Warfare in 4e

[Imperialus]

1) Warlord class sucks at leading in warfare. Most powers are short range and only effect a few targets. Powers that effect more than 10 people, are mostly close burst 5 powers with nothing below level 10 except +2 initiative.
Defensive rally (daily-10) close burst (CB) 5
Renew the Troops (daily-15) allies in LOS
Warlords banner (enc-15) CB 5
White Raven Formation (enc-15) CB 5
Victory surge (daily-19) all allies 10 squares
and Own the battlefield (daily 22) CB 10 actually targets foes.

The paragon feature Cry Havoc (11) is only good for the first round of combat (allies within 10 squares)

Well that kinda makes sense. After all there is going to be a lot of shouting, screaming, people banging bits of metal together and all sorts of other things that make it tough to hear the inspirational instructions of a warlord. Even a 3.X bard would have difficulty in this since instruments in battle were typically used to give very simple instructions "March here!" "Turn Around!" "Charge!" ect.

Perhaps a new utility power for the warlord, call it 'inspiring speech' or something to represent the warlord doing a Hollywood style monologue as he rides his horse up and down the lines prior to the battle. The effect would be minor (you're never going to turn a militia into ubermench) but especially if you have the player RP a speech (it doesn't have to be long and fancy) it can help underscore in the players minds the importance of the battle.

In a smaller unit, like a warlord leading a forlorn hope or trying to rally a section of the line that's under pressure I think some of the more conventional powers would work too and could account for some of the 'Dogs! Do you want to live forever!?', 'Once More Into the Breach!' and 'Leeeroooy Jeeeenkins!' quotes.

Also remember that even if the powers themselves only reach a few feet other soldiers will see people rallying around his banner, holding the line, pressing the attack or whatever else and if they are doing well it might inspire confidence in the troops.

The only place on the planet that rumors travel faster than a battlefield is a high school. There are dozens of examples throughout history where a battle has turned one way or another on the death, injury, or sometimes even just rumored death of a commander. If word gets out that the troops near the warlord PC are really sticking it to the enemy the rest of the troops are going to feel like the battle is in their favor.

 

[hamishspence]

Heroes of Battle

It recommended focusing on the PCs, and haveing them be deciding factor in smaller actions. better, I think. Huge battles should work differently. Maybe flowchart, or multiple skill challenges rather than single. Combine skill challenges with encounters, simultaneous, or sequential.

 

[bramadan]

4ed DnD implied setting is not really conducive to large battles.
Culturally it is the dark ages. There are no large empires to field the armies. 99% of the military action will be skirmishes and warband on warband action, both fitting well within the DnD parameters.

If the actual rules for mass combat were needed the best would be to write them out from the whole cloth, including the new class abilities. As a fan of the Birthright setting I would love that to happen but would not try to simulate it with the current rules (which are great for what they do but very very focused)

 

[gonesailing]

Wow you all Ninja'd the heck out of me and these are all very good ideas. I am currently drafting a Skill Challenge set in a besieged city, which (should) end in interesting (possibly large scale) combat. I'd appreciate any ideas on how to improve it as I go.

http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=4300221&postcount=3

 

[hamishspence]

PoL base campaign setting

What if you really like the concepts (Bael Turath, Arkhosia, Nerath) but want them to take centre stage? Maybe shifting back 110 odd years to the time not long before the invasion. Big battles vs gnoll hordes.

Or, push it even further back: dragonborn vs tieflings. Siege of Razortear.

You can play in the implied setting and still have the big battles: if you shift the timeline.

 

[Imperialus]

You can play in the implied setting and still have the big battles: if you shift the timeline.

And you just gave my my plan for the Epic tier. Nevermind planar travel. TIME TRAVEL!

 

[Amphimir Míriel]

What about fights where characters are not involved? and what kind of tactics would 4e fantasy armies use?

If an army gets ambushed in a forest, and no one hears it, does it make an attack roll?

If no PCs are involved in the matter, it is just DM prose.

If the PC's are involved in the matter, then there are several ways to handle it, without having to micromanage the attack rolls for hundreds of combatants.

Wow you all Ninja'd the heck out of me and these are all very good ideas. I am currently drafting a Skill Challenge set in a besieged city, which (should) end in interesting (possibly large scale) combat. I'd appreciate any ideas on how to improve it as I go.

My suggestion for running a big battle would be doing it "epic movie style":

On one hand, we have the sweeping vistas of the thousands of soldiers in the battlefield, with the occasional closeup to the commanders shouting orders and gnashing their teeth as they see the armies clash.
This part is handled by an extended, opposed skill challenge between the strategists on both sides.

On the other hand we see the protagonists, hacking and slashing through tens of minions and occasionally an opposing champion or two.
This part is handled by the regular combat scene, where "shaky camera-close up action" (a.k.a.: "the fog of war") prevents the party from affecting stuff happening outside of a certain radius.

The DM then alternates between adjudicating the results of the Skill challenge between both strategists, narrating the battle on a grand scale, and running the "regular" melee of which the PCs are part.

Every once or twice the action switches between "big picture" and "up-close and personal", the DM can declare a "new encounter" has started, more enemies are added to the battlemat (position and numbers might be influenced by the current results of the skill challenge), and per-encounter abilities are recharged.


How does that sound?

(of course, you may add a third set of actions where the plucky comic relief characters try to avoid the melee altogether, running and cowering and trying to hide beneath rocks, corpses, and discarded shields, but that's a matter of taste)

 

[CountPopeula]

If you plan to make mass combat a major part of the game, and plan to do it wit skill challenges, a warfare or tactics skill might be a good idea. It would have limited applications outside of mass combat, but would allow the player who trains it to really shine as a leader in mass combat.

I wouldn't bother if you want to use mass combat once or twice, but if you want to have one or two big battles per session, then it's definitely an option.

 

[hamishspence]

warfare

Insight is one possibility: "reading the moment" and knowing exactly when and where to launch an attack. At the very least, it and perception fit well. Using Multiple skills might be more fun than creating new ones.

 

[Byrons_Ghost]

If you plan to make mass combat a major part of the game, and plan to do it wit skill challenges, a warfare or tactics skill might be a good idea. It would have limited applications outside of mass combat, but would allow the player who trains it to really shine as a leader in mass combat.

I wouldn't bother if you want to use mass combat once or twice, but if you want to have one or two big battles per session, then it's definitely an option.

I think most tactical situations could be covered by existing skills. Bluff to feint the enemy, Stealth to hide the unit, Perception to spot the attackers, etc. This assumes that the PCs are leading the unit, or otherwise able to use their skills to help it.

If you're thinking of tactics as "knowing how to use the ground," then knowledge skills come into play. Streetwise determines the best routes through a city combat, Dungeoneering determines how to break a keep, Nature gives you knowledge of the local terrain and tells you which trees afford the best cover, or which marsh will slow you down the most.