Question: Life on the Battlefield

[Water Bob]

I'm working on a large engagement for my campaign. Clan vs. Clan warfare. Like a movie, I plan on focussing on the PCs, down in this hell, and only play out fully what happens to the PCs.

As for the rest of their clan, I'm going to throw dice to determine the overall fate of the PC's clan (there's a system for this, not like a typical wargame style battlesystem, in the Conan RPG that I'm going to use).

What I'm curious about is battlefield casualties.

Picture two Ancient Celtic clans going at it in the woods. Rought terrain. Hilly. No vehicles or horses. No bows--only the occasional thrown spear or hand axe.

It's not a big engagment--something like 30 warriors on each side.

As a general rule of thumb, if a warrior is taken out of action, is he dead? Or, is he more likely wounded so that he cannot continue to fight?

Can you ballpark a percentage on this with your opinion?

And, of those that live, how many (%) do you think will have life-changing wounds--something that won't heal and allow them to return to the next battlefield (like being blinded, having a limb amputated, cracking a warrior's back, and so on...).




I'm trying to speculate how many warriors are just flat out dead when they are incapacitated (the majority?) and how many will return to fight another day.


The floor is yours....

 

[Stormonu]

Pulling numbers out of my ... well, y'know. I don't think anyone can truthfully give you any firm numbers - it all depends on the skill and attitudes on both sides.

That said, this is my feeling:

Somewhere around 25% more casualties than the other side, the losing side is gonna start getting nervous. By the time you hit 50% more casualties than the other side (reaching 2 to 1 odds), the losing side is probably ready to quit the field - most likely a hasty withdrawl, if not a full-blown retreat. If the losing side hangs on until its taken 75% or more casualties than the other side (3 to 1 odds), the survivors will probably panic and flee. The side that cracks first and runs will have lost. The worst number of casualties tend to occur when one side turns its back, throws down it weapons and starts running - victims are basically leaving themselves wide open to attack.

Depending on the war views of the clans will determine how bad the final casualty list will be.

Does the clan believe in letting the fallen live? If not those who can't quit the field on their own two feet will be slain. In this case, any injury where the opponent can't flee the battlefield=death. If the winners prefer to take prisoners or make slaves of the losers, they may even patch up some of the survivors to induct them, giving you an increase in the number of survivors.

Do the winners run down the losers? If so, you'll have more casualties - say 5-10%. If the winners let the losers withdraw without pursuit - or among some more honorable clans - withdraw from the field with their wounded, you could be looking at survival rates among those taken out of the fight between 50% to 75%.

The winning side will have control of the battlefield, allowing them aid any fallen comrades. Of those dropped due to wounds on the battlefield, perhaps up to 75% may still be alive at the end of the skirmish - depending on the weapons, skill and luck of the combatants. However, just because a large portion may still have survived to see the end of the battle, that doesn't necessarily mean those folks are out of danger, which leads to...

Battlefield medicine/Trauma treatment will also have a big effect on the battle. Bleeding, shock, limb loss and the like are more likely than instant death and tend to kill over time - if the wounded can be treated in the "golden hour" they have a much better chance of survival. Also, the practices in play by each clan will have an effect; having access to magical healing, doctors, medics and whatnot will save lives whereas reliance of foundless superstitions or stoic refusal of treatment and the like may end up in more deaths.

 

[S'mon]

Slashing weapons tend to cause injuries that maim or disfigure but are often survivable. In typical dark ages combat with slashing weapons (axes, broadswords), an initial blow to the legs drops the target, followed by a killing blow to the head or neck.

Penetrating wounds to the gut are used to maximise fatalities. Roman military doctrine emphasised stabbing wounds to the gut, the gladius was broad-bladed enough for the wound to be disabling, and almost always fatal either from loss of blood or later from infection. It also takes a lot less effort to stab an unarmoured man in the gut than hacking at him with a slashing weapon, important when the legionaries were each expected to kill many foes in a battle - the doctrine was aimed at butchering the enemy with maximum efficiency.

Looking at historical records of battlefield losses, typically the winning side suffers around five-six times as many non-fatal wounds as deaths. Wounded on the losing side who cannot flee are killed by the victorious side. So in an evenly matched battle, both sides may suffer quite similar numbers of total casualties, but the losers will suffer at least six times as many deaths as most of their wounded are then killed.

Pitched battles are rare in inter-clan warfare, ambushes and pre-dawn raids are far more common and if successful give very lopsided casualty totals. A more common form of warfare is the 'show' battle where the two sides stand off at a distance, throwing missile weapons from extreme range, rarely inflicting casualties. Sometimes two champions from the opposing sides may advance to melee each other, with the victor's side being acknowledged the winner of the 'battle'.

Where pitched battles do occur, unless constrained by terrain the losing side almost always flees while a majority of its warriors are still standing/combatant. Flight may be prompted by defeat of a single champion, by the defeat of an elite warband within the larger mass, by a perception of overwhelming enemy numbers, by being pushed back, or by other factors. The more evenly matched the sides appear to be, the higher the likely casualties before either side flees. Total casualties very rarely exceed 30%, with most of those suffered during flight. Exceptions can occur in case of envelopment, but that seems rare in pre-State warfare.

 

[Water Bob]

Looking at historical records of battlefield losses, typically the winning side suffers around five-six times as many non-fatal wounds as deaths.

So, if I wanted a quick-n-easy check, I could do something like this...

A unit consists of 10 clansmen. If the unit is destroyed on the battlefield, then 1/5 are considered out-right dead (2 of them).

What's a decent guess at how many of the remaining 8 will have some major wound like being blinded, limb amputated, fingers lost? 50%?



Or, for a particular NPC within a unit that was destroyed, I could roll 1d6, with a 1 indicating he was out-right killed.

Maybe a 2-3 gives him a major wound.

4-6 he survives to fight another day.



Think the 50% is too high for major wounds? I mean, maybe the guy was just routed, or knocked unconscious, or collapsed from blood loss from a wound that he recovers from. Lots of possibilites.

 

[S'mon]

So, if I wanted a quick-n-easy check, I could do something like this...

A unit consists of 10 clansmen. If the unit is destroyed on the battlefield, then 1/5 are considered out-right dead (2 of them).

I'm not sure what you mean by 'destroyed on the battlefield'.

If there are 10 casualties on the winning side, you might expect 2 deaths (killed in battle, or dying within a few days) and 8 with recoverable wounds. A proportion of those will be crippling injuries, but the ratio will vary depending on the enemy's weapons. I might go with 2 dead, 2 crippled and 6 with non-crippling wounds as reasonable for game purposes. Piercing weapons tend to result in a higher proportion of fatalities and fewer survivable but crippling wounds.

If a group of 10 is overrun by the enemy, the enemy will normally butcher the fallen wounded, so most or all will be dead.

 

[Water Bob]

I'm not sure what you mean by 'destroyed on the battlefield'.

Think of a Mass Combat System or war game. One counter equals 10 clansment. When that counter gets into base-to-base contact with the enemy, dice are thrown, and the counter could be wounded, routed, or destroyed. When it's destroyed, the counter is taken off the battlefield map, but just because a counter is destroyed, it doesn't mean that all 10 men in the counter will outright killed.

Thus, the OP. I'm looking to figure out who's left once a battle is over.

 

[Piratecat]

For the life of me, I can not read this thread title without singing Pat Benatar.

 

[S'mon]

For the life of me, I can not read this thread title without singing Pat Benatar.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjY_uSSncQw]Love is a Battlefield by Pat Benatar - YouTube[/ame]

 

[S'mon]

Think of a Mass Combat System or war game. One counter equals 10 clansment. When that counter gets into base-to-base contact with the enemy, dice are thrown, and the counter could be wounded, routed, or destroyed. When it's destroyed, the counter is taken off the battlefield map, but just because a counter is destroyed, it doesn't mean that all 10 men in the counter will outright killed.

Thus, the OP. I'm looking to figure out who's left once a battle is over.

As I said, I think it will depend on whether the 'counter' belonged to the winning or losing side. From a couple games I have:

In Warhammer Battle 2e minis rules, the winner recovers 75% of losses, the loser recovers 50% - which seems rather generous, unless it reflects availability of reinforcements, but it could be that in this system most removed minis represent just temporarily incapacitating wounds which make the wounded flee or somesuch.

In War Machine abstract d% rules from the BECMI Companion Set, typically the loser suffers % loss of troops around double that of the winner, but then the winner also recovers 50% of losses as 'wounded' after 1-4 months, so for two equal-size armies the loser ultimately suffers around 4 times the winner's losses, on average, which seems reasonable, or a bit lower than the usual disparity of around 5-6 to 1.

For D&D purposes, I suggest either 2/3 or 3/4 of men from a 'removed counter' on the winning side should be recoverable. No more than 1/4 of the men will have been killed on the field, though some may die later of injuries inflicted. If there is no healing magic and you're allowing for long-term crippling injuries you could lower the recoverable proportion to 1/2, but depending on morale etc I think that would tend to give bloodier results than the historical record tends to show.

Edit: Depictions of battle in Conanesque swords & sorcery tend to have much higher fatality rates than IRL though, so a 1/2 figure might be more genre-appropriate.

 

[Stormonu]

Or, for a particular NPC within a unit that was destroyed, I could roll 1d6, with a 1 indicating he was out-right killed.

Maybe a 2-3 gives him a major wound.

4-6 he survives to fight another day.

On a roll of 2 if the enemy is using missile weapons, the poor fellow's taken an arrow to the knee and will never adventure again.

----------------------------------------

If you're concerned whether a particular NPC has taken a grevious wound that will permanently maim or scar, I suggest if they're in a "lost unit" making a Constitution check DC 20.

- If the check succeeds, the individual gets patched up and will be none the worse for wear.

- If the check fails by 4 or less, the individual will be out for a few days and will have a scar to tell the grandkids about, but will otherwise pull through.

- If the check fails by 5 -9, the individual has taken a traumatic wound, will be bed-ridden for a few weeks. You'll need to decide what the traumatic wound is - from losing a few teeth or an ear to having lost a limb or having a never-fully-healed wound that acts up every once in a while

- If the check fails by 10 or more, the individual has been slain.