Some thoughts on D&D warfare

[S'mon]

Obviously you've not read Sepulchrave's Story Hour...

My arbitrarily determined death total for the whole sordid episode was around a thousand – more than twenty percent of the army. In a pitched battle, this kind of loss would have been deemed utterly catastrophic.

Obviously I was only talking about my own campaign!

However it looks like the Druid, in optimal conditions (enemy squished into a very small area & effectively defenseless), only actually killed about 1,000 enemy troops - IMC that would defeat the local orc horde but not a serious national army (typically 30,000-100,000); only if he were able to do it night after night without being stopped and no counter measures being effective would the army be eventually be defeated; as noted above an army of 20,000 IMC would have substantial numbers of PC-classed characters; even in my low-magic world they will include some mid-level (6-8) spellcasters; if the Druid came back repeatedly IME his 2nd or 3rd attack would be fatal (for him).

However, I certainly agree that high level PCs (esp 12+) in D&D will always be devastating against small armies/large warbands in the 1,000-5,000 range, a group of PCs including arcane & divine spellcasters can certainly defeat this kind of force. IMC there are legends of invading armies marching into the druid-ruled Forest of Beskarn, never to be seen again...

 

[Anaxander]

I wonder how effectively an undead army would be. Skeletons or zombies 'cost' 25gp per HD to raise. They don't need food nor water nor proper housing. For 50 gp per HD you can create mummies etc. The price of black onyx gems would rise tremendously, however...

 

[S'mon]

How does your average army, armed with bows and swords, kill a flying (500 feet in the air), stoneskinned, wizard, accompanied by a flying cleric, when the wizard has 10 wands of fireball and can just teleport away when things start looking bad?

As far as the "it's better to have 500 mooks than not," I would argue "no, it's really not." The cost of training and equipping those 500 warriors will be staggering; equipping them with even modest equipment will cost around 40gp. If you want to feed them for a year, that's another 90,000gp (per year, and it will invariably be more for an army). Training them was probably hideously expensive. I don't recall seeing any rules for how long or how much it costs to train a warrrior, but it is probably something like 6 months at minimum, 2 years at maximum. And then you have to house them in some sort of barracks.

1. No wizard IMC has ever had 10 wands of fireballs. Say you have 1,000 archers firing at a Wizard, that's 5 hits per round, or 10 with rapid shot. His Stoneskin is depleted fast, he will also take damage from x3 crits. An invisible wizard can reduce that of course. Personally I now use a modified instant kill rule, 20-20 requires DC 15 Fort save; it's about as lethal as the DMG standard variant (20-20-confirm = instant death); it means minimum 1 in 8,000 attacks are fatal, or 1 in 16,000 if Invisible/Greater Displaced. Still, a high level Wizard/Sorc + Cleric combo with the right spells prepared can certainly defeat several hundred mooks.

2. Historically and IMC, most mooks are expected to supply their own equipment! Otherwise they get a spear (if lucky) or club (if not). Only rare professional troops get their gear provided for them. Likewise on the feudal model, the ruler isn't paying to train the troops. On an offensive campaign troops arrive lured by the promise of loot and plunder. On a defensive campaign, troops are raised as levies to defend the country. Only the rulers' elite royal guard is actually paid for from revenue. Likewise only the rare professional trooper needs to be permanently housed in barracks, and he has plenty of other functions as well as fighting in pitched battle.

BTW I'm not disputing that a Wiz-15 can be better value than 1,000 War-1, if you actually have to pay the full cost of both. In a feudal setting you don't, though. And IMC few rulers have access to a Wiz-15, those that do have a huge advantage and can conquer vast empires.

 

[S'mon]

You could easily have spent 400,000gp on upkeep, equipment, and training for those 500 warriors. Then the fight becomes Fighter15 with 500 War2s vs. Fighter15 with 400,000gp more. My money is still on the long Fighter 15.

IMC if a Ftr-15 receives 400,000gp cash, he may well spend it all on pretty magic items*. If he's a feudal ruler he can still raise levy troops almost for free. The Fighter-15 who spends 100,000gp on personal items and 300,000gp on his well-equipped Royal Guard (including spellcasters & leaders) will probably do better as a ruler, though, and IMC would have no trouble beating the first guy.

*Edit: In fact this is exactly what happened in my high-level game last session. The 18th level Warlord PC leading an army of 20,000 extorted 800,000gp of tribute from the country he was invading. He had to give 400,000gp to his disgruntled horde; he spent the rest commissioning & buying magic items, some from that same country.

 

[S'mon]

Which would necessitate, of course, that armies be raised only from noble children (the only ones with enough money to have the equipment to actually be competent combatants). If you want a large army, you have to either conscript or provide wages and equipment.

Tribal hordes are very popular IMC, just as they were IRL - every free tribesman is expected to maintain his own weapons and armour/horse etc, and they don't need pay, just the prospect of plunder. It works for Mongali (Mongols), Norse vikings, orcs, etc. Of course a professional standing army of equal number is more effective, but vastly more expensive.

 

[S'mon]

Looking at what levels represent in terms of 'animal-fighting ability' and 'getting hit with a sword or gun survival chances,' an average medieval adult should be at least a 3rd level commoner, expert or warrior.

That was my conclusion. In 1e the animals were weaker, so 0-level humans were more credible, though still too weak. In 3e it gets really silly. Hence when I decided on a more realistic feel for my game, I decided on 2nd-3rd level as typical and max hit points at 1st level for medium 1-hit dice creatures. Thus most adult males have ca 8-12 hit points and are still somewhat unrealistically vulnerable to mountain lions, but not ridiculously so.

 

[S'mon]

What the heck? You actually believe a normal, clawless, furless human wins half the time against a specialist predator in unarmed combat?

A trained fighter with a reach weapon, sure. A trained fighter with a sword, ok. Guy with a gun, absolutely. But a normal guy, unarmed? No way.
We are not built for killing quite the way they are. Our only strength is tool use. I'd win against a mountain lion by doing something clever (ambush, deadfall, big darn rock)...which fighting it unarmed manifestly isn't.

Humans can kill mountain lions just through unarmed grappling, using our greater mass and primate build. I do _not_ recommend this, but it's quite true, a human can kill a mountain lion unarmed. The lion may well kill you too, though. We're not standard prey for lions so they can't easily do the throat-kill they're designed for and have to rake us to death with their claws, which is hard in a grapple. An unarmed human can kill a single dog or wolf too, likewise - in fact AFAIK a fit adult human can usually beat a lone dog of even greater mass. Dogs or wolves are designed to kill in packs, and are only really good at killing humans when in packs. The only land predators that can really easily and reliably kill humans 1-1, making us a suitable prey animal, are tigers and large African lions. Grizzly & polar bears can easily take your head off in 1 swipe and should be avoided, also.

 

[S'mon]

Actually, a trained woodsman (not a fighter, per se. closer to an expert) with a good knife has a 50/50 chance. Don't sell the human body short.

I would definitely bet on the woodsman in that case. He'll be bloodied but unlikely to be killed.

 

[S'mon]

But our first assumption is false. A quick look over the official price lists and the profession and craft skills shows that 3rd edition has moved to a defacto gold peice standard for wages. The silver peice standard is simply unworkable under the rules and any meta-rule which suggest labor could be hired for less than 1 g.p. per day will ultimately led to economic paradoxes if you try to game these assumptions out (of course so will the craft rules but that's a different discussion). In short, D&D peasants require probably 2-4 g.p. per week to survive. Skilled labor will demand somewhat more than that, but unfortunately the profession rules are equally a mess because they imply all professions require equal skill and earn equal ammounts of pay.

I don't entirely agree with this - the PHB prices are for adventurers; the PHB Craft/Profession earnings are likewise for PCs; neither provides much basis for GM world-building although they can provide hints. The DMG says 1sp/day is subsistence level wages for 1 adult and suggests 2 sp/day for soldiers. IMC a maid or scullion employed long-term & housed under employer's roof costs 1sp/day; professional soldiers cost 4 sp/day though, or 12gp/month; and adding on NCO & officer costs that goes to more like 18gp/man/month in an army. That covers all costs - the soldier's actual net pay after food, equipment replacement etc will be more like 2 gp/month. Typical tax income IMC is typically around 5sp/month per head of population; most countries are feudal and the King rarely sees more than 1sp/person/month, of which only about 1 cp/10% is actual cash that can be spent on magic items, mercenaries et al.

So a typical real IMC - the Archduchy of Colladel population 2 million, total tax 1 million gp/month of which the Archduke Ulfius gets 200,000gp, of which up to 20,000gp can be turned into magic items or saved in the treasury. Stronghold & court costs ca 100,000 gp, so he has 80,000 gp to spend on his standing military forces; he can spend the cash on those too if he wants for 100,000gp worth of troops. IMC 80,000gp/m buys around 3,200 highly trained professional troops at average 25gp/man/month including officers, cavalry & specialists. In war time the Archduke can raise levies; Subordinate rulers etc are taking in 800,000gp/month and spending probably 400,000gp/month on troops, probably about another 16,000 men exist in standing forces. In theory up to about 100,000 men in Colladel are available for military service, in practice a defensive feudal army of about 40,000 is more likely.

 

[S'mon]

Actual weapons are probably much cheaper in history than in DnD. Another "pro-mook army" houserule would take a serious look at the cost of a longbow for example. IIRC one medieval expense sheet listed longbows at 2 shillings each, which would be 24 sp each if you accept my 1d=1sp conversion.

The D&D short & long bow prices are completely ridiculous, yup.