To avoid resurrecting the other thread, let me ask - how do you deal with mounts and leaders in your mass combat games?
I'm thinking specifically B/X, but I might need to find answers elsewhere, including chainmail, ADnD, battlesystem, 3rd party stuff.
First, how to deal with a mounted individual - considering the mount has different AC and HP?
What about charges? Lances do double damage on a charge (2d6) but an attacking horse does 2d6 damage and it cannot attack on a charge... So a charge REDUICES your damage form 3d6 to 2d6.
Finally, including a leader apparently gives you +2 morale, but how do you attack him? as part of the unit or individually?
One more thing, OSE listed orcs and goblin mercenaries that are way cheaper than others. Im assuming their morale is lower despite this page suggesting otherwise?
https://oldschoolessentials.necroticgnome.com/srd/index.php/Mercenaries
1E has answers to all these questions.
Mounts themselves can attack but only after the first round of melee.
Morale for other than monsters is based on loyalty. There's a detailed list of modifiers for that. Paladins can fairly easily whip up their men into fanatic level loyalty, even to the point where they remain fanatical even if the Paladin dies.
Non-human troops present a whole separate set of challenges. There's a section on it in the 1E DMG, which includes a racial preference table for common non-human, non-demihuman troops, making it a bit much to summarize here.
I run mostly Savage Worlds these days. Their Mass Combat rules are *excellent*. They're scalable from small skirmishes to intergalactic fleet combat while letting your PC's (and NPC major villains) shine. Mounts? Sure why not?
I'll explain the rules a little later if people are interested. (I'm not sure if you're looking for an OSR solution).
Quote from: Lunamancer on April 24, 2023, 10:24:46 AM
1E has answers to all these questions.
Mounts themselves can attack but only after the first round of melee.
Morale for other than monsters is based on loyalty. There's a detailed list of modifiers for that. Paladins can fairly easily whip up their men into fanatic level loyalty, even to the point where they remain fanatical even if the Paladin dies.
Non-human troops present a whole separate set of challenges. There's a section on it in the 1E DMG, which includes a racial preference table for common non-human, non-demihuman troops, making it a bit much to summarize here.
Ill check my OSRIC books so see if they mention how they treat these issues! Thanks!
Quote from: tenbones on April 24, 2023, 11:09:25 AM
I run mostly Savage Worlds these days. Their Mass Combat rules are *excellent*. They're scalable from small skirmishes to intergalactic fleet combat while letting your PC's (and NPC major villains) shine. Mounts? Sure why not?
I'll explain the rules a little later if people are interested. (I'm not sure if you're looking for an OSR solution).
Color me interested!
I have a battle system that I have outlined in a post here: https://composedreamgames.com/forum/discussion/9022/dungeons-unleashed-battle-system#latest (https://composedreamgames.com/forum/discussion/9022/dungeons-unleashed-battle-system#latest)
and have included in my free Dungeons Unleashed! (https://composedreamgames.com/marketplace/dungeon-unleashed) beta.
I've run a number of battles with in it my (on pause) Crimson Shield campaign.
Calvary has a higher attack rate against infantry, typically. Normally, one die lower against other cavalry. Wolfmen and Minotaurs have been treated as equivalent to calvary in this respect.
The main things "leaders" do in the system, are that they can commit themselves directly to the fray, risking regular personal combat. This bolsters morale/unit cohesion and hopefully keeping the unit from fragmenting.
I've had a lot of fun with it, so happy to talk more.
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 24, 2023, 09:30:14 AM
One more thing, OSE listed orcs and goblin mercenaries that are way cheaper than others. Im assuming their morale is lower despite this page suggesting otherwise?
Humanoids don't necessarily have low morale. But they do have 'issues'. Like when Franco used Algerians against the Republicans during the Spanish Civil War, and when the Free French used Moroccans in Italy during WW2. They tend to do a lot of raping and pillaging, which may not be what you want.
Greetings!
Ahh, yes. Leaders, and Leadership. Whenever I think about the effects that a leader can have upon the outcome of a battle, I recall the ancient stories of Julius Caesar, and Alexander the Great, as two hugely defining examples.
Julius Caesar, during his battles in Gaul, was outnumbered. Caesar's Legions were suffering, exhausted, and getting beaten by the fierce Celts. Caesar, seeing the danger his men were in, donned his famous Red Cloak, and went down from his command post, supervising the battle over trenches and fortifications. Caesar then drew his sword, and flung himself into the center of hand to hand combat, fighting man-to-man where the fighting and danger was most the hottest!
Caesar's men--the soldiers of his beleaguered Roman Legions--upon seeing their great commander leading the way in the fighting--and desperately in danger--went berserk with rage. The Legions were renewed in hope, energy, and purpose, and proceeded to absolutely annihilate the superior Celtic army. All eyes were on Caesar. The Legions gloried in Caesar, and were eager to lay down their lives for their beloved Commander, who was like a loving and stern father to them all.
Alexander the Great, leading his powerful army into the jungles of India, came upon a great fortress city, and his earlier attacks against the city had failed. Alexander's men, while long suffering, and veterans of 10-years of war and conquering the entire Persian Empire and most of the known world, all of Greece, Turkey, the Levant, Syria, Arabia, Egypt, and much of Central Asia and Northern India, were exhausted, and wanted to return home.
Alexander the Great, clad in his radiant white and gold armour, and his brilliant white plume, grabbed his sword, and charged the enemy city. Alexander scaled the siege ladder, and mounted the enemy wall, and seeing the enemy warriors gather around him, leaped down forward into the enemy warriors, yelling in rage! Alexander was only accompanied byhis bodyguard and two other officers, and within the following moments, the two officers were killed, his bodyguard was wounded, and Alexander had been slashed and shot through with an arrow.
Nonetheless, the sight of Alexander the Great flinging himself headlong into danger, straight into the waiting enemy warriors, sent a rippling shockwave through Alexander's entire army. The sharp realization that their beloved commander, their King, who had given them the entire world to rule as masters, was in mortal danger, and about to be killed.
Also in mere moments, Alexander's army charged into immediate action, like a war machine bringing divine wrath upon a helpless world. The Greek army burst through the city gates, while other assault teams frantically climbed the siege ladders in endless rows. Commands were shouted, and growling roars went up and down the line. The whole army went berserk in a frenzy, desperate to save their King. At the last moment, bleeding and about to be killed, Alexander's loyal men arrived on the scene. Many great warriors were weeping in fierce shame, and their rage spread like a ruthless fire, engulfing the entire city.
The great fortress city was annihilated. The defending armies were slaughtered, and the city's population brutally crushed in an orgy of conquest and slaughter. The lucky few were marched off as slaves. The army, as a whole, sighed a great sigh of relief that their King had not been killed, and even as they knelt in subjection and repentance, they rejoiced in the favour and praise of Alexander the Great.
In both examples, the decisive actions, the valour, the leadership, of one man in mere moments, even an hour, entirely changed the course of battle from defeat to absolute and total victory. One man's actions decided the fate of tens of thousands of his own men, and hundreds of thousands of enemy troops and people.
That is what history tells us about leaders, and leadership. Leadership has a spiritual dynamic, which can completely upend all known logic, mathematical certainty, and calculations of reality. In both cases of Caesar and Alexander, they were like divine avatars, huge champions of war and glory that were unstoppable. No mortal could defeat them, despite them being outnumbered and pressed from every side. Even while they bled from wounds, they did not relent, and they did not fall. They continued to slaughter their enemies, and cry out for their loyal men to join them by their side!
Through fire, through danger, and even through the cloud of death--their men answered their call with heroism and ferocious loyalty that inspires even today, down thousands of years of history.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
All good points! great write up about historical leaders.
I do think a good leader could affect the morale of thousands, especially if he is leading from the front, with "skin in the game".
There should also be some space for strategy - great thinkers instead of charismatic warriors.
The reason why I'm asking about morale and leaders is because these rules exist in B/X (OSE), but I'm not sure how to use them.
B/X orcs have morale 6 (8 with leader), but the mercenary table indicate otherwise.
I wonder if looking at how ACKS has done it would help? Since that is apparently a B/X revision with a emphasis on "Conquering" etc.
So I hear, I haven't read it or played.
Yeah, this might be a good idea, thanks!
Most OSR games tackling this want to approximate the numbers to get something like chainmail, but ACKS usually has very good rules.
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 24, 2023, 04:00:10 PM
All good points! great write up about historical leaders.
I do think a good leader could affect the morale of thousands, especially if he is leading from the front, with "skin in the game".
There should also be some space for strategy - great thinkers instead of charismatic warriors.
The reason why I'm asking about morale and leaders is because these rules exist in B/X (OSE), but I'm not sure how to use them.
B/X orcs have morale 6 (8 with leader), but the mercenary table indicate otherwise.
Greetings!
Thinkers! Certainly, Eric!
Brilliant thinkers and strategists often contribute immensely to achieving victory in warfare--though oftentimes, by their intellectual, introspective nature and work, they are not generally *seen* or recognized as being inspirational, or having an immediate effect upon the battlefield.
That brings to my mind the examples of US General George C. Marshall, Army Chief-of-Staff, and primary advisor to President Franklin D. Roosevelt during World War II. Marshall pretty much engineered the entire grand strategy of America during World War II, from the build up and defense of Britain, to the campaigns in North Africa, Italy, Normandy, and onwards into the Nazi Reich. Marshall also, interestingly, coordinated his grand strategy with another intellectual genius--US Navy Fleet Admiral Ernest J. King. Admiral King ws disliked by most, and had few friends--though he was credited with being a literal genius in regards to Naval Warfare. Admiral King was strict, disciplined, demanding, arrogant, and forceful--though he was willing to listen to others contribute because his overriding goal was absolute victory. It was Admiral King that worked with General Marshall, to coordinate the Pacific strategy with General MacArthur, Admiral Nimitz, and US Marine General Vandegrift to create the winning strategy against the Empire of Japan. Interestingly, also, in their own ways, MacArthur, Vandegrift, Nimitz, and Generals Patton and Eisenhower were the charismatic front leaders that put into action the elements of victory--but it was Marshall and King that laid down the technological, logistical, and strategic blueprints to achieve such victories.
So, yes, there is definitely a place for intellectual thinkers and strategists, though I think that ancient and medieval warfare, being somewhat obviously less technologically and resource-dependent, and sophisticated, the intellectual thinkers and strategists are less prominent or even necessary, because the base needs and requirements are decidedly different. That isn't to say that as we go back in time, that such thinkers and strategists were not important, but it is to say that as industries have grown, resource management more critical, and technological sophistication has increased, the contributions of thinkers and strategists have thereby increased in significance and impact. It has also remained a constant though, the critical importance of charismatic battle leaders.
I'm also reminded of an episode during World War II in Europe, where Supreme Allied Commander Eisenhower was considering sending General Patton back to the States after Patton had slapped a soldier for cowardice, and publicly berated the soldier. In the press, this became something of a scandal, with some politicians demanding action against Patton. Eisenhower confessed, according to written notes and verbal interviews, that largely, the American public would simply not accept such a judgement against Patton, flat out. That wasn't going to happen. But on another level, Eisenhower acknowledged that Patton, by himself, was worth 20 enemy divisions in casualties, and it would amount to treason on Eisenhower's part to discipline Patton. America winning the war, and the Allies, meant that Patton really was absolutely essential. There would be no Allied victory in Europe without Patton. So, Eisenhower said it was an easy and immediate realization--Patton would stay in Europe, and command mighty armies, come Hell or high-water. It is also interesting to note that Eisenhower was more intellectual, and more given to strategic thinking--but he simply did not have Patton's abilities as a battle commander and leader of men.
Very interesting dynamics playing out in such events!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Great info on WW2 figures, Shark. If you had to suggest only one account of the military history of WW2, in other words the one you think of as the best or one of the best, what would it be? If you don't mind. Thanks!
Just to stay on topic, I'm sure it would be great source material for non-WW2 gaming.
Quote from: Baron on April 24, 2023, 11:12:26 PM
Great info on WW2 figures, Shark. If you had to suggest only one account of the military history of WW2, in other words the one you think of as the best or one of the best, what would it be? If you don't mind. Thanks!
Just to stay on topic, I'm sure it would be great source material for non-WW2 gaming.
Greetings!
Thank you, sir! Well, your question is truly *vast*--despite seemingly being simple. To be honest, World War II is such a vast subject. I like how the gang over at Timeriders--I think that's the name of the site--put it; World War II is really the story of multiple wars going on, all simultaneously, all over the globe. It is the first and truly *Global War* in human history, having wars and operational theaters on every continent except Antarctica. These different theaters--Europe, the Eastern Front; North Africa, Italy, and the Mediterranean; China, Burma, India; the South-West Pacific; the Central Pacific; the Northern Pacific; then, there are sub-categories, almost composing "wars" of their own--the naval war in the Battle of the Atlantic; the U.S. Submarine "Wolfpack" War against Japan; the Air War against Japan; the Air War against the Nazi Reich--that's SEVEN major theaters of war, plus two separate naval wars and two distinct air wars.
The literature and scholarship is also VAST.
I would have to narrow it down, as it truly is necessary to specialize at least somewhat in order to actually gain clarity. One-volume books that seek to cover the entirety of World War II in its full scope, embracing all of the theaters and perspectives, well, honestly are just general public overviews. So, specialization really is necessary to learn anything meaningful.
Now, that I have prefaced with all of that, as I believe it is a crucial concept to understand, or a crucial dynamic of the scope of the war and the historiographical literature written about the war, I would say this about America's involvement in World War II, I would say the one most profound and thought-provoking book would be "There's a War to Be Won--The U.S. Army in World War II"--by Geoffrey Perret. I placed an Amazon link for you below;
https://www.amazon.com/Theres-War-Be-Won-United/dp/034541909X
The book discusses and covers many campaigns that America was involved in during the war, but Perret devotes special attention to the huge problems facing America at the beginning of the war--the whole problem of fighting a truly global war when you start with nothing but obsolete junk and ill-equipped divisions that have no idea how to even get into the fight--while everything around you is being crushed and conquered by Nazi Germany and the Japanese Empire. Out of the gate, we started with a crippling defeat, and being sucker punched to our knees. We, as a nation, were on the ropes, the world was in flames, and we were looking at ashes and defeat at every corner.
It is from this profound and alarming position, teetering on the edge of the abyss of defeat and ruin--that America truly wakes up, as "The Sleeping Giant". Perret covers all of the personalities involved--all of the people I talked about, and many more. He details what specifically, the problems and challenges were--and what the solutions were. Crucially involved, were Franklin Roosevelt, General George C. Marshall, and Admiral Ernest J. King. Roosevelt provided the leadership, the trust, and the authority; Marshall and King established the blueprints and frameworks for forging ultimate victory on a global scale. MacArthur, Vandegrift, Nimitz, Eisenhower, Clark, Bradley, and Patton, and also General Doolittle and General Henry "Hap" Arnold--the architect of U.S. Total War and Strategic Bombing Campaigns--were the primary front commanders that *executed* policy and strategic goals into tactical and battlefield reality.
The coordination of American industry, through Presidential mandate--the gathering and stockpiling of every kind of resource you can imagine--and the 24/7 absolute focus on building a military machine that could dominate every enemy, on every battlefield, and in every way--from sea, land, and air, is simply breathtaking, and deeply inspiring. The United States, all by itself, out produced all of the Axis Powers--Nazi Germany, the Japanese Empire, and Fascist Italy--in everything, many times over. In addition to creating an arsenal of war to forge the American military--America also sent huge tons of equipment and resources to the Soviet Union, China, and the entire Western Allies.
Perret gets into the details, and also spotlights some of the clashes and personality conflicts--all along the way, as he demonstrates how America waged and won World War II. It is also especially gratifying to learn how deeply powerful and influential brilliant leaders like Marshall and King were--in most books on the war, they are typically little more than footnotes. Despite the fact that these two men--one in charge of the Army, and the other in charge of the Navy--literally outranked everyone else except the President. It was these two men that decided the grand strategy, the scope, the road we were to walk. Not to get away from the great work that so many others did, but it is refreshing to get a closer view of how these two leaders operated, and what they did, and why. Absolute geniuses!
In short, this one book will entirely and permanently transform your entire understanding and appreciation for the huge and mighty achievement that America accomplished in World War II.
As an aside, it is also fascinating to learn about General MacArthur's struggles and personality conflicts--he too, had many high officers that did not get along so well with him. It is also important to remember that General MacArthur was tested as a high-rated Genius--and graduated FIRST IN CLASS at the United States Academy at West Point. He was often arrogant, grandiose, a glory hound, demanding, and mercurial in temper--but, despite his many faults, MacArthur was a genius, and absolutely essential for America's victory in World War II. It says something when a special submarine was sent to the Philippines when the Japanese armies were conquering them all--and General MacArthur was told to pack his things and get in the submarine--by direct order of President Franklin Roosevelt. Roosevelt said that MacArthur was himself simply too important to be allowed to be killed by the Japanese, or taken prisoner and imprisoned. Top Secret, not going to happen. So, MacArthur was whisked away to safety in Australia to carry on the war by Presidential Order. Yes, MacArthur wanted to fight to the death against the onrushing Japanese armies, with his American and Filipino troops at his side. MacArthur was a Five-Star General. Imagine being General Marshall, let alone some other General--and having to deal with a titanic figure like MacArthur? MacArthur was followed everywhere by the Press, and even at the beginning of the war, MacArthur was already a decorated war hero, with 25 years of service in the United States Army. MacArthur was famous, widely respected, and absolutely beloved by the American public. Everyone had to deal with him very carefully, to be sure.
And yes, this book, and many others dealing with World War II, can very much help with our D&D games, especially with large-scale military action, great wars and campaigns. I have gotten immense inspiration from dozens of angles, topics, tactical and strategic problems, personality conflicts, struggle for resources, geographical dynamics, politics, diplomacy, Leadership, Generals, training, manpower and recruitment--the list goes on!
I hope that I have helped in some small way, my friend!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
You certainly were helpful, thank you. I would say that outside of school, my only book on WWII was this one:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9769154-the-how-and-why-wonder-book-of-world-war-ii (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9769154-the-how-and-why-wonder-book-of-world-war-ii) ;D
So I'll grab the Perret book. Again, my thanks!
Thanks Shark, this is all very interesting indeed!
Gave me a broader perspective on some ideas.
It makes sense that technology/logistics makes strategists more important, but in ancient warfare seeing a mighty leader in shinning armor would make all the difference.
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 25, 2023, 08:54:07 AM
Thanks Shark, this is all very interesting indeed!
Gave me a broader perspective on some ideas.
It makes sense that technology/logistics makes strategists more important, but in ancient warfare seeing a mighty leader in shinning armor would make all the difference.
I think the pure logistic side of things are easy to overlook. If your troops are fed, decently equipped (such as for the weather), paid, and reasonably rested, their morale and fighting capabilities will be higher.
Those are all logistics pieces.
Quote from: Thondor on April 25, 2023, 10:25:04 AM
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 25, 2023, 08:54:07 AM
Thanks Shark, this is all very interesting indeed!
Gave me a broader perspective on some ideas.
It makes sense that technology/logistics makes strategists more important, but in ancient warfare seeing a mighty leader in shinning armor would make all the difference.
I think the pure logistic side of things are easy to overlook. If your troops are fed, decently equipped (such as for the weather), paid, and reasonably rested, their morale and fighting capabilities will be higher.
Those are all logistics pieces.
You make a great point here. These kinds of logistics are one step removed from the actual battles. Makes you wonder if they need their own mini-game.
On one hand, some players might find it boring to deal with. OTOH, resource management, including rations, weight, etc., are a big part of old school play.
Quote from: Baron on April 25, 2023, 03:29:10 AM
You certainly were helpful, thank you. I would say that outside of school, my only book on WWII was this one:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9769154-the-how-and-why-wonder-book-of-world-war-ii (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9769154-the-how-and-why-wonder-book-of-world-war-ii) ;D
So I'll grab the Perret book. Again, my thanks!
Greetings!
You are very welcome, Baron! I am glad to help!
I was reading some of the Amazon reviews of Perret's book, and it was interesting how so many of them reflect my own analysis and impressions from his excellent book!
When you get Perret's book, Baron, get into it and read it my friend! I would love to hear your commentary and thoughts--as you read the book, chapter by chapter. That's also a good way to really chew into the material, and learn it, too.
It is also a good exercise to jot down some notes on how concepts and issues discussed in the book may reflect in and be elements of a D&D campaign. I know it re-focused thoughts for me, things to be aware of, other important factors to consider, all kinds of neat things.
I recall one section for example, where he discusses the equipping, training, and recruitment of special forces. Marines, Mountain troops, and Ranger battalions for use as Airborne paratroopers. Very interesting discussion.
It is also deeply gratifying and interesting how he highlights that even ordinary, common US soldiers rose to the challenge, and demonstrated war-winning tenacity, courage, discipline, and heroism. Again, and again. Against the Nazis best troops, and also the fanatical troops f the Empire of Japan.
We sent them all packing on a one-way trip to Hell.
Perret also discusses doctrine, social values, and technology. And independent thinking. How the American way of war was crafted with our own values and talents in mind--and when honed sharp, brought absolute destruction and defeat to the enemy. Independent hayseed sergeants, young buck hot-shot Lieutenants, using maximum Time on Target artillery called in by radio, odd crew men working overtime to repair tans out of bubblegum ad chicken wire, and lots of ordinary American men saying, the line is drawn here. We fight them to the death! Or digging the Japanese out of dug in bunkers and caves in the Pacific, blasting them with flamethrowers, tossing a grenade in, and then moving in with troops firing machine guns, killing them all. So inspiring! His narrative hops along nice, from being sometimes funny, interesting, thought-provoking and intellectual, and then *BOOM*--a section on gripping, harsh combat against tough odds! Damn!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Okay - Savage Worlds Mass Battle System. One of the beauties of this system is it could, with very little effort be imported into any other system. Note: This system is *not* supposed to be realistic. It's supposed to be cinematic and dramatic. A "standard" Mass Battle round is 2-hrs but you can make it whatever you need it to be - a 5hrs, a day, whatever fits.
Setting Up
You figure out your opposing side's numbers. It doesn't matter if its 15 people or 15-million. You assign 10 Tokens to the larger side. To the smaller side you give proportionately less tokens. So if it's 10,000 troops on one side and 7,000 on the other, the larger gets 10 and the smaller gets 7. Then you adjust accordingly to *whatever* you think is relevant - One side might be Veterans
- Better gear etc.
The goal is to measure the sides in terms of relative actual ability. Don't worry about plans, defenses etc. Every round each side's Commander will make a Battle skill check to determine the ebb and flow of the battle.
Battle Modifiers
There is a skill in Savage Worlds called Battle. It is used for anything having to do with military strategy and organization etc. Once you have the Force Tokens dispensed, you need to add up all relevant Battle Modifiers. These modifiers go as follows:
Force Bonus - The side with the most Force Tokens adds +1 for each point of difference between sides.
Tactical Advantage - Grant a +1 to +4 bonus for any circumstance that gives one side an advantage. This is where players can get creative, fortifications, use of tactics for that round that narratively sound cool and plausible to your tastes. The point is to try and collect as many bonuses as possible for that round's check.
Battle Plan - Get another +1 to +4 Bonus if one or both sides has a clever plan over the other.
Before the Commander makes their check against their adversary Commander (which may both be PC's, mind you). ALL relevant PC's (and NPC's) are allowed to make some kind of Support Action with some relevant skill with the GM's approval as to what they are doing that round. Success gives another +1 to the Commander's roll (but it gives a level of fatigue to the PC). A Raise on the check gives the Commander +2 and no Fatigue OR they get to roll on the Battle Effects Table which is a random table that grants effects to the overall battle that are due to PC's actions (GM can contextualize it). So for example - a player might say he's doing combat medic duty, and running to the front and dragging people back to safety and doing First Aid. So his check for the round is First Aid. Let's say that player rolls an 8 (a Raise) and chooses to roll on the Battle Effects table and rolls 12 (An Army of One) then the following effect happens:
An Army of One: Tales will be told and songs sung of the warrior's epic feats this day. The enemy army loses a Force Token immediately (this doesn't subtract from his Battle roll but does cause a morale check even if he wins).
EACH PC gets to do this. And each major NPC (so have the major NPC's figured out during the setup) gets to do the same thing as well. Once all of these bonuses are added up - the Commanders roll.
Tie - Both sides lose one Force Token
Success - The Victor loses one Force Token, the Loser loses *two* Tokens
Raise - The Defeated army loses two tokens.
Morale
If an army loses one or more Force Tokens the Commander must make a Spirit check to maintain the integrity of his force. There are various bonuses to the roll -
-1 For each Force Token Lost
+2 If the army is made up of "fearless" troops.
+2 If the army is within fortifications or prepared positions
+2 The army cannot retreat or will be killed if it does.
Success means the army fights on. If the Commander fails... the army breaks it's a rout. I've abbreviated some of this - most Mass Battles last for several rounds and get quite dramatic. PC's can start taking on Fatigue and Wounds (and die gloriously). But the GM just needs to contextualize it all based on this large abstracted rolls while letting the PC's do what they do best (literally) to help change the outcome of the fight. Once a side is routed, it gets dangerous - most minions are already slaughtered by this point - remember a Force Token is representing possibly *thousands* of troops. And often by the time a route occurs, if there are good leaders, some NPCs/PC's are wounded and possibly dying, so they have to make Vigor checks to see what their final disposition is.
Of course this could lead directly to normal combat in a route as well... which itself is its own drama.
If you want more detailed questions/examples I'd be happy to provide them.
This looks like a solid abstract system, I like it.
I've been looking into ACKS, it has a good system (Domains at War) but too complex.
OSRIC gave me some hints but no definitive answers, especially about mounts. Also, couldn't find the price of hiring leaders for your troops.
Here is what I'm looking for, but not sure it exists:
---
- Perfectly compatible with B/X*.
- Minimal conversion needed.
- No approximations. AC 4 and AC 5 are different things.
- Results that are similar to individual combat.
- No new units needed, use ANY humanoid or monster in the book.
- Avoiding new mechanics, such as using 1d6 or 2d6 for attack rolls.
(*This also means it could be used with other OSR and TSR games with minimal conversion, for example, adding +1 to you attack bonus, etc.).
---
I devised a simple approximation:
---
In the freeform system, the damage of an unit is equal to the sum of all individual damage, averaged and divided by three. For an unit of 20 veterans, it would be 30, for example (20d8, average 90, divided by 3).
To hit, simply make three separate attack rolls. Each successful attack inflicts 30 points of damage.
Three is an arbitrary number, of course - you might as well divide the total damage by 10 or twenty and roll as many dice.
---
Ridiculously simple but solves most of my issues. Still, it leaves out all the special circumstances such as single figures, leaders, mounts, walls, area attacks, etc. Each of this has to be addressed on a case by case basis or use abstractions, like the SW rules mentioned above.
Well that's where you could lift some of the mechanical aspects of B/X and abstract them. Let players and important NPC's make checks using whatever abilities are relevant to the overall battle. Then create tables of possible outcomes based on those effects.
It's very much in the table-rich nature of OSR design. The issue for Mass Combat is *always* abstraction vs. realism. We did a very good mass combat system for the Talislanta: The Savage Lands D&D 5e edition.
I'll try to do a summation of them later.
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 27, 2023, 08:44:58 AM
OSRIC gave me some hints but no definitive answers, especially about mounts. Also, couldn't find the price of hiring leaders for your troops.
You need to go to genuine 1E. Those manuals answer everything. OSRIC is trash in my view.
Quote from: Lunamancer on April 27, 2023, 10:52:51 AM
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 27, 2023, 08:44:58 AM
OSRIC gave me some hints but no definitive answers, especially about mounts. Also, couldn't find the price of hiring leaders for your troops.
You need to go to genuine 1E. Those manuals answer everything. OSRIC is trash in my view.
Could you give me some hint? I have the 1e books but the organization is awful, hard to find anything. I'm looking at the DMG, maybe hiring mercenary leaders is in the PHB?
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 24, 2023, 09:30:14 AM
To avoid resurrecting the other thread,
I believe I figured out the math behind the battlesystem chart.
So I know it had something to do with a binomial distribution which is a function that tells you the odds of X success happening in Y trials (or rolls).
Battlesystem assumes figures of 10 men. That a battlesystem round is 3 AD&D combat rounds or 3 minutes. That the damage dealt is in HD (1d8 in AD&D).
By rolling 2d6+THACO-AC+modifiers, you find a number of HD of damage dealt by each figure on the chart. The designer of this chart uses the binomial distribution to figure this number out.
The problem was that I was running binomial distribution for 10 figures. Then it occurred to me that was a mistake. Instead I should be running binomial distribution charts for 30 possible hits. Because if each battlesystem is 3 AD&D round that means a figure of 10 men will have 30 attempts at hitting an opponent.
Finally a rough pattern emerged. I ran another binomial chart of 60 possible hits and the pattern held. So I found the spot on the original battlesystem chart where result of a 50-50 shot at hitting were listed and there was definitely a rough correlation to a 2d6 dice roll. Not only that. When I jump the odds of hitting up and down by 5%, it shifted up and down by one success. What was 15 hits at 50% odds jumped up to 16 hits at 55% odds and 14 hits at 45% odds.
There is some fudging involved which is why I doubled checked the pattern by running the charts for 60 hits and 120 hits.
But the result is close enough that I can create the attached chart, Battle Machine Rev 02.
To use this roll 2d6+Ascending AC-To Hit Bonus. This particular chart is for Swords & Wizardry and assumes that d6s are used for hit dice. If the damage has multiple dice like 2d8 then double the result. If the damage has a bonus or minus, subtract that amount of hit dice from the result.
Hope you find this useful.
I think I should probably check battlesystem... Is there any available version you'd recommend? I noticed the 2e version on DTRPG. Not sure if the original is available in PDF.
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 28, 2023, 11:43:58 AM
I think I should probably check battlesystem... Is there any available version you'd recommend? I noticed the 2e version on DTRPG. Not sure if the original is available in PDF.
It is Battlesystem 1e. Not 2e which is a completely different system.
Rob Conley
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 27, 2023, 11:25:00 AM
Could you give me some hint? I have the 1e books but the organization is awful, hard to find anything. I'm looking at the DMG, maybe hiring mercenary leaders is in the PHB?
The only reason I didn't give you a hint is because I didn't think anyone would need one. Because the organization is not awful, and it is not at all hard to find. Like it's ridiculously easy to find.
Hiring leader types?
Okay, DMG Table of Contents shows the section on HIRELINGS begins on pg 28 (and runs up to the section on HENCHMEN on page 34).
Turning to page 28, the section only begins in the second column and continues onto page 29. That brings you to a section on Expert Hirelings, which has a table, under which various types of mercenaries are listed. So we're definitely in the right place.
This might be a surprise to you if you bought into the idea that the organization is awful. I guess you were expecting it to be hidden in the Appendix on underwater basket-weaving or something. But, no. Turns out it's exactly where you'd expect it to be if you approached it with the mindset that there actually is a logic to how the book is organized. People can have different opinions all they want. But when some opinions prove to be more useful than others, at some point a reasonable person has to admit the less useful opinions are just plain objectively false. Such is the myth that this is a poorly organized work. Hey. If you're going to needlessly editorialize with negative bullshit in your question, expect to have it shoved back in your face in the answer.
Now listed among the mercenary types are Captains, Lieutenants, and Serjeants. Those are your leader types. The cost of hiring them is listed as "Special." So you have to go to their descriptions after the table.
- Captain (detailed on pg 30) is listed as a fighter of 5th-8th level (skewing towards the lower end of that range), commanding as many scores of troops as he or she has levels, and a number of lieutenants equal to his or her level, serjeants not counting against either total. Their monthly cost is a whopping 100 gp per level.
- Lieutenant (detailed on pg 31) is listed as being a fighter of 2nd-3rd level (70/30 chance for each), and can command as many decades of troops as he or she has levels, once again serjeants not counting against this number. The lieutenant can also command 2 or 3 serjeants (depending on level) in addition to those serjeants normally serving with the decades of troops. The monthly cost for Lieutenants is likewise 100 gp per level.
- Serjeant (detailed on pg 31) is listed as 1st level fighters. At a minimum there needs to be 1 serjeant for every 10 soldiers, and at most 1 for every 5. The monthly cost for serjeants is 10 times the rate of the troops he or she commands. So if heavy horseman cost 6 gp per month, the serjeants commanding heavy horsemen cost 60 gp per month.
First, despite the needlessly aggressive tone, thank you for pointing me the way.
Yes, now that you point that out, it is where it is supposed to be - page 28, in the second column, right after the "weapon types" section that ends in the very same column, a bit before the chapters on spells, and in no way related to the "non-players characters" chapter on page 100 (which includes hiring NPCs to cast spells and non-human troops). Silly me for thinking that hiring NPCs had anything to do with hirelings.
I hope you didn't take my criticism of AD&D organization as a personal insult (after calling OSRIC trash), since, I think, you were not responsible for that.
I don't play AD&D and I had a hard time finding it, but I was looking in the wrong places (campaigns, combat, etc.). I find AD&D incredibly confusing but I've only played a few times. When I was playing GURPS, I found it extremely easy because familiarity, but people kept telling me it is hard. Maybe you find that the bard and druid are easy to grasp and that having information about character classes in the DMG makes perfect sense, or the way the chapters are organized in no apparent order. I don't see it, but I bow to your superior wisdom of AD&D.
And if there is a similarly obvious place explaining how mounted troops are damaged, feel free to point this out too.
I sincerely appreciate your help and it was genuinely useful FWIW.
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 24, 2023, 09:30:14 AM
To avoid resurrecting the other thread, let me ask - how do you deal with mounts and leaders in your mass combat games?
I am heavily influenced by Battlesystem 1e.
Cavalry is handled as follows
*Use the to hit bonus of the rider
*For damage taken average the HD of the rider with the HD of the mount. Round up
*Use the poorer AC of the mount and rider
*Movement is equal to the mount.
*Add the damage of the Rider to that of the Mount.
*Any special attack or defense of either the rider or mount can be used.
As for Leaders they fight as a figure on the battlefield but with a +15 (higher is worse) modifier to their 2d6 battle result roll. This will often but not always mean zero HD of damage inflicted that round of mass combat. However multiple attacks may mean that they get multiple rolls. And keep in mind in D&D and AD&D fighters get 1 attack per level when attack 1 HD creature (D&D) or less, or 1-1 HD creatures or less if it is AD&D.
Three figures of 10 men each can attack a single leader figure.
The most valuable use of a leader is their impact on morale and commanding the troops.
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 24, 2023, 09:30:14 AM
I'm thinking specifically B/X, but I might need to find answers elsewhere, including chainmail, ADnD, battlesystem, 3rd party stuff.
I use two mass combat system, AD&D Battlesystem 1e when I want to fight out the battle in detail. And GURPS Mass Combat when I want something more abstract especially if the focus on waging out an entire campaign for one or two sessions. GURPS Mass Combat is pretty abstract so I can adapt it to classic D&D easily enough.
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 24, 2023, 09:30:14 AM
First, how to deal with a mounted individual - considering the mount has different AC and HP?
See a previous answer
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 24, 2023, 09:30:14 AM
What about charges? Lances do double damage on a charge (2d6) but an attacking horse does 2d6 damage and it cannot attack on a charge... So a charge REDUICES your damage form 3d6 to 2d6.
The advantage of a charge is that it is an attack after a full move. As for the mount, saying the mount can't attack during a charge is a bad ruling on the part of Gygax. Yes the horse isn't lashing out with hooves, but it is a two ton object slamming into bodies.
I recommend following these guidelines which I adapted from OD&D and Chainmail. The simple answer to your question is that the horse will have a chance to do 1d10 as result of a body slam in addition to the rider's lance attack.
Mounted CombatMounted Combat is an important aspect of fighting outside the dungeon. A mounted warrior has greatly enhanced mobility, speed, and strength compared to the foot soldier. As the centuries roll on techniques will be developed by massed troops to effectively counter the mounted warrior but in the interim the fighting man on horse is the lord of the battlefield.
When fighting from horseback the following rules are in effect.
• When the mounted fighting man moves more than ½ move towards his target he is considered charging.
• Automatically wins initiative if charging. If charging mounted fighting men are present on both sides initiative is diced first among those charging followed by everyone else.
• Gains an advantaged attack roll to hit any target on foot
• Any target on foot is disadvantaged on his attack roll to hit the horseman.
• If charging the mounted fighting man gets to +2 to his damage on a successful hit on any weapon.
• If the weapon is a lance and the wielder attacks while charging he has the option of doubling the lance's damage to 4d4+2. When this option is used the lance has to make a saving throw of 15 or better or it is shattered. Knights will do 8d4+2 damage.
• On a charge, the rider may opt to do a knockdown. The horse will slam into the target instead of a rider's weapon attack. If successful the target is knocked prone and must make a advantaged roll for his saving throw versus paralyzation or be knocked unconscious. Damage is 1d10.
The horse can attack separately from the mounted fighting man.
• The horse may not attack if charging. Note the charging knockdown attack is an exception.
• The horse can only attack a target on foot.
• If a person on foot attacks the horse on the rider's shield side then the horse gains the rider's shield bonus.
• If you track rations a horse requires rations equal to that of an individual character. The referee may rule that if the party is in a fertile region with grass then horse requires only half of the rations an individual needs.
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 24, 2023, 09:30:14 AM
Finally, including a leader apparently gives you +2 morale, but how do you attack him? as part of the unit or individually?
Individually,, up to three figures (10 men) can attack an individual medium sized figure. It won't be pretty so the leader should embed themselves as part of a larger unit.
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 24, 2023, 09:30:14 AM
One more thing, OSE listed orcs and goblin mercenaries that are way cheaper than others. Im assuming their morale is lower despite this page suggesting otherwise?
https://oldschoolessentials.necroticgnome.com/srd/index.php/Mercenaries
This is more of a setting question. In Battlesystem creatures less than 1 HD get -1 to morale. Less than 1/2 HD -2 to morale. Demihuman get +1 to morale but Orcs and Goblin don't get a particular penalty because they are humanoids.
Hope this helps.
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 27, 2023, 08:44:58 AM
- Perfectly compatible with B/X*.
- Minimal conversion needed.
- No approximations. AC 4 and AC 5 are different things.
- Results that are similar to individual combat.
- No new units needed, use ANY humanoid or monster in the book.
- Avoiding new mechanics, such as using 1d6 or 2d6 for attack rolls.
Battlesystem 1e is your ticket if you can find a copy. It accounts perfectly all the various D&Disms regardless of edition except perhaps for 4e. The rules has notes for both AD&D 1e and D&D.
Quote from: estar on April 28, 2023, 11:09:29 PM
Hope this helps.
It helps immensely estar! Thanks!
And each of these rules/ruling makes lots of sense. It looks like battlesystem, plus AD&D, plus your tips solves most of my questions.
I'm still amazed sometimes at how much creative output there was in the early days of our hobby. People still discuss certain OSE questions that were solved in 1978 (e.g., level limits).
Quote from: Eric Diaz on April 29, 2023, 09:40:21 AM
I'm still amazed sometimes at how much creative output there was in the early days of our hobby. People still discuss certain OSE questions that were solved in 1978 (e.g., level limits).
The reason for the debates is that classic D&D has a fair amount of arbitrary conventions. I found after extensive playtesting that these conventions have little to do with whether a campaign feels D&Dish or not. In short, D&D does not break if you remove level limits. If they fit what you have in mind for your setting, then by all means keep them. If not, you will still be able to use the wealth of material written specifically for D&D.
Of course, there are limits beyond which the game and the campaign become something else. However, I found these limits to be broader than what most people think. For newer players it is a neverending source of debates.