Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="S'mon" data-source="post: 6075485" data-attributes="member: 463">Diplomacy - I prefer to freeform it through internal aspect on NPC motivations. I think 4e works as well as any other game for that. 3e had a big problem with the broken Diplomacy skill, 4e fixed that though.Warfare - I was thinking the encounter/scene-based approach of 4e ought to work well for a literary/cinematic style. In Southlands 4e campaign I used the Mentzer d% War Machine rules for the mass battles - War Machine works brilliantly in pre-4e D&D but with 4e I found it insufficiently dramatist - there was an unhappy disjunction between the outcome of the PCs' own battlefield encounters and the results of the War Machine, even with +30% for PC Heroic Achievements etc. So in future I would model my 4e mass battles on the kind of close-in-focus approach you see on TV, in particular the 'Sharpe' ITV Napoleonic War series, which unlike HBO's Game of Thrones does a good job of portraying mass warfare on a limited budget! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  This would work much like 3e Heroes of Battle; basically stay focused on the PCs, and their battlefield achievements will typically determine the course of the battle, or at any rate determine the outcomes important to the PCs - in 'Sharpe's Waterloo' the actions of the protagonists did not determine the outcome of the climactic Battle of Waterloo with its 200,000+ men on the field, but they did shape which of them lived and died, and various other things important to themselves.</blockquote>

Verification