Mass Combat for E.N. Publishing's War of the Burning Sky

[Land Outcast]

Another possibility is making use of the battlefield as randomencounterfield:

Ex:
01-30: X average soldiers
31-45: Enemy "beast" (Dire boar, Troll, change as appropriate)
46-55: X Elite soldiers
56-70: Allied troops in need of support (roll again ignoring 41-45 to determine threat)
71-80: X elite soldiers in onslaught (ej: cavalry charge, hail of arrows)
81-85: Enemy battlefield mage + bodyguards
86-90: Magical Attack (From far away)
91-95: Enemy Officer + Elite soldiers
96-99: Enemy Commander + Elite soldiers
100: Enemy General + "Beast" + Elite soldiers

 

[FunkBGR]

To be honest, I think if you want something that doesn't require a lot of learning, Cry Havoc does it.

The thing that requires time about Cry Havoc is building the stat blocks. The rest of the combat feels exactly like the D&D combat.

You use miniatures, you have the same actions - instead of a move and a standard, you get two full round actions. You don't have to provide a list of what groups can accomplish - just leave it to whatever's in the PHB. Leave a note that if people want even more, they can pick up Cry Havoc. If you're trying to not alienate people from D&D combat, it'd be the easiest because it's just D&D combat on a scale of x10.

 

[Cergorach]

I think a lot of DMs/players wouldn't need anything more complicated then the GT system. You could go for a supplement that gives the DM/player a more detailed battle system as an option.

Question 1: Are all the possible units that will be used in the campaign known? Id so that would make designing a slightly more complicated version of the GT system easier.

Question 2: Are you aiming for a visualy/prop aided system (using counters/minis and a battle board)?

 

[howandwhy99]

I'm actually just starting a full review for Mass Combat systems designed for d20. It's likely to take me a few months though to get through all of it. Having looked at over two dozen systems I have to say there is one question to answer: Do you want to play
1. a wargame with multiple miniatures on bases?
2. a miniature game similar to d20 combat?
3. or an abstraction of combat that may or may not require minis?

1. Fields of Blood is best for the first.
2. Open Mass Combat System II (or revised) in Book of Strongholds and Dynasties is best for the second.
3. Grim Tales Mass Combat is best for the last.

Cry Havoc is actually the most absolutely thorough and exacting system (produced by Skip Williams author of 3E). But playing it is more complicated than d20 and with every bit as many tiny rules to memorize. Sadly, it is only close enough to d20 to mess with your head if you memorize both systems.

That said, it's easily the best designed system on the market if d20 compatibility is the #1 priority for you.


PS: There's a post a year or two back in one of the House Rules "Mass Combat Threads" that separates out 6 or 7 good systems by preference using an If-Then system.

 

[kenmarable]

I'll have to get a copy of the GT version and read up on my Cry Havoc, but personally, I think something simple like how you describe GT would be cool, and then throw in some special abilities for the odd units. Mechanically, they can be really simple, but just describe them differently.

For example a dragon could use a Breath Weapon Strafing attack (very cool sounding attack). Actual mechanics could simply be "Does double damage, but can't attack next round because it has to circle back."

Drow could have an Ambush ability that allows them to hide and take no actions one turn during which they get a bonus to whatever is used for defense. They then get a bonus to attack on the following turn. Balance it out by allowing them to only use it once a combat (once you've sprung an ambush, it's kind of hard to all hide and ambush again).

Even an elite group of soldiers could have a Rallying Cry ability that when they are down by half, they get a bonus to hit or something.

So with simple mechanics, you can convey a handful of interesting abilities. A mini-book/web enhancement could have information for carrying out the battles using other mechanics for those who want something more complex.

Since it's being designed for a set campaign saga, all of the units should be known and giving each of the ones that aren't just a bunch of average soldiers 1-3 cool abilities could be enough to convey the feel without having to learn an entirely new system.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Fields of Blood by Eden

Cry Havok by Malhavock (also yanked for Advanced Player's Guide by Green Ronin and Warcraft)

Grim Tales

Heroes of Battle (descriptors with goals as opposed to pure mechanics.)

Coin Flipping

 

[Yair]

I too would suggest looking up Heroes of Battle and using its ideas and mindset. Leave the wargame as an option, sure, but campaigning through the war without a mass combat system should be an option too, and in that regard HoB can help.

Otherwise, I very much like GT's system. Make sure that, if the group chooses to use it they will use it across several battles, as much of its subtlety does not come to bear in a single one.

I could simply copy the pertinent materials into the adventures that will use it, and include it with the campaign saga, or I could point people in the direction of Bad-Axe's products, which I'd be a fan of because I dig any chance to pimp the works of Ben Durbin.

Unless my memory fails me, you'd want to take a close look at the OGC declaration, ponder it, and realize you can't copy anything from the work without Ben's permission. Either referring to his work or copying it can be a really good idea, but you'd need to ask his permission. (There are ways around this, but asking should be best I think.)