Quick Out-of-Play Combat Resolution Needed

[howandwhy99]

SWBaxter - DM fiat for me is the enemy. For me, it tells the players their choices don't matter; that I say who dies and who doesn't die in Cops & Robbers. I prefer dice weighted to the skillful play of the players. Chance is essential in almost every RPG, this makes them actual games. IMO, winning and losing shouldn't be arbitrary. At some point, PCs will become powerful enough to be leaders of other people. For me this is at first level, but it is going to happen at some point for every DM, no? The orders the PCs give to others do affect their odds, the world, and the chance the PCs might ultimately succeed at their plans. So I'm looking for a quick and easy method to simulate these out-of-sight challenges.

I understand your two points. For me, the world is dynamic. Nothing is set in stone, so nothing needs a complete overhaul because of a quick roll or two. Dynamic worlds are not nearly as hard as they sound. (one simple element is wandering encounters and plenty of DMs use those) As for the "won't see the light of play" philosophy, I am right there with you. I probably wouldn't have statblocks for the guys in the examples. A very quick roll is all I desire to resolve the situation. What I think that gives me is a another option for broader play where the PCs can influence events outside their own line of sight without that influence being arbitrary.


Nifft - yeah, I'm willing to play these out sometimes when it won't reveal anything into Player knowledge. But my players have even refused to play hitch along NPCs. I'm for whatever makes people happy.


S'mon - Warmachine in the Cyclopedia is pretty detailed. McFarland is automated and I would almost prefer to use that. Too many factors would really slow play. But really, mass combat for me is something I've been working on some months now. I see it as central, but that's a style of play I leave up to each group. I just want to have the option handy, if and when.

Here's what I have so far for a d12 methodology. (I have such a player mentality. You come up with a good idea and I just have to use the one I modified off it. )

[b]Roll	Result	Self	Foe[/b]	   
12	Blowout	0%	100%	   
11	Success	10%	90%	   
10	Success	20%	80%	   
9	Edge +2	30%	70%	   
8	Edge +1	40%	60%	   
7	Draw	50%	50%	   
6	Draw	50%	50%	   
5	Edge +1	40%	60%	   
4	Edge +2	30%	70%	   
3	Success	20%	80%	   
2	Success	10%	90%	   
1	Blowout	0%	100%

EL difference per level = +/-2
Minor advantage / disadvantage = +/-1
Major advantage / disadvantage = +/-2

The whole system is generic, so a situation has to be placed into it for any of it really to make sense. Edges and Draws can optionally be rerolled until one winner is determined. Losses are cumulative and represent hit points, casualties, resources, or whatever else may be at risk. It's pretty fluid, but I like it well enough.

I also am partial to opposed rolls like they use in Warmachine. That way I can just roll 3 dice, if 3 groups face each other instead of the standard two.

A means of including win/win or lose/lose outcomes might be helpful too.

 

[Nifft]

Nifft - yeah, I'm willing to play these out sometimes when it won't reveal anything into Player knowledge. But my players have even refused to play hitch along NPCs. I'm for whatever makes people happy.

Ah, well, that's a problem. Your solution looks pretty good.

Maybe some sort of circumstance adjudication system too?

1: Ambush! (prereq: some Survival, faster movement and/or stealth)
2: Cavalry! (prereq: military resources of unknown location in the general area)
3: Three-Way Battle! (prereq: wandering monsters plausible in the area)
4: ... er, I dunno. More funky random circumstances.

Also, if you want to reward player choices, assign a +x / -x based on the terrain and the opposition force structure for each NPC "unit" that they allocate for a particular task. If the enemy has the "10 melee mooks" unit, then adding a high-level reach fighter gives +1, Great Cleave gives another +1, and a 5th level Evoker gets +3. On the other hand, if the bad guys have the "4 imps" unit, then the Evoker gives nothing, but a Cleric would give +2 and a Diviner or Abjurer would give +1.

Bah, that might be too complicated.

Cheers, -- N

 

[takasi]

Well this isn't exactly mass combat, but the system I am introducing to one of my campaigns for random encounters is this:

If Party > EL
Party automatically wins

if Party = EL
75% chance of automatic win

if Party = EL - 1
50% chance of automatic win

if Party = EL - 2
25% chance of automatic win

if Party = EL - 3
0% chance of automatic win

I am using this method to allow the large group of 10+ players to decide to split the party.

We are running a module where months pass before the big encounter at the end. Each week players can use their survival skills to hunt prey and depending on the EL they kill the assets of their village increases (allowing them to buy more stuff, they have a ton of money but currently can't spend it). Also, instead of killing the creature they can capture it and later try to awaken, dominate or otherwise control the creature for the final battle.

 

[howandwhy99]

That's pretty cool, Takasi. How the party splits changes the odds on how much they could find overland, but also on the dangers involved when wandering creatures attack. Is that right?
Also, I'm not looking for mass combat rules. Just generic rules.


Nifft - Special bonuses groups can qualify for that alter the odds is just too much for my brain to handle. The above advantages / disadvantages are generic and really applied differently for each individual situation.

It's not even required to be mass combat or standard combat. The PCs could send a squire to a magically sequestered archmage ally. They give the squire specific steps on reaching a location, what to avoid saying, where to stay, who to meet up with, and perhaps some special password for the final encounter. That's just one non-combat example. The bonuses and penalties are going to change each time. I'm looking for something broad enough to cover nearly any situation, but not just a win/lose single roll.

Is there any way to roll multiple opposed dice with a single modifier affecting a table perhaps? Adding the same modifier to each die isn't so bad, but standard opposed rolls normally use multiple people applying multiple modifiers. That's too much for me rolling one quick time.

 

[takasi]

That's pretty cool, Takasi. How the party splits changes the odds on how much they could find overland, but also on the dangers involved when wandering creatures attack. Is that right?

Yes. Splitting the party allows them to do separate survival checks for hunting. It also allows some members of the party to do other things during this time, like working on improvements to the village, looking for aide from neighboring tribes or campaigning to elect the next lord mayor.

We have 10 characters at ECL 9 and 7 characters at ECL 7. I designed a chart, using the encounter calculator from d20srd.org, to determine the average party level for pretty much any combination of characters that want to go hunting.