are armies any good?
- Thread starter alsih2o
- Start date
Why doesn't the modern military use nothing but tanks? After all, in every concievable way, a tank is a superior combatant to an infantryman. They are much harder to damage, they have better range, they cause a tremendous amout more damage.
Because armor can take territory and take it well. But it can't hold territory. You need literal boots on the ground for that.
An example from my campaign. The character had won the lordship of the Gran March, but the country was in shambles. They were constantly being harassed by the giants that ruled neighboring Geoff. So the druid flies about and scouts it out. The closest city is ruled by orcs, trolls, ogres, and a few giants.
They bust out a planar ally scroll they'd been saving for a rainy day and sent some celestial wrath down. I didn't even roll the combat. They had single handedly taken out the forces of an entire city.
But what exactly were they supposed to do now? They had no intention of setting up shop here, they had a kingdom to run. If they left, the giants would move right back in. The humans here were weak and broken. They couldn't take refugees, they could barely feed their own people. In the end they had to meet with the leadership and sue for peace.
Because armor can take territory and take it well. But it can't hold territory. You need literal boots on the ground for that.
An example from my campaign. The character had won the lordship of the Gran March, but the country was in shambles. They were constantly being harassed by the giants that ruled neighboring Geoff. So the druid flies about and scouts it out. The closest city is ruled by orcs, trolls, ogres, and a few giants.
They bust out a planar ally scroll they'd been saving for a rainy day and sent some celestial wrath down. I didn't even roll the combat. They had single handedly taken out the forces of an entire city.
But what exactly were they supposed to do now? They had no intention of setting up shop here, they had a kingdom to run. If they left, the giants would move right back in. The humans here were weak and broken. They couldn't take refugees, they could barely feed their own people. In the end they had to meet with the leadership and sue for peace.
David Argall
First Post
scissors, paper, stone
"Speaking on mass battles, doesn't anyone else feel that area effect spells spell the doom for massed formations of pikemen?"
Pikes [or spear types in general] are poor weapons, except vs heavy calvary -the knight our genre is so fond of-. The pike is longer than the lance and thus the charging knight gets a lot of ouchies.
However the pike is also very slow and hard to use, which means attacking swordsmen sorta push the points out of the way and slip in too close for the pike to be useful, following which the pikes hit the dirt, as do most of the pikemen.
But the swordsman is nowhere near as lucky vs our knight, who can just lance him at a safe distance as he charges in.
Area effect spells won't chase the pike away, but whether the enemy is knight or swordsman will decide that.
"Speaking on mass battles, doesn't anyone else feel that area effect spells spell the doom for massed formations of pikemen?"
Pikes [or spear types in general] are poor weapons, except vs heavy calvary -the knight our genre is so fond of-. The pike is longer than the lance and thus the charging knight gets a lot of ouchies.
However the pike is also very slow and hard to use, which means attacking swordsmen sorta push the points out of the way and slip in too close for the pike to be useful, following which the pikes hit the dirt, as do most of the pikemen.
But the swordsman is nowhere near as lucky vs our knight, who can just lance him at a safe distance as he charges in.
Area effect spells won't chase the pike away, but whether the enemy is knight or swordsman will decide that.
Azure Trance
First Post
Re: scissors, paper, stone
I always thought that was how the cycle worked (a la Age of Empires) but back in the day (14th-15th? c.) what made the Swiss Pikemen so infamous? And how would the formations of old (Say, the Greek moving wall of spears, 3 rows deep) fare vs Medieval armies?
David Argall said:
I always thought that was how the cycle worked (a la Age of Empires) but back in the day (14th-15th? c.) what made the Swiss Pikemen so infamous? And how would the formations of old (Say, the Greek moving wall of spears, 3 rows deep) fare vs Medieval armies?
s/LaSH
First Post
I'm going to do some abstract reasoning here. There will be flaws in my logic, but I'm certain that the overall result will be enlightening.
What's the absolute maximum number of fireballs (and people) a mage can toast in a day? Devoting all available slots, a sorcerer can throw out about 30. Each fireball (with radius 20) toasts, what, 50 squares (each with a tightly-packed warrior in it)? That's 1500 warriors in a day.
So you spread your troops out, and do what every sensible army does: have the toughest troops at the back. This serves two purposes: one, they will kill anyone who breaks in front of them, and two, the enemy wastes their resources on green troops who wouldn't make much difference in a battle anyway. If you arrange your troops in staggered lines, with 10 feet between troops, your fireball slinger only fries about 5-8 goons per fireball, bringing fatalities down to 150-240 per day. (And that's in a period of 3 minutes. The clever commander will use either sacrificial soldiers or fire-immune spec-ops forces to draw the mage's firepower and cut him/her down before committing troops.)
Having taken care of the casters with minimal casualties (keyword minimal, not nil), your force engages high-level fighter types and other beasts. In a dungeon, these characters are quite powerful because of the limited room you have to bring up support troops, but on the field of battle you have a good number of archers at your disposal. High-level characters faced with a spread of archers are at a disadvantage, because longbows can fire 700 feet (albeit at horrible penalties) and with that much range to spread out, a clever commander will still avoid spell casualties. Peppering the high-level types with arrows might not bring them down, but it could easily give you the opportunity to bring up tough support troops to meet their attack. (Say creatures with DR 5 to shrug off most arrows in melee, and you can continue a bombardment.)
Even if adventurers can 'port into a critical command area, that's where the most elite troops will be stationed. Not for nothing are the most famous legions of Rome called the Praetorian Guard; they were elite defenders, not attackers, although they certainly could have been used in such a way. Defence is always important to a general; he knows he's the enemy's main target.
Anyway, those examples aside, adventurers can certainly clear the floor around them. The key is, that's a fairly small area. Adventurers don't conquer kingdoms; they simply don't have the sustained mobility and presence needed to control such a large area. Adventurers are spec-ops units in wartime; they attack key locations and take care of other spec-ops groups on the other side.
And here's the real reason you'd still see armed forces in D&D settings: Constabulary. Yes, that's right, the police we have today are a relatively recent invention. If you have a guy with a sword on every street corner, then you have peace in your own cities because nobody's going to try anything. If you rely on four guys with fireball spells to stop pick-pockets, you end up with something from Slayers (read: metropolitan overkill).
What's the absolute maximum number of fireballs (and people) a mage can toast in a day? Devoting all available slots, a sorcerer can throw out about 30. Each fireball (with radius 20) toasts, what, 50 squares (each with a tightly-packed warrior in it)? That's 1500 warriors in a day.
So you spread your troops out, and do what every sensible army does: have the toughest troops at the back. This serves two purposes: one, they will kill anyone who breaks in front of them, and two, the enemy wastes their resources on green troops who wouldn't make much difference in a battle anyway. If you arrange your troops in staggered lines, with 10 feet between troops, your fireball slinger only fries about 5-8 goons per fireball, bringing fatalities down to 150-240 per day. (And that's in a period of 3 minutes. The clever commander will use either sacrificial soldiers or fire-immune spec-ops forces to draw the mage's firepower and cut him/her down before committing troops.)
Having taken care of the casters with minimal casualties (keyword minimal, not nil), your force engages high-level fighter types and other beasts. In a dungeon, these characters are quite powerful because of the limited room you have to bring up support troops, but on the field of battle you have a good number of archers at your disposal. High-level characters faced with a spread of archers are at a disadvantage, because longbows can fire 700 feet (albeit at horrible penalties) and with that much range to spread out, a clever commander will still avoid spell casualties. Peppering the high-level types with arrows might not bring them down, but it could easily give you the opportunity to bring up tough support troops to meet their attack. (Say creatures with DR 5 to shrug off most arrows in melee, and you can continue a bombardment.)
Even if adventurers can 'port into a critical command area, that's where the most elite troops will be stationed. Not for nothing are the most famous legions of Rome called the Praetorian Guard; they were elite defenders, not attackers, although they certainly could have been used in such a way. Defence is always important to a general; he knows he's the enemy's main target.
Anyway, those examples aside, adventurers can certainly clear the floor around them. The key is, that's a fairly small area. Adventurers don't conquer kingdoms; they simply don't have the sustained mobility and presence needed to control such a large area. Adventurers are spec-ops units in wartime; they attack key locations and take care of other spec-ops groups on the other side.
And here's the real reason you'd still see armed forces in D&D settings: Constabulary. Yes, that's right, the police we have today are a relatively recent invention. If you have a guy with a sword on every street corner, then you have peace in your own cities because nobody's going to try anything. If you rely on four guys with fireball spells to stop pick-pockets, you end up with something from Slayers (read: metropolitan overkill).
LostSoul said:
Well a 1st level PC is just a kid basically. Someone who just finished basic training and is like 15-17 (or less sometimes) would be 1st level.
Most fo the time the low level guys are out causing small time trouble (err adventuring thats it) They shouldn't try to take on military units.
Anyway PC's tend to have high stats, higher than anyone with an NPC class would have. Thus a l3 PC class Fighter can probably handle a L4 or L5 warrior
DM with a vengence
First Post
Large medieval armies would be almost useless for conventional attacks in a D&D world. According to the DMG, a 1st level NPC has 900 gp worth of equipment, while a wand of Fireballs cost 11250. This means that a Wand of Fireballs cost as much as 12.5 1st level soldiers. In any sort of confrontation at battlefield ranges, the wizard with the wand is going to mop the floor with the soldiers. However the wizard has his won enemy, elite units such as PCs or monster that can utilize high hitpoints and superior mobility to attack them in melee combat. However these elite units are vulnerable to massed ranged weapons fire from large numbers of low-level soldiers, so a D&D battle looks something like this.
Each side picks a high hill or other defensible position to place its wizards on. Screens of low-level characters move out to try and interdict high level characters from breaking through. Invisible elites and summoned extra-planar allies attempt to break through the cordon of bodyguards around the wizards and take them out so their own troops can advance. Meanwhile, armies are clashing on the field, mages are throwing spells every which way, and chaos consumes everything.
Behind the lines, teleporting wizards fireball towns and summon Demons to raise the dead for a massive zombie army. (Many evil outsiders get Animate Dead as a spell like ability. If you don’t have any specific tactical plans for your undead army, just animating corpses and telling them to march towards the capital, killing as they go, would put a major crimp in your enemy’s supply lines.) Crack squads of Druids shift weather and poison crops to cause famine, while Rogues assassinate leaders and bring down the economy.
Castles would be very valuable, because they can protect your fragile casters form enemy special forces.
Wands of Fireball would also be pretty common. I did some calculations and a D&D Nation with 100 randomly generated towns (pop 283,845) has 127 wizards capable of making Wands of Fireballs. A nation that had spent a long time preparing for war could have several hundred wands, enough fireballs to level a city or three.
Each side picks a high hill or other defensible position to place its wizards on. Screens of low-level characters move out to try and interdict high level characters from breaking through. Invisible elites and summoned extra-planar allies attempt to break through the cordon of bodyguards around the wizards and take them out so their own troops can advance. Meanwhile, armies are clashing on the field, mages are throwing spells every which way, and chaos consumes everything.
Behind the lines, teleporting wizards fireball towns and summon Demons to raise the dead for a massive zombie army. (Many evil outsiders get Animate Dead as a spell like ability. If you don’t have any specific tactical plans for your undead army, just animating corpses and telling them to march towards the capital, killing as they go, would put a major crimp in your enemy’s supply lines.) Crack squads of Druids shift weather and poison crops to cause famine, while Rogues assassinate leaders and bring down the economy.
Castles would be very valuable, because they can protect your fragile casters form enemy special forces.
Wands of Fireball would also be pretty common. I did some calculations and a D&D Nation with 100 randomly generated towns (pop 283,845) has 127 wizards capable of making Wands of Fireballs. A nation that had spent a long time preparing for war could have several hundred wands, enough fireballs to level a city or three.
s/LaSH
First Post
Wait, an idea occured to me.
Why do the high-level characters work in an army at all?
If you're a dragonslayer out to make a living, you don't kill hundreds of enemy soldiers, you kill another dragon in a lost realm far from civilisation and blow a few thousand gp on ale when you get back.
If you're an archmage who has pierced the planes of existance and can summon infernal forces to your side, why do you obey the requests of a king who wants you to blow up some plebians? In a few hundred years your armies of DOOM will sweep over the countryside under your own command, anyway. (Or if you're good, you'll be blasting those infernal forces in pursuit of mystic artifacts or something.)
If you're a rogue who can sneak into the king's palace and steal his crown, what possible motivation could you have for him promising you great riches if you assassinate the enemy leader? (OK, there could be a case for employment here...)
But my overall point is: high-level characters don't necessarily think of war as being in their best interests.
Another point: The wielders of great mystic power might have a pact to keep it out of the hands of the general political landscape. Even if they don't now, the casualties that magical proliferation would incur in a major war would probably force the adoption of some set of protocols to this end once the mages and priests saw how much havoc they could wreak.
Why do the high-level characters work in an army at all?
If you're a dragonslayer out to make a living, you don't kill hundreds of enemy soldiers, you kill another dragon in a lost realm far from civilisation and blow a few thousand gp on ale when you get back.
If you're an archmage who has pierced the planes of existance and can summon infernal forces to your side, why do you obey the requests of a king who wants you to blow up some plebians? In a few hundred years your armies of DOOM will sweep over the countryside under your own command, anyway. (Or if you're good, you'll be blasting those infernal forces in pursuit of mystic artifacts or something.)
If you're a rogue who can sneak into the king's palace and steal his crown, what possible motivation could you have for him promising you great riches if you assassinate the enemy leader? (OK, there could be a case for employment here...)
But my overall point is: high-level characters don't necessarily think of war as being in their best interests.
Another point: The wielders of great mystic power might have a pact to keep it out of the hands of the general political landscape. Even if they don't now, the casualties that magical proliferation would incur in a major war would probably force the adoption of some set of protocols to this end once the mages and priests saw how much havoc they could wreak.
shilsen
Adventurer
s/LaSH said:
In Sepulchrave's Story Hour, he uses the Great Injunction, which is a strongly-enforced agreement between arcane spellcasters of all kinds to not aid in any manner in political conflicts. I'm using a variant of it in my own Greyhawk campaign, to deal with a number of the questions raised in this thread.
Similar Threads
