WAR! huh! what is it good for?

[ACreepierFolklaw]

I've got a huge war on the horizon in my game right now (although the PCs don't know it...) so it made me think what do people think about all-out war in thier rpgs? what makes them good, what makes them bad, how do you prefer to handle them as a DM (plot wise and mechanics), and how you prefer (or dislike to) play them as a player and why?

 

[Nagol]

As a DM, I generally use war as a backdrop and a tool to change the character of a region -- occupants, threat level, and encounter types.

PCs rarely get involved as regular forces. The PCs may become involved as a specialised strike team on one side or another or perhaps just their own. Such teams perform surgical strikes to accomplish strategic goals (i.e. go on adventures) that are expected to materially affect the situation or to prevent the opposing forces from doing the same.

Depending on the game system in use, war involvement suits low to mid-level groups best. High level groups can avoid the setting, engage on their own terms, and simply win against masses of low level opponents. High level groups need to be distracted by/focused on high-level threats like an opposing group of like heroes or fell being performing the same function.

 

[Hand of Evil]

It re-draws maps.
It creates ruins.
Zombies!


Mostly it is just something that happened X years ago for my games. If it is about to happen, the players are working to try and stop it.

 

[Meatboy]

War is a great reason for adventurers to get out of bed in the morning. It provides a way for heavily armed persons to go trapsing through towns with out too many sideways glances. In times of peace the heroes would most likely get harrased by the government for bringing "trouble" but with war or civil strife they are just another group of individuals making the best of a bad situation.

 

[billd91]

We had wars relatively frequently back in the campaign I played in 20-odd years ago. There were to particular wars that stand out.

1) In the first war, we played pretty much every day of our first winter break home from college. So we played a LOT. At that point, we all had multiple characters in the campaign, so we found ways to work them all in. The DM had devised a variety of missions for our PCs to go on. We tried to rescue some important prisoners, we engaged in some diplomacy in other countries to find allies, we sent a strike team to take out a powerful enemy general, and we sent other PCs to find a particular great hero and his mighty artifact to help save our bacon. We fought plenty of soldiers, but we weren't regular armed forces by any stretch of the imagination. We didn't fight armies on large scales. We were the commandos.

2) In the second war, same campaign, we played guys who joined up with the Border Rats - a rag-tag unit of irregular soldiers. We were kind of like a French Foreign Legion - sent in to trouble spots because we were largely expendable. Our backbone of PCs (7 or 8 of us, all with some form of fighter class, but also some multiclasses) made the unit significantly more elite. We fought orcs and hostile mercenary companies trying to overrun Fort Caul. We desperately held the ford at Tunwilly Downs. We became highly decorated leaders of the Border Rats, which had to be re-organized periodically due to casualties. We also had trouble with the lord in charge of the elite cavalry and believed the vizier was plotting to usurp the king (which he did). This campaign had a lot of combat in it. We did all the action at a personal scale, though, no Battlesystem or other wargame-style larger units.

Both campaigns were fun, but in different ways. We probably couldn't have run too long as plain soldiers without also adding in some of the commando-style raiding PCs can perform. That kind of variety helps keep a campaign from stagnating into one combat after another and it's what PCs are particularly good at.

 

[KiloGex]

The campaigns I've been playing for the last few years have all been centered in the same region over 200ish years, and war happens frequently. However, the characters have never been front and center on the battlefield; instead, they encounter troops heading to and from the battlefield on the outskirts, or are running trade routes between towns to supply the armies. War is a great reason for adventurers to have something to do, but they don't have to be part of the armed forces just to have something to do. Foreign wars affect you at home just as much as they do on the battlefield.

 

[Jack7]

War is good in-game (RPGs) when:

1. the characters have a direct stake in the outcome
2. characters can directly affect the outcome
3. the characters can engage in the war at several levels (leadership, combat, espionage, diplomacy, training, etc.)
4. it will dramatically change, for better or worse, the surrounding world
5. the characters will profit (I don't necessarily mean monetarily) if the war turns in their favor, and they will suffer if their cause loses
6. the War is truly dangerous, and potentially lethal to characters, as well as to everyone else involved
7. the war can be fought in an interesting and different way than normal combat
8. the war leads to character change (status in society, rank, privilege, heavier rpeosnsibilty, opportunities for different types of adventure, loss of comrades, any kind of change common to war that men either benefit from or suffer through)
9. the war teaches lessons, of all kinds
10. the war ravages, and also leads to rebuilding
11. Comrades are killed, and/or commit heroic acts
12. new inventions, technologies, and advances are made, and war usually leads to some type of change or advance to both societies and technologies (even if it is only war-technologies, such as weapons)
13. war tests the Strategic genius and capabilities of the players
14. war tests the tactical genius and creativity of the players
15. war leads to bizarre, unusual, or momentous new (or renewed/ancient) discoveries
16. the war posits previously unknown threats and reveals hidden enemies
17. the war leads to infiltration and subversion of things and areas and groups and individuals previously thought safe and reliable
18. the war leads to powerful and inescapable moral dilemmas
19. the war leads to previously unknown/unexamined weaknesses in the characters
20. the war leads to many opportunities for acts of individual Heroism


Not every War has to have all of these characteristics, it will depend upon the nature of the War, and who is involved, and how the characters are involved. But the best Wars have many of these characteristics, including ones I didn't mention.

I often use War in-game, because in-game War is good. Very good.

 

[haakon1]

Good posts. There's an ongoing war in the background of my two campaigns (both in the same part of Greyhawk).

billd91's post about what to do "in" a war is good stuff, kinda similar ideas to the Red Hand of Doom module (which is great).

To add to that, I have lots of missions, with the government as patron, that are not directly part of the war, but are intended to help the war effort. Because the military is busy and the local militia is called up, there's a power vacuum in much of the land, and the PC's are handy contractors to help out.

It's a great way to knit disparate modules together and make an episodic storyline (which I prefer to the BBEG is taking over the universe, entire campaign is to stop him stuff).

Some examples:

-- Sunless Citadel (WOTC). The place has magic apples that, when you eat them, essentially cast Heal on you. Take the place back from the goblins down there, so we can grow more of these apples for the war effort!

-- Pohl Dubh Doracha adventure from Dragon. A giant has a cauldron that magically produces mass quantities of food. Get it for the war effort, to feed the troops.

-- Standing Stones adventure (WOTC). A village that supplies food and charcoal to the dwarvish mines and forges in the mountains has stopped sending supplies, and the dwarves who investigated went missing. Your mission is to get the supplies flowing again, so the dwarves can make arms and armor for the war effort.

-- Buckbray Towers adventure (3rd party publisher, I forget which one). A nobleman is suffering from attacks by orcs and wolves. A minor problem, but he says he can't spare his militia for the feudal call up, and if his don't do, the others won't either. Fix it, now.

-- The Last Baron (Paizo). A nobleman is plotting secession from the kingdom. The army will be sent, if necessary, to besiege his town. Infiltrate and prevent the secession.

 

[Squire James]

Whoever wrote that song obviously didn't think of its salutatory effects in an RPG...

War is one of the big "salt shakers" used to inject some excitement into a stagnating campaign. For instance, a major war can easily explain why a bunch of CR 10 opponents suddenly occupy an area they never hung around before!

 

[DnD_Dad]

Im currently running a 2.0 campaign and we are in a battle of 5 players, 1000 basic soldiers, 10 mercenaries vs. 6000 orcs. I play a lot of warhammer and I'm running the battle in turns using blocks or troops of 200. We play using a 1"x1" battle mat and I have each square measuring 100yards. I keep movement at attempts of 5x movement at -8 str checks. For damage and attacks I run archery at 200 soldiers role a percentile for hits, then defenders get a percentile for defense. If the attackers get a larger number then I roll a d20 x d4 casualties. Close combat is pretty much the same but 2x d20. For the characters themselves I have them role THAC0 vs. The opposing unit. The difference is added to the d20 for the unit they are commanding. Other than that, when characters are facing captains or named characters they run just as normal rounds of combat. I have a lot more but this is coming from my phone and my thumbs are cramping. Hope this helps.
~cheers