Worlds of Design: Battle Maneuvers

The longer the campaign, the more likely PCs become military strategists. Here’s the basics.

1280px-Fire_and_movement.jpg

Picture by RGodforest - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, File:Fire and movement.svg - Wikimedia Commons

Welcome to the Big Leagues​

As an RPG campaign gets longer and longer, characters tend to become important citizens, military people, rulers. Likely they’ll be engaged in larger battles beyond the typical skirmishes, though these maneuvers can apply to combat in the dungeon too (in limited capacity). So the GM, and the players, need to understand something about how battles work. It’s helpful to use military history as a foundation for campaign conflict, and in this case, classic maneuvers of battle.

A commander often must employ more than one maneuver to achieve victory; e.g. they may try to penetrate the center but fail, feign a retreat, and then envelop a single flank. Each maneuver has advantages and disadvantages while some may be more effective in some situations and less in others. In all of these cases, the ultimate objective is attacking the enemy from behind their line. That’s sure to cause chaos and fear with the objective of causing the enemy’s morale to fail. Most casualties in a melee battle occur after one side has broken and flees.

Meet Your Maneuvers​

Napoleonic historian David Chandler in The Art of Warfare on Land listed Seven Classic Maneuvers of War (all are from the same viewpoint facing the enemy), which we will discuss below. I’ve added an eighth, Refuse the Center, a defensive maneuver related to but different from Feigned Retreat, also related to Attack from a Defensive Position.
  1. Penetration of the Center: This is both obvious and common. One side has more soldiers, or thinks its soldiers are better fighters, and goes for the throat, so to speak. “In your face.” This maneuver is often used by practitioners of direct rather than indirect methods (see The Ways of War) If the enemy keep a reserve, they might commit it to stopping the penetration. Most parties likely use this tactic in lieu of any other option.
  2. Envelopment of a Single Flank: Going around the flank (side) of the enemy line. Even better when you can conceal the enveloping force until they are close to the enemy. Of course, the enemy will seek to prevent the envelopment. Rogues typically use this to their advantage, depending on how flanking works in tabletop play.
  3. Envelopment of Both Flanks: More ambitious than a single flank, requiring more troops and more coordination. But it likely prevents the defender from reinforcing one flank from the other flank (not an extraordinary occurrence). This tactic requires both knowing the terrain well enough to flank and splitting the party, two options not typical for PCs but can bestow considerable advantage if used wisely.
  4. Attack in Oblique Order: Neither parallel nor at a right angle to a specified or implied line; slanting.” One flank (and possibly the center) approaches the enemy at a slant, made famous by Epaminondas in defeating the Spartans long after the Persian invasion of Greece, but also seen in gunpowder wars. Rarely used and unlikely to happen in smaller conflicts.
  5. Feigned Retreat: Frequently used by mounted archer steppe-based armies, sometimes very successfully. They can retreat faster than the enemy can advance, giving them time to turn around, get organized, and counterattack the overextended enemy. Some think the Normans used this maneuver at the Battle of Hastings (where they had cavalry, the Saxons did not). This maneuver is much more likely part of a generally indirect than a direct approach. Parties with ranged combatants can leverage this, and it might also require checks to “fool” the opposition into believing the ruse.
  6. Attack from a Defensive Position: Common where one side can use natural terrain or fortify a position, or defends a fort/castle/town. We often read of defenders making a sortie from a fortified town to disrupt an enemy siege. Although not common for most PCs (who are the attacker), PCs who are protecting NPCs may find themselves resorting to this, depending on how much the game leverages cover.
  7. The Indirect Approach: Under this heading we can include all kinds of unusual maneuvers and stratagems that cleverly strive to win without hard fighting (or only overwhelming a small proportion of the enemy). This method is explained in Ways of War, previously cited. Like single flanking, this is a method that works best with rogues but can include just about any deception that attacks the enemy without standing in front of them, from illusions to summoned monsters.
  8. Refuse the Center: Forces are placed in an arc, with the center further back than the wings. This is a defensive maneuver that can lead to offense. It helped Hannibal at Cannae, as the Romans partially put themselves “into the bag” attacking the center as the Carthaginian cavalry enveloped the Roman wings. Works best with spellcasters in the back (who tend to be more vulnerable) and melee combatants along the “wings.”

Choose Your Tactic​

Melee battles are actually quite simple, compared with firepower battles. Given the efficacy of fortifications in melee eras, it was hard to force an enemy to fight unless you were willing to besiege a place or attempt an expensive escalade. So battles usually occurred when both sides felt they had a good chance to win, frequently on broad flat fields. Then the classic maneuvers might come into play, or it might just turn into a huge, deadly slog.

Your turn: What maneuvers do your monsters or PCs use in battle?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lewis Pulsipher

Lewis Pulsipher

Dragon, White Dwarf, Fiend Folio

Fix 'em, flank 'em, finish 'em.

However, technology, design, and doctrine are the alloy that makes a war machine. What worked for Roman legions does not work for medieval troops, and a guy who read books about Napoleon isn't an authority on anything except books about Napoleon.
 

Mid to high level rpg characters often have abilities that allow flight, teleportation or other forms of non classic maneuvering. Same for many creatures. Very possible a party of such characters would be a 'special forces' unit tasked with killing/kidnapping the opposing leader, recovering the princess(Trojan War objective), or simply causing a large amount of damage and distractions on the enemy's back area. OR, to prevent the same from the enemy's special forces units.

Even a lower level spell/ability that allows far vision or hearing could be very useful on a battlefield. Know what the enemy is doing before they even suspect you are in the area. Same for simple message sending spells. Something as simple as Pathfinder's Spark cantrip could be very useful to set a dead grass prairie on fire upwind of the enemy if weather conditions were appropriate. Spark + fly or flying mount might let one person light up a very long line of fire in a few minutes. If zero magic then flying mount + bag of molotovs could achive the same thing.

Magic and creatures with special abilities can render the classic manuvers of military warfare obsolete.
 

From the DM side of things, a combination of #3 and #5 work well against over-eager PCs. Give up the center to a charging PC and lead them into double envelopment.

Whether or not the game uses Facing Rules has some influence on how effective such tactics may be, but being surrounded and isolated is usually bad.

If playing a game with common magic items and magic that can mimic the tools of modern warfare, a lot of things taught to soldiers today can be effective.
 

I think this neglects the fundamental maneuvers that are rolled into mass combat and are considered to obvious as to not need mentioning, except they do.


First up is distance. Ttrpgs seem to believe that most enemies encounter each other at like 75ft. The number of adventures where the set up is "arrows rain down on the party. Those with keen eyes can tell the arrows came from at least 100ft away..." is abysmally low.

Outside dense forests & jungles (neither of which are fun for armies or most bandits), awareness of enemies often happened at distances well outside bow-shot. Even massive forests usually have swaths of meadows and lightning-based fires regularly carve out many square miles of low-cover areas, which would be where ambushers would set up.

Anything road-like usually provides one or more miles of visibility along the path of travel and has large cleared areas on each sides. Trade routes rarely had much cover close to the road for the simple fact the travelers would use the trees for firewood and when they camped they would tromp down the brush. Quaint tree-lined country lanes only exist when no one camps on them, meaning in the middle of civilization, or at least surrounded by farms. The open farmland would prevent many large forces hiding in those few quaint trees.

Which leads to a discussion of ranged weapons. Most RPG encounters are woefully low on ranged attacks. The number of encounters where the npcs don't even have ranged weapons is stupidly high.

Ranged weapons should be used:
* as part of an advance. Many armies equipped the troops towards the front with javelins/darts/slings/etc to be used while closing for battle. It didn't have a lot of effect on well-equipped & well-trained phalanx-types who could "turtle up" but it could soften up other forces and allow the front line officers to make last-second adjustments to tactics based on the perceived effect.

* as an attempt to goad enemies to break formation. Think #5 but they never truly engage, always staying 100-200ft away shooting arrows. There's only so long a group of soldiers will tolerate steady arrow fire before they either flee or attack. The goal can be to shift the unit under fire or cause the opponent to deploy their reserve.


Both of these apply to rpg skirmishes as well.
  • Hobgoblin raiders advancing on PCs should throw javelins at 100ft, switch to darts at close range before switching to melee weapons.
  • Goblins ambushrs should use shortbows at 200ft or slings from 100ft out. Surprise + 2-4 rounds of softening fire (more if they fire while retreating) can kill mounts and/or PCs who don't have ranged attacks and is likely to break up parties.
 

Mid to high level rpg characters often have abilities that allow flight, teleportation or other forms of non classic maneuvering. Same for many creatures. Very possible a party of such characters would be a 'special forces' unit tasked with killing/kidnapping the opposing leader, recovering the princess(Trojan War objective), or simply causing a large amount of damage and distractions on the enemy's back area. OR, to prevent the same from the enemy's special forces units.

Even a lower level spell/ability that allows far vision or hearing could be very useful on a battlefield. Know what the enemy is doing before they even suspect you are in the area. Same for simple message sending spells. Something as simple as Pathfinder's Spark cantrip could be very useful to set a dead grass prairie on fire upwind of the enemy if weather conditions were appropriate. Spark + fly or flying mount might let one person light up a very long line of fire in a few minutes. If zero magic then flying mount + bag of molotovs could achive the same thing.

Magic and creatures with special abilities can render the classic manuvers of military warfare obsolete.

Things like teleport and flight increase mobility of units and allow classical frontline defenders to be bypassed but are still following tactics like Flanking. Of course, Aerial combat means that there is now vertical flanking to be considered in addition to normal ground-based flanking - which means things like Deny the Centre now need improved aerial defence.

Generally though while Attack and Defense capabilities are obvious components, the effectiveness of manoeuvres comes down to the balance of mobility, command (including comms and recon) and precision (selective targeting and battlefield control) all of which are enhanced by magic.
Magic takes the place of technology and means that both attackers and defenders get greater mobility, better recon, more chance to alter the battlefield and greater opportunity to circumvent defenses and gain precision, but the basic tactics dont become obsolete, if anything they should be more dynamic - if only the rules and game assumptions didnt limit things.
 

I think this neglects the fundamental maneuvers that are rolled into mass combat and are considered to obvious as to not need mentioning, except they do.

First up is distance. Ttrpgs seem to believe that most enemies encounter each other at like 75ft. The number of adventures where the set up is "arrows rain down on the party. Those with keen eyes can tell the arrows came from at least 100ft away..." is abysmally low.
Depends on technology, doctrine, and culture. There are plenty of examples of roman through late medieval forces getting caught unawares by enemy getting in close without being spotted.
 

Depends on technology, doctrine, and culture. There are plenty of examples of roman through late medieval forces getting caught unawares by enemy getting in close without being spotted.

Yes but those "close" are of the "too little time to form up" kind of close. Roman legions would take hours to form up. At that point, "too close" is 3-5 miles away. Hannibals's "close range" ambush of Flaminius at Lake Trasimine had the Carthaginians hiding a half mile to a mile away (1-2km)

If your forces only need 15 minutes to get in fighting order, "too close" is still up to 3/4 mile (1.1km) away.

These are all more than an order of magnitude greater distances than ttrpg encounter ranges.
 

Yes but those "close" are of the "too little time to form up" kind of close. Roman legions would take hours to form up. At that point, "too close" is 3-5 miles away. Hannibals's "close range" ambush of Flaminius at Lake Trasimine had the Carthaginians hiding a half mile to a mile away (1-2km)

If your forces only need 15 minutes to get in fighting order, "too close" is still up to 3/4 mile (1.1km) away.

These are all more than an order of magnitude greater distances than ttrpg encounter ranges.
Depends on your TTRPG. It certainly isn't, at my table.

And Romans did not take anywhere near that long to form up, unless you are confusing a transition from a Legion on the march assembling with 'forming up'.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top