Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Protecting Troops from Fireball
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Imperialus" data-source="post: 2717989" data-attributes="member: 893"><p>Really I see 3 options.</p><p></p><p></p><p>1) Suck it up and be damned with the casualties. This is fairly well described in the first Mazatlan Book of the Fallen (the author escapes me) where a half dozen battle wizards duke it out with the army standing in between, the protagonists bulloxed it up and I think the end casualties were something like 20,000 dead. Admittedly the wizards in this book are D&D wizards on steroids and PCP but the concept is sound. This is a particularly viable option for armies where the value of an individual troopers life is relatively low and they can be easily replaced. Mages would defiantly be a minority in a military structure like this or they would simply overpower any resources that you were able to throw at them, the bulk of the fighting and dieing would be done by grunts. I'd say 95% of the army would consist of non spellcasting classes with only the odd mage or cleric to support them.</p><p></p><p>2) If you like formations but want to minimize casualties then the most important training a soldier should receive would be various formations and marching drills. This would lead to battles closely resembling a Napoleonic (or even Roman) battlefield where troops would get into line formation if they were up against artillery and square to repel cavalry charges. This is an intensely ordered military style however and would likely be inappropriate for chaotic cultures. Mages would likely be more prevalent in such a military culture as their presence on the battlefield would have led to the tactical doctrine in the first place. These troopers would likely be significantly more professional then their example 1 counterparts and is better suited to armies with a professional officer corp and standing armies. Due to the expense of maintaining professional armies the battles would likely be much smaller but the troops would likely be higher level and generally more capable of surviving a given attack. A given regiment would likely have a mage or two in support to aid in counterspelling along with a number of clerics present throughout the ranks and bards serving as regimental pipers/general support.</p><p></p><p>3) The furthest departure from D&D cannon is one that has been discussed before, small units capturing specific objectives is probably the most effective way of mitigating magic’s effect. These units would require more training than their example 2 counterparts but not necessarily more discipline thereby allowing chaotic cultures to also take advantage of them. Small units would be heavily supported by battlecasters and their ilk but mages and the like would likely be used more for battlefield control and troop support than direct attack. This would more closely resemble 20th century battlefields than anything else and some people might have a problem with that. Still though there is something to be said for a group of infantry casting message and calling in a draconic airstrike on enemy positions or opening a summoning circle deep behind enemy lines and allowing a pit fiend to rampage through an enemy encampment. This is best suited to small armies with an inordinate number of powerful spellcasters, like elves. Many other armies might keep a single elite unit trained and equipped in such a manner, which gets committed to particularly tough battles. This is a key spot that PC’s can fill in an army and can often be filled by professional (and expensive) mercenary companies as well.</p><p></p><p>Keep in mind that these are broad military traditions and generalized tactical doctrines. In my own campaign the actual structure of an army varies from race to race and culture to culture. The dwarves for example specialize in a method similar to the British tactical doctrine late in the first world war called “bite and hold” where small units capture objectives and example 2 infantry move to re-enforce them and hold the position. Elves rely almost entirely on small units backed up by impressive magical support, and Orcs have huge hoards of ill trained Orc and Gobin barbarians with elite unites of “black-blades” operating behind enemy lines to eliminate enemy spellcasters and disrupt command and control.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Imperialus, post: 2717989, member: 893"] Really I see 3 options. 1) Suck it up and be damned with the casualties. This is fairly well described in the first Mazatlan Book of the Fallen (the author escapes me) where a half dozen battle wizards duke it out with the army standing in between, the protagonists bulloxed it up and I think the end casualties were something like 20,000 dead. Admittedly the wizards in this book are D&D wizards on steroids and PCP but the concept is sound. This is a particularly viable option for armies where the value of an individual troopers life is relatively low and they can be easily replaced. Mages would defiantly be a minority in a military structure like this or they would simply overpower any resources that you were able to throw at them, the bulk of the fighting and dieing would be done by grunts. I'd say 95% of the army would consist of non spellcasting classes with only the odd mage or cleric to support them. 2) If you like formations but want to minimize casualties then the most important training a soldier should receive would be various formations and marching drills. This would lead to battles closely resembling a Napoleonic (or even Roman) battlefield where troops would get into line formation if they were up against artillery and square to repel cavalry charges. This is an intensely ordered military style however and would likely be inappropriate for chaotic cultures. Mages would likely be more prevalent in such a military culture as their presence on the battlefield would have led to the tactical doctrine in the first place. These troopers would likely be significantly more professional then their example 1 counterparts and is better suited to armies with a professional officer corp and standing armies. Due to the expense of maintaining professional armies the battles would likely be much smaller but the troops would likely be higher level and generally more capable of surviving a given attack. A given regiment would likely have a mage or two in support to aid in counterspelling along with a number of clerics present throughout the ranks and bards serving as regimental pipers/general support. 3) The furthest departure from D&D cannon is one that has been discussed before, small units capturing specific objectives is probably the most effective way of mitigating magic’s effect. These units would require more training than their example 2 counterparts but not necessarily more discipline thereby allowing chaotic cultures to also take advantage of them. Small units would be heavily supported by battlecasters and their ilk but mages and the like would likely be used more for battlefield control and troop support than direct attack. This would more closely resemble 20th century battlefields than anything else and some people might have a problem with that. Still though there is something to be said for a group of infantry casting message and calling in a draconic airstrike on enemy positions or opening a summoning circle deep behind enemy lines and allowing a pit fiend to rampage through an enemy encampment. This is best suited to small armies with an inordinate number of powerful spellcasters, like elves. Many other armies might keep a single elite unit trained and equipped in such a manner, which gets committed to particularly tough battles. This is a key spot that PC’s can fill in an army and can often be filled by professional (and expensive) mercenary companies as well. Keep in mind that these are broad military traditions and generalized tactical doctrines. In my own campaign the actual structure of an army varies from race to race and culture to culture. The dwarves for example specialize in a method similar to the British tactical doctrine late in the first world war called “bite and hold” where small units capture objectives and example 2 infantry move to re-enforce them and hold the position. Elves rely almost entirely on small units backed up by impressive magical support, and Orcs have huge hoards of ill trained Orc and Gobin barbarians with elite unites of “black-blades” operating behind enemy lines to eliminate enemy spellcasters and disrupt command and control. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Protecting Troops from Fireball
Top