[Malhavoc] cry havoc!

[Paul_Klein]

Can anyone tell me how compatable this system is with other d20 products... namely Star Wars Revised d20?

 

[Varianor Abroad]

rounser, the example doesn't show enough. In CH during playtest (and I wasn't told that this changed much), damage factors applied to one critter at a time for weapon results. Magic damage was spread equally to all unit members in the area of effect. (If the unit saves, it takes 1/2 damage, etc.) So you can have the situation where a fireball crisps ogres down to 1 DF apiece, followed by a good volley of arrows that drop most of the ogre unit.

Table 3-3 I can't comment on yet. Haven't seen the final product and I'm not sure what you're driving at.

 

[Eben]

Would I like it as a wargamer? (And roleplayer, obviously.)

 

[Celtavian]

re

I'm waiting for the print version. It sounds like a good book.

 

[Arnwyn]

I'm waiting for a review of this and Fields of Blood (when it's released) so I can compare and contrast the two products and choose.

Needless to say, though, the preview at Monte's site has left me very impressed. Skip seems to have included concepts that I find important (eg. the rallying point idea) and made it non-reliant on having a large number of miniatures.

 

[Mystery Man]

From the Malhavoc web site:



This seems odd to me since 1E didn't have it; 2E didn't have it; and the 3E DMG is already 256 pages. I suspect it wasn't included because of chainmail, more more importantly because it's never been included and there wasn't room.

Having said that, I'm keeping a keen eye on the reviews. It's probably true that the team that did Cry Havoc is among the best qualified in the industry to put something like this together!

But to be fair, there was a mass combat system that was developed in 2E (I think it was 2E), that was included in a series of modules.


However, if this product is well recieved and delivers what it says I just may get it.

-Mystery Man

 

[ruleslawyer]

But to be fair, there was a mass combat system that was developed in 2E (I think it was 2E), that was included in a series of modules.

Actually, the BATTLESYSTEM mass combat rules were developed as separate accessories both for 1e and 2e.

 

[Emiricol]

Actually, the BATTLESYSTEM mass combat rules were developed as separate accessories both for 1e and 2e.

And both versions were horrid, imho. Hopefully this one is better

 

[Mystery Man]

And both versions were horrid, imho. Hopefully this one is better

Yes, they were bad. Probably why nothing was put in the 3.0 or 3.5 DMG.

If I ever do a battle, I think I'd just have my players play it out in individual pockets of the whole, the outcome of the battle hinging on them surgically taking out a key commander or something.

 

[Varianor Abroad]

Would I like it as a wargamer? (And roleplayer, obviously.)

Think of it as a way to do D&D combat as a wargame. Just with big numbers. 100 or more on a side. The rules increase the scale of standard combat so that you can use units of people instead of individuals and use spells on a large scale. (Though you can still stop a battle for a Hero Challenge between individuals.) We ran one large battle as a playtest that involved the PCs having to unite (temporarily) two warring countries against a common enemy - a horde of wyverns, dragons and half-dragons heading to an Orb of Dragonkind. The terrain and morale rules gave it a very wargame-like feel too.

I hope that helps.