Orcs vs. Commoner Humans

[irishfast]

another thing: you're assuming that these dogs herding sheep and such are war dogs. not too likely. your dogs are going to be slaughtered. the average villager have more important things to do every day than train his dogs to attack orcs. sure, they'll bark. but you have to think in terms of rounds here. dogs always bark, so one or two going isn't a big deal. it'll wake up the occupants of that house. by this time, the orcs have either ignored the dogs or slaughtered them, and moved on inside. after waking up, the occupants of the house will still have to get up, find a light, figure out what's going on, arm themselves, and then orient themselves to danger. the average commoner, even at the edge of orc lands, won't be rolling out of bed ready to fight every time his dog barks.

you figure that if a village holds about 50 people, only 6-10 have to die to put a nice dent in their morale. 10% of your population dying in a raid will likely make you pack up and move.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Nogray....

Sounds like your Orcs got plenty of Int... with your way of doing things... i could make sure 2 Orcs would be enought to raid the Town... Don't Overplay them...

Don't overplay them. I laugh at this statement. Not all the orcs should have the same stats. You're allowed to have an orc Ftr2 with Int 12 and Charisma 10 telling "the boyz" what to do.

Using stealthy tactics is extremely basic. Kids know to do this, and most kids aren't tactical experts.

So, if the humans (Who are much smarter than Orcs) apply their own intelligent tactics to defense what can be done?

They might win. Among 50 peasants, there's bound to be a few warriors and maybe a few people who aren't warriors but have decent Int. Too bad they suffer from the defender's disadvantage.

Contrary to popular belief, the defenders have a lot of disadvantages. They know the terrain better, have better lines of supply and communication, and can fortify themselves - very good advantages. However, they don't always know if an attack is coming, nor do they necessarily know where the orcs will attack. (A smartish orc leader, whose tribe lives west of the village, might think to attack from the south instead.) The humans either concentrate their defenses one way, or they have to spread out their defenses, leaving their "border" thinly guarded. If the humans have never suffered a serious attack before, they might be complacent.

The humans need to be prepared in order to win. It's doable, but not guaranteed.

On morale issues - most of the peasants have probably never been in a serious fight before. They might have seen a serious fight, but that's not the same thing as never having been in one. They might think they can't beat an orc.

The Battle of the the Golden Spurs is a great example of commoners with high morale beating a theoretically superior force. (The Flemish commanders were smarter than the French commanders in this battle. The commoners were the Flemings.) See the wikipedia article for more details.

 

[Moonstone Spider]

another thing: you're assuming that these dogs herding sheep and such are war dogs. not too likely. your dogs are going to be slaughtered.

Actually I don't assume that, the wimpy dog stats are sufficient to inflict nasty orc penalties. However I direct you to the Monstrous Manual Page 272 under Riding Dogs: "Yhis category includes working breeds such as collies, huskies, and St. Bernards."

So it's absolutely certain that these dogs for herding sheep and such are going to be using the Riding Dog stats, which are the murderous ones that are a match for Orcs as written at about 2-1 odds. They're not going to be trained for war so they don't have the Trip ability but they're still the riding dogs with more HP, more initiative, a better BAB, and Better Armor than an Orc. And they can track so if these orcs are dumb enough to simply try raiding. . . the commoners are going to use their sheepherding dogs to track them down and kill them in daylight when the orcs are at every disadvantage.

Contrary to popular belief, the defenders have a lot of disadvantages. They know the terrain better, have better lines of supply and communication, and can fortify themselves - very good advantages. However, they don't always know if an attack is coming, nor do they necessarily know where the orcs will attack. (A smartish orc leader, whose tribe lives west of the village, might think to attack from the south instead.) The humans either concentrate their defenses one way, or they have to spread out their defenses, leaving their "border" thinly guarded. If the humans have never suffered a serious attack before, they might be complacent.

While this is true, this kind of tactic is also highly counter-productive to the Orcs. They're in seriously bad shape during the day, so they have to hole up and if any humans come across their tracks or spot their hideout during that time, they're probably dead meat once the local lord sends in his warriors (If Orcs vs. Peasants is a fight worthy of debate, Orcs vs. Warriors in daylight is going to be a slaughter). This pretty much limits Orcs to a marching range of six hours of their border (Call it twelve miles). If they want to get fancy with these directional tactics, that means they have to somehow find an undefended hamlet less than that, say four of five miles from their territory (Unless they're willing to run a serious risk of detection and facing trained warriors in daylight).

Do you honestly think commoners are going to set up a nice little hamlet with minimal defenses just a couple of hours jog from Orc-controlled territory?

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

While this is true, this kind of tactic is also highly counter-productive to the Orcs. They're in seriously bad shape during the day, so they have to hole up and if any humans come across their tracks or spot their hideout during that time, they're probably dead meat once the local lord sends in his warriors (If Orcs vs. Peasants is a fight worthy of debate, Orcs vs. Warriors in daylight is going to be a slaughter). This pretty much limits Orcs to a marching range of six hours of their border (Call it twelve miles). If they want to get fancy with these directional tactics, that means they have to somehow find an undefended hamlet less than that, say four of five miles from their territory (Unless they're willing to run a serious risk of detection and facing trained warriors in daylight).

Do you honestly think commoners are going to set up a nice little hamlet with minimal defenses just a couple of hours jog from Orc-controlled territory?

I wasn't aware exactly how far they were from the humans. I was also under the association they weren't constantly attacking, otherwise the village would have developed a few warriors just through their XP of shooting at orcs and what not.

If the humans are that close to the orcs, they're also going to take their defenses very seriously, and if they don't have an expert telling them how to set up the walls, they might import one for a few days to draw plans. In that case, it's no longer an orc raid, but a full-scale assault for the orcs to attack the vilalge. Now we wonder why are the orcs attacking? A well-defended village isnt' an easy target, so whatever they're getting has to be worth the assault.

PS I think the orcs might have eight hours to march if darkness exists for about twelve hours. They can take the short route home, unless they're loaded down with too much loot. If they win the battle, they can occupy the village for the next day, and hope no one could spread the alarm. (Fighting from the indoors would give the orcs some considerable advantages, but they would be hampered by poor daytime lookouts.)

 

[Imp]

In an attack the dogs will make enough noise to raise the dead, alerting the whole village in short order as other dogs take up the call. The other villagers will be showing up in a minute or two. The Orcs have, at most, ten rounds to climb a fence, manage to kill two dogs (And the orcs can count on losing at least four of their number to just two dogs and four humans in the process), Eight humans, and loot and burn. If they can't manage to steal whatever it is they want and escape by then (They can't) the rest of the village surrounds them and kills them all.

Climb? Wouldn't the orcs just chop down the fence? Also, they don't have to climb the fence to start killing, if they packed javelins or something. Much easier to take the dogs down from the other side of the fence. Assuming it's just a fence and not a solid palisade. I don't think a 50-person village would have the resources or time to put up an honest-to-goodness palisade surrounding their village. Realistically, they might have some kind of fortified area to retreat to, a hilltop with a palisade, perhaps.

Again, you've really gotta figure, in a 50-person village, half are going to be in their prime as combatants - the others are going to be various kinds of old, with the penalties to their physical stats to match, or else children. They will be proficient in one simple weapon and it's probably not ranged. Crossbows are expensive and a sling in the hands of a commoner is not going to kill an orc in one or possibly two or maybe even three hits. The orcs, outfitted for raiding and proficient in anything martial, are going to have the advantage.

Oh, and the statblock for orc in the SRD does specify 2 3rd-level sergeants and a leader of 3rd-6th level in a squad of 11-20, if you were to reeeally play it by the book.

 

[nogray]

A point-by-point argument, if you don't mind the format.

But your tactics do rely on the Orcs sneaking up (Without any move silently or hide skills) on watchmen who most likely do have the spot and listen skills.

Don't overestimate the skills of the commoners. They have 12 skill points. As you point out, they are likely to spend a portion of those and their two feats on life-skills (profession and craft). Even if they do manage to squeak out a few for spot and listen, they won't be maxxed out. The best you would probably get is +2 to +4 for each. Call that +3 on average, and compare it to the orcs move silently score of -1 and it seems the humans have an edge until you take into account the distance penalty of -1 per 10 feet. On average (taking 10 on the relevant skills), a commoner won't spot or hear the orc until the orc is within 50 ft. Spot is impossible beyond 60 feet (for a lantern that costs 7 gold, plus oil) or 40 feet (for a torch that costs 1 copper). Of course, the orcs are setting up for a charge by then.

And don't forget the village's dogs, which are useful not only for security but jobs like herding and keeping vermin away from the chickens. They have quite acute senses (For level 1 creatures) and will also bolster defenses.

So, if the humans (Who are much smarter than Orcs) apply their own intelligent tactics to defense what can be done?

First a big mean dog or two in each house. It'll be a minor drain on resources but they're useful for a lot of other stuff too. This adds a major bolster to defenses, and provides a very sharp-eyed and eared watcher for the clumsy noisy orcs.

Dogs are expensive. Guard dogs cost 25 gold, and commoners have an average starting wealth of 5d4 gold. Effective dogs (the stats of riding dogs) are much more costly (about 150 gold). The (somewhat) affordable dogs do have spot and listen skills of +5, moving the detection range out to 70 feet or so. Chancy, true. As to the combat effectiveness of dogs, that is fairly overstated, too. A dog has only a 50% chance to hit the orc, and of those hits, only one in four will put an orc out of the fight (by damage, ignoring crits, and the orc will still be conscious at zero hit points). The orcs, on the other hand, have the same 50% chance to hit the dogs, but any hit is a guaranteed kill. Similar numbers for the combat effectiveness of the commoners are as follows:

chance of a commoner to hit an orc: 40%
chance that a hit takes the orc out of the fight: 2/6 or 1/3 (1/6 to put negative)
chance of an orc hitting a commoner: 75% (not counting charges)
chance that an orc outright puts a commoner into negative hit points: 100%

The intelligence difference is less significant than you make it out to be. Only a one-point difference in bonuses. The thing that helps human commoners is the extra four skill points.

Second just build a fence. One a hundred feat or so away from the house will be fine. At night you bring your livestock inside this fence and let your dogs roam around inside protecting it.

In an attack the dogs will make enough noise to raise the dead, alerting the whole village in short order as other dogs take up the call. The other villagers will be showing up in a minute or two. The Orcs have, at most, ten rounds to climb a fence, manage to kill two dogs (And the orcs can count on losing at least four of their number to just two dogs and four humans in the process), Eight humans, and loot and burn. If they can't manage to steal whatever it is they want and escape by then (They can't) the rest of the village surrounds them and kills them all.

Your combat numbers look off to me. The orcs kill an average of three humans in four swings. Humans usually take two hits to kill the orc, and hit less often. I'm figuring an average rate of extinction (at zero hit points or less) of one orc every four or five swings by a commoner. In a fight, I might even put one orc versus two humans to be a somewhat fair fight, depending on dice. In the first round, the pair would only have a 42% chance to put the orc down, whereas he would kill one of them 75% of the time.

Similarly, the dogs fall at a rate of about one every other round to a single orc, while it takes an about three or four attacks from a dog to kill an orc. (Note that these are attacks, not hits, from a bog standard orc, dog, and human commoner using a 1d6 weapon, and it ignores crits--those would favor the humans and dogs, though, since on the orcs part, crits are "wasted damage." Against the much-more-expensive riding dog, the crits are useful to the orcs, but not so much to the riding dogs.)

A fence (assuming here that it is no higher than 10') would help the villagers, but at a +2 to their jump and climb (+3 from strength, -1 from armor), the orcs have a decent chance of clearing it in a move action. Also, at 100 feet, the listen check modifier is -9 without considering the intervening walls. This means that the orcs will largely be undetected by people in the houses until the dogs begin to bark. A smaller fenced area would be better, actually, since the dogs are more likely to hear the orcs (knowing "farm dogs" like I do, they are very likely to be right next to the house for much of the night). It would also be less expensive. Unfortunately, the dogs are likely to die quickly and without hurting the orcs too much unless there is some light nearby (thanks to the 50% miss chance from concealment due to darkness); even in shadowy illumination, there is a 20% miss chance for the dogs and none for the orcs.

(Wow, this got long.) Anyway, I hope you aren't taking this as me being antagonistic. You started the thread mentioning that 24 orcs wouldn't have a chance against a village of 50 commoners. I am just positing ways (and probabilities) that would make it possible for you to have the adventure you mentioned. Not even accounting for morale, the commoners don't have much of a chance. The orcs will probably remain in small units easily capable of killing equal-sized groups of peasants or mixes of peasants and dogs. (Don't discount that the orcs might have dogs, too.) The human commoners will not likely mount an organized defense until quite a few families have been put to the orcish falchion. Even then, the orcs kill people with savage efficiency. Each hit downs a peasant (the damage for orcs is listed as 2d4+4 versus the average commoner's 2 hit points). There is even a slight chance that the orc kills (puts to -10 hit points) a peasant outright--and in a satisfyingly gruesome manner--with either a crit (11% chance of critting each swing) or a max damage hit (about a 5% chance per swing). That is a morale-influencing event. Any commoner in the fight has a roughly 16% chance per swing of immediately going from healthy to spectacularly slain. That compares to their 7% chance of hitting the orc hard enough to put it at zero (still standing) or 8% chance to make the orc go to dying (those numbers do, very roughly, include crits).

 

[Grog]

The town/village dichotomy is one I didn't think of but you're claiming that a village, which happens to be in orc-raided lands, will not be planned to defend against orc attacks.

If the village is in orc-raided lands, what are they doing without any warriors for protection? For that matter, what is such a small village doing there at all?

Anyway, the combat differences have been explained by others, but I'll take a crack at it too.

Orcs: 5 HP, AC 13, +4 attack bonus, damage 2d4+4

Commoners: 4 HP, AC 10, +0 attack bonus, damage 1d6 (probably), proficiency with one weapon they may or may not have handy in a surprise raid.

So the orcs need a 6 or better to hit the commoners, the commoners need a 15 or better on average (assuming half of them will have the weapons they're proficient with handy and the other half will have to improvise and take the -4 penalty) to hit the orcs. The commoners do an average of 3.5 damage per hit and need an average of ~1.5 hits to drop an orc. The orcs do an average of 6 damage and drop a commoner with every hit.

In a mass meele of 25 orcs vs. 50 commoners, it'd go like this:

Round 1: 25 orcs swing and get an average of 18 hits (dropping all fractions). 18 commoners down. 50 commoners swing and get an average of 15 hits. 10 orcs down.

Round 2: (15 orcs vs. 32 commoners) 15 orcs swing and get an average of 11 hits. 11 commoners down. 32 commoners swing and get an average of 9 hits. 6 orcs down.

Round 3: (9 orcs vs. 21 commoners) 9 orcs swing and get an average of 6 hits. 6 commoners down. 21 commoners swing and get an average of 6 hits. 4 orcs down.

Round 4: (5 orcs vs. 15 commoners) 5 orcs swing and get an average of 3 hits. 3 commoners down. 15 commoners swing and get an average of 4 hits. 2 orcs down.

So the commoners win, but suffer 70-80% casualties or so. Hardly the lopsided battle you've made it out to be. The village has been basically wiped out by an orc raiding party half its size.

But of course, that was just a simple example assuming everyone's fighting at once (and assuming everyone in the village can fight, but that's another subject). In a surprise raid, the orcs wouldn't be fighting all 50 commoners at once; they'd be fighting them a few at a time and could kill a significant number before the rest could organize resistance.

And the raiding band would have higher level officers who would have a huge impact on the battle, as has been mentioned before. And the orcs would certainly attack at night, so their darkvision would give them an additional advantage. The commoners know the terrain, but the orcs can do things like set the buildings on fire to cause chaos and negate that advantage.

The commoners would be slaughtered. So the moral of the story is, if you live in orc-raided lands, a) don't live in such a small village, and b) get warriors for protection!

 

[Pickaxe]

Actually I don't assume that, the wimpy dog stats are sufficient to inflict nasty orc penalties. However I direct you to the Monstrous Manual Page 272 under Riding Dogs: "Yhis category includes working breeds such as collies, huskies, and St. Bernards."

So it's absolutely certain that these dogs for herding sheep and such are going to be using the Riding Dog stats,

I disagree. First, if we want to argue according to the literal RAW, "includes" does not equal "includes all," so don't assume that a sheep-herding dog is equivalent to a riding dog. Border collies and shelties are working dogs, and I can't imagine either as a size M creature that can serve as a mount for a halfling. Those two breeds are clearly very different from a Saint Bernard; should they have the same stats?

Regarding the OP, it would be helpful to know the circumstances of the encounter. Is this village in an area habitually raided by orcs, or are these orcs part of a new incursion? This would have an impact on the preparedness of the villagers. If the former, many of the assumptions reagarding defenses others have mentioned would apply, and I would even suggest that some of the commoners would have levels. If the latter, I imagine that the orcs would have a great advantage, even in their smaller numbers, due to their higher abilities, better armor, and being able to ambush a relatively unaware population.

--Axe

 

[drothgery]

It's probably also worth noting that by the book, large portions of the citizenry in a frequently-raided border village/town are going to be warriors, not commoners.

And if you're not going by the book, and instead using something like the demographics I usually toss around as being more plausible (which say that a normal adult is a 3rd-5th level character; 1st-level commoners are children; 1st-level characters in other classes, and 2nd-level commoners, are people with just enough responsiblity to be trusted on their own), then you've got Orc Warrior 3s (probably with a Barbarian 4 or 5 warchief) facing town guard (Warrior 3s with a Fighter 4 captain), militia (multiclass Warrior 1/Commoner 2s), and in the last extreme of their own defense, general citizens (commoner 3s). In a border villiage or other place with a strong yeoman soldier tradition, treat all able-bodied adults as militia.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Villages in outlaying/frontier areas would be mostly farmers. As such they would be spread out to a degree.

Look at early colonization phases of North America for a real world example.

Orc War bands would be out on a 'viking', so to speak. Away from thier homeland for months at a time. Striking at unprotected communities who thought they were safe, then moving on out of range for the local army to catch up. Speed and surprise are their freinds.

Something to remember, sans magic, it takes time for messengers to get around. The war band could be hundreds of miles away before the local army was even notified..

then we get into whether there is a standing army or conscript, which gets into economics, etc..
Look at the real world viking raids or the Indian Wars in America for inspiration.

I think the reasons why a Orc band could wipe out villages was fairly well laid out above.

The last thing to add.. why do people think that an INT of 8 is soo stupid? Wolf pack tactics, which the Orcs would emulate, are done by critters with an INT of 3!

Sneak up, charge, slay/loot/pillage/burn.
Pretty easy. And if a few valiant Orcs die at the hand of the evil human scum.. well, that happens.