. This is enough to reduce their expedition speed to 6 miles, but each tent-group (8 men) was issued a mule, with a normal load of 15 stone. The mule carries some of the legionnaires’ load, enough that they can march 12 miles per day (5 1/6 stone), plus water for itself for one day (5 stone), and feed for itself for 6 days (15 stone). The mule is overburdened, reducing its speed to half, equal to the soldiers. The mule will likely also be burned with various bric-a-brac that isn’t regulation, much to the commander’s dismay. In combat, the heavy bundle the legionnaires carry is ditched, slimming them down to 5 4/6 stone, enough to add back on their waterskin and their money-pouch while still moving at 30’ per march action.
Historically, the Romans deployed at intervals of 5’ (ibid), yet they were definitely able to act as Formed Foot, but also as Loose Foot (the maniple swap). During the deployment phase, the general chooses which formation to deploy them in, and can switch formations as an action in lieu of attacking. If desired, treat this as a bonus proficiency, per AXIOMS 4. Personally, I believe this should be a standard ability of units that qualify to be either LF or FF (as the legionnaire does).
Stats For Roman Legionnaires In D@W
A double-century (company) as a whole has HD 1-1, 6uhp, and make 2 attacks at 11+ per round (regardless of weapon), and have a range of 2 when throwing their javelins. The cohort replicates these statistics but has double uhp and damage. Their combat speed is 2/3/4. Speed and range double when deployed at platoon scale. As heavy infantry (by doctrine and training), their morale is 0. Because they carry so few javelins (and no container to store them in), they can only discharge missiles once per battle without resupply (Judge’s discretion; note that later legions would carry lighter plumbata to resolve this issue, they would deal 1d4 damage). As mentioned above, they can swap between FF and LF, and have an expedition speed of 12 miles per day (note: claims by Roman military writers that their armies could march 20 miles per day were propaganda, see here for actual archeological evidence on their speed, 10-12 miles per day).
BR and Wages
The BR for a company of legionnaires, deployed as Loose Foot, is 1.749253455, or 1.5. Deployed as Formed Foot, it is 1.357449124, or 1.5. Commanders will usually deploy their legions in loose order (5’ spacing), as they did historically. Plumbata-armed Dominate legions, as Loose Foot, have BR 1.261656673, rounding to 1.5, and as Formed Foot 1.168200623, rounding to 1. Dominate legions are definitely Loose Foot. This data was calculated via D@W: Battles.
Via D@W, we can calculate that the monthly wage of the Roman legionnaire should be around 9gp. This is equal to 18 bushels of wheat per month. To recapitulate our earlier calculations, in the time of Augustus, they got (source) around 10 asses per day, with a provincial cost of wheat of around 8 asses per modius. By Nero’s time (ibid), the wage had jumped to 16 asses but the price of wheat to 16, reducing their net income (Domitian increased wages; gee, I wonder why). Given that 4 modii make one bushel, our ACKS legionnaires are getting double pay. Clearly, the Principate counting on making up for penalties to Unit Loyalty resulting from being underpaid (no official guidelines for this exist; talk to your local Judge) by simply never encountering calamities (that’s loser talk!). For the more important Praetorians, triple pay was given, giving a loyalty bonus over the standard (at least, in theory…).
Typical Officers
A Roman cohort is a battalion-scale unit of 480 men. It is composed of 6 80-man centuries. For D@W play, bundle three into two company-scale units, led by their senior centurions (the junior gets to watch how it is done). Centurions therefore will likely range from 3rd level (high enough to lieutenant a platoon) to 5th (high enough to command in a platoon-scale battle or lieutenant a company in company-scale battles).
In the real world, centurions received 16 times the wage of the common soldier (ibid). That comes to the equivalent of 72gp, enough to raise them to 2nd level purely from campaign income, and enough to pay their monthly henchman wage and then some. The son of a prosperous commoner who bought a commission hits 1st level in 12 months, and 2nd level in another 4 years. A tribunus militum angusticlavius, likely the son of an eques, gets 50 times standard legionnaire pay, or 225gp, enough to rise to 4th level. The Legate gets 70 times base pay, for 315gp, not quite enough to reach 5th level on its own. Of course, the tribune will inherit his father’s estate sooner or later, while the Legate certainly has his own senatorial estates, both adding to their monthly income. Still, it seems that Roman armies were severely under-officered by ACKS standards. Perhaps they made up the difference with legitimized corruption…
Tactics
The real-world Roman army tended to win battles by advancing at a solid clip to the enemy, throwing their javelins at them from close range, then charging in, counting on their armor (superior to most of their foes) and the shock of their discipline to break their enemies’ morale.
The sample ACKS analogue should operate similarly. When fighting enemy infantry with 90’ movement speed, they deploy as Loose Foot. When the enemy is more than 7 hexes away (for platoon scale double these distances), they delay until after the enemies’ initiative (if they can) and then hustle. The delay prevents the enemy from pulling a double-move on them. At 5-7 hexes away they advance on their initiative at a march and ready an attack (diegetically, they throw their pila as the enemy closes). They do not charge, as this would leave their AC lowered to the enemies’ counter-attack. At 4 hexes they advance at a march and throw their javelins. If the enemy attempts to retrograde after javelin discharge, the Romans will be with range of a charge, even if the enemy hustled. At 1-2 hexes distance they advance and engage in melee, if the enemy is not already wounded. They charge if they are out of javelins (have made at least one set of attack rolls) and are within range and not engaged, or if they are within range, not engaged, and the enemy has uhp remaining equal to half their maximum +1 (that is, if dealing any damage would trigger shock rolls).
If they encounter infantry with 60’ movement, they proceed as before, except they hustle unless that would put them within 4 hexes (that is, unless they are at 6 hexes or closer). At 5-6 hexes, they delay, march, and ready, and at 4 hexes they delay, march, and throw javelins. At closer distances they march and attack. They do not charge, even if they lack javelins. Instead, they make sure that they can withdraw if hit, withdrawing the maximum 2 hexes, then closing the distance on their initiative.
Encountering 120’ or faster units, the legions maneuver to threaten a fixed point, then storm it.
When encountering archers, the legions deploy as Formed Foot and defend with their shields instead of readying to receive an attack or hustling, and otherwise use much the same tactics. These are all general guidelines.
Conclusion
In summary, ACKS does not have an exact parallel to Principate Roman legionnaires. This paper develops such a mechanical parallel, and notes differences between ACKS’s economic assumptions and the Roman army’s pay scales. A forthcoming paper will provide further analysis of these economic assumptions, revealing both some major errors while also showing how ACKS manages to provide high-verisimilitude simulation despite these (in effect, the errors tend cancel out; this speaks to careful research that does not fall into the trap of reporting “surprising facts” uncritically).