Followers

Wednesday, May 25, 2022

Some thoughts about Aztec Warfare


I’ve been thinking about Aztec warfare and how to represent it on the table top. I'm looking to produce games that read like an excerpt from The Conquest of New Spain written by the Conquistadore Bernal Diaz.  If you are interested in Aztec warfare that is the must read witness account.  You will want the Maudslay edition.

Lets start with the basic Aztec unit.  It contains troops of every quality.  Men who had never fought before, men who had a bit of experience and elite warriors.  That was the reality.  Naturally, the elite did most of the slaughtering.  The others did they best they could.  Motivation all round was high because fighting was how you got up the Aztec social ladder.

A composite unit then, with a mix of weapons. Some of those weapons were short range distance ones. Fighting commenced with a short range barrage followed by a fierce attack.  The elites led the fighting and everyone else joined in to the best of their ability.  Ambitious men, of whatever status, sought to take prisoners.  Those who did so might advance a social rank.

This means that we should rethink our idea of Aztec units. No more serried ranks of Eagle or Jaguar knights in neat units. Instead we should imagine them mixed together and supported by the other men of their neighborhood. 

Priests fought in their own units but again by temple.

I envisage a notional Aztec unit as comprising about one quarter of elite warriors and ditto experienced with the remaining half being more or less untried. All of the unit lived in the same locality.  In a wealthier area it might be one half elite warriors-remember social standing was intrinsically linked to battle field prowess.

 


The elite were the better fighters and also comprised the leadership of the unit.  This had consequences when the Aztecs met the Spanish.  We will get to that later.

For the moment how do we represent the different fighting abilities within our Aztec unit?  I've gone for different coloured dice.  Let's say our unit has four combat dice, one black, one red and two yellow.  The black dice requires a lower score to achieve a kill or wound than the red dice.  The yellow dice has less chance of causing a hit than both. The black dice represents the elite warriors, the red the experienced fellows and the yellow dice the new boys.  Should that prove to be over elaborate I'll move to one third, two thirds 1 black dice, two yellow ones.

Let's take this further.  Our elite warriors lead the fighting and so are more at risk.  Any casualties should come first from them.  As they are better protected and highly skilled they might benefit from a saving throw. Not so the lesser warriors.  If they become casualties that's that.  This all works well enough against other Meso-Americans. That, of course, covers most of the fighting, for allies always hugely outnumbered the Spanish contingent. 

Fighting the Spanish was different.

Spanish weapons utterly nullified Aztec armour.  Our elite Aztec warriors were much more likely to die when leading the attack against Spaniards.  Consequently, our Aztec unit could quite quickly lose its leadership and cohesion.  Morale then sharply diminished and unit withdrawal and collapse became likely. 

How to represent all this is vexatious.  As you might expect easy solutions do not readily come to mind.  Currently, I'm pondering Die Fighting by Bob Jones in this context.  Bob has given us something very elegant and very different.  My previous insight was that wounds were the way in to capturing what happened on the battlefield.  Bob's method which involves dice being gained or lost lends itself to what I have in mind.  A note of caution is needed here.  I can't just try to force what we know of Aztec warfare into Bob's innovative system.  That way lies failure.

I consider the above useful progress.  

Next, I need to think about captive taking and how it influenced the conduct of both Aztec and Spanish troops. Perhaps a winning Aztec unit gets an additional 'captive' dice for the second round of melee or any pursuit.  A score of 5 or 6 results in a captive.  Maybe, may be.  

An alternative might be to to give the Aztecs the option of turning a kill into a captive by way of a dice throw.  A dice throw because there was a chance that fellow Spaniards would rescue the would be prisoner.  That, after all, is how Cortez escaped death.


Here are some Aztec skirmishers should you have thought I'd forgotten them. 

Also, it maybe that Aztec Cuachic veteran warriors formed discrete units. Either operating as a reserve to the warriors of their locality  or leading the advance.  I'm going to go with that concept, not least because I have a surfeit elite warrior figures.

Welcome to an Aztec Game work in progress.  I'm minded to call it Bernal or perhaps Cuauhtemoc.  Will it work?  I don't know, but the journey should be interesting.

The time scale for progress is elastic.  I do want to first write something here about why the Aztecs lost.  There was more to it than Guns, Germs and Steel important as those three were.

12 comments:

  1. Your notes on the composition of Aztec units is very interesting. It certainly is making me rethink how I will portray Aztec armies on the table top.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks Brian, yes I'm thinking of (re) basing up a couple of units to reflect the actuality.

    ReplyDelete
  3. A very good insight into how the Aztecs fought and not something I've come across before. You different coloured die is a simple and elegant idea on how to represent these mixed units.

    ReplyDelete
  4. In the early 1990's I built an Aztec army using the beautiful Naismith range in 25mm? At the time George Gush's rules were the go to rules. A key point was the fanaticism of the knightly orders, prone to wild and uncontrollable charges. The main warriors were steady and a bit reluctant to close with the Spanish. One tactic I attempted to implement was the hidden Aztecs who were hunkered down in pits and surprised the Spanish as they passed by. I had to add a die roll to see if Aztec's captured a Spaniard for sacrifice and this was the rub really, two conflicting aims in the battles. The Aztecs only realised the aim of the Spanish was annihilation of their opponents when it was too late. It was still touch and go for them and it was only when they recruited the Taxalacans could they overcome the Aztec. Best of luck with the project, oh and dont forget the Otomi and the warrior priests who clearly inspired the warriors.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Interesting that you went for the capture dice roll back then. It does seem to be a logical thing to do.

    Quite right about the Tlaxcala too, without them it was game over for the Spanish.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Enjoyed reading your thoughts about how you plan to game this period and form of warfare. I'm interested in seeing how this evolves.
    Lovely looking figures and informative insight.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Appreciated Richard. I don't know if we will get there but I'm going to give it a go.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Im following your rules efforts with great interest as I purchased the WoFun prepainted plastic flats and I now have a huge Aztec army plus Spanish and Tlaxacalan allies. But haven't figured out a set of rules for them yet.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hi Joseph, I thought this series would be up your street. Don't now if you have come across this DBA variant?

    http://ilivewithcats.blogspot.com/2016/04/quetzalcoatl-rampant.html

    I think I'm getting somewhere with my current effort at Aztec Warfare.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Interesting take - and I agree that Diaz is the source to use. I wrote a set of rules (well, a supplement to the Feudal Patrol rules) for the Spanish Conquest that is a free download here: https://wargamesbuildings.co.uk/product/civilizations-collide-feudal-patrol-supplement-2nd-edition/ My rules are for skirmish/28mm. I treat units a bit differently - and it depends on the scenario I use (I have developed 15 so far). For the most part, I keep Elites as Elites - so they are mostly homogeneous except in later scenarios where either casualties or say being in a war canoe might mix them. For Veterans, I have them in larger units with an equal number of novices that they are training. It's similar but not exactly the same with the Tlaxcalans. In my games, when the Aztecs incapacitate a figure, in most scenarios it is mandatory that they assign a figure to drag off that poor victim for future sacrifice. Of course, then that unit is down a figure. My blog has over 50 posts on wargaming the period (with more to come) - and while it's different than DBA, maybe some of my ideas may be helpful. Glad to see more interest in the period for gaming. Just this year I have run 14 convention games for Aztecs/Conquistadores/Tlaxcalans - and the reception has been amazing.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Hi Mark, I've followed your Aztec Project with interest. The terrain you have made is a real treat. Thanks for making the download freely available. I will have a good read.

    I'm not sure how my game is going to go just yet, probably pitched at large skirmish/small battle.

    ReplyDelete