Haakon_val'Ishi wrote:
If that's the case then the Former Legionnaire background needs to be revisited, because it perpetuates the idea that a legionnaire is a heavy infantryman. All you have to do is look at the skills, talents and equipment provided to see that. If as you say the legions had more variety then we should have more options available to us. Think about it, what does the equipment provided match? Pretty much a classic Roman Legionnaire. To be clear I am not taking issue with anyone's take on this, just saying the game mechanics don't match up in my opinion.
Mike, there are now several Backgrounds that count as Former Legionnaire:
1. Former Legionnaire (A:RPG)
2. Equestrian (CoH)
3. Former Scout (CoH)
4. Former Tribune (CoH - clarified on boards and in errata I believe)
Could a Centurion function without a horse? Absolutely. Centurions as officers are apparently trained to be skilled horsemen. Despite the title of the Talent there's no flavor text. It grants a +1 to all Ride and Beast Lore skills to ride, care for or train a mount. You could just as easily call the Talent "Trained Horseman" and it would be fitting.
You're trying to match game mechanics against a Roman Centurion rather than a Coryani Centurion. As long as you insist that they have to operate the same way, I expect you'll have this conflict in expectations.
Even if the powers that be agree with you, I wouldn't expect to see a change in talents short of a second edition. There are no game balance issues impacting the selection of skills and talents that would require errata.
With a sweep of his hat,
Paul