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="mmadsen" data-source="post: 271050" data-attributes="member: 1645">What little changes do you think D&D could use to make it a decent mass combat game (or rather, a decent game for playing out a very, very small segment of a larger battle)?If we want the game to reflect reality (at all), we want real-life tactics to work.  We want formations, for instance, to have some kind of facing, so that flanking (on that scale) means something.  And if forcing the enemy to approach you with his right side to your archers was important for Sun Tzu to specifically mention it, I think (a) shields should provide excellent cover vs. missiles, and (b) they should only provide that cover to the front and left.One of the major advantages of the Greek Hoplites over their Persian foes was that the heavy, bronze hoplon shield crushed the lighter shields of the Persians when the lines collided. Naturally, I'd like to see a reason for lines to Bull Rush each other, and I'd like to see large, metal shields beat small, wicker shields.  Without a nearby lava flow or furnace, there isn't much point in Bull Rushing someone in D&D.Perhaps the chief advantage of the Roman legions was their famous gladius thrusting shortsword.  If the Romans were famous for closing inside of their enemies' spears, I'd like spears (not just longspears) to fail at close range.  And, of course, I'd like ordinary soldiers to be able to wield an 8' spear in one hand.Any other thoughts or suggestions?</blockquote>

Verification