Cry Havok-Sell me on it.

[shadow]

Okay, I've been waiting some time for a set of good mass combat rules. I have been thinking on picking up either Malhavoc's Cry Havok or Eden's Fields of Blood. However, despite what Eden says, I really think that Fields of Blood is vaporware, so that leaves me with Cry Havok. I've been waiting for the print copy to come out (I dislike having to print out PDFs). My question is-is it worth it? Before I shell out any more cash on gaming books I really would like to know a few things about it. Is it 3.0 compatible (I'm not switching to 3.5e rules)? Does it allow PCs to join the battle as "epic units"? (I always wanted a system that let PCs play their characters alongside their units. Much like the legendary heroes of mythology who would terrorize the battle field.) Does it follow 3.5e's system of square facings, or can I have units or creatures that have other formations? Finally how easy is it to take creatures from the MM, MM2, or any of the monster books and convert them into mass combat statistics?

 

[Silveras]

Testament

If a something on the mythical scale is what you are seeking, you may find the mass combat in Testament to your liking. It allows single heroes to act as those legendary heroes of mythology. It also allows them to be part of a "regular" unit, if that is your preference. And, it is 3.0, not 3.5.

OTOH, I believe Cry Havoc (from what I have heard) can say the same. It is by Skip Williams and Monte Cook, so it should be 3.x compatible. Conversion issues, if any, should be minimal.

 

[Halivar]

Personally, I don't understand why we need to write new rules for mass fantasy combat. Fantasy is basically medieval with magic thrown in, right?

So, use an existing medieval historical miniature gaming system. There are several good ones, some of which have been around for 20+ years. Others have been around longer than D&D 1st Ed,. Try that for playtesting.

Here are some historical miniature wargames I'm acquainted with:

WRG 7th Ed. -- Exhaustive rules, very time-consuming, very realistic. Frankly, not worth the time investment if you don't use mass combat much. Because of all the math involved, however, it is probably the easiest to throw in modifiers for magic armor and whatnot. Several decades of playtesting since first edition behind it.

De Bellis Multitudinus (or De Bellis Antiquitis) -- Successor the WRG 7th. Lighter rules, still pretty exhaustive. I would still consider this very friendly to throwing in modifiers for magical weapons and armor, feats and magic attacks. I would run this if I had mass combat with any regularity.

Armati -- Throw out those bulky rules! This is for fast-and-furious one-time mass combat stuff. Easy to pick up, and whole battles take little more than an hour or two (for the largest battles) to resolve.

In each of these, an easy way to do magic is to use artillery rules for wizards. Artillery in these games typically are pretty easy to kill, just like that 60 hit-point level 20 wizard.

Another alternative would be to pick up some old TSR or Avalon Hill war games (with the little cardboard chits) and have at it. Pick up a renaissance game and treat artillery chits as magic users.

In a pinch, just use AH's King Maker with extra cards for wizards (everybody has that, right?).

This way, I can just use all those old games my dad has stuffed in his closet instead of shelling out for more rulebooks.

 

[Silveras]

Personally, I don't understand why we need to write new rules for mass fantasy combat. Fantasy is basically medieval with magic thrown in, right?

So, use an existing medieval historical miniature gaming system. There are several good ones, some of which have been around for 20+ years. Others have been around longer than D&D 1st Ed,. Try that for playtesting.

Uhm ... because the historical minis rules don't cover magic ? D&D has literally hundred of magic items that, used in quantity, would make the stats of any 'normal' medieval minis irrelevant.

 

[Halivar]

Uhm ... because the historical minis rules don't cover magic ? D&D has literally hundred of magic items that, used in quantity, would make the stats of any 'normal' medieval minis irrelevant.

Well, considering that mass combat typically means armies of several thousand combatants on a side (sometimes in excess of 50,000, sometimes more) I would not think you could raise the funds to make them all level 20 sorcerors with wands of Summon Monster IX, or outfit them all with +5 100% fortified full-plate. The most you would probably see would be support units casting fireball, icestorm, chain lightning, or other somesuch stuff, and elite fighter units with magic full-plate.

I'm just saying that, generally, units comprised entirely of combative spellcasters can be treated as renaissance artillery units.

Attack bonus can be meted out for the following:
- Units of fighters instead of warriors.
- For each class level past first if the entire unit is advanced
- For magical weapons
- If everyone in the unit has strength enhancements

Defense bonuses can be given for:
- If everyone in the unit has dexterity bonuses
- If everyone has magical protection, armor-based or otherwise.

Remember that the obscenely powerful magic stuff in D&D is for adventures for extraordinairey people. The grunts in your armies are going to be very ordinairey folks. Not everyone in a standing army is going to be a level 5 fighter, or even level 2. Most will not have any magical enhancements.

Just my thoughts.

 

[Spatula]

Personally, I don't understand why we need to write new rules for mass fantasy combat. Fantasy is basically medieval with magic thrown in, right?

Magic... and monsters. Converting D&D monsters into stats for your wargame of choice would be a hassle.

And then there's powerful heroes, which can make a tremendous difference all by themselves (especially wizards/sorcs).

But also, useful battlefield magic isn't limited to blast'em-type spells. How do you handle illusions? Enchantments? Summoning creatures with DR, which can't be hurt by normal forces?

 

[shadow]

*bump*