Mass Combat


Kingmaker

101 to 150 of 295 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well that might be truer than you think seeing as they built 3 brothels in the first 5 months


another idea is simulcras. Something like 10 ancient black (any scales left behind??) @ 10*3BP or 10 mature silver *2?BP

Such armies would however also be able to wipe out any non-ranged and non-flying, by staying in ranged combat forever.
Or hell, just go with one dragon armies, seeking out the vulnerable ones :p

Not quite yet thought this thru, but kobolds should be making traps. Probly like having a look at costs for barracks and such, then halving it (its kobolds, and they are expert trapmakers. see races of dragon), but instead of mere DV, they would have OV too!
Yes, it would take a month, but after that a battlefield could be a real meatgrinder for the kobolds enemies.

***"certain troop level available for defense that doesn't eat consumption"***
-as told by some military representatives, it takes about 20 years to build a basic army infrastructure, officertraining and such. After that, actual armies can be raised very quickly (1 week, basic training in rifles, tactics and basic orders = crossbows and axes :p ). But lose that infrastructure and you are positively screwed as a nation.

Also, a lot of the nations have at various times put solders to work, sweatshops etc during peacetime. So they would be earning their own paychecks while in a city. When marching, well, its not just the food they carry... but long lines of supplies aswell. Have fun planning how many trains of 100+ wagons are needed to say supply a cavalry some 200 miles away. Basically id say 1 wagon /10 men would have to reach them daily!!! Thats the expensive part of war ;)

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

Also, how many mammoths/mastodonts are catchable? Also, how about actually breeding them.. im sure the building "stable" can account for something.. ohwell..
Also, them being huge and humans medium, i suppose one could carry say 10 archers each, a driver and a few pikemen..


cannot believe i forgot about my favorite trick...

summoning stabiliser (magical building addon, see Path of Magic) + summoning multiplier (see frostburn). Memorylock (also path of magic)

Basically allowing a single summong spell to summon several monsters, whatever, and have them last 24h. Memory lock allows a wizards tower user to cast the same spell multiple times without even having to memorise it.
Inside the towerfor free, outside, it starts costing.
Ofcourse liches could break the rules and be both inside and outside at the same time, but..

Anyways, perfect way to summon up a horde of teleporting demons/devils/angels/worse. 50+ make a fairly respectable army :p


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

On Mounts-

Say I have a Ftr 7 (12/month) riding a fire drake (Bloodsworn Vale) which is CR5, so 2o bp/ month for its consumption. I further pay the points for ranged for the fighter. (8/month)

Now,in a ranged sequence against an army, does the fighter attack with bow and the dragon attack with breath weapon, (2 attacks) or are they lumped together as a single creature, and attack at that CR? (whatever a 5+7 is, 8 maybe?)


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I have a question about the strategy table that I haven't seen elsewhere (apologies if I missed it!). The table gives bonuses to BOTH the offense modifier and the "damage modifier." But, as I understand it, the damage is normally calculated just by

1d20 + OM - DV

(provided that is positive). I haven't seen any explicit reference to a "damage modifier" elsewhere. So, is the damage modifier in this table added to the above sum for additional damage? That seems a bit odd because effectively the bonus to OM is also providing a damage bonus, so I want to make sure I am understanding it correctly.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Alatariel wrote:

On Mounts-

Say I have a Ftr 7 (12/month) riding a fire drake (Bloodsworn Vale) which is CR5, so 2o bp/ month for its consumption. I further pay the points for ranged for the fighter. (8/month)

Now,in a ranged sequence against an army, does the fighter attack with bow and the dragon attack with breath weapon, (2 attacks) or are they lumped together as a single creature, and attack at that CR? (whatever a 5+7 is, 8 maybe?)

A unit of fighters on flame drakes are lumped together as a single creature that fights as its CR. A 5 + 7 would indeed equal a CR 8 creature... although remember that in Pathfinder a 7th level fighter is actually just CR 6.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

caelum wrote:

I have a question about the strategy table that I haven't seen elsewhere (apologies if I missed it!). The table gives bonuses to BOTH the offense modifier and the "damage modifier." But, as I understand it, the damage is normally calculated just by

1d20 + OM - DV

(provided that is positive). I haven't seen any explicit reference to a "damage modifier" elsewhere. So, is the damage modifier in this table added to the above sum for additional damage? That seems a bit odd because effectively the bonus to OM is also providing a damage bonus, so I want to make sure I am understanding it correctly.

I believe the word "damage modifier" should be referring specifically to increasing the entire offense check. Since that's how you damage stuff.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
I believe the word "damage modifier" should be referring specifically to increasing the entire offense check. Since that's how you damage stuff.

Thanks for the rapid feedback!

This is basically what is confusing me! The strategy table does list a separate value for "offense modifier" though (50% smaller than this damage modifier - e.g., aggressive gives -2 DV, +2 OM, +3 damage mod.). So it seems like the OM/damage values ought to stack, but that provides a pretty huge bonus!


The sample army, Gargantuan Army of Kobolds (Warrior 1) is listed as CR4, implying that the kobolds are a -2 base modified by +6 for gargantuan. Should the CR be 6 (0 for warrior 1 plus 6 for size)?


James Jacobs wrote:
caelum wrote:

I have a question about the strategy table that I haven't seen elsewhere (apologies if I missed it!). The table gives bonuses to BOTH the offense modifier and the "damage modifier." But, as I understand it, the damage is normally calculated just by

1d20 + OM - DV

(provided that is positive). I haven't seen any explicit reference to a "damage modifier" elsewhere. So, is the damage modifier in this table added to the above sum for additional damage? That seems a bit odd because effectively the bonus to OM is also providing a damage bonus, so I want to make sure I am understanding it correctly.

I believe the word "damage modifier" should be referring specifically to increasing the entire offense check. Since that's how you damage stuff.

I still don't get it.

For example, an army A with OM 1 attacks an army B with DV 11, using the Reckless strategy track (DV mod -4, OM mod +4, Damage mod +6).

The d20 comes up with 10, I add the basic OM (+1) and the OM mod from the strategy (+4) for a total of 15.

Now, how much damage does army A deal to army B?
1) is it 4 (10 + OM 1 + OM mod 4 - DV 11, disregarding the damage mod)?
2) is it 10 (10 + OM 1 + OM mod 4 - DV 11 + 6 damage mod)?
3) is it 6 (10 + OM 1 - DV 11 + 6 damage mod)?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Zen79 wrote:

I still don't get it.

For example, an army A with OM 1 attacks an army B with DV 11, using the Reckless strategy track (DV mod -4, OM mod +4, Damage mod +6).

The d20 comes up with 10, I add the basic OM (+1) and the OM mod from the strategy (+4) for a total of 15.

Now, how much damage does army A deal to army B?
1) is it 4 (10 + OM 1 + OM mod 4 - DV 11, disregarding the damage mod)?
2) is it 10 (10 + OM 1 + OM mod 4 - DV 11 + 6 damage mod)?
3) is it 6 (10 + OM 1 - DV 11 + 6 damage mod)?

The damage done in this case is 10.


Zen79 wrote:

I still don't get it.

For example, an army A with OM 1 attacks an army B with DV 11, using the Reckless strategy track (DV mod -4, OM mod +4, Damage mod +6).

The d20 comes up with 10, I add the basic OM (+1) and the OM mod from the strategy (+4) for a total of 15.

Now, how much damage does army A deal to army B?
1) is it 4 (10 + OM 1 + OM mod 4 - DV 11, disregarding the damage mod)?
2) is it 10 (10 + OM 1 + OM mod 4 - DV 11 + 6 damage mod)?
3) is it 6 (10 + OM 1 - DV 11 + 6 damage mod)?

It's more important to consider what happens when your army rolls a 4. In this case, you add +1 for the basic OM of the army and +4 for the tactics; a total of 9, which is not enough to do any damage to the defenders.

The difference between OM bonus and damage bonus is that the damage bonus only comes into play <i>if</i> you hit.

(Oh, and for the record, my understanding of what happens in your example is #2; 10 points of damage.)

(Also, in my campaign we're experimenting with adding the damage modifier to <i>both</i> sides attacks, so that the Reckless Attack of your example causes both the attacking and defending armies to take and extra 6 points of damage if they're hit. It means that an army of suicidal kobolds has a decent chance of stopping an army of trolls, but it's definitely going to cost them.)


Thank you very much, now it's clear.

Liberty's Edge

Could someone give me some ideas about making a medium army of paladins?

Liberty's Edge

One thing I'm not entirely sure about (yet).

Is the cost (in BP) for armies (per week) intended to be "only during times of war"?

My campaign is currently in RRR; and we typically prefer a great deal of verisimilitude in the game as opposed to just relying on mechanics to govern everything. The mechanics work well - but we also like to see them translate into believable in game experiences.

They are already wanting to start accumulating an amry; they are a kingdom afterall with foreign and domestic threats, and are worried that if they don't have some form of army they'll be up the creek. Plus forming and having an army to command in their kingdom is something that the players have been looking forward to for a long time - I don't wish to deny them that until we get to chapter 5.

I know in the mechanics of the game, many "events" can just be cured by a "stability" check which is enhanced by the existance of a garrison.

But my concern is that using the "cost" of armies in book 5 seems to be enormous undertaking if they're wanting to build some standing army to be part of the kindom now. Considering the passage of time in my game has already been nearly 2 years since RRR started (and their kingdom started) and they're only a third of the way through that volume. I'm concerned they'll never be able to pay the cost x4 per turn (Considering it's a weekly cost vs the monthly "turn" that the kingdom is developed upon).

My initial thought is that cost "weekly" is for "periods of war" and cost "monthly" is for "periods of peace."

But comments, thoughts and experiences from others is what I need right now.


Paladinosaur wrote:
Could someone give me some ideas about making a medium army of paladins?

just some ideas for that. but does your kingdom have many religious centers, how much of the population would be paladins, is the reason for making an army a holy or righteous one. and what is the level that you want the paladins to be. the higher the level the harder it is to get them.

key level points would be there mount and when they get spell casting for how the army might be modified.

Scarab Sages Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games

Robert Brambley wrote:

One thing I'm not entirely sure about (yet).

Is the cost (in BP) for armies (per week) intended to be "only during times of war"?

My campaign is currently in RRR; and we typically prefer a great deal of verisimilitude in the game as opposed to just relying on mechanics to govern everything. The mechanics work well - but we also like to see them translate into believable in game experiences.

They are already wanting to start accumulating an amry; they are a kingdom afterall with foreign and domestic threats, and are worried that if they don't have some form of army they'll be up the creek. Plus forming and having an army to command in their kingdom is something that the players have been looking forward to for a long time - I don't wish to deny them that until we get to chapter 5.

I know in the mechanics of the game, many "events" can just be cured by a "stability" check which is enhanced by the existance of a garrison.

But my concern is that using the "cost" of armies in book 5 seems to be enormous undertaking if they're wanting to build some standing army to be part of the kindom now. Considering the passage of time in my game has already been nearly 2 years since RRR started (and their kingdom started) and they're only a third of the way through that volume. I'm concerned they'll never be able to pay the cost x4 per turn (Considering it's a weekly cost vs the monthly "turn" that the kingdom is developed upon).

My initial thought is that cost "weekly" is for "periods of war" and cost "monthly" is for "periods of peace."

But comments, thoughts and experiences from others is what I need right now.

The idea is that yes, it is a cost you pay all the time for having a standing army. It's even realistic - check out the hefty share of national budgets that go to standing militaries today, and look back to the middle ages when large standing armies were a nonesuch - you'd have a few small armies strategically positioned, as well as your common law enforcers (i.e., the mechanically-invisible people that enable your Stability checks).

When war happened (or at least when it threatened), THAT is when you started raising an army.

Now, if you have PCs with the Leadership feat, I could see that being a way to perhaps reduce the cost of a smallish standing army, though exactly how that would interact with kingdom army-raising is an interesting question.

Liberty's Edge

Jason Nelson wrote:

The idea is that yes, it is a cost you pay all the time for having a standing army. It's even realistic - check out the hefty share of national budgets that go to standing militaries today, and look back to the middle ages when large standing armies were a nonesuch - you'd have a few small armies strategically positioned, as well as your common law enforcers (i.e., the mechanically-invisible people that enable your Stability checks).

When war happened (or at least when it threatened), THAT is when you started raising an army.

Now, if you have PCs with the Leadership feat, I could see that being a way to perhaps reduce the cost of a smallish standing army, though exactly how that would interact with kingdom army-raising is an interesting question.

Hey Jason N, thanks for the response and info. When I read it - I thought to myself that it really didn't help me much - not that it's your fault - it just didn't help my esoteric needs for my game. I tried to struggle as to why exactly it didn't hook me.

Here's why: the cost in BP may make sense, and by the 5th book, having an economy so booming that it COULD have plenty of armies and paying weekly would be feasible.

The problem is were at year two with the kingdom in my campaign; PCs are middle of RRR (book two), and the cost seems exorbitant only because I don't know any different - because I havne't actually seen how ballooned an economy in this game can be. As of right now, they make about 2-5 BP per turn.

However, neither the players nor I really want to wait till book 5, 14th level whatever to have the army building, ammassing, and concerns play a role. It's something that we've all been wanting to do from early on. Being in control of a kingdom and having your own armies are things many players dreamed about for a long time; this campaign can actually provide that in full. So I don't want to rob or delay them of the excitement of commanding armies and using them for other events and such until way late. I don't intend to have them be a major factor - I don't want the focus of the game shifted to that and away from actual roleplaying game adventuring w/ the PCs. But I do want it to play a role.

What we envisioned all along was have access to armies etc to use in defense of their kingdom throughout the entire campaign - perhaps aiding in the events - not just from the invisible mechanics of stability....

So what I was hoping for something in between.

The "Mechanically invisible warriors" that makes up the stability check is feasible; but not really "fun" I'd say.

Don't mind me...I'm just musing here....there's got to be a way to integrate this system earlier on - to make the "mechanically invisible people" to be in fact visible some how and cost a lot less.

So that we're not repeating ourselves, I'm going to continue my musing and post some ideas HERE

Robert


2-5BP? I was under the impression that if you succeed your Economy check you get the whole Economy + D20 worth of BP - and a failed check is 0.


General Chaos wrote:
2-5BP? I was under the impression that if you succeed your Economy check you get the whole Economy + D20 worth of BP - and a failed check is 0.

Failure = 0

Success = result/5, drop fractions

Sovereign Court

Boogey wrote:
General Chaos wrote:
2-5BP? I was under the impression that if you succeed your Economy check you get the whole Economy + D20 worth of BP - and a failed check is 0.

Failure = 0

Success = result/5, drop fractions

Yup. +1. No idea how you came to that conclusion chaos lol.


I agree that you pay for the army every week, no problem. But I do have a question.

When you equip your guys with masterwork weapons, or potions of healing, is that a one time cost, or does it add to consumption for each week?

Example - Gargantuan kobold army. Consumption 2. Add masterwork armor & weapons and potions of healing - Resource cost 18.

Does the consumption then go to 80 per month (2+18 x4), or is it a one time cost of 18, with consumption at 8 per month?

Frankly, I can see them being able to afford 80 per month for one army, but not for multiples. Or, if you drop the potions, it becomes 40 per month. But if you have at least four armies, since it recommends each PC run their own army, you could easily be talking about a consumption of 200+ per month.

On reading the rules again, it seems like resources is a one time buy, but I can see where it implies that the costs are paid every time. Just want to be sure before we start mass combat.


Major__Tom wrote:

I agree that you pay for the army every week, no problem. But I do have a question.

When you equip your guys with masterwork weapons, or potions of healing, is that a one time cost, or does it add to consumption for each week?

Example - Gargantuan kobold army. Consumption 2. Add masterwork armor & weapons and potions of healing - Resource cost 18.

Does the consumption then go to 80 per month (2+18 x4), or is it a one time cost of 18, with consumption at 8 per month?

Frankly, I can see them being able to afford 80 per month for one army, but not for multiples. Or, if you drop the potions, it becomes 40 per month. But if you have at least four armies, since it recommends each PC run their own army, you could easily be talking about a consumption of 200+ per month.

On reading the rules again, it seems like resources is a one time buy, but I can see where it implies that the costs are paid every time. Just want to be sure before we start mass combat.

I believe that James has said before that it is a reoccurring cost.


I thought so, but there is at least one serious joker in that deck. 60 BP ~120,000 GP per month to maintain a single ballista? For the initial startup cost 15 BP, you should be able to build the ballista, train the crew, pay their salaries for the rest of their lives, fully fund their pensions, start up 401Ks and college funds for their kids, and supply luxury transportation to and from the battle.

My players just won't accept that, and I sure won't try to make them. Masterwork costs, sure. Ranged costs, sure. Magic items, I'll probably have to adjust a bit as well. Maybe make them pay the full 50 BP to equip with magic weapons, but 1/2 that for maintenance (that's still 100 BP a month, I don't think I would be letting them off too easy).


Major__Tom wrote:

I thought so, but there is at least one serious joker in that deck. 60 BP ~120,000 GP per month to maintain a single ballista? For the initial startup cost 15 BP, you should be able to build the ballista, train the crew, pay their salaries for the rest of their lives, fully fund their pensions, start up 401Ks and college funds for their kids, and supply luxury transportation to and from the battle.

But the siege engines have to be transported with the army, which means additional pack animals, food for the pack animals, handlers for the pack animals; engineers to break the siege engines down for transport and re-assemble them; depending on the siege engine, the army must also carry ammunition and spare parts, etc.

Anyway, maybe 15 BP is still too much...


Zen79 wrote:
Major__Tom wrote:

I thought so, but there is at least one serious joker in that deck. 60 BP ~120,000 GP per month to maintain a single ballista? For the initial startup cost 15 BP, you should be able to build the ballista, train the crew, pay their salaries for the rest of their lives, fully fund their pensions, start up 401Ks and college funds for their kids, and supply luxury transportation to and from the battle.

But the siege engines have to be transported with the army, which means additional pack animals, food for the pack animals, handlers for the pack animals; engineers to break the siege engines down for transport and re-assemble them; depending on the siege engine, the army must also carry ammunition and spare parts, etc.

Anyway, maybe 15 BP is still too much...

Or you could just get a level 7 scroll of telleport object any time you need to move it, costing 1 BP. For a lower level solution, break it appart into a handful of component pieces and cast shrink object, allowing the army to carry it in their pockets.

Sovereign Court

I suspect the 'ballista' is not a single weapon, but a unit of them.

Also, try not to think of BP as pure gold coins, because its not. And down that road lies madness...


Alex;

Of course you're right, it's not an actual GP value. And the RAW does say each 'siege engine', but it could very well be a group of five, or even ten.

In fact the only fair way to compare is relative costs. One seige engine, or engine troop, if you will = 60 BP a month.

Gargantuan Human army (1000) = 12 BP a month.

Same human army with mstwk weapons/armor = 40 BP a month.

So literally, you could support five armies of 1000 each, for the price of one ballista troop. I know siege engine troops require special training, and it's expensive to move them, but really?

Sovereign Court

Major__Tom wrote:

Alex;

Of course you're right, it's not an actual GP value. And the RAW does say each 'siege engine', but it could very well be a group of five, or even ten.

In fact the only fair way to compare is relative costs. One seige engine, or engine troop, if you will = 60 BP a month.

Gargantuan Human army (1000) = 12 BP a month.

Same human army with mstwk weapons/armor = 40 BP a month.

So literally, you could support five armies of 1000 each, for the price of one ballista troop. I know siege engine troops require special training, and it's expensive to move them, but really?

And the same army with magic weapons is 50 per week, over 200 per month? Or is the magic item a single-time cost and the maintenance is 40 per month?

Scarab Sages Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games

13 people marked this as a favorite.

Some modified mass combat rules I just sent around to my players. I added in a few bits about Barracks and Garrisons, armies in reserve vs. armies in the field, and some utility for the Profession (soldier) skill and Leadership feat. See what you think. Happy reading!

RAISING AN ARMY: You can raise an army in any city that has a Barracks or Garrison. A Barracks can raise an army up to size Medium; raising a larger army requires a Garrison. Each Barracks or Garrison can raise only one army per turn. As a "kingdom action," raising an army replaces constructing a building, so you can only raise as many armies in a turn as you are allowed for your kingdom size.

Raising an army requires a Loyalty check with a penalty equal to twice the CR of the army you want to raise. If the check succeeds, you spend BP equal to twice the army's CR and the army is created. If the check fails, you spend BP equal to intended army's CR but the army is not raised. However, if you attempt to raise an army from the same Barracks or Garrison on your next kingdom turn, you gain a +4 bonus to your Loyalty check.

MAINTAINING AN ARMY: Armies cost consumption each WEEK that they are kept in the field, or each MONTH that they are kept in reserve. An army can always be created in one place and moved to another location to be placed in reserve there. It is considered to be in the field while moving its base of operations and must pay that consumption for that week, but if it reaches its destination in less than a week, it can be treated as being in reserve and must pay consumption only once more for the remainder of the month. To be kept in reserve, an army must be housed in one of the following buildings, each of which can host an army of the following size.

Watchtower: One Small or smaller army.

Barracks: One Medium or smaller army.

Castle: One Large or smaller army.

Garrison: One Huge or smaller army.

A Gargantuan or Colossal army cannot be kept in reserve, it must remain in the field.

An army's base consumption is equal to half its CR (rounded down, minimum 1), paid at the beginning of each week (or month). If you don't pay, its morale goes down by 2; if it hits -5, the army disbands. If an army disbands from lack of pay, your kingdom suffers a permanent -2 penalty to your kingdom's Stability, Economy, and Loyalty. So don't do it. It's bad. :)

LEADING AN ARMY: Each army must have a designated leader. A leader with a good Profession (soldier) skill and/or the Leadership feat can assist the army's performance on the battlefield. An army's leader can be a PC or an NPC, but must spend at least 3 days per WEEK (if the army is in the field) or per MONTH (if the army is in reserve, see below), or the army suffers a -1 penalty to Morale. This penalty accumulates each week or month the leader fails to show up. If the army's morale drops to -5, it disbands as noted above. The leader can alleviate this penalty by simply showing up the required amount of time; each week or month he does so, the penalty is reduced by 1. The penalty can also be reduced by 1 each week or month by doubling the army's consumption.

EQUIPPING AN ARMY

Your army starts out with typical melee-focused gear. You can, however, beef them up by buying additional stuff for them when they are created. The noted extra buildings are required in the city where the army is created.

Healing Potions (10 BP, +5 consumption after every battle, requires Alchemist or Magic Shop): Up to twice during a battle, you can forgo attacking to heal your army hit points equal to twice their CR.

Improved Armor (3 BP, +1 consumption, requires Smith): +1 DV.

Improved Weapons (5 BP, +1 consumption, requires Smith): +1 OM.

Magic Armor (15 BP, +3 consumption, requires Smith and Caster's Tower or Magic Shop): +2 DV.

Magic Weapons (50 BP, +5 consumption, requires Smith and Caster's Tower or Magic Shop): +2 OM.

Mounts (BP = mount's CR, consumption = mount CR + rider CR (not halved), requires Stable): +2 OM and DV, and use the mounts' speed for the army. The army's CR is determined by the mount's CR if it is higher than the rider's.

Ranged Weapons (2 BP, +1 consumption): The army can act in the ranged combat phase.

Siege Engines (15 BP, +5 consumption, requires Exotic Craftsman): +2 OM. For every siege engine in the army (you can buy more than one, which does not increase the OM bonus above), you reduce the enemy's bonus to DV from fortifications by 1d4 each round of the melee phase. Army's speed is halved (minimum 1).

MASS COMBAT

Really, it's very simple. There can be a few modifiers for favorable or especially familiar terrain, an ambush situation, or fighting inside fortifications, but pretty much it goes like this. There are very few rolls:

Offense Check:

Add: 1d20 + your OM + 1 per 5 ranks of Profession (soldier) of the attacking army's commander

Subtract: The target's DV - 1 per 5 ranks of Profession soldier of the defending army commander

Equals: Damage to the defending army.

If you roll a natural 20, you inflict 1 extra point of damage (or 1 point, even if your total roll is less than the target's DV).

If you roll a natural 1, your army can't make an Offense check next round.

If you have the Leadership feat, you can spend action points to affect your army's Offense checks.

Morale: 1d20 + the army's morale score + 1 per 5 ranks of Profession (soldier) of the army's commander.

If you have the Leadership feat, you can add their Charisma bonus to morale checks and use action points to affect Morale checks.

TACTICS PHASE: Each side decides what tactics it's going to use. Combat is simultaneous, but the leader on each side makes a Profession (soldier) skill check. Whoever rolls lowest declares their tactics first and declaring tactics continues in order. You can change your one 'step' in either direction each round, but changing them more than one step requires a DC 20 Morale check; if failed, the army's strategy stays what it was the previous round.

1. Defensive (+4 DV, -4 OM, -6 damage)

2. Cautious (+2 DV, -2 OM, -3 damage)

3. Standard (no mods)

4. Aggressive (-2 DV, +2 OM, +3 damage)

5. Reckless (-4 DV, +4 OM, +6 damage)

RANGED PHASE: Usually this only lasts 1 round as armies approach. If you have ranged attacks, you get to attack. If you don't, you don't.

MELEE PHASE: This phase continues one round at a time until one side's armies retreat or are destroyed. Combat is simultaneous, so it's possible for two armies to destroy each other.

DEFEAT: If the army's hit points drop to equal to or less than its CR, make a Morale check or the army breaks and runs. The opposing army gets a free Offense check against it before they escape. If an army is dropped to 0 hit points, it is destroyed, and your kingdom suffers a penalty to Stability, Economy, and Loyalty checks equal to half the army's CR (minimum -1). If the army escapes, its hit points reset to equal its CR but it cannot fight again unless you make a Loyalty check on your kingdom's next Upkeep phase (so you can only try to revive routed units once per month, though you can do it for as many routed armies as you have anywhere in the kingdom).

VICTORY: If you win, your army's hit points remain where they are and you can make a Loyalty check to allow your army to learn a new Tactic (see below) and improve its morale by +1.

RECOVERY: An inactive army heals hit points equal to its CR each day of total rest (no movement and no combat). If you have the Leadership feat, you can attempt a Loyalty check at the end of each day, whether your army is resting or not, to restore hit points equal to the army's CR.

Sczarni

Jason, thanks so much.

consider these stolen!

Sovereign Court

Jason Nelson wrote:
Some modified mass combat rules I just sent around to my players. I added in a few bits about Barracks and Garrisons, armies in reserve vs. armies in the field, and some utility for the Profession (soldier) skill and Leadership feat. See what you think. Happy reading!

This looks like it fixes all of the problems I had with the system. Thanks!

One question, though -

Quote:

TACTICS PHASE: Each side decides what tactics it's going to use. Combat is simultaneous, but the leader on each side makes a Profession (soldier) skill check. Whoever rolls lowest declares their tactics first and declaring tactics continues in order. You can change your one 'step' in either direction each round, but changing them more than one step requires a DC 20 Morale check; if failed, the army's strategy stays what it was the previous round.

1. Defensive (+4 DV, -4 OM, -6 damage)

2. Cautious (+2 DV, -2 OM, -3 damage)

3. Standard (no mods)

4. Aggressive (-2 DV, +2 OM, +3 damage)

5. Reckless (-4 DV, +4 OM, +6 damage)

In Kingmaker, this is called the Strategy Track. Should it still be called strategy, or have tactics been done away with? (I hope not, they were awesome!)

Scarab Sages Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games

Nep359 wrote:
Jason Nelson wrote:
Some modified mass combat rules I just sent around to my players. I added in a few bits about Barracks and Garrisons, armies in reserve vs. armies in the field, and some utility for the Profession (soldier) skill and Leadership feat. See what you think. Happy reading!

This looks like it fixes all of the problems I had with the system. Thanks!

One question, though -

Quote:

TACTICS PHASE: Each side decides what tactics it's going to use. Combat is simultaneous, but the leader on each side makes a Profession (soldier) skill check. Whoever rolls lowest declares their tactics first and declaring tactics continues in order. You can change your one 'step' in either direction each round, but changing them more than one step requires a DC 20 Morale check; if failed, the army's strategy stays what it was the previous round.

1. Defensive (+4 DV, -4 OM, -6 damage)

2. Cautious (+2 DV, -2 OM, -3 damage)

3. Standard (no mods)

4. Aggressive (-2 DV, +2 OM, +3 damage)

5. Reckless (-4 DV, +4 OM, +6 damage)

In Kingmaker, this is called the Strategy Track. Should it still be called strategy, or have tactics been done away with? (I hope not, they were awesome!)

You're right, that was an oopsie by me.

To revise, I would say that the low Prof (soldier) roller has to declare his Tactics (per p. 56, Defensive Wall, Dirty Fighters, etc.) *AND* his Strategy on the track.

Scarab Sages Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games

2 people marked this as a favorite.

A correction and a few addenda:

1. TACTICS PHASE: Each side decides what Tactic and what Strategy it's going to use. Tactics are specialized skills and army develops as it wins battles. Armies that have never seen combat have no Tactics; they can only be gained through experience and victory. Strategy is its general approach to the battle, from a careful Defensive strategy to a Reckless all-out attack.

Combat is simultaneous, but the leader on each side makes a Profession (soldier) skill check. Whoever rolls lowest declares their Tactics (if any) and its Strategy first and declaration continues in order. You can change your one 'step' in either direction each round, but changing them more than one step requires a DC 20 Morale check; if failed, the army's Strategy stays what it was the previous round.

2. MULTIPLE ARMIES: Multiple armies can fight on each side, and the rules do not consider tactical movement or their precise location on the battlefield. Any army on the field can attack any other army on the field. Each attack affects only a single enemy army. Multiple armies can attack the same target army on the enemy side.

3. COMPOSITION OF ARMIES: Armies are groups of mechanically identical creatures (or paired riders and mounts, for cavalry). If you have groups of different creatures, they should be formulated as separate armies.

4. Offense Check:

Add: 1d20 + your OM + 1 per 5 ranks of Profession (soldier) of the attacking army's commander

Subtract: The target's DV + 1 (I had put -1) per 5 ranks of Profession soldier of the defending army commander

Equals: Damage to the defending army.

5. Under Morale: If you have the Leadership feat, you can add your Charisma bonus to morale checks and use action points to affect Morale checks for an army under your command.

6. It should also go without saying that a LEADER must be present at a battle in order to lead his/her army and give them bonuses. If the Leader's army is routed or destroyed... I would say the leader has a 50/50 chance of being captured or killed if he's an NPC. If he's a PC, I'd say that, to keep things simple, he automatically escapes, probably with some arbitrary percentage of damage, say 50% of his hp left if his army is routed, 25% if it's destroyed.

I could see having a PC leader be placed in a capture situation, but I'd be a little leery of just auto-capturing a PC as a result of an abstracted battlefield roll. It's potentially cinematic, but it's also the kind of situation where you'd end up wanting to revert to micro-combat and letting the PC use their personal powers to get out of the situation.

I dunno... what happens to the leader of a defeated force is a bit of a sticky question in an abstracted system, and I almost think it's the sort of question you might talk to your players about how they would like to handle it.

Perhaps you need to develop a stat block for PC leaders (assuming they are CR 9 or above) in case they need to fight as an army of one!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Have many people run simulations of battles yet? I've done a couple and my only real concern was the balance of the strategy track.

If you think of it as attack bonuses and armour class for PCs, each +1 to OM affects both it's attack value and damage. So, the track would look like:

1. Defensive (+4 AC, -4 attack, -10 damage)
2. Cautious (+2 AC, -2 attack, -5 damage)
3. Standard (no mods)
4. Aggressive (-2 AC, +2 attack, +5 damage)
5. Reckless (-4 AC, +4 attack, +10 damage)

If you gave these same sorts of options to a melee oriented PC, they'd be jumping at the "reckless" option almost all of the time. As far as the defensive option goes, you'd have to surpass the target's AC by at least 15 to do a single point of damage.

Even though most would probably still choose the reckless side over the defensive side, I think the following would be a little more balanaced:

1. Defensive (+4 AC, -4 attack, -6 damage)
2. Cautious (+2 AC, -2 attack, -3 damage)
3. Standard (no mods)
4. Aggressive (-2 AC, +2 attack, +3 damage)
5. Reckless (-4 AC, +4 attack, +6 damage)

So, if we convert this back into Mass Combat rules, we would get:

1. Defensive (+4 DV, -4 OM, -2 damage)
2. Cautious (+2 DV, -2 OM, -1 damage)
3. Standard (no mods)
4. Aggressive (-2 DV, +2 OM, +1 damage)
5. Reckless (-4 DV, +4 OM, +2 damage)

What do people think?

Sovereign Court

Jason Nelson wrote:
Perhaps you need to develop a stat block for PC leaders (assuming they are CR 9 or above) in case they need to fight as an army of one!

I dunno, Jason. Like James noted earlier, it really breaks verisimilitude. I'd advice an optional rule being that PCs or creatures any less than Huge are prohibited from engaging in mass combat (they'll just be swarmed). Failing that, perhaps they can only take the Normal strategy and no tactics - that helps to even things out a bit, considering they start with several Resources (like magic armor and weapons).

This does allow PCs to wild shape or form of the dragon into mass combat, though!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't think it breaks verisimilitude at all. Level 10 or higher PCs (that's what level you have to be for CR9) are already "superheroes" who can do things that only exist in mythology. Cuchulainn managed to fight an army by himself; why shouldn't my own high level Fighter be able to? And, hell, 10th level is high enough for 5th level spells, which lets a Druid cast control winds to create a 800 foot diameter tornado as a standard action, assuming there's already high winds in the area. That'll do massive damage to any army.

Scarab Sages Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games

Tem wrote:

Have many people run simulations of battles yet? I've done a couple and my only real concern was the balance of the strategy track.

If you think of it as attack bonuses and armour class for PCs, each +1 to OM affects both it's attack value and damage. So, the track would look like:

1. Defensive (+4 AC, -4 attack, -10 damage)
2. Cautious (+2 AC, -2 attack, -5 damage)
3. Standard (no mods)
4. Aggressive (-2 AC, +2 attack, +5 damage)
5. Reckless (-4 AC, +4 attack, +10 damage)

If you gave these same sorts of options to a melee oriented PC, they'd be jumping at the "reckless" option almost all of the time. As far as the defensive option goes, you'd have to surpass the target's AC by at least 15 to do a single point of damage.

Even though most would probably still choose the reckless side over the defensive side, I think the following would be a little more balanaced:

1. Defensive (+4 AC, -4 attack, -6 damage)
2. Cautious (+2 AC, -2 attack, -3 damage)
3. Standard (no mods)
4. Aggressive (-2 AC, +2 attack, +3 damage)
5. Reckless (-4 AC, +4 attack, +6 damage)

So, if we convert this back into Mass Combat rules, we would get:

1. Defensive (+4 DV, -4 OM, -2 damage)
2. Cautious (+2 DV, -2 OM, -1 damage)
3. Standard (no mods)
4. Aggressive (-2 DV, +2 OM, +1 damage)
5. Reckless (-4 DV, +4 OM, +2 damage)

What do people think?

It's a good point. Because OM is both attack and damage, adding an extra bit on the end seems pointless, although to be fair taking a DV hit is also taking a hit to AC and damage.

You could read it as the damage modifier supersedes the OM penalty ONLY for the purpose of determining damage (apply the OM penalty to see if you beat DV, then replace it with the damage mod to see if you hurt the enemy), but that seems like a stretch.

I think it might not be a bad idea to ditch the separate damage number.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Jason Nelson wrote:


I think it might not be a bad idea to ditch the separate damage number.

I raised this issue earlier in this thread (near the top of this page) and James said that the two bonuses are cumulative for damage. But personally I agree with your idea here; I think it makes the reckless strategy way too effective otherwise, and it introduces a huge amount of "swinginess" since you are doing a lot of damage per turn.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jason Nelson wrote:

Some modified mass combat rules I just sent around to my players. I added in a few bits about Barracks and Garrisons, armies in reserve vs. armies in the field, and some utility for the Profession (soldier) skill and Leadership feat. See what you think. Happy reading!

Hey Jason, good to see that we're thinking along the same lines - I see that you've taken a liking to the raising an army suggestions that I brought up.

I too have presented some variant house rules on these to my players. The largest difference is between yours and mine are the differences between the amount of time it takes to raise an amry. Though tying them to the various military structures remains a constant theme.

The difference in our outlook is that:

Yours allows raising and army of any challenge rating and size (dependant on loyalty check capabilities). I find your approach simple, and I like the increased difficulty in doing so via the "two times the CR of the army" However, where I find flaws in your approach is this to me breaks a degree of verisimilitude that someone can simply muster a group of 200 7th level fighters in a months' time. Secondly which is inherent in both our systems I think is that loyalty checks are based on Control DC. Control DC is hinged on the "size" of the kingdom. The larger the kingdom, the harder it is to make a loyalty check. However, it seems a bit backwards - for I am inclined to think that the LARGER a kingdom is, the EASIER it would be to recruit 200 7th level fighters.

In contrast, mine allows for the recruitment and training of an army that start as lvl 1 warriors and over time builds and trains to an increased challeng rating.

I think I remember your saying you're in book 4 (characters are lvl 11); so maybe it's too late in the game to start that approach. My game is currently in book 2. Characters just made 5th level and are now looking at starting an army. If they contine to do so and make a few, they'll essentially "level" as the PCs can continue to be utilized in growing threats that "scale" along w/ the campaign.

The other part of what I altered - was made the army resources have a scaled cost based on army size. I've noted some concerns in this thread that equipping a small sized army w/ masterwork weapons costs the same as a huge army. Which doesn't make sense in truth. Granted - it simplifies things - but as I've noted before, I've been consistent with preferrering a bit more verisimilitude and accepting the extra complications that it demands.

I have a question for you: in regards to your buildings and the size of the army it can "house" - how have integrated your "fort" idea - from the "FORT/MINE/CAMP" posts? I believe the flavor of the Fort idea was to be able to place such a structure as a "watchtower" in a hex that was not improved via a city. Are these buildings (Watchtower, barracks, garrisons) allowed to be free-standing structures in a hex so that an army can be housed on the edge of a kingdom - the frontier if you will? Or do they still need to be built/supported in a city? And if you are allowing only a Fort to be built in an otherwise unpopulated hex - you list it as being the equivalent to a watchtower - so thus only small armies can be housed outside a city?

Here is what I posted for my players. I may alter them a bit - after analyzing the things you have posted and perhaps tweaking things via influences of your posted ideas.

(To avoid confusion any references to the name Pen Draig is in regards to my players kingdom-name.)

ARMY MANAGEMENT

Spoiler:

TERMS

UNIT: A small force of soldiers that are billetted to a specific type of building. The size of the unit is directly correllated to the size of the building. A unit's primary function is to man a building designed for defense. A unit with a CR of 1 or more is considered an army. You can combine "like" units together to create an army.

LIKE UNITS: Multiple units can be banded together if and only if the units are of similar build in regards to class level, fighting style (i.e ranged, cavalry, melee), and of same special combat abilities (if any).

ARMY: A group of "like" units that are combined to form a single armed force. Such a group must have a CR of 1 or more, or else it is not considered an army for the purposes of mass combat. Continue to add more troops to the group until it reaches a CR of 1.

RECRUITS: All troops that are recruited into a unit. All freshly recruited troops are 1st level warriors (individually CR 1/2 creatures) consisting of a race indicative of the civilization that recruited them. (i.e. humans in a primarily human civilization.). Other demi-humans will exist within the recruits at a similar percentage of such demi-humans existing in the civilization. For instance, a community that is 90% human, 6% elves, 3% dwarves, and 1% halfling would have the same general makeup within a unit/army. However, this is for flavor only and has no bearing on the actual mechanics for the army or mass combat.

BUILDINGS

BARRACKS: A barracks has a standing unit of 25 troops. This unit has no cost to the kingdom and is part of the construction of the building. This unit is what provides the benefits to the kingdom's statistics for the completion of the building's construction. If the unit is ever removed (for instance, used to create an army), the benefits to the kingdom cease to exist until replacements for the unit are recruited. A barracks can billet and train an additional 25 troops.

GARRISON: A garrison has a standing unit of 100 troops. This unit has no cost to the kingdom and is part of the construction of the building. This unit is what provides the benefits to the kingdom's statistics for the completion of the building's construction. If the unit is ever removed (for instance, used to create an army), the benefits to the kingdom cease to exist until replacements for the unit are recruited. A garrison can billet and train an additional 100 troops.

RECRUITMENT

After construction of a barracks or garrison is complete, the kingdom may begin to recruit troops (these are in addition to the unit that comes with the construction of the building). Barracks and garrisons may recruit one additional unit of the same size as the original unit (25 for barracks, 100 for a garrison).

Recruitment takes time. Each turn (month), the Warden (barracks) or the General (garrison) can attempt a Loyalty check against the kindoms Control DC. Success indicates that one fifth of the size of the unit is recruited (5 for a barracks, 20 for a garrison). If the Loyalty check beats the DC by more than 5, two months worth of recruits join the unit. Beating the DC by more than 10 attracts 3 turns worth of recruits. A Loyalty check can be made for each barracks and each garrison within a kingdom. As soon as the unit is complete, it can used to join other units to eventually form an army, or the unit can be trained additionally.

Recruitment assumes that some level of training is occuring at the same time - to explain the new recruits acheiving 1st level warrior status.

TRAINING

Once a unit has been completely recruited to capacity within one of the buildings, the leaders of the kingdom can decide to move them to another location within the kingdom, join them with other units to perhaps form an army, or decide to train them further. They are trained using the same frequency as recruitment occurs for the particular builidng; using the same Loyalty check and formula. Once training is complete for an entire unit, they are advanced to level 2 warrior (individually CR 2/3 creatures for most humanoid and demihuman races; Warrior level 3 is considered CR 1). An army's CR can never be more than 2 less than the kingdom's general's own CR. For most PCs, this will be the HD/level minus one of the general - as per the rules on Challenge Rating in the Core Rulebook on page 398.

NOTE: Should the general be replaced by another with lower CR, an army who breaks this rule would see some of its troops abandon it until the CR dropped to an allowable amount.

This training can continue to occur for a particular unit, each time increasing the level of the individuals by one warrior level. Eventually this advancement will provide special talents (like Army Feats) to a unit.

CONSUMPTION

There is no cost in BP consumption for the original unit that appears with the completion of a barrack's or garrison's construction. As soon as additional recruits are brought in, the kingdom must pay for their existance during the Upkeep Phase. The cost for any unit or army is one-half the CR of the unit/army rounded up (minumum 1). If a kingdom has multiple barracks, add the BP of consumption for all barracks and divide by 4 (rounding up, minimum 1). Essentially 1 garrison's cost in unit's consumption is equal to 4 barracks.

For instance, Pen Draig has 3 barracks and 1 garrison, and all decide to begin recruiting at the same time. The cost for the garrison's recruitment of it's first 20 1st level warriors costs 1 BP that turn. The cost for the three barracks combined (5 1st level soldiers at each building) is only 1 BP. The cost during the Upkeep Phase for that turn would be 2 BP. If Pen Draig had 5 barracks, the cost would be 2 BP for the combined barracks, and thus 3 BP for that turn. After several turns, the garrison and the 3 barracks have completely been recruited. Pend Draig could then opt to remove all units and place in one army. However this would not be an official "army" since it's CR for the army would be less than 1 (see more information in later posts about CR and army size). In such a case the troops would be standing by until an appropriate number of additional troops are trained to the same level (and abilities, if any) until the unit becomes an appropriate army. Alternatively, Pen Draig can keep them in place at their respective buildings and try to train them to become level 2 warriors.

NOTE: No barracks or garrison can recruit and train in the same turn (even to different units).

RESOURCES

Spoiler:

RESOURCES
The following resources must be purchased with BP before an army can be outfitted with them. Most armies are only outfitted with most resources only when they are about to do battle. It is otherwise quite costly to have armies outfitted with many resources all year. The cost in BP depends on the size of an army. The following letters will define the army size, and it’s associated cost (Fine, Diminutive, Tiny, Small, Medium, Large, Huge, Gargantuan, and Colossal)

Mounts (BP = Mounts CR, -3F -2D, -1T, +1H, +2G, +3C): The army is mounted on horses or other war-trained animals. Increases DV and OM by +2. If your army uses mounts that are more powerful than the soldiers themselves, your army’s CR (and all derived scores) might increase. All resources cost a minimum of 1 BP regardless of calculations.

Improved Weapons (BP = 1F, 2D, 3T, 4S, 5M, 6L, 7H, 8G, 9C ): The army is armed with masterwork weapons (increase OM by +1). For 10 times the cost in BP, you can instead outfit the army with magic weapons (increase OM by +2).

Improved Armor (BP = 1F, 2D&T, 4H&G, 5C): The army is armed with masterwork armor (increase DV by +1). For five times the BP cost, you can instead outfit the army with magic armor (increase DV by +2).

Healing Potions (BP = 2F, 4D, 6T, 8S, 10M, 12L, 14H, 16G, 18C): Each solder is equipped w/ several healing potions. At any point during a battle (but no more than twice per battle), you can order your soldiers to drink their potions – they cannot make an Offense check this round, but they regain hit points equal to twice their CR.

Ranged Weapons (BP=1F,D&T, 2S,M&L, 3H&G): Your soldiers are equipped with ranged weapons (such as crossbows or bows). Your army gains ranged capability.

Siege Engines (15 BP per engine): Your army includes catapults, trebuchets, ballistae, rams, and other siege engines designed to break down fortifications. Increase OM by +2 (regardless of the total number of siege engines you control); each round of melee phase, reduce the enemy’s bonus to DV provided by fortifications by 1d3, plus 1 for every siege engine in that army. Fine armies may only have one. Diminutive and tiny may have up to 2. Small, medium and large armies may have up to 3. Huge and gargantuan armies may have up to 4. Colossal sized armies may have up to 5.

Robert

Scarab Sages Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games

To your last question first, a "Fort" improvement in a non-city hex is identical in all ways to a "Watchtower" building in a city hex, so it would work the same.

To the question of time, yep, I'm sticking to a KISS once a month as part of your kingdom turn you can make "an army."

I do agree that there is a strangeness to having a flat resource cost to stuff you buy for the army that is not modified by the army's size, but I don't think it's enough of a problem for me to want to do anything about it. By the same token, I should also enforce larger numbers of stables and smiths to support barracks and garrisons, and I am keeping simplicity fairly high as a goal.

The most important point, though, centers on recruiting non-standard armies. I'm a great believer in prereqs, and in this case not just for kingdom size vs. army size (as per the standard armies), but also in terms of anything that's not a basic army of human warrior 3 and horses.

The PCs IMC (who are 10th/11th and are actually off the AP doing a revised Hook Mountain Massacre over in the "lost colony" in the Glenebon Uplands, and planning to seed a satellite kingdom over there) have a kingdom size somewhere in the upper 30s I think. They can make a Paltry Militia or a Regular Militia. They also have made an in-game effort to breed river elk as warbeasts, so they can build a 100-strong War Elk Raiders unit. They also allied with the lizardfolk near Candlemere, so they can build a unit of Lizardfolk Hunters (a Small army of 50 lizardfolk Rgr2).

That's it.

The player of the ruler asked if they could start building an army of 5th level wizards or fighters or barbarians, and I said nope, that they hadn't achieved things in game to allow that. They weren't big enough and hadn't met the milestones for it.

I am planning to write up some rules about kingdom buildings and things that would enable more specialized troops (along the lines of "if you build X number of Academies, and your kingdom size is Y, then you can add the spellcasting special ability of Z to a unit, or create a unit of wizards of level A, B, C; black markets let you make rogues; cathedrals let you make clerics; theaters let you make bards) - that sort of thing.

Haven't written it yet, but that's the basic concept I'm working with. When I get time to put it together, I'll post it up.

I also have made a few more tweaks to the rules here and there and maybe once I've settled them into a place of finishing I'll post em again, rather than just piecemealing little changes here and there.

Scarab Sages Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games

One other thing about Loyalty checks is this:

At first glance, it seems like Loyalty checks get harder the bigger your kingdom is - +1 per hex and city district.

However, buildings that boost Loyalty are dirt cheap by comparison (if I recall, you can get half-price monuments for 3 BP that give +3 Loyalty), and as your kingdom spreads those bonuses will increase much faster than the DC with even a very modest investment of kingdom resources. The PCs' kingdom IMC could probably take a -10 penalty to every roll (-20 to Econ if I recall correctly) and still only fail on a 1.

Building boosts outstrip Control DC by a mile once your kingdom gets going.

Liberty's Edge

Jason Nelson wrote:

To your last question first, a "Fort" improvement in a non-city hex is identical in all ways to a "Watchtower" building in a city hex, so it would work the same.

Thanks for the info.

So - as far as I can tell: your players can make a Fort in a non-city hex and house a Small army within.

Anything else such as a barracks, or garrison that can house larger armies must be placed within cities; thus the only border patrol armies etc are small.

I have been contemplating how to allow for larger armies to be stationed strategically in forts/watchtowers etc on the edge of the kingdom - protecting the borders and farms in the area etc. This of course was pretty standard in fiefdoms and feudal lords etc.

Jason Nelson wrote:


I'm a great believer in prereqs, and in this case not just for kingdom size vs. army size (as per the standard armies), but also in terms of anything that's not a basic army of human warrior 3 and horses.

As am I. In fact what I did for NPC leader positions was allow "part" of their ability score to apply to the kingdom but would actually increase it (like leveling up) if/when a specific building was made for them. (e.g. luxury shop for Oleg as treasurer, a stable for a ranger NPC that they appointed as Councilor, etc.)

Jason Nelson wrote:


I am planning to write up some rules about kingdom buildings and things that would enable more specialized troops (along the lines of "if you build X number of Academies, and your kingdom size is Y, then you can add the spellcasting special ability of Z to a unit, or create a unit of wizards of level A, B, C; black markets let you make rogues; cathedrals let you make clerics; theaters let you make bards) - that sort of thing.

That would be fantastic. I have been wondering how to pull off such things like that - centaur armies, lizard folk, kobolds etc......just never too sure if I wanted to undertake that amount of complexity just yet - this being my first and probably only in a long time, effort at doing this kingmaker/kingdom building type of scenario.

Regardless, I totally see building types as being the basic foundation for prereqs for types of troops and resources; much live Civilization games do.

I would be very much interested in knowing what you've concocted so far, and would be more than willing to assist in brainstorming towards that goal.

The River Elk idea for instance is a wonderful idea....

Robert

Scarab Sages Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games

Robert Brambley wrote:
Jason Nelson wrote:

To your last question first, a "Fort" improvement in a non-city hex is identical in all ways to a "Watchtower" building in a city hex, so it would work the same.

Thanks for the info.

So - as far as I can tell: your players can make a Fort in a non-city hex and house a Small army within.

Anything else such as a barracks, or garrison that can house larger armies must be placed within cities; thus the only border patrol armies etc are small.

I have been contemplating how to allow for larger armies to be stationed strategically in forts/watchtowers etc on the edge of the kingdom - protecting the borders and farms in the area etc. This of course was pretty standard in fiefdoms and feudal lords etc.

Easy. Just make a fortress city.

Establish a city, and fill it with nothing but Castle, City Walls, Barracks, Garrisons, Smiths, and Stables (and Magic Shops if you want magic weapons).

You can call it "Superfort Strongholdville" or whatever, but there's your uber-fort; it's only a city in the rules, not in name. As far as everyone in the kingdom knows, it's just a great big fort.

Liberty's Edge

Jason Nelson wrote:


Easy. Just make a fortress city.

Establish a city, and fill it with nothing but Castle, City Walls, Barracks, Garrisons, Smiths, and Stables (and Magic Shops if you want magic weapons).

You can call it "Superfort Strongholdville" or whatever, but there's your uber-fort; it's only a city in the rules, not in name. As far as everyone in the kingdom knows, it's just a great big fort.

D'oh! I spend so much time thinking of grand mechanics and math and great robust concepts that sometimes the simplest answers evade me.

Good point, jason.

Robert

Scarab Sages Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games

Robert Brambley wrote:
Jason Nelson wrote:


Easy. Just make a fortress city.

Establish a city, and fill it with nothing but Castle, City Walls, Barracks, Garrisons, Smiths, and Stables (and Magic Shops if you want magic weapons).

You can call it "Superfort Strongholdville" or whatever, but there's your uber-fort; it's only a city in the rules, not in name. As far as everyone in the kingdom knows, it's just a great big fort.

D'oh! I spend so much time thinking of grand mechanics and math and great robust concepts that sometimes the simplest answers evade me.

Good point, jason.

Robert

:)

Sometimes simple answers are the best... probably more often than not.

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

Jason Nelson wrote:


Easy. Just make a fortress city.

Establish a city, and fill it with nothing but Castle, City Walls, Barracks, Garrisons, Smiths, and Stables (and Magic Shops if you want magic weapons).

You can call it "Superfort Strongholdville" or whatever, but there's your uber-fort; it's only a city in the rules, not in name. As far as everyone in the kingdom knows, it's just a great big fort.

You mean your players aren't so super paranoid that all of their cities don't look like that?

Have they done the Battle for Taztleford yet?

Two cities have Defense values over 25...which mean that even with a paltry army defending it, the city is night unassailable....

I think any battles will look like the Peloponnesian War....you have to cripple them economically, destroying farms and crippling their ability to field an army rather than trying to take any city but the lease defended. Unless something changes, I expect Irovetti to salt the earth....literally.

Sovereign Court

Jason Nelson wrote:
Sometimes simple answers are the best... probably more often than not.

Would you think this appropriate for ships, under your newer rewrite?

Ships (10 BP per 100 soldiers, +5 consumption, requires Waterfront)?

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

Robert Brambley wrote:
Jason Nelson wrote:

Some modified mass combat rules I just sent around to my players. I added in a few bits about Barracks and Garrisons, armies in reserve vs. armies in the field, and some utility for the Profession (soldier) skill and Leadership feat. See what you think. Happy reading!

Have you considered using start up costs vs. maintenance costs for some of the resource items. I think the system tweaks I am interested in should address:

1) Verisimilitude...For example, why does it cost 50BP to get magic weapons and why does that last only a week?

2) The values are off. Mounts are way too cheap and magic weapons are way too expensive. Mounts give way better bonuses for way cheaper. Also larger armies get stuff at a discount when it matters more.

3) Why does losing an army suck? Why not just generate a new army every time you can?

I like how your recruiting rules addresses each, and I think similar rules for the additional resources could work even better.

Improved armor and weapons should be expensive to get, but cheaper to maintain. Especially as compared to things like potions or horses.

Additionally, if there are start up costs associated, it makes losing an army more substantial. You lose morale, tactics, and equipment.


John Spalding wrote:

3) Why does losing an army suck? Why not just generate a new army every time you can?

War of the River Kings page 58:

Quote:
Every time an army is defeated, reduce the kingdom’s Stability, Economy, and Loyalty by 2.

As I read this, those are permanent maluses.

101 to 150 of 295 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Adventure Path / Kingmaker / Mass Combat All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.