are armies any good?

[mmu1]

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.

Faulty analogy. If they could make something that had the firepower, armor, cross country speed and mobility of a tank, but only weighed as much, took up as much space and was as easy to transport and support logistically as a single infantryman, then they'd be more than happy to only use those for most duties.

 

[mmu1]

Now why would D&D armies bother trying to get to a battlefield to begin with?

A few 5th level wizards could decimate the supply lines of an army at will (if you have your spellcasters protecting teamsters, then they're not on the front lines - besides, fireballs fired from 400' are kind of hard to spot in time and counterspell), burn bridges and destroy villages, while their 9th level boss could skip around starting fires in cities or ports and terrifying people with poison gas...

The real issue isn't the power balance between an army of 1000 grunts and a party of 10th level adventurers - it's the nature of the magic system.

Core D&D magic, except on a personal level, is all offense and no defense. (and even on a personal level, the attacker generally has an advantage, because the best defensive spells are too short-lived to be in use constantly)
There is nothing in the core rules to stop teleporting, scrying your enemies is ridiculously easy, there are no easy ways to protect structures or cities from fire, and there are no spells at all that can provide meaningful logistical support - the wizard, cleric and a few other people have perfect mobility and unlimited food created out of thin air, but the grunts still need to haul around their supplies the old-fashioned way, and the supplies are still produced by large numbers of defenseless villagers...

No war is going to get off the ground when it's this easy to destroy supply lines and slaughter the people who produce your food and make you the money you use to pay for your army.

 

[Black Omega]

A few thoughts. In my game the PC's started off at 3rd level. The average rank and file samurai in my Rokugan is around 3rd-4th level. Rank and file elite are around 7-9th level. The PC's had plenty to do. tracking down bandits for the first adventure, fighting ronin, fighting bakemono. They started young and relatively inexperienced, but they've come a long way since then.

I gave alot of thought to the question of armies in a FR/Rokugan setting. Fireballs is indeed nasty, though Cloudkill is even better for large scale death. Cast a few other a city at night and you can depopulate the area.

For my game at least it doesn't happen for a couple of reasons. City guards prepare for random terrorists trying stuff like that.

More importantly, no faction practices total war. For the clans of Rokugan, not only is there no honor in killing peasants, but they want land and the people to use it. Killing peasants is counter productive. even evil factions like the Bloodpeakers have no real reason for Total War. they have uses for peasants as well.

The question of why magic users don't dominate battles is tougher. forget wizards, though. Sorcerers and Shugenja would be more prized, they can cast the damage spells more and don't require near the gold investment a wizard does. A few wizards for utility are nice, but with luck the bulk of your firepower are shugenja and sorcerers.

Spellslingers at this point basically act like artillery in the 20th century. Left on their own they can dominate a battlefield. You need counter-spellcaster tactics. In the recent battle I ran there were assigned units with ways to see invisible specifically there to counter spell assaults as well as units with magical mobility able to get where the spellcasters are. every round they are trying to stay alive is one round they are not raining death on the battlefield.

The spellcasters won't destroy armies in most cases, but you just need to destroy their willingness to fight. Most battles are decided when one side's morale breaks, not by one side killing the other.

 

[Ace]

Now why would D&D armies bother trying to get to a battlefield to begin with?

A few 5th level wizards could decimate the supply lines of an army at will (if you have your spellcasters protecting teamsters, then they're not on the front lines - besides, fireballs fired from 400' are kind of hard to spot in time and counterspell), burn bridges and destroy villages, while their 9th level boss could skip around starting fires in cities or ports and terrifying people with poison gas...

The real issue isn't the power balance between an army of 1000 grunts and a party of 10th level adventurers - it's the nature of the magic system.

Core D&D magic, except on a personal level, is all offense and no defense. (and even on a personal level, the attacker generally has an advantage, because the best defensive spells are too short-lived to be in use constantly)
There is nothing in the core rules to stop teleporting, scrying your enemies is ridiculously easy, there are no easy ways to protect structures or cities from fire, and there are no spells at all that can provide meaningful logistical support - the wizard, cleric and a few other people have perfect mobility and unlimited food created out of thin air, but the grunts still need to haul around their supplies the old-fashioned way, and the supplies are still produced by large numbers of defenseless villagers...

No war is going to get off the ground when it's this easy to destroy supply lines and slaughter the people who produce your food and make you the money you use to pay for your army.

All are excellent points! My game world actually takes just what you said into account. The results are odd...

 

[Dr. Strangemonkey]

A DnD world without armies wouldn't be as different from the early middle ages as you might expect.

It's not that people like William the Conqueror didn't have armies, but the man constantly campaigned for forty years and only ever participated in two pitched battles.

Most conflict consisted of siege warfare and small scale battles involving limited numbers of elite troops and their supporters as they moved about the countryside looking to secure loose assets like poorly protected supplies, villages, nobles, and fortifications.

You basically have an adventurers style of conflict right there.

When pitched battles did occur casualties were only counted among the elite units, as they were the only casualties that really mattered.

I can certainly see some of the paradigms and tactics from this period working for a world with a fair population of levelled and interested individuals.

You could also settle things via the 'LotR general strategic usefullness paradigm.' In that scenario you give all the really elite characters some easy means of checking up on each other and limiting each others power. Which means all the big wigs are far more vulnerable to each other when they use their power in full effect. So armies and kingdoms become useful as catspaws, and gaining the alliance or servitude of a fantasticly powerful character is the sweetest victory of all. Course that's not core rules.

Core rules elite characters don't seem to be effective checks on each other since divination magic is too limited and easy to evade. You may as well go after the peasants since going after the enemy wizard in his tower is suicide and you don't really know when he leaves or if he leaves or if he's even there. That's only true of the very highest level people with their insane versatility and mobility, however, the lower down you go the more conventional you can make the tactics.

The lack of a proper system of long range power detection and tracking seems to me to be the major flaw in Elminster's argument in FR about the effectiveness of high level characters.

 

[Frostmarrow]

You could also settle things via the 'LotR general strategic usefullness paradigm.' In that scenario you give all the really elite characters some easy means of checking up on each other and limiting each others power. Which means all the big wigs are far more vulnerable to each other when they use their power in full effect. So armies and kingdoms become useful as catspaws, and gaining the alliance or servitude of a fantasticly powerful character is the sweetest victory of all. Course that's not core rules.

Core rules elite characters don't seem to be effective checks on each other since divination magic is too limited and easy to evade. You may as well go after the peasants since going after the enemy wizard in his tower is suicide and you don't really know when he leaves or if he leaves or if he's even there. That's only true of the very highest level people with their insane versatility and mobility, however, the lower down you go the more conventional you can make the tactics.

The lack of a proper system of long range power detection and tracking seems to me to be the major flaw in Elminster's argument in FR about the effectiveness of high level characters.

Players are not going to care about being tracked by magical means. They'll use what they have to destroy the enemy even if they are risking ringwraiths homing in on their position. Perhaps it works in LoTR but player characters will not be as yellow as Gandalf is.