What If? Gender Mixed Armies in Fantasy

[Abyssgazer]

Inspired from a trip down memory lane and enough dunking to earn its place at a NBA game.

Considering the fantasy element inserts such a massive and manifold variable that can't be covered in a single blanket idea.

So lets segment this into separate tiers/ideas of increasing fantasy elements.

The First idea is the closest to Real life.

Presupposing a equal-opportunity human army/military that exists in a realistic/very low fantasy world.

What roles would women be employed in combat-roles or non-camp follower support roles?

Second:

When it comes to fantasy races(Centaurs, Orcs, elves, dwarves, Lizardpeople, etc.) how would their sexual dimorphism or lack of it in some races effect role selection/placement in their armies/military that would be seen or as above what combat-roles or non-camp follower support roles would they see and the differences to humans have.

Second and a half:

What consideration of limitations and such that might come into play with fantasy mounts from Dogs large enough to ride to flying mounts like a Griffin.

A historical consideration for inspiration on this topic is horses, as for a chunk of history horses hadn't been bred large enough to carry a heavily armored man.

Third:

Introducing/assuming a system of magic that is a viable for combat and utility uses which doesn't inherently remove the differences of sexual dimorphism in humans and other fantasy races.

______________________​

Discussing and considering relevant permutations of the ideas presented in each tier is encouraged.

From magic being inherent or only requiring long laborious study to use. How dangerous magic is from Warhammer Fantasy level, Dragon age level or being very safe to use. The setting considered for fantasy races(DnD humans fall under this as they are not Real Life humans.) as various settings can very different interpretation of the same fantasy race.

 

[Deleted member]

Inspired from a trip down memory lane and enough dunking to earn its place at a NBA game.

Considering the fantasy element inserts such a massive and manifold variable that can't be covered in a single blanket idea.

So lets segment this into separate tiers/ideas of increasing fantasy elements.

The First idea is the closest to Real life.

Presupposing a equal-opportunity human army/military that exists in a realistic/very low fantasy world.

What roles would women be employed in combat-roles or non-camp follower support roles?

Second:

When it comes to fantasy races(Centaurs, Orcs, elves, dwarves, Lizardpeople, etc.) how would their sexual dimorphism or lack of it in some races effect role selection/placement in their armies/military that would be seen or as above what combat-roles or non-camp follower support roles would they see and the differences to humans have.

Second and a half:

What consideration of limitations and such that might come into play with fantasy mounts from Dogs large enough to ride to flying mounts like a Griffin.

A historical consideration for inspiration on this topic is horses, as for a chunk of history horses hadn't been bred large enough to carry a heavily armored man.

Third:

Introducing/assuming a system of magic that is a viable for combat and utility uses which doesn't inherently remove the differences of sexual dimorphism in humans and other fantasy races.

______________________​

Discussing and considering relevant permutations of the ideas presented in each tier is encouraged.

From magic being inherent or only requiring long laborious study to use. How dangerous magic is from Warhammer Fantasy level, Dragon age level or being very safe to use. The setting considered for fantasy races(DnD humans fall under this as they are not Real Life humans.) as various settings can very different interpretation of the same fantasy race.

First: Women would be used for several specific limited roles. Women would comprise all the light cavalry to gain a speed advantage. Even 30 - 50 lbs is significant to light cavalry and the length and duration of being able to ride. The moment you have an outside source of locomotion (i.e. a horse) that is weight limited in its performance, this becomes dominant. Ironically, women would actually be perfectly capable of also using the lance, because a couched lance relies on the force of the charge, not physical strength. The problem is that in melee fighting strength and endurance begin to predominate again. But light cavalry should never let itself be caught up in a melee. Some units armed like Uhlans for the pursuit would be worthwhile, however.

Secondly, women will form a body of reserves on the Sukothai pattern, armed with pikes. Their main function is to defend with the Pike, and they are to cover retreats and provide reinforcement after long periods of fighting exhaust the men in the front rank. To receive the charge and defend themselves they would normally ground the pike, which allows them to focus on dexterity rather than strength because the physical repulsion of the horse or advancing mass is conducted by the ground rather than their bodies.

Thirdly, a very limited cadre of small women unusually strong for their size will be selected and very rigorously trained. They will be armed with swords; their job will be to slip between the ranks of the male pike formations in the front rank to counterattack enemy pike. They are a picked elite comprising a very small fraction of the women actually in service, and they take advantage of their small size to be even more effective than men were in the Spanish Tercio formations of the 16th century at actually crawling under the push of pike to cut and slice at the legs of the enemy. If you can imagine calmly crawling under a forest of jostling and shoving pikes above you... To attack a man from below while on your knees... Then this job is for you.

Next up is the reality that men get rowdy in quarters and in sacks and occupations of cities. If you don't want this to happen, women are often better at calming your own men down. They are also better at conducting searches, especially of homes, for enemies, fugitives, and contraband. So you would have essentially a female military police force. They could also provide guards for sensitive positions. I would expect that this would mostly be your light cavalry force, just dismounted... Except many times, being on horse would be perfect for these roles, especially with whips for nonlethal deterrence.

Second: Just adjust the number of women as a function of sexual dimorphism. For instance, with the Talorans I created, men and women are mostly equal in combat because women are taller and have longer reach but men are stronger on a weight-for-weight basis. That isn't exactly sexual dimorphism being reversed, but it shows the kind of impact you might have, even if women are just very willowy and tall, the extra reach will help a great deal. But then some of the very same roles selected above--based on weight and height--would then be eliminated as places of focus for female talents.

Second and a Half: Women would dominate any flight based on weight. Obviously, say, Targaryen dragons don't care about whether or not the human on their back is 120 lbs or 200 lbs (or 400lbs if Aegon IV had a dragon...) but they're exceptionally large relative to their riders. Most things like Griffins would care altogether a great deal. The same thing with light, very fast mounts on land.

Third: See Thomas Harlan's Oath of Empire series; women served in the Roman Legionary Thaumaturgical services on equal basis with men, and could rise to importance and position of command in armies as a consequence; that's because your talent as a thaumaturge was precious enough for the legions that they didn't care what your sex was if you were magically talented. You couldn't teach just anyone magic in that universe, and if that's true in the universe we're discussing, then female thaumaturges will probably serve in numbers. They often had sworn shields who were women as well, for obvious reasons of privacy.

 

[ShieldWife]

Gunpowder really opens up opportunities for women. I was thinking maybe female dragoons could be interesting. Dragoons are mounted infantry, they had muskets, carbines, and/or pistols. My thoughts are that a dragoon combined the female advantage for light cavalry and mitigates our strength disadvantage by using black powder weapons.

Discussing that era, what about female sailers/pirates/marines during the age of sail? Women armed with muskets or a brace of pistols could be comparably dangerous as a similarly armed man and we tend to be smaller targets, myself excepted. Age of sail combat is less likely to involve armor that requires strength to penetrate or formations with lots of pushing. A woman with a rapier or boarding pike may be less disadvantaged against a man than with many other melee weapons, especially with no armor involved. Now, as to the advantage of female sailers, women are smaller, have less muscle mass, and generally slower metabolisms. This will mean that less food and water will be required for ocean journeys and a similarly sized ship could have a potentially larger crew. Also, if our ship gets lost, the crew will be more likely to stop and ask for directions.

On the down side, for a certain interval of time each month, the situation on the ship might become rather unpleasant.

Would any of these black powder era ideas work with crossbows for an earlier time period? I'm not sure. It seems like a windlass crossbow is like a musket in some regards - it requires less strength to use, packs a powerful punch, but is slow to load. Could some kind of crossbow winding mechanism work or be rigged to work from horseback? If so, maybe that is a possibility. Women do have advantages as light cavalry, though mounted archers are still going to be inferior in some ways because it takes a lot of upper body strength to draw a war bow.

 

[keb Mark 2C]

Could some kind of crossbow winding mechanism work or be rigged to work from horseback?

The cranequin was in use during the 15th and 16th centuries and could be used to span a crossbow while on horse back.

Tod of Todsstuff shoots a medieval 450lb cranequin hunting crossbow (he starts loading the crossbow at around 0:57)

 

[ShieldWife]

The cranequin was in use during the 15th and 16th centuries and could be used to span a crossbow while on horse back.

Tod of Todsstuff shoots a medieval 450lb cranequin hunting crossbow (he starts loading the crossbow at around 0:57)

That’s just what our mounted crossbowwomen need.

 

[Deleted member]

Gunpowder really opens up opportunities for women. I was thinking maybe female dragoons could be interesting. Dragoons are mounted infantry, they had muskets, carbines, and/or pistols. My thoughts are that a dragoon combined the female advantage for light cavalry and mitigates our strength disadvantage by using black powder weapons.

I actually had female dragoons as the sole female unit of the Ptolemaic Egyptian Army in The Bearer of Victory, the ISOT novel I just finished here. It really does make perfect sense. The Sukothai Period was somewhat bloody interstate anarchy between Thailand, Burma and the Khmer Empires which probably isn't as universally applicable in what people did then.

Discussing that era, what about female sailers/pirates/marines during the age of sail? Women armed with muskets or a brace of pistols could be comparably dangerous as a similarly armed man and we tend to be smaller targets, myself excepted. Age of sail combat is less likely to involve armor that requires strength to penetrate or formations with lots of pushing. A woman with a rapier or boarding pike may be less disadvantaged against a man than with many other melee weapons, especially with no armor involved. Now, as to the advantage of female sailers, women are smaller, have less muscle mass, and generally slower metabolisms. This will mean that less food and water will be required for ocean journeys and a similarly sized ship could have a potentially larger crew. Also, if our ship gets lost, the crew will be more likely to stop and ask for directions.

*giggles*

Women make very good topmen, being light and nimble and judicious. Reckless bravery helps less than you might think 200 ft above the swaying deck of a ship. The problem is the raw physicality required to load and work cannon and operate windlasses and capstans. I have worked solutions to both, but it requires the ship to be purpose-designed for women from the start.

...Or, you can use steam technology. It existed since the 100s AD, after all, and the kind of steam supply for operating windlasses and capstans is much less demanding than full-up propulsion; there were many sailing ships in the 19th century which had small steam donkey engines for precisely this purpose.

On the down side, for a certain interval of time each month, the situation on the ship might become rather unpleasant.

Not really for this, but just in general, I think sex segregation by ship is necessary.

Would any of these black powder era ideas work with crossbows for an earlier time period? I'm not sure. It seems like a windlass crossbow is like a musket in some regards - it requires less strength to use, packs a powerful punch, but is slow to load. Could some kind of crossbow winding mechanism work or be rigged to work from horseback? If so, maybe that is a possibility. Women do have advantages as light cavalry, though mounted archers are still going to be inferior in some ways because it takes a lot of upper body strength to draw a war bow.

Here's an idea that just came to me on that vein: A corps of women charioteers who have repeating crossbows which are cranked by a Hellenistic-style bronze gear mechanism attached to the chariot's axle.