Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jmucchiello" data-source="post: 525859" data-attributes="member: 813">I play in one game (out of all that I ever played in) where it would be in character for one (and only one) of the players to lead troops into battle. Her character is a CG paladinoid in a 1st ed game that we still play. The only problem with her leading this battle is that she (the player) has no concept of stategy, tactics or methods of war. Just because she plays a character who is supposed to know everything known about warfare, is a tactical genius and has crush armies before does not mean we want the player to actually stand at a table and decide where to place units, etc. The DM, a trained tactician in real life, would destroy her.This is my objection to tactical battle rules. Now those 25 ranks in Knowledge Battle Tactics is meaningless since we are using the player's tactical abilities instead of the characters.Most abstract rules also assume the player is going to lay out the field, there's just less troop movement shown on the field with an abstract system. Again, initial placement requires player knowledge of how battles work. In this case, the battle is far more palatable if the DM just describes her plan to her (no die roll) and explains how the battle goes over the course of the day. The other good thing about not running the war with die is speed. A day of wargaming can last two weeks with detailed tactical rules or a good 1-4 hours abstractly. The DM can make up a description in minutes and move use on to the next character driven interlude that much faster.</blockquote>

Verification