war companies...

Ok, i want to create a war company but i can't find the rules to assign the various values like the ones for the people. And i thought the war-captain would have a war company (judging by his name) but in the playbook there isn't a rule to allow him to have and create one (like the gangs in AW) but you have "the right to roll your company's war".
Am i missing something?

no one?

The war company inherits its numbers from the people that the company is mustered from. If it is composed of groups of fighters from different peoples, say archers from one and cavalry from another, then the company gets its War from the majority or largest fraction.

That's how I read it.

Does anybody start the game with a War Company? If so, how many peoples can be recruited into it from the get go? Or is this all handled with the Muster Warriors move?

As I read it, it this game, a war company is not something that you have (like you have a gang in AW), but instead is a mechanically much more loose group that needs to be called together, used and then released (since most warriors probably have households to look to).

So I then read your question as, can the war captain start the game with their company already mustered? If you ask me, I'd say, why not. For example if the captain's player chooses soldiering as their pre-game season move, it seems reasonable that they would start with their company mustered (and perhaps weary and wanting to be released).

and perhaps weary and wanting to be released).

That's another thing: it seems like there should be a way for War Companies to dissolve other than attrition. I guess they're an ongoing subject of "make something cost" and "take something away" ?

...i thought the war-captain would have a war company (judging by his name) but in the playbook there isn't a rule to allow him to have and create one (like the gangs in AW)...

I'm reading War Companies as temporary groups that disband before the end of a season and have to be mustered again. Or if you're mustering from different Peoples then it might reflect a temporary alliance that ends when they have completed a war campaign or, again, at the end of a season.

It doesn't explicitly say that the War-Captain starts with a War Company under their command, but I also don't see why you couldn't have the War-Captain be in command of one starting out - as long as it fits in with the fiction and doesn't artificially swell your People numbers.

I recently started watching Vikings and mustering troops is exactly what Ragnar does in the second episode, but by the fifth episode Ragnar is clearly no longer in command of the company as the men have all returned to their families and households are readying for winter... which leaves Ragnar vulnerable. If you're reading this then you should really put Vikings on your list of things to watch!

...then the company gets its War from the majority or largest fraction.

I find the wording for that confusing. I think it needs to be more explicit because I'm just going to default to using the highest War rating and then maybe adding +1 if I think there are 30-59 warriors or +2 for 60+ warriors (because I can't get the number ratings for gangs in AW out of my head).

This week my play test group is certainly going to war.  Muster troops is a Basic Move.  Everyone has those for sure unless I missed something.  So everyone has the right to muster troops for battle.  I'm planning on letting every character muster troops if they desire.  Once someone has rolled Bold and has people following them into battle I'm going to be playing it like they all are in charge of their own armies.

Unless one player musters troops and tries to give them to another players army... which they were talking about... crap.

Any ideas about how to handle that?

I can just let that happen... but I feel they should have to Win Over their troops to get them to follow their new leader. 

I'll figure it out when I get there unless anyone else has any good ideas.

I'd definitely let one PC muster warriors to another PC's company, unless I had a particular in-fiction reason to have them refuse.

-Vincent

Once someone has rolled Bold and has people following them into battle I'm going to be playing it like they all are in charge of their own armies.

Unless one player musters troops and tries to give them to another players army... which they were talking about... crap.

...

I can just let that happen... but I feel they should have to Win Over their troops to get them to follow their new leader. 

Okay, so you've got A and B, and B's mustering troops for A's army. Here's the big question: is B going to be in the battle? If so, great - it's one big army under A for combat resolution purposes, but B's leading their unit of soldiers for role-playing purposes.

If B's not going to be present, though, that might call for some kind of roll. "Will you fight for me? Uh, well, I mean, not for me exactly. Actually for him. I won't be on the battlefield. I'll be in another province. Totally rooting for you though."