What historical conflicts have you used in your game?

[adwyn]

I have tended to use the Crusades model because I like the opportunites of having the PCs and their allies being surrounded by foes without needing to have wiped out all of civilization.

As a variant I also draw from the Allied intervention in Russia at the end of WWI. Sent to assist an ally in a sideshow theater of a bigger war the PCs are instead stranded when the war comes to a nominal end and they must fight with minimal support the former ally as well as remnants of the former foe.

 

[Bercilac]

"Trends"

I agree with Wombat on this one. I've used:

1. Barony of Giltram
Centralisation of feudal authority, destruction of traditional economies, rebels inspired by the EZLN crossed with Robin Hood.

2. Green Isles
Spanish colonisation of Caribbean, rise of merchant capital, destruction of feudal allegiances, devastation of indigenous communities, primitive capital accumulation.

3. Goblin City of Kreyak
Rise of totalitarian states inspired by Nazi Germany, the British National Party, and the recent media effort for the war in Iraq; the repression of the urban poor, the sacrifice of lives for economic success; the discovery of superweapons like the atomic bomb, the tank, or biological weapons... This was a really dark campaign. It's probably for the best that it didn't last long. The players worked as slave drivers, participated in a fascist coup, and nearly launched a war that would have ended with the deaths of two thirds of the city's population.

Note the party were very much the bad guys here. At one stage they were driving a convoy of slaves to work in the mines, and they spotted one straining against his burden, pushing with all his might but unable to move it. They... (five minutes later) ...as his guts dripped down the ogre's lips and the priest finished his sermon on commitment to one's labours. After the game, one of the players (the priest, actually) reflected, with some discomfort, that the poor little slave had actually been a strongly Christlike image. He's not Christian, but was raised as such and wasn't so comfortable with his role.

It's difficult to "avoid politics" in these matters, as I tend to design my adventures in a way that makes pretty explicit political statements. That doesn't mean I make all of the issues black and white. I try to make all the sides rather despicable, and just put the party in a situation where they're compelled to get their hands dirty somehow (which is itself a political viewpoint). Though I still have my moments of undisguised propaganda, I must admit.

 

[NewJeffCT]

A long ways back, I had strongly hinted that rather than helping to townsfolk to escape, they could have attempted to use a battle of Cannae type scenario to attack the oncoming horde of orcs. If the party could have convinced the dwarf allies to be that strong middle that pretends to give ground while the flanks move forward to surround the orcs, it could have worked.

Alas, none of them were students of history and they just managed to use some commando tactics to delay the oncoming orc horde to allow the town to evacuate. It was still a win for the PCs, but it could have been a great & climactic battle with hundreds of orcs surrounded by humans and dwarves.

 

[NewJeffCT]

I've stolen the mongol invasion of Europe almost wholesale, dressing it up as mounted orcish archers. It was astonishingly successful.

I've also borrowed political aspects of Venice and Florence, but that's less conflict and more pure treachery.

I was thinking of using something like the mongol invasion of Europe, only with hobgoblins instead of orcs.

great minds think alike!

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I was thinking of using something like the mongol invasion of Europe, only with hobgoblins instead of orcs.

great minds think alike!

Yeah, when i want to represent Mongols, I usualy use Hobgoblins or Wood Elves. Orces aren't smart enough to be true Mongol warriors.

Recreating Cannae would be awesome, though I suspect you'd have to hand-wave in some rules for the morale and tactical effects of a double envelopment to make a big difference. As well as some leeway in cramped fighting rules. Supposedly the Romans were pressed so tightly together they couldn't even really swing/thrust their weapons...

 

[diaglo]

all of them.

i figure i can use all of history to help the players. that way they feel attuned to their characters.

i change up some details just like you and i aren't complete historians and get some things wrong.

so tales of vampires
tales of gilgamesh
tales of trips across the sea and falling off the world

they are all in there.

how many of them are encountered is miniscule.

but i have them ready. and the players are ready. something i don't have to spend hours telling them about. but drop a few hints for them to make guesses and pick up on the vibe and roll with...

 

[NewJeffCT]

Yeah, when i want to represent Mongols, I usualy use Hobgoblins or Wood Elves. Orces aren't smart enough to be true Mongol warriors.

Recreating Cannae would be awesome, though I suspect you'd have to hand-wave in some rules for the morale and tactical effects of a double envelopment to make a big difference. As well as some leeway in cramped fighting rules. Supposedly the Romans were pressed so tightly together they couldn't even really swing/thrust their weapons...

True, but I've always used morale in my games... early on in my current campaign, a lot of my bad guys ran away. Maybe not main ones that had a reason to stick it out, but why would Joe Goblin stick around if Boss Goblin, Gobbo Lieutenant and Shaman Goblin just got killed?

However, in regards to Cannae, the double-enveloping force would have the advantage of more attackers because they have more room to attack from: their surrounding square is bigger than the inner, surrounded, square of the Romans (or orcs in a D&D game). A quick square within a square on Excel for me netted 36 attackers getting melee attacks vs 28 defenders getting melee attacks. The attackers on the corners would also get flanking bonuses as well.

There could have been as many as 36 more orcs in the middle, but none of them could have attacked in melee without going through another orc first. And, in D&D rules, they'd be firing into melee, so -4 to hit.

The actual battle also had the square being closed off being Hannibal's returning cavalry, which likely would have been doubly-disheartening to the Romans, as they'd also have to fight mounted troops with now none of their own.