Simplified mass combat rules

[MerakSpielman]

Check it out: http://www.cheapass.com/free/games/rotgb.html

I'll post the basic rules here:

So, your RPG has run into a situation where there's going to be some sort of large scale battle. Sure, the players can be involved in their corner of the way, but they'd really like to have some control over the whole fight. What do you do? Pull out that copy of Advanced Squad Leader and put the RPG on hold for a few years?

Well, here's a very cheapass way to simulate large battles without having to deal with maps and counters and fifteen hours per turn. Obviously, it can't cover a lot of things, but if you want more detail, get a regular wargame of some sort.

Roll Out The (Gun) Barrels (ROtGB) can handle basic combat for any era, with as many unit types allowed as you have types of dice. It uses the same basic mechanic as Button Men (TM), so if you're reading this game, you probably know how the basics work.

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

Each player should have distinctive dice. If not all of one color, at least make sure everyone knows which dice belong to which player. This can get, ah, dicey when you have more than 3 or 4 players, of course.

Since you'll probably have more of these types than any other, d6s and d10s will represent whatever the "vanilla" units are. d6's are infantry, destroyers, hovercraft, whatever the genre uses for grunts. d10s represent the standard "pretty tough" unit, be they chariots, mechanized divisions or battleships. Other dice can represent other sorts of units that fill in your forces, some suggestions will be given at the end.

Your forces will consist of some number of dice of various types. By adding up the total number of sides on all your dice, you get the point value of your army. Players will usually want to have the same number of points, but need not. Determine who goes first by some random method, then have all players roll their dice.

When it is your turn, you try to destroy enemy units in one of two ways: direct assault and flanking maneuvers.

In a direct assault, pick one die of yours that shows a number greater than one die of an opponent's. Take the enemy die and put it in your scoring area, then re-roll the die you used. If you want color here, the rerolled die is invigorated by its success if the new roll is higher, and is depleted from bloody combat if the new roll is lower.

For a flanking maneuver, choose two or more of your dice whose total equals that of an enemy die. Greater than doesn't work, the total must be equal. This represents the greater finesse required in outflanking an opponent. Additionally, one of the dice used in the flanking maneuver must show a value that is at least half as large as the value shown on the die being attacked. This keeps a horde of d1's from being able to overwhelm any other target, unless that target rolled really poorly. As with a direct assault, you place the enemy unit in your scoring area, and re-roll all of your units involved in the assault.

Once you've made your attack, regardless of the type, the turn passes to the next player. Obviously, in a game with many players, the opening rounds will be very bloody as all the low-rolling dice are eliminated.

The game ends when only one player has any dice left. Total up the sides of the dice you have in your scoring area, highest total wins.

It's simple and elegent enough that I think I'll use it for the rare times such a battle will be happening in my D&D campaign.

 

[francisca]

Pretty nice! Thanks for the link!

 

[TerraDave]

Another mass combat thread, it has been so long

The ability to "roll" your units is clever. It would be nice if the tactical side was just a little richer.

 

[takasi]

Hmmm, here's a method that's a little more "d20"-esque:

First, calculate the EL of the army using this formula; it's loosely based on the DMG rules:

EL=CR+2(log2)

Where n = number of units

For example, let's try 1000 orcs that are first level fighters (CR1). We can estimate that log2(1000) is 10. The total EL is then 21.

Now for the very simplified set of mass combat rules.

EL is your army's HP and combat result modifier. Instead of attack bonus and AC, each army makes opposed EL rolls and subtracts the difference from the loser's HP.

When adding 2 or more ELs together, you increase the EL by 1 for every two ELs that within one EL of each other. For example, adding these 2 ELs:

1000 Bugbears (3+2(log2(1000)=10) = EL 23)
2000 1st level Goblin Warriors (1/4+2(log2(2000)=11) = EL 22)

Would result in an EL of 24.

Here is an army of 3 ELs:
500 4th level Warforged Fighters (4+2(log2(500)=9) = EL 22)
4000 First Level Human Fighters (1+2(log2(4000)=12) = EL 25)
1000 Zombies (2+2(log2(1000)=10) = EL 22)

In this case, the 2 EL 22's add up to an EL 23, but that's not within an EL of the first level human fighters so the EL remains at 25.

Let's try some more exotic equations:

Demons
2 Balors (CR 20) (20+2(log2(2)=1) = EL 22)
50 Hezrous (CR 11) (11+2(log2(50)=6) = EL 23)
150 Vrocks (CR 9) (9+2(log2(150)=7) = EL 23)
1000 Dretches (CR 2) (2+2(log2(1000)=10) = EL 22)
Total EL = 25 (22+22)+(23+23)

Devils
4 Pit Fiends (CR 20) (20+2(log2(4)=2) = EL 24)
15 Cornugons (CR 16) (16+2(log2(15)=4) = EL 24)
1000 Bearded Devils (CR 5) (5+2(log2(1000)=10) = EL 25)
Total EL = 26 (24+24)+25

Let's add a third party to the mix:

Humans
30 13th Level Fighters (CR 10) (13+2(log2(30)=5) = EL 23)
5000 1st Level Warriors (CR 1/2) (1/2+2(log2(5000)=12) = EL 24)
Total EL = 25 (23+24)

When more than one army fights, have each army do opposing combat rolls for each army they choose to engage with.

For example,

Round 1:
Demons (13+25=38) vs Devils (9+26=35)
Devils take 3 damage (23/26)
Demons (7+25=32) vs Humans (14+25=39)
Demons take 7 damage
Devils (10+26=43) vs Humans (1+25=26)
Humans take 11 damage

Since this is abstract and simplified, damage does not change the combat result modifier; the humans still get +25 on their next roll even though they were pounded in round 1.

Only losing armies may retreat. Retreat or victory results in the end of battle. At the end of battle the combat result modifier is now equal to your army's remaining HP. Reduce units from your previous army until they match the new EL.

For example, let's say the humans retreat. Their new EL is 13. You can either have a single 13th level fighter escape or you could have about 70 or so warriors survive the slaughter.

What does everyone think? This method leaves a lot of the battle up to luck. For more strategy you could add circumstance bonuses; +5 for home turf, +3 for higher ground, etc. You could also add morale modifiers for every successful round of combat.

Also, to make it a little more fair, you could allow armies to take 10 on combat rolls. This prevents the 70 warriors from coming back and somehow defeating 1000's of outsiders with a lucky roll.

 

[TerraDave]

Its interesting...though again tactical options are limited. I should note that Grim Tales Mass Combat is EL based, but more involved.

 

[MerakSpielman]

Yes, it is extremely limited. Not something to use if there will be frequent mass combat in your campaign.

But if you're not running a campaign that features mass combat, and your adventure expects the PCs to sneak around the hobgoblin army, but instead they unite the local kobold tribes and convince (er, bribe) them to attack, you have a quick way of figuring out how it pans out.

It's simple enough to add modifiers, too. For Hobgoblins vs. kobolds, you could us d10s, but the hobgoblins get +1 on all their rolls, and the kobolds get -2 on all theirs. Or if one side has a bardsong going they could get +1 on their rolls, or if the other side is demoralized they could get -1... whatever the DM thinks is fair and the players can talk him into.

And you can simplify by having each die represent 5 or 10 individuals.

 

[asdel]

Have you considered a dramatic/encountered based resolution, focused on character actions. I will be running big battle in about two weeks, so this is more or less what I have in mind:

I think if it as a microcosm/macrocosm sort of thing. If the PCs do well, their side does well. It might be that the PCs directly affect the course of the battle, or I simply use assume if the PCs are doing well, those near them are also doing well.

A simplistic approach would be three or five melee fights. You guage the success of the armies by how many encounters you PCs can beat in succession before someone gets knocked out or the players start getting the scared look. (You don't want to grind them down completely, do you.)

Anyway, to make it more interesting, I am planning three tests and a finale. The finale is the Boss Monster, the enemy general, and the PCs really have to beat him to actaully win.

test 1: Change - PCs have have to wipe out so many monsters in a limited time span. Thie represences a thundering charge--can the charge keep its momentum, or does it do the knights get stuck in early.

test 2: Dash - The PCs see an NPC in trouble, and have to cross the battlefield for a rescue. Movement rate and jumping/climbing over obstables are more important the fighting, becasue the NPC will suffer a brutal fate if the PCs are that quick.

Test 3: Tactical test - The PCs are confronted with a body of superior troops, and have to deside how to tackle them. To hand are various allies. The trick will be how to use them to maximum effect without getting the weaker ones wiped out. I could have run the entire battle like this, with the PCs being the generals, but that would have only appealed on a sunset of my players. Yet I need this tactical encoutner to please that subset.

Finale - PCs vs. Boss Monster. Classic bash. "The Boss Monster is rallying his scattered troops on a knoll, there. Best get him before he gets his cavalry reformed for the change..."

I determine the success of the battle based on outcome of all four encounters.

Any thoughts?

 

[RandomPrecision]

Takasi, I enjoy your method, although I think a d20 is a bit too random. That means EL 20 worth of creatures can be randomly thrown about with each round of combat.

Since a huge battle would take quite a long time, I'd be more in favor of small rolls. I'm leaning toward something in the d10 range, although any of d8-d10-d12 seems to be fair game. War can be pretty chaotic - maybe the die used should be randomly determined before each round.

I'd also add some strategy to it, but I think that can be easily done. First, I'd create some definite bonuses or penalties for things like higher ground, flanking, morale, home field advantage, and other things, but I'd also allow armies to divide or assume formations for some bonuses. I'd have to think about this for some while. An example is that 1000 orcs could split into 2 groups of 500 orcs and flank an enemy army for the flanking bonus, but they'd be treated as 2 armies. And to decide when actions take place, there should be some sort of initiative roll, which I'd consider linking to the commander's leadership score.

I'll probably use a method like yours if I get my upcoming campaign off the ground; I intend for there to be several large combats, and I really like this system.

Asdel, I like your approach too. I'm not going to have the PC's just sit and watch my die rolls and logarithmic equations for the duration of an enormous battle, and I was considering something like what you've proposed for the time in between. The first stage could even provide a modifier to the combat roll above - if the PC's can speed up their army's progression, that army receives a bonus, but if they get bogged down, they take a penalty. I wouldn't include the second stage in every battle, but the occasional side-quest during a fight would be interesting. The third stage seems similar to what the PC's will have to do during each round, although the enemy need not be insurmountable. The PC's in the combat will simply have to fight a proportionate number of enemy troops during each round that the combat lasts (which brings up the question of how often to roll the dice - again, it might vary with the conflict - I might roll once every 10 rounds for the vanilla huge battle scenario). The final stage would only be applicable to fights that have a BBEG/LBEG encounter at the end, but that's certainly an important part too.

 

[TerraDave]

Have you considered a dramatic/encountered based resolution, focused on character actions. I will be running big battle in about two weeks, so this is more or less what I have in mind:

I think if it as a microcosm/macrocosm sort of thing. If the PCs do well, their side does well. It might be that the PCs directly affect the course of the battle, or I simply use assume if the PCs are doing well, those near them are also doing well.

A simplistic approach would be three or five melee fights. You guage the success of the armies by how many encounters you PCs can beat in succession before someone gets knocked out or the players start getting the scared look. (You don't want to grind them down completely, do you.)

Anyway, to make it more interesting, I am planning three tests and a finale. The finale is the Boss Monster, the enemy general, and the PCs really have to beat him to actaully win.

test 1: Change - PCs have have to wipe out so many monsters in a limited time span. Thie represences a thundering charge--can the charge keep its momentum, or does it do the knights get stuck in early.

test 2: Dash - The PCs see an NPC in trouble, and have to cross the battlefield for a rescue. Movement rate and jumping/climbing over obstables are more important the fighting, becasue the NPC will suffer a brutal fate if the PCs are that quick.

Test 3: Tactical test - The PCs are confronted with a body of superior troops, and have to deside how to tackle them. To hand are various allies. The trick will be how to use them to maximum effect without getting the weaker ones wiped out. I could have run the entire battle like this, with the PCs being the generals, but that would have only appealed on a sunset of my players. Yet I need this tactical encoutner to please that subset.

Finale - PCs vs. Boss Monster. Classic bash. "The Boss Monster is rallying his scattered troops on a knoll, there. Best get him before he gets his cavalry reformed for the change..."

I determine the success of the battle based on outcome of all four encounters.

Any thoughts?

Its a good aproach that doesn't require the players to learn new mass combat rules.
They are not really the leaders of the battle here, and for that you might want additional rules for the battle.

 

[MerakSpielman]

Have you considered a dramatic/encountered based resolution, focused on character actions. I will be running big battle in about two weeks, so this is more or less what I have in mind:

I think if it as a microcosm/macrocosm sort of thing. If the PCs do well, their side does well. It might be that the PCs directly affect the course of the battle, or I simply use assume if the PCs are doing well, those near them are also doing well.

A simplistic approach would be three or five melee fights. You guage the success of the armies by how many encounters you PCs can beat in succession before someone gets knocked out or the players start getting the scared look. (You don't want to grind them down completely, do you.)

Anyway, to make it more interesting, I am planning three tests and a finale. The finale is the Boss Monster, the enemy general, and the PCs really have to beat him to actaully win.

test 1: Change - PCs have have to wipe out so many monsters in a limited time span. Thie represences a thundering charge--can the charge keep its momentum, or does it do the knights get stuck in early.

test 2: Dash - The PCs see an NPC in trouble, and have to cross the battlefield for a rescue. Movement rate and jumping/climbing over obstables are more important the fighting, becasue the NPC will suffer a brutal fate if the PCs are that quick.

Test 3: Tactical test - The PCs are confronted with a body of superior troops, and have to deside how to tackle them. To hand are various allies. The trick will be how to use them to maximum effect without getting the weaker ones wiped out. I could have run the entire battle like this, with the PCs being the generals, but that would have only appealed on a sunset of my players. Yet I need this tactical encoutner to please that subset.

Finale - PCs vs. Boss Monster. Classic bash. "The Boss Monster is rallying his scattered troops on a knoll, there. Best get him before he gets his cavalry reformed for the change..."

I determine the success of the battle based on outcome of all four encounters.

Any thoughts?

This is a very cinematic approach that sounds like a lot of fun. However, it does make the presumption that the PCs are active participants in the battle.