Levels: How much of a difference should they make?

[Psychic Robot]

A simple question, really: how much should a level 1 character be able to threaten a level 5 character?

I'm not talking in terms of abilities, but rather in terms of pure numbers. Let us pretend that we're in a magical world where everything stays perfectly on the RNG at all times. Should bonuses scale at a rate of +1 per level, +1 every two levels, +1 every four levels, or what? I'm thinking that they should be at a rate of +1 every level so that the human guards who have been fighting off orcs for the past twenty years (and have only reached level 3 or so) would have a significant advantage over the smelly brutes.

But that's just me, so I'm asking people who know things better than I do.

[RandomCasualty2]

There is really no right or wrong answer to this one actually.

Levels can mean as much or as little as you want them to mean. The key balance point of a level system isn't what a level 5 can do to a level 1, but rather that all level 5 characters are equal and all level 1 characters are equal.

The rest is about what you prefer.

[Username17]

In 3e D&D a 5th level hero is supposed to be an even match personally for 4 1st level heroes working together. And a 9th level hero is supposed to wade through 1st levelers like they weren't even there. In old school Warhammer Fantasy Battle a level 5 warrior was about equal to 6 or 7 regular soldiers, while a 5th level wizard was supposed to be exchangeable for an entire squad of 10-20.

The importance of the level equivalency is not what it is, but that it is.

-Username17

[Koumei]

I like that Warhammer approach. If you're not starting in Awesomeland, then gaining a level should be a huge leap forwards, to get there as soon as possible, and place you on the Dynasty Warriors scale regarding normal people.

Sure, K will come in and tell you that because everyone is a dick, all settings will fall apart as PCs instantly hack kingdoms to pieces for the lulz, but I have rarely experienced that, so imagine it's quite uncommon, and players will seriously say "Let's do what the king says, because he's clearly the underdog. We could flatten this kingdom, but choose not to. That other guy could flatten it too, and has decided it's a good idea. Let's stab him in the face."

So, seeing as some people here like games to start at Warhammer Fantasy Roleplaying "I'm a shit-shoveler!" level, gaining 2-3 levels should advance you to be able to stride through an army of those level 1 guys. Blindfolded. And gaining ten levels should make you a commander who is in actual fact worth just as much as the entirety of the rest of your army.

[RandomCasualty2]

Sure, K will come in and tell you that because everyone is a dick, all settings will fall apart as PCs instantly hack kingdoms to pieces for the lulz, but I have rarely experienced that, so imagine it's quite uncommon, and players will seriously say "Let's do what the king says, because he's clearly the underdog. We could flatten this kingdom, but choose not to. That other guy could flatten it too, and has decided it's a good idea. Let's stab him in the face."

So, seeing as some people here like games to start at Warhammer Fantasy Roleplaying "I'm a shit-shoveler!" level, gaining 2-3 levels should advance you to be able to stride through an army of those level 1 guys. Blindfolded. And gaining ten levels should make you a commander who is in actual fact worth just as much as the entirety of the rest of your army.

Well, the problem isn't so much that you're afraid PCs will be dicks. That can be fixed by just telling PCs that they have to heroes and that evil alignments aren't allowed.

The problem is that having people wade through armies creates a suspension of disbelief. If armies are that fragile and impotent, then why have them at all? Armies take a shitload of effort and money to create and maintain, and they're clumsy and slow to move around. Pretty much if armies can't hurt even low level people then there's just no justification for why armies exist at all.

First, you have the top level concept: "Why are we paying massive amounts of gold and effort to support this army when a single level 3 warrior chewed through the entire thing. Shouldn't we just devote the money to hero school?"

And of course the bottom level army recruitment: "Yeah, you get to join this army as a grunt and rush at some hero who is going to cleave through you like butter. You have basically no chance and you exist solely to show how awesome he is. Yeah, it's pretty much a suicide mission and you get to die as a nameless soldier."

That sort of thing just rubs me the wrong way from a world consistency standpoint where I'm trying to play up the people of the world as real human beings and set up a believable world.

[ubernoob]

Well, if a hero can wade through armies he's a powerful dude like heracles or beawolf (I'm certain I spelled that wrong). Those dudes are rare because a lot of people die before they get that powerful. If your level three dude is that strong thenn he's like the 3E equivilant of a level 10 guy. He's superhuman and incredibly rare. You don't go around just hiring those guys because they are fucking rare and they are practically legends. They can't be hired because they don't work for petty things like gold.

My take at least.[/u]

[Orion]

Here's the thing, Random --

The Modern American army actually consists, at least in theory, of highly trained badasses. Every soldier is supposed to be skilled and important.

Dark age armies though, are likely not to have "recruitment" at all. They have conscripts. And yeah, their job really is to rush in and hope to inconenience a real warrior before dying an ignoble death.

[Koumei]

Yeah, things seriously did work that way (to a lesser extreme, however). In this case it's basically "Let's conscript a huge army to stall them before our hero opens up a can of whupass on the enemies." or alternatively "Shit, we don't have a hero. While we try to find one, let's scrounge an army together - the army might manage to take one of their heroes down."

Besides, you already cry if things aren't like Bored of the Rings, so I don't care too much about your opinion.

[fliprushman]

Well it's a matter of tastes when it comes to bonuses and numbers but when you talk about levels, I think Frank summed it up pretty well.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Dark age armies though, are likely not to have "recruitment" at all. They have conscripts. And yeah, their job really is to rush in and hope to inconenience a real warrior before dying an ignoble death.

This point can not be stressed enough. Discounting modern equipment, the difference in quality between a highly trained volunteer army and that of conscripts is just sickening.

A soldier in a modern army has constant training, both physical and mental, and can count on medical treatment and three square meals a day. They also get things that were at a premium in the pre-Civil War days that we just take for granted today, like soap and uniforms.

Furthermore leaders in modern day armies get uniform training no matter what their rank and get promoted (in theory) by competence and education as opposed to something completely retarded like their daddy buying commissions or by inheritance. Even green armies at least have the knowledge of knowing that their sergeant has some idea as to what they're doing.

All these advantages are hard to qualify with levels and experience, but if you had to I'd say that if you treated a peasant conscript like this the average level of any soldier would be level 3. Still not really a challenge for your Hercules and your Beowulf types, but for your Ulysses and Theseus types, they're not going to be dying in droves.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Or in other words, to show what a difference a couple of levels would make for an entire army, note the difficulty levels of Tenchu or Metal Gear Solid.

At lower difficulty levels, the enemies go down easier, hit less hard and accurately, and (most importantly) are dumber. Your character with his kickass lifemeter and healing items and superior equipment is the equivalent of your typical 8th level murdering sociopath.

But at higher difficulty levels, you can't just rip through the people you hate like you used to. You can take on maybe 2, 3 enemies tops. Having an entire squad fight you is out of the question; you'd get your ass handed to you unless you had some huge advantage.

Maybe that's what RC has in mind?

[Koumei]

Furthermore leaders in modern day armies get uniform training no matter what their rank and get promoted (in theory) by competence and education as opposed to something completely retarded like their daddy buying commissions or by inheritance.

Don't they still have Officer Schools though? Where you sign up for that, and get taught the arts of "paperwork" and "ordering people about", and walk out the door with a pattern of strips, pips and crowns on your shoulder?

[JonSetanta]

A 5-level difference should mean death for the lower level, without any chance of victory, if the higher level character chooses to do so.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Don't they still have Officer Schools though? Where you sign up for that, and get taught the arts of "paperwork" and "ordering people about", and walk out the door with a pattern of strips, pips and crowns on your shoulder?

Depends what service you are and what your rank is.

If you actually have to lead men in the field then you actually need to have some brains. Or they'll end up outside your skull.

[TavishArtair]

A simple question, really: how much should a level 1 character be able to threaten a level 5 character?

I'm not talking in terms of abilities, but rather in terms of pure numbers. Let us pretend that we're in a magical world where everything stays perfectly on the RNG at all times. Should bonuses scale at a rate of +1 per level, +1 every two levels, +1 every four levels, or what? I'm thinking that they should be at a rate of +1 every level so that the human guards who have been fighting off orcs for the past twenty years (and have only reached level 3 or so) would have a significant advantage over the smelly brutes.

But that's just me, so I'm asking people who know things better than I do.

While I loathe dumbing down something so far that it feels blocky and clumsy, I do still admire consistency and simplicity. Given the decision making power, this would inform my choices in how to influence scaling. Pretty much any gain that cannot be expressed as "+1 every level" or "+1 every (odd/even) level" should be thrown out, because you really shouldn't be sitting there wondering what exactly the values are, even for a few seconds... you should be able to perform straightforward math that even someone halfway drunk (or just having a bad day) could feasibly add up. Division by 1 or division by 2 are both easy to track. Anything else leaves the player squinting for a bit too long. Games already involve complex tactical choices, we have to really ask ourselves if any additional math is worth the overhead.

Still, frankly my experience is that people don't really care all that much about getting bigger white numbers or bigger green numbers floating above their actions whenever they take a turn. As long as the math is relatively consistent and produces useable results, it's fine. You could hypothetically design a game where statistically the odds of a character being outright killed in a swing by an orc remain the same from level to level and the only thing there that is stopping this from happening is the character's new abilities.

So I'm in favor of disregarding sheer numbers and getting an ability that is broadly useful and in some sense somewhat better than the last one I got each level. This feels like advancement. You get a new trick, a new something you can write down on your sheet. Just upping a bunch of numbers is.... performing math, really. Not as entertaining as saying "And now I can use Black Blade of Disaster!" For players, at least, this is crucial.

What should the numbers look like on the abilities? Well, there should feel like some nominal improvement, but it doesn't have to be straight addition to damage/hit/armour, etc. It could be the edge of targeting two targets instead of one. But the scaling should be fairly transparent, if present.

[Draco_Argentum]

I agree with TA. Upping numbers isn't exciting or fun. That said how much your numbers go up per level really depends on how hardcore you want 'high level' to be and how many levels it will be. Since levels should come with an ability the number of abilities you intend to give out sets the number of levels you can have.

For example:
For super badass PCs with few ability gains +2/level.
For weaker PCs with lots of abilities +1/2 levels.

[TavishArtair]

I agree with TA. Upping numbers isn't exciting or fun. That said how much your numbers go up per level really depends on how hardcore you want 'high level' to be and how many levels it will be. Since levels should come with an ability the number of abilities you intend to give out sets the number of levels you can have.

For example:
For super badass PCs with few ability gains +2/level.
For weaker PCs with lots of abilities +1/2 levels.

Oh, yeah, "+1" is a sample value, you could also have 2 or 5 or 10 or other easily mentally grasped numbers as the additive, i.e. the numerator, so most integers. The denominator should be 1 or 2, though.

Please.

For the love of God, Montresor!

[RandomCasualty2]

Well, if a hero can wade through armies he's a powerful dude like heracles or beawolf (I'm certain I spelled that wrong). Those dudes are rare because a lot of people die before they get that powerful. If your level three dude is that strong thenn he's like the 3E equivilant of a level 10 guy. He's superhuman and incredibly rare. You don't go around just hiring those guys because they are fucking rare and they are practically legends. They can't be hired because they don't work for petty things like gold.

My take at least.[/u]

Well how rare someone is dependent on the experience system, and has little do with the gap between levels.

Now given that I think most of us here don't want to spend an eternity at level 1, I'm figuring it'll be pretty easy to get to level 3. Now I could be wrong there since I don't know what Koumei was thinking exactly, but I'm thinking it's not that it takes months of play time to get to level 3.

Yeah, things seriously did work that way (to a lesser extreme, however). In this case it's basically "Let's conscript a huge army to stall them before our hero opens up a can of whupass on the enemies." or alternatively "Shit, we don't have a hero. While we try to find one, let's scrounge an army together - the army might manage to take one of their heroes down."

Besides, you already cry if things aren't like Bored of the Rings, so I don't care too much about your opinion.

Not at all. I don't want every setting to be like LotR. I think a system should be able to simulate LotR, but that doesn't mean every fantasy should be that way.

Now, what I do want is high powered fantasy that makes sense. I'm okay with having a vastly different fantasy world where armies just aren't that powerful and people use heroes and enchanted beasts as their fundamental military unit. You could write a world where that sort of thing actually makes sense.

What I don't like however is when the world just doesn't make sense at all. To me, sending armies at people is a bad idea. For a few reasons.

First, it's pretty damn ineffective, and armies cost a lot of money.

Second, anyone in that army is potentially a new hero for you, he just needs to get some kills.

Third, you're giving experience to the enemy heroes by killing your armies.

No, what would actually happen would be a bunch of conscripts brought to an arena like competition, where you'd keep pitting your peasants against each other tournament style to produce a reasonably high level hero. That way you'd lose just as many people, but you'd be giving XP to your side, not the enemy and you could reuse the weapons and armor, because they wouldn't be getting claimed by the enemy.

So really, it'd all be Mortal Kombat style, where you actually just gather a bunch of your peasants to fight each other. That's vastly different from LotR but it could work. But that's okay actually especially for an RPG, because it means that PCs don't have to fight armies, which is usually boring as shit anyway, even if you can cleave through them. Few people want to just hack through 500 trivial goblins who can only hit them on natural 20s. It might be fun on Dynasty Warriors where the math is done for you, but it's a total drag on a tabletop and not really something we want to have happen.

But the whole concept of building armies to fight enemies is basically nonsensical in a hero dominated world, so regardless, you're just not going to get into a dynasty warriors scenario ever, because the moment armies go from being a credible threat to being "free XP!!!" you'll never see them on the battlefield. But again, that's okay because nobody really wants to fight an army.

Unless of course you're okay with your world just not having any verisimilitude, and just having a bunch of nonsensical NPC warlords who send out armies just to be butchered.

[Koumei]

Oh, I'm completely okay with not actually ever seeing armies to fight - it sounds pretty cool that Mortal Kombat arenas take place to train up hero strike teams, and those teams clash on the battlefield with the only other people being observers.

It's true that it wouldn't actually be fun having to seriously roll through hacking an army to bits, and I'm fine with kings deciding they have better things to waste money on, but it's important that, if an army was to theoretically attack the heroes, they'd tear it apart before breakfast.

So the reason heroes don't meet armies would be "We're too strong!" not "They're too strong!"

[RandomCasualty2]

So the reason heroes don't meet armies would be "We're too strong!" not "They're too strong!"

Yeah, pretty much you want to eliminate armies as a viable opponent in most RPGs through some means. Whether it's through the LotR method which is "you guys need your own army to beat theirs and when you fight you don't battle the whole army but rather a small skirmish microcosm with your two armies fighting in the background."

Or it becomes the superhero mentality where armies are an outdated means of warfare and everyone resorts to heroes. Your towns would basically be a wild west style, where you don't try to kill a bunch of guards, but instead face off against the sheriff and his deputy.

Though I still don't see it as a good idea to have level 3s be able to kill infinite level 1s, because if you keep that model and have level 5s be able to kill infinite level 3s and so on, it's going to be a very narrow window for encounter design, and it will have a lot of untouchable NPCs that your PCs can run into, which is really frustrating from a PCs standpoint.

The other issue is that you've got to worry about those world destroyer NPCs. The thing about hero based organizations is that the battles go much quicker. It's a lot easier to ride into town and shoot down the sheriff than it is to manage a full scale invasion, which even if successful, costs lots of resources. And given that that level 10 archmagi can basically slice through sheriffs like they're not there and has basically infinite resources, you're going to have a problem explaining why he hasn't taken over the world. Because in a day he could be teleporting around taking cities.

The verisimilitude drawback of a steep level power curve is that when numbers don't matter, there may well be nothing you can do when the latest demigod steps into town, because even if you gather together your best 20 level 5 heroes, they're no match for the level 10 at all. Which is problematic. It's basically the fundamental Forgotten realms problem, where you've got lots of high magic civilizations that never do anything. Now it's possible you could get that to work, but it's going to be hard.

The main reason I seem to support LotR as a base is because LotR is an easy thing to set up. People generally know how it works, and the world's power structure by default makes some degree of sense. Super hero style worlds tend to be very alien in concept to most people and thus it's difficult to get them to work, since a lot of things have to operate differently from the real world. Mortal Kombat arenas instead of armies for instance. There are few world designers who can really get that right and make it make sense, but any fool can create an LotR world.

[virgil]

You seem to be assuming that everything has to be on a D&D/CRPG scenario where everybody is fueled by death (kills = XP).

[fliprushman]

You seem to be assuming that everything has to be on a D&D/CRPG scenario where everybody is fueled by death (kills = XP).

True but combat is a good place to start when thinking of how characters gain experience. It doesn't have to stop there however. Experience gain be gained through quests, crafting items, training, debates, etc. But it's hard to give experience for some of those because combat pushes those skills to the max because of the characters will to survive. I know from a fact that training can teach you well and give you the abilities you would need but until you are faced with life and death, you never will truly find out how poorly or well you are trained.

[baduin]

So the reason heroes don't meet armies would be "We're too strong!" not "They're too strong!"

Yeah, pretty much you want to eliminate armies as a viable opponent in most RPGs through some means. Whether it's through the LotR method which is "you guys need your own army to beat theirs and when you fight you don't battle the whole army but rather a small skirmish microcosm with your two armies fighting in the background."

Or it becomes the superhero mentality where armies are an outdated means of warfare and everyone resorts to heroes. Your towns would basically be a wild west style, where you don't try to kill a bunch of guards, but instead face off against the sheriff and his deputy.

Before the Greeks, the warfare looked somewhat like that. In the a cient Greece there happened something called "the hoplite revolution" (it was a Revolution in Military Affairs, in modern parlance, and rather an evolution, not revolution sensu stricto). It created the modern way of fighting.

http://www.flowofhistory.com/units/birth/3/FC19
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Gr ... te_phalanx

In the traditional way of conducting war there were two classes - nobles and commoners. Nobles fought on chariots, on horses, or sometimes on foot, but always fully armed and trained. They were brave, but fought individually, for honor and loot. The commoners were poorly armed and occupied themselves mostly by shooting arrows etc. They were used as "filler", to stop the enemy nobles from free movement on the field. Real killing was done by elite.

The fighting, except for massed chariot charges, was done in spurts. (And cavalry also charged and then retreated). Two crowds stood facing one another and shooting arrows etc. From time to time a hero would jump forward, kill somebody and retreat into his own crowd. All were afraid of being attacked from the back, and so always had to retreat. You can see that kind of fighting on football stadiums.

The visible sign of hoplite revolution was moving the handle on the shield from the centre to the rim. This way, the shield covered mostly the neighbour, and the hoplite couldn't fight alone at all. He had to fight in a line which moved all at once.

Herodotus, Battle of Plataea

http://www.herodotuswebsite.co.uk/Text/Book9.htm

"For the Persians had made a rampart of their wicker shields, and shot from behind them sUch clouds of arrows, that the Spartans were sorely distressed. The victims continued unpropitious; till at last Pausanias raised his eyes to the Heraeum of the Plataeans, and calling the goddess to his aid, besought her not to disappoint the hopes of the Greeks.

As he offered his prayer, the Tegeans, advancing before the rest, rushed forward against the enemy; and the Lacedaemonians, who had obtained favourable omens the moment that Pausanias prayed, at length, after their long delay, advanced to the attack; while the Persians, on their side, left shooting, and prepared to meet them. And first the combat was at the wicker shields. Afterwards, when these were swept down, a fierce contest took Place by the side of the temple of Ceres, which lasted long, and ended in a hand-to-hand struggle. The barbarians many times seized hold of the Greek spears and brake them; for in boldness and warlike spirit the Persians were not a whit inferior to the Greeks; but they were without bucklers, untrained, and far below the enemy in respect of skill in arms. Sometimes singly, sometimes in bodies of ten, now fewer and now more in number, they dashed upon the Spartan ranks, and so perished.

The fight went most against the Greeks, where Mardonius, mounted upon a white horse, and surrounded by the bravest of all the Persians, the thousand picked men, fought in person. So long as Mardonius was alive, this body resisted all attacks, and, while they defended their own lives, struck down no small number of Spartans; but after Mardonius fell, and the troops with him, which were the main strength of the army, perished, the remainder yielded to the Lacedaemonians, and took to flight."

Some descriptions of ancient and modern kind of war:

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/hoplite-rev.html

Homer or Mahabharatha describe exactly that kind of combat. Poorly trained commoners stand in a crowd, throw spears or shoot bows and stop the enemy heroes from moving at will over the battlefield. The killing is done by heroes.

To simulate that kind of combat, it is best to give big to hit, or better damage bonuses for multiple characters surrounding one enemy. That way, for example 5 level fighter could kill an infinite number of 1 level fighers without any risk, but only if they attacked him one after another. If they surrounded him, they could easily kill him.

This encourages heroes to take some followers along, so they can keep the battlefield crowded and stop the heroes from getting surrouned.

In such a system "regular warrior" should have much better defense than offense. This is realistic - untrained people mostly try no to get killed and so their attacks are rather weak. It also helps to keep them alive, but not a serious threat (unless they manage to surround our hero and pull him down). If two crowds of common warriors get to fight, they should mostly poke ineffectively at one another, with any serious killing done by the heroes leading them.

[virgil]

If I recall in Celtic myth, this was how it worked. There weren't enough people to maintain armies, so they used opposing champions. I don't have source material on hand (or the time to go 'netting for it), so I can't bring up a plethora of source material at the moment.

[baduin]

Celts certainly had armies. But they were not standing armies, but masses of peasants led by a small cadre of noble horsemen. As they were a very hero-worshipping, "elitist" people, only nobles counted as serious combatants. If a commoner would dare to attack a king, he could be killed by the blazing heat surrounding him. Commoners were there to die.

http://www.maryjones.us/ctexts/mucrama.html

"Well’, said Lugaid, ‘Éogan will now challenge me to single combat and his ardent spirit-[he being] son and heir of the king and grandson of another-will overthrow me’."

From time to time there were duel of champions, of course; in fact, it was often customary to begin a battle with a few such duels.

For normal cattle-raids the army consisted mostly of nobles, but from time to time in great combats the whole people was mobilized, with the women often following the army camp. See eg the invasion of Greece or the battles of Boadicea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Watling_Street

http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/annals.10.xiv.html
"Nor was Suetonius silent at such a crisis. Though he confided in the valour of his men, he yet mingled encouragements and entreaties to disdain the clamours and empty threats of the barbarians. "There," he said, "you see more women than warriors. Unwarlike, unarmed, they will give way the moment they have recognised that sword and that courage of their conquerors, which have so often routed them. Even among many legions, it is a few who really decide the battle, and it will enhance their glory that a small force should earn the renown of an entire army. Only close up the ranks, and having discharged your javelins, then with shields and swords continue the work of bloodshed and destruction, without a thought of plunder. When once the victory has been won, everything will be in your power."

Such was the enthusiasm which followed the general's address, and so promptly did the veteran soldiery, with their long experience of battles, prepare for the hurling of the javelins, that it was with confidence in the result that Suetonius gave the signal of battle.

At first, the legion kept its position, clinging to the narrow defile as a defence; when they had exhausted their missiles, which they discharged with unerring aim on the closely approaching foe, they rushed out in a wedge-like column. Similar was the onset of the auxiliaries, while the cavalry with extended lances broke through all who offered a strong resistance. The rest turned their back in flight, and flight proved difficult, because the surrounding waggons had blocked retreat. Our soldiers spared not to slay even the women, while the very beasts of burden, transfixed by the missiles, swelled the piles of bodies. Great glory, equal to that of our old victories, was won on that day. Some indeed say that there fell little less than eighty thousand of the Britons, with a loss to our soldiers of about four hundred, and only as many wounded. Boudicea put an end to her life by poison. ... Nothing however distressed the enemy so much as famine, for they had been careless about sowing corn, people of every age having gone to the war, while they reckoned on our supplies as their own."

My favourite quote about the Celtic combat:

http://www.ucc.ie/celt/published/T301035/text021.html
"After Cú Chulainn had been thus distorted, the hero sprang into his scythed chariot with its iron points, its thin sharp edges, its hooks, its steel points, with its sharp spikes of a hero, its arrangement for opening, with its nails that were on the shafts and thongs and loops and fastenings in that chariot.

Then he performs the thunder-feat of a hundred and the thunder-feat of two hundred and the thunder-feat of three hundred and the thunder-feat of four hundred, and he stopped at the thunder-feat of five hundred for he thought that at least that number should fall by him in his first attack and in his first contest of battle against the four provinces of Ireland. And he came forth in this manner to attack his enemies, and took his chariot in a wide circuit outside the four great provinces of Ireland. And he drove the chariot heavily. The iron wheels of the chariot sank deep into the ground so that the manner in which they sank into the ground left furrows sufficient to provide fort and fortress, for there arose on the outside as high as the iron wheels dikes and boulders and rocks and flagstones and gravel from the ground.

The reason why he made this warlike encircling of the four great provinces of Ireland was that they might not flee from him and that they might not disperse around him until he took revenge on them by thus pressing them for the wrong done to the youths of Ulster. And he came across into the middle of the ranks and threw up great ramparts of his enemies' corpses outside around the host. And he made the attack of a foe upon foes among them so that they fell, sole of foot to sole of foot, and headless neck to headless neck, such was the density of their corpses. Thrice again he went around them in this way so that he left a layer of six around them, that is the soles of three men to the necks of three men, all around the encampment. So that the name of this tale in the Táin is Sesrech Breslige, and it is one of the three slaughters which cannot be numbered in the Foray, the three being Sesrech Breslige and Imslige Glennamnach and the battle at Gáirech and Irgáirech, except that on this occasion hound and horse and man suffered alike. Others say that Lug mac Eithlend fought along with Cú Chulainn at Sesrech Breslige.

Their number is not known nor is it possible to count how many fell there of the common soldiery, but their chiefs alone have been counted. "

A description of a duel is here:

http://www.ucc.ie/celt/published/T301035/

"Then the men of Ireland considered what man should be sent to fight with Cú Chulainn in the hour of early morning on the morrow. They all said that it should be Fer Diad mac Damáin meic Dáire, the brave warrior from Fir Domnand. For similar and equal was their power of fighting and combat. With the same fostermothers, Scáthach and Úathach and Aífe, had they learnt the arts of valour and arms, and neither of them had any advantage over the other save that Cú Chulainn possessed the feat of the ga bulga. However, to counterbalance this Fer Diad had a horn-skin when fighting with a warrior on the ford. ...

‘What weapons shall we use now, Cú Chulainn?’ said Fer Diad. ‘Yours is the choice of weapons until night’ said Cú Chulainn, ‘since you were the first to reach the ford’. ‘Let us take then’ said Fer Diad, ‘to our polished, sharpened, hard, smooth spears with their thongs of hard flax’. ‘Let us do so indeed’ said Cú Chulainn. Then they took on them two hard, equally strong shields and they had recourse to the polished, sharpened, hard, smooth spears with their thongs of hard flax. Each of them fell to casting the spears at the other from the middle of the day till the evening. Despite the excellence of the defence, so good was their mutual casting that during that time each of them bled and reddened and wounded the other. ‘Let us cease from this now, Cú Chulainn’ said Fer Diad. ‘Let us do so indeed if the time has come’ said Cú Chulainn.
....

"‘What weapons shall we use today, Fer Diad?’ said Cú Chulainn. ‘Yours is the choice of weapons until night’ said Fer Diad, ‘since I had choice of weapons on the day that is past’. ‘Let us then’ said Cú Chulainn, ‘take to our great long spears today, for we think that thrusting with the spears today will bring us nearer to a decisive victory than the casting of missiles did yesterday. Let our horses be harnessed for us and our chariots yoked that we may fight from our horses and chariots today’. ‘Let us do so indeed’ said Fer Diad. Then they put on two broad, strong shields that day. They had recourse to the great long spears that day. Each of them began to pierce and wound, to overthrow (?) and cast each other down (?) from the twilight of early morning until sunset. If it were usual for birds in flight to pass through men's bodies, they would have gone through their bodies that day and carried lumps of flesh and blood through their wounds and cuts into the clouds and the air outside. And when evening came their horses were weary and their charioteers tired, and the heroes and champions themselves were weary too. ‘Let us cease from this now, Fer Diad’ said Cú Chulainn, ‘for our horses are weary and our charioteers are tired, and when they are weary, why should we also not be weary?’ "
...
They remained there that night. Then Fer Diad rose early on the morrow and came alone to the ford of combat, for he knew that this was the decisive day of the fight, and he knew too that one of them would fall in the fight that day or that both would fall. Then before Cú Chulainn came to meet him, he put on his battle equipment. Of that battle equipment was his filmy satin apron with its border of variegated gold which he wore next to his fair skin. Outside that he put on his apron of supple brown leather, and outside that a great stone as big as a millstone, and outside that stone, through fear and dread of the ga bulga that day, he put his strong, deep, iron apron made of smelted iron. On his head he put his crested helmet of battle which was adorned with forty carbuncle-gems, studded with red enamel and crystal and carbuncle and brilliant stones from the eastern world. In his right hand he took his fierce, strong spear. He set at his left side his curved battle-sword with its golden hilt and guards of red gold. On the arching slope of his back he put his huge, enormous fair shield with its fifty bosses into each boss of which a show boar could fit, not to speak of the great central boss of red gold. That day Fer Diad exhibited many and wonderful and brilliant feats of arms which he had not learned from anyone before that, neither from fostermother nor fosterfather, not from Scáthach nor Úathach nor Aífe, but he invented them himself on that day to oppose Cú Chulainn.

Cú Chulainn too came to the ford and he saw the many brilliant, wonderful feats of arms performed by Fer Diad. ‘You see yonder, my friend Láeg, the many brilliant, wonderful feats performed by Fer Diad, and in due course now all those feats will be directed

p.227
{line 3271-3307} against me. Therefore if it be I who am defeated this day, you must incite me and revile me and speak evil of me so that my ire and anger shall rise the higher thereby. But if it be I who inflict defeat, you must exhort me and praise me and speak will of me that thereby my courage rise higher’. ‘It shall so be done indeed, little Cú’ said Láeg.

Then Cú Chulainn too put on his battle-equipment and performed that day many brilliant, wonderful feats which he had not learned from any other, not from Scáthach nor from Úathach nor from Aífe.

Fer Diad saw these feats and knew that they would in due course be directed against him. ‘What feat of arms shall we perform today, Fer Diad?’ said Cú Chulainn. ‘Yours is the choice until nightfall’ said Fer Diad. ‘Let us perform the "feat of the ford" then’ said Cú Chulainn. ‘Let us do so indeed’ said Fer Diad. But though he said that, it was the feat he deemed it hardest to encounter for he knew that it was at the "feat of the ford" that Cú Chulainn overthrew every champion and every warrior he encountered. Great was the deed that was done on the ford that day, the two heroes, the two champions and the two chariot-fighters of western Europe, the two bright torches of valour of the Irish, the two bestowers of gifts and rewards and wages in the northwestern world, the two mainstays of the valour of the Irish coming from afar to encounter each other through the sowing of dissension and the stirring up of strife by Ailill and Medb. Each of them began to cast these weapons at each other from the twilight of early morning until midday, and when midday came, the rage of the combatants grew fiercer and they drew closer to each other.

Then for the first time Cú Chulainn sprang from the brink of the ford on to the boss of Fer Diad's shield, trying to strike his head from above the rim of the shield. Fer Diad gave the shield a blow with his left elbow and cast Cú Chulainn off like a bird on to the brink of the ford. Again Cú Chulainn sprang from the brink of the ford on to the boss of Fer Diad's shield, seeking to strike his head from above the rim of the shield. Fer Diad gave the shield a blow with his left knee and cast Cú Chulainn off like a child on to the brink of the ford. Láeg noticed what was happening. ‘Alas!’ said Láeg, ‘your opponent has chastised you as a fond mother chastises her child. He had belaboured you as flax (?) is beaten in a pond. He had ground you as a mill grinds malt. He has pierced you as a tool pierces an oak. he has bound you as a twining plant binds trees. He has attacked you as a

p.228
{line 3308-3345} hawk attacks little birds, so that never again will you have a claim or right or title to valour of feats of arms, you distorted little sprite’ said Láeg.

Then for the third time Cú Chulainn rose up as swift as the wind, as speedy as the swallow, as fierce as the dragon, as strong as the air, and landed on the boss of Fer Diad's shield, seeking to strike his head from above the rim of the shield. Then the warrior shook the shield and cast off Cú Chulainn into the bed of the ford as if he had never leapt at all (?).

Then occurred Cú Chulainn's first distortion. He swelled and grew big as a bladder does when inflated and became a fearsome, terrible, many-coloured, strange arch, and the valiant hero towered high above Fer Diad, as big a fomóir or a pirate.

Such was the closeness of their encounter that their heads met above, their feet below and their hands in the middle over the rims and bosses of the shields. Such was the closeness of their encounter that they clove and split their shields from rims to centres. Such was the closeness of their encounter that they caused their spears to bend and turn and yield to pressure from points to rivets. Such was the closeness of their encounter that sprites and goblins and spirits of the glen and demons of the air screamed from the rims of their shields and from the hilts of their swords and from the butt-ends of their spears. Such was the closeness of their encounter that they forced the river from its usual course and extent, and a couch might have been prepared for king or queen on the floor of the ford for not a drop of water remained there except what might drip there with the wrestling and trampling of the two heroes and champions on the floor of the ford. Such was the closeness of their encounter that the horses of the Irish went mad and frenzied and broke their spancels and shackles, their ropes and traces, and women and boys and children and those unfit to fight and the mad among the men of Ireland broke out through the camp south-westwards.

By this time the two combatants were at the edge-feat of swords. Then Fer Diad caught Cú Chulainn unguarded and dealt him a blow with his ivory-hilted blade which he plunged into Cú Chulainn's breast. And Cú Chulainn's blood dripped into his belt and the ford was red with the blood from the warrior's body. Cú Chulainn brooked not this wounding for Fer Diad attacked him with a succession of deadly stout blows, and he asked Láeg for the ga bulga.—Such was the nature of the ga bulga: it used to be set downstream and cast from between the toes: it made

p.229
{line 3346-3383} one wound as it entered a man's body but it had thirty barbs when one tried to remove it and it was not taken from a man's body until the flesh was cut away about it.

And when Fer Diad heard the mention of the ga bulga, he thrust down the shield to shelter the lower part of his body. Cú Chulainn cast the fine spear from off the palm of this hand over the rim of the shield and over the breast- piece of the horn-skin so that its farther half was visible after it had pierced Fer Diad's heart in his breast. Fer Diad thrust up the shield to protect the upper part of his body but that was help that came too late. The charioteer sent the ga bulga downstream. Cú Chulainn caught it between his toes and made a cast of it at Fer Diad. And the ga bulga went through the strong, thick apron of smelted iron and broke in three the great stone as big as a millstone and entered Fer Diad's body through the anus and filled every joint and limb of him with its barbs. ‘That suffices now’ said Fer Diad. ‘I have fallen by that cast. But indeed strongly do you cast from your right foot. "