Given magic and monsters, how would warfare adapt and change? Would mages be used in massed groups as artillery, or assigned to individual units for counterspelling and protection? Would standard castle designs be effective against griffon cavalry or spells like stone shape and passwall? Would sappers be replaced with a druid or wizard casting move earth?
What are everyone opinions and ideas on the subject?
Thraxus wrote: Given magic and monsters, how would warfare adapt and change? Would mages be used in massed groups as artillery, or assigned to individual units for counterspelling and protection? Would standard castle designs be effective against griffon cavalry or spells like stone shape and passwall? Would sappers be replaced with a druid or wizard casting move earth?
What are everyone opinions and ideas on the subject?
I think fantasy warfare would be closer in many ways to early 20th century warfare.
Trenches would be more common aspects... and are even mentioned in the Ustalav write-up in the Campaign Setting. Trenches would break up some of the area effect spells with all their twists and turns and levels.
I think you would have a mix of mages (wizards and sorcerers) between dedicated "artillery" units and "squad mages/support weapon". If you have casters, keeping some of them highly mobile and. Imagine a howitzer that can that can teleport around the battlefield.
Clerics would also be mixed. Some in dedicated recovery units and some as "squad medics/support weapon".
With both types of spellcasters you would also have specialist units...counter-undead, counter-planar, counter-aerial, etc.
You would also have dedicated mage-killers...various classes whose main focus was to take out the enemy spellcasters, especially the stronger ones.
These special units would for all intents be special forces from our modern militaries.
As for fortification, the tops of towers would more likely be open and weapons like smaller ballista would have more vertical movement. Would be like anti-aircraft batteries. Open tower tops would also allow defending casters better targeting options. Flying in ona flight of gryphons would draw more fire than German bombers over London.
Factor all this in along with "living war machines" (trolls, giants, ogres, etc) and fantasy warfare becomes something as horrific as World War 1....cloudkill = mustard gas.
-Weylin
If magic and monsters are common enough, then they would change the methods of warfare. Castles would never have become standard if the ability to teleport was commonplace, and high walls would not deter flying mounts.
If the campaign is to have the feel of the medieval period, then it logically dictates that the numbers of spellcasters and monsters cannot be sufficient to make medieval-type defenses obsolete before they are built.
Specialty units presume that there are sufficient numbers of monsters and spellcasters around, enough that they can be formed into such units and that losses in battle can be replaced from new recruits (as with standard units).
There is a discussion of how fantasy warfare comes to resemble modern warfare in Complete Warrior.
A lot woud depend on how common mages/clerics were.
Makes me think there should be more mage-killer classes and builds :-)
with the standard breakdown of population vs. # of spellcasters in the rules, actual combat mages/clerics will be either 1: Very Uncommon 2:Very Low Level or 3: Both 1 & 2.
The actual "teleporting howitzers" mages will likely be the Majors/Generals of the force, less likely to be on the front lines except as intelligence gathering / troop rallying.
That being said, with a careful application of a few lower-level spells, a force of general archers / melee-ists can be made MUCH more effective, in an efficient and easy-to-access manner. A low level Bard, for example, becomes more and more effective with every combatant that can hear him, and the various Fog and Cloud spells yield higher efficiency with greater numbers of enemies.
In my opinion, the general "border skirmishes" and property battles that were common in the era will be between normal soldiers of the land, either conscript or volunteer, with some minor bits of enhancement here and there. The places with the most material resources (iron, water, food, etc) will have the best equipped and trained infantry, and likely the best support structures in place for their survival.
When you start talking about spec-ops type maneuvers, that's where the "abnormal citizens" start coming into play. In other words, adventurers.
-t
While I agree that spellcaster may not be that common overall, low level magic would still impact a battlefield. A few stone shape scrolls could easily create a breach in a castle wall.
Defenses that are largely undergound or comprised of enclosed structures would be the most defendable. I do like the idea of ballista designed to target airborne targets. I can actually see them being built on rotating platforms with an armored shield akin to the AA guns in WWII.
Trenchs, would work for open warfare for the reasons mentioned above.
I am really interested how this might get addressed with the upcoming Kingmaker AP.
An interesting exercise might be looking at 1st through 3rd level spells and see how they would affect a battlefield. A wand of fireballs in the hands of a character trained with Use Magic Device is dangerous. At miminum effect you can drop a 5-die fireball on a target 600 feet away. With a ranged touch, you can drop the spell through an arrow slit.
I believe Ugbash has put his finger on the crux of the matter. It depends on how many clerics and mages there are. If we look on page 138 of the 3.5 DMG, it gives us a method for determining based on the size of the population the number of leveled individuals in a community. I will admit I don’t completely understand all of it.
To use a parallel example, on page 20 of Seven days to the Grave, there is a side bar that might be of some use. The side bar breaks down how many clerics there are in Korvosa, and of what level they would be. For the purposes of casting a remove disease spell, there would only be nine high enough to cast cure disease. Including paladins, only three would be high enough level to posses the remove disease ability,
This breaks down to less then 0.1 percent of the population.
One could extrapolate similar numbers of arcane casters. In a city the size of Korvosa, at roughly 18,500, there would be 3 13 level wizards, 6, 6 level wizards, 12 3rd level wizards and 24 first level wizards. Only nine would be high enough to cast fireball.
If we include sorcerers we can double that number to 18 individuals in a city the size of 18,500, capable of casting fireball.
I hope this helps. (Yes I know to everything the is an exception. There is the Acadamae, and another magical college as well in the city.
Wands and such also bring up troops trained to use them without being casters or casters who normally could not cast a given spell using scrolls, wands and other items.
Give a squad of rogues (or stealth oriented Experts) such items and they become extremely dangerous. While not Pathfinder or OGL, there are some nasty items that were mentioned in Heroes of Battle. Including what amounted to a limpet mine.
The bulk of warfare would not change too much though. The above mentioned trenches would be a good precaution unless you are sure the enemy cannot field casters.
The main difference would come when special units arrived on the field of battle. Airborne archers, creatures, and just about any PC class.
Most troops are either conscripted or militia Commoners or Warriors with a few Experts and Aristocrats. Military casters would posisbly more likely be adepts than Wizard/Sorcerer/Cleric/Druid. Actual PC classes are so much more effective than those classes. I have personally always seen any PC classes found in an army to be either very exceptional individuals or members of elite units. An average unit would probably be composed of 1st to 3rd level Warriors led by a 3rd to 5th level Warrior (or Warrior-Aristocrat) with possibly an Adept along.
I think that it would be very interesting. I could see sorcerers and wizards having to make hard decisions such as destroying 50 orcs or six ogres with a fireball or making 5 hill giants very angry with them. I could see evil orc warlords sending mass waves of orcs to get slaughtered so that their fell priests could reanimate them as undead. With their damage reduction against missle fire being a five, whole squads of skeletons and zombies could carry siege ladders and brace them agains castle walls then climb up them to battle attackers. Skeletons would be devastating against normal man-at-arms with slightly above average strength (str 13 or 14) wielding normal longswords. (average roll of 4 with +1 str = 5 dmg vs DR5)I sure hope their defenders priests have a high enough wisdom to use channeling often!
The Black Company series by Glen Cook is a good example of warfare in a fantasy setting. Link to wikipedia entry. The series follows a mercenary company in a fantasy world; the twist is that their main employer is the evil overlord.
In these books, magic-users are very rare, but still have a major impact on battles. Illusions are cast to fool and demoralise enemies, shields protect from arrow fire, winds are used to blow up dust or smoke. Shapeshifters stalk enemies in the night, causing serious morale issues in encampments.
Fireballs and such do exist, but are strenuous. This is mirrored in DnD rules, casters can't just keep going. Their best powers are kept in reserve until a really prime target presents itself; compare this to use of squad anti-tank weapons in modern warfare. Any sort of mage is indeed a prime target, and even high-level ones can be taken down by enough concentrated force. Low-level casters can counter high-level ones' defences with spells like See Invisible and Dispel, leaving them open to attacks by mundane weaponry.
Earthworks are a more common defence line than castle walls. They are cheaper, much easier and faster to construct, and from a gaming mechanics point of view, harder to actually effect. Moving a 20' high earthen rampart is harder than putting a hole in a solid stone wall, just because there is so much thicker.
Consider: a fireball covers 44 squares, but if a commander knows this, he will make his troops use skirmisher formations, causing a far lower loss of life. In addition, if we presume that both sides have casters, Dispel Magic is available, and should actually be more common than Fireball, as both divine and arcane casters get it.
Personally I think that the higher level the mage, the less likely they are to get involved in battles. They know how dangerous it is, and the gains are probably not personally worth it (unless they are paid obscene amounts of gold). There are of course exceptions, like Paladin-styled clerics, or court mages of kingdoms. I however think high mages have more important things to do with their time in fantasy settings, like closing demon gates, fighting corrupted dark mages, that sort of thing.
Armour wrote: Personally I think that the higher level the mage, the less likely they are to get involved in battles. They know how dangerous it is, and the gains are probably not personally worth it (unless they are paid obscene amounts of gold). There are of course exceptions, like Paladin-styled clerics, or court mages of kingdoms. I however think high mages have more important things to do with their time in fantasy settings, like closing demon gates, fighting corrupted dark mages, that sort of thing. Which is part of the reason I sugested looking at spells of 1st-3rd level. Low level spells are easily available as scrolls or wands and can be used fairly well by non-spellcasters trained in Use Magic device.
Here are some examples:
Alarm can be used to provide additional security on an officers tent or to set an alarm on approaches to an army's camp.
Create food and water has obvious benefits for feeding an army.
Entangle can stop a fighting force very quickly. Range and area make it a great battlefield spell. A few low level druids or a few scrolls and a military commander can quickly gain control of a battlefield.
Flaming sphere makes for a useful siege spell. Roll the ball of flame next to a building or wall and watch it burn.
Fog cloud would serve the same purpose as smoke grenades on the modern battlefield. It can act as signal marker or to block line of sight.
Water breathing can allow for attacks on shps and costal forifications.
Wood Shape can assist in breeching castle gates.
When it comes to casters, I dont think it would be common to find a battle caster higher than 5th or 6th level on the actual field of battle. But every nation is going to field casters if at all possible and probably as many as possible. Even if it is only one for every 50 or even 1:100 warriors, that is still going to radically change the face of war. A 5th level caster has good odds of wiping out an entire squad of warriors with fireball. Which if used on a formation breaks it open for a fairly brutal cavalry charge.
And higher level casters who take the field are likely to be protected by very competent bodyguards, at least one of which is probably a mage-killer build of some sort. Clerics would be more likely on the actual field of battle than wizards/sorcerers.
Higher levels would be staff officers coordinating the mage corps actions, probably through various low level spells and items. It also means if the line breaks, taking out the actual military commanders becomes a lot more dangerous when there is a mix of 7th to 10th level wizards, sorcerers, clerics and/or druids near said commanders.
I am begining to think that drawing ideas from modern warfare is probable a good way of looking at magic augmented warfare.
Nations with access to significant magical resources (Geb and Nex) could easily destroy the surrounding landside.
Even nations without heavy magic resources would have access to better medical care for troops and the ability to extend food supplies in the field, all with low level spells.
Thraxus wrote: I am begining to think that drawing ideas from modern warfare is probable a good way of looking at magic augmented warfare.
Nations with access to significant magical resources (Geb and Nex) could easily destroy the surrounding landside.
Even nations without heavy magic resources would have access to better medical care for troops and the ability to extend food supplies in the field, all with low level spells.
Geb did destroy the surrounding landside. And between them Nex and Geb did destroy the borderland. ;)
Also consider nations like Cheliax who are mentioned to field devils mixed in with their regular troops. Or Qadira who could field djinn if they so chose..and probably do. Irresen can field ice trolls in numbers easily. Most of these beings are better than bringing a siege engine or even Alkenstar bombard to war.
Anything with even DR 5, let alone one with DR 10,is going to be a walking atrocity on the battlefield. Once you get to beings with DR 10, you are not going to stop them usually short of direct magic (spells or weapons).
Using the Cheliax example. Suppose they field even two Bearded Devils (CR 5) in a battle. They each have an AC of 19, average Hp: 56, attack is +11/+6 to hit and 1d10+6, DR 5/silver or good, and have Greater Teleport at will.
Unless the troops get some magical support fast, these two can chew through a unit in short order and then teleport across the field to do the same thing to another unit.
I completely forgot about Cheliax fielding devils.
I suspect that most nations have special units filled with fighters, paladins, or the like for situations like this.
As you noted, some nations field armies higher up the power curve. Mendev is another one that comes to mind. Fighters, paladins, and clerics make up a good chunk of their military might.
All this running around the field of battle and the average warrior is expected to face it for 3sp a day. Desertion rates must be insane ;) or punishment for deserters is even more draconian and horrific than our own world ever thought of.
Weylin wrote: All this running around the field of battle and the average warrior is expected to face it for 3sp a day. Desertion rates must be insane ;) or punishment for deserters is even more draconian and horrific than our own world ever thought of. You're forgetting something.. With all these horrors, kingdoms would prefer to stay peaceful, in case their enemies "go nuclear" and make pacts with some sort of Big Nasty (or Big Good, if its an evil nation attacking. Karma exists, and Celestials can step in too.).
Also, that old saying.. soldiering is mostly occupied by long periods of boredom, punctuated by short periods of terror. 3sp a day adds up quick in a world where they would otherwise be earning 1sp a day, if they could find work. Plus, in the army their equipment and upkeep is paid for, allowing them to send money home to their families.
Armour wrote: Weylin wrote: All this running around the field of battle and the average warrior is expected to face it for 3sp a day. Desertion rates must be insane ;) or punishment for deserters is even more draconian and horrific than our own world ever thought of. You're forgetting something.. With all these horrors, kingdoms would prefer to stay peaceful, in case their enemies "go nuclear" and make pacts with some sort of Big Nasty (or Big Good, if its an evil nation attacking. Karma exists, and Celestials can step in too.).
Also, that old saying.. soldiering is mostly occupied by long periods of boredom, punctuated by short periods of terror. 3sp a day adds up quick in a world where they would otherwise be earning 1sp a day, if they could find work. Plus, in the army their equipment and upkeep is paid for, allowing them to send money home to their families. From the write-ups in most worlds, the fear of an enemy "going nuclear" does not seem to be much of a deterrent really. Most settings histories are dotted with major wars and many include at least one major war in the brewing in their current time. If they were facing the equivalent of a magical nuke that might actually deter them, but probably not. Geb and Nex are an example of that. Their war didnt stop because of what Geb did to the landscape, it stopped because Nex (one of the driving forces) vanished.
Given all the factors in fantasy warfare, any pitched battle probably has amazingly higher losses than any of our worlds equivalent except maybe the supposed tallies from ancient china and world war 1. And the aftermaths probably look far far worse than either of those. 3sp is not going to amount to much when even border skirmishing could mean a run in with a lesser devil, elemental, fey, celestial depending on the world and the region of that world. be surprised if every major border fort in Cheliax did not have at least one summoner and one lesser devil assigned to it.
Great thread!!
One of the challenges I always have is trying to remember is scale. While I have no doubts that magic can have great influence on a "local" level, most of the medieval battle accounts I've read about discuss troop levels in the thousands (if not tens of thousands). I don't know how much impact fireballs/lightning bolts/etc. would have in a battle with 10,000+ combatants. On the other hands, summoning magic and controlling (walls/weather/etc.) magic have the potential to have a far greater impact, but this generally will limited to higher-level casters who will (as noted) be primary targets...
I really liked the analogy made previously about modern warfare - I think that magic is akin to technology: it doesn't make warfare any easier or better - just different and a lot more options.
I've always seeing magic having the most impact via small unit tactics (aka "special forces") to try and achieve objectives that will have potentially much greater impact on the battlefield.
AJC
In terms of defenses, I would think that mages who could ward locations against teleport, scrying and summoning would be extrodinarily valuable (and rich as a consequence for providing such magical security) let alone diviners with a crystal ball.
In terms of offense, summoners would be strategically nearly impossible to deal with. A flank that looks weak can be suddenly be bolstered with nearly anything and given a wand a single caster (or UMDer) could hold choke points for hours.
And that speaks to how kingdoms would treat certain types of magic. Necromancy of any form would likely be banned for fear of a single necromancer starting up an army.
I also think Druids would be universally feared as they don't need an army to strike fear into a nation. A high level druid simply shifts into a sparrow... flies to the kings turrent in the castle, shifts into a mouse, infiltrates to his bedroom and that night while the king is sleeping casts summon animal until he's out of spells while still wild shaped... then changes form and flies away again with no one the wiser.
The next morning there's a note tacked to the draw bridge saying "stay out of my forest." (and that's assuming the king some how lives through 20+ summon animals of various levels with no armor on.
I think application of magic in warfare will vary greatly. Different nations will use it different ways. National and regional character has always been a huge inlfuence in how various classical, medieval and renaissance nations fought their wars. Only after WW2 have things really become standardized.
I think most wuold use them both on large and small scale. Probably very different spells in each. You would have your strategic casters who are concerned about controlling large portions of the battlefield and dealing maximum damage across the enemy forces. then you would have your tactical casters who are more concerned with augmenting their particular units performance and completion of their assign objectives. Officers and NCOs basically. Most fo the big controlling spells would be from high level and high ranked officer casters. Buffing, on the spot healing, and such would be NCO casters of low to mid level.
If they have creature troops those are probably held in reserve until needed or unleashed immediately in hopes of breaking enemy morale before the battle ever really gets going.
Petrus222 wrote: In terms of defenses, I would think that mages who could ward locations against teleport, scrying and summoning would be extrodinarily valuable (and rich as a consequence for providing such magical security) let alone diviners with a crystal ball.
In terms of offense, summoners would be strategically nearly impossible to deal with. A flank that looks weak can be suddenly be bolstered with nearly anything and given a wand a single caster (or UMDer) could hold choke points for hours.
And that speaks to how kingdoms would treat certain types of magic. Necromancy of any form would likely be banned for fear of a single necromancer starting up an army.
I also think Druids would be universally feared as they don't need an army to strike fear into a nation. A high level druid simply shifts into a sparrow... flies to the kings turrent in the castle, shifts into a mouse, infiltrates to his bedroom and that night while the king is sleeping casts summon animal until he's out of spells while still wild shaped... then changes form and flies away again with no one the wiser.
The next morning there's a note tacked to the draw bridge saying "stay out of my forest." (and that's assuming the king some how lives through 20+ summon animals of various levels with no armor on.
I think the Druid scenario is where the King's Magician role comes in as well as probably several other casters (wizards and priests) on staff at the castle and probably always in the King's entourage. The druid trying it thinking it was that simple could be found by his friends nailed to a tree as a warning to "stay in your forest".
Weylin wrote: I think the Druid scenario is where the King's Magician role comes in as well as probably several other casters (wizards and priests) on staff at the castle and probably always in the King's entourage. The druid trying it thinking it was that simple could be found by his friends nailed to a tree as a warning to "stay in your forest". Maybe but it'd be an awfully tedious and difficult job even with magic to vette every flock of birds that flies over the castle and ensure that the local rodent population were truely and consistently rodents. (let alone the horses in the stable or any other livestalk.)
However for that matter, you don't even need to get the king. Go after the local populace who don't have any magic to figure out what's going on.
An high level angry druid would be very nearly the perfect fantasy world terrorist.
There was an excellent DRAGON article from the late 1990s on this. Assuming a high-magic setting, they proposed radical redesigns to castles, giving turrets and parapets sloped roofs to try to deflect dragon fire and how basic troops would be trained in different methods of killing enemy mages and clerics when they deployed on the battlefield. I think they even suggested having poles and nets that could be extended from the castle during times of battle to try and prematurely detonate fireballs before they actually hit the walls. They also discussed tactics, such as casting an invisible wall of force right across the path of a cavalry charge that would throw the charge into chaos and allow a counter-attack by friendly forces. I think their main piece of advice was that in any battle with magic forces present, as a DM try to have mages or clerics on the other side as well, so the two sides' magic-users spend their time fighting one another rather than aiding/interfering with the non-magical battle.
For added inspiration I'd check out the Malazan novels by Steven Erikson, where the use of regimented magic in open warfare in a (very) high-magic setting is featured several times. It is also featured in Scott Bakker's Prince of Nothing trilogy, although is perhaps less applicable to D&D due to the presence of weapons (chorae) which can kill mages by just touching them, so wizards are considerably more vulnerable in that setting.
Another good example of the effects magic can have on warfare is the Black Company series by Glen Cook. It is used both in battlefields and sieges. Casters are by no means common in that setting, and usually tend to be either roughly 3rd to 5th or 15th to 18th. The battles in the book include everything from fireballs to flying carpets to powerful shapshifters.
It also depends on setting too.
For example in Galorian they have stated that except for specific characters the highest NPC level is 9. So casters in the level range to cast 3rd level spells are actually fairly advanced NPCs.
Where as in Forgotten Realms casters over level 20 are a dime a dozen.
Abraham spalding wrote: It also depends on setting too.
For example in Galorian they have stated that except for specific characters the highest NPC level is 9. So casters in the level range to cast 3rd level spells are actually fairly advanced NPCs.
Where as in Forgotten Realms casters over level 20 are a dime a dozen.
Could you cite where i can find that declaration? because it is not going to match up in any higher level APs.
The mention I recall of 9th level limit was only referencing that the average NPC class (not NPC in general) is rarely going to go past 9th level...based on something Sean Reynolds wrote up a I recall (which was awesome to read). Based mainly on most NPC Class types dont really get into situations to gain much xp.
Actually so far in the APs I remember a lot of monsters at higher levels... not so many actual NPCs (and many of the NPC types are outsiders, giants or the like 'monstrous' types of things as opposed to player character like NPCs).
Sean stated it and James has repeated it. I don't remember where but it was fairly recently (last week or two).
Mainly I'm just pointing out that the level assumptions for a setting will have a huge impact on how practical and useful mages on the battlefield will be.
Abraham spalding wrote: Actually so far in the APs I remember a lot of monsters at higher levels... not so many actual NPCs (and many of the NPC types are outsiders, giants or the like 'monstrous' types of things as opposed to player character like NPCs).
Sean stated it and James has repeated it. I don't remember where but it was fairly recently (last week or two).
Mainly I'm just pointing out that the level assumptions for a setting will have a huge impact on how practical and useful mages on the battlefield will be.
Assumptions about level in a setting makes sense to be a factor. The basis you are using does not for Golarion from what I have seen about the setting.
Sean's article "A Theory About Peasants" was focused on NPC classes not NPC as a whole. And mentioned using it for inactive/non adventuring NPCs who have PC Classes...there are adventuring NPCs in Golarion. As I recall that was the subject of the thread where "9th level limit" was stated (i cannot find that thread dspite trying).
Two things factor into how fantasy warfare is played out. Average level of characters and rarity of magic-users.
Most fantasy novels work with the assumption of rare amount of casters, who function mostly as heavy artillery support. In this case, most medieval conventions of war still work.
Actually, with enough casters on either side, they'd be slinging magic and whatnot at each other, and leaving the normals to do their par to the battles with sticks and stones. It's a very gentlemanly style of conflict.
D&D's, and by extension Pathfinder's take on magic, however, changes things radically. When you have casters doing their little tricks, the battle shifts from army-to-army clashes to assassinating the most powerful caster on the other side with either a small band of elite anti-caster soldiers, or another caster.
Open conflict between armies just aren't feasible when people who can kill entire armies with a wave of their hands exist. Well, they still exist, but only when the high-powered casters are busy doing something else.
A decent take on low-magic fantasy warfare(the first type) is this fanfic that retells the events of Warcraft 2. It is awesome.
Actually, spellcasters are not as much a factor as you might think. Scrolls and Wand can be used with the Use Magic Device skill. Given the cost of scrolls, this makes magic a useful option even when you don't have a lot of spellcasters.
All you need are a few specificly trained NPCs (experts or rogues).
Thraxus wrote: Actually, spellcasters are not as much a factor as you might think. Scrolls and Wand can be used with the Use Magic Device skill. Given the cost of scrolls, this makes magic a useful option even when you don't have a lot of spellcasters.
All you need are a few specificly trained NPCs (experts or rogues).
A valid point. But that only affirms the idea of war becoming a cat and mouse game between casters. An abundance of scrolls may help level the difference, but they will still be in the hands of a select portion of the population: those with high UMD. In open conflict, low level scrolls might come into play as a form of light artillery and communications(sending).
Adding to this, we could relate incredibly high level casters with nuclear weapons, with the idea of mutually assured destruction on both sides if ever open conflict arises. Hence the shift of focus to eliminating the 'nukes' of the enemy, or amassing even more of your own.
Terry Pratchett's Discworld had the wizards themselves agreeing not to fight with each other using destructive magics, because the previous war between sourcerers nearly destroyed the world. Magic is traditionally that destructive.
I seem to have lost my train of thought.
If you want more 'conventional' styles of warfare, there's a plausible way to do it. Consider the care military units take of their standards. The way people from the Romans onwards kept them in shrines, used them in religious ceremonies, give them special protection in battle, and treat losing them as such disgrace while capturing your enemies is a great triumph. Or perhaps the other things that particular units do to show off their special status, whether things they wear or musical instruments or something else. In a world where magic works these are enchanted items, which you activate before a battle to provide you special protection against magic.
One other things I'll suggest - Pavises. They provide total cover, if you can hide behind them. That's a bonus to your Reflex save and Evasion. Fireball people behind them, and you probably don't do as much damage as you'd like. Which since they're a fairly common piece of equipment for medieval armies, suggests another way to reduce the effect of some types of magic if that's what you want.
Bluenose wrote: If you want more 'conventional' styles of warfare, there's a plausible way to do it. Consider the care military units take of their standards. The way people from the Romans onwards kept them in shrines, used them in religious ceremonies, give them special protection in battle, and treat losing them as such disgrace while capturing your enemies is a great triumph. Or perhaps the other things that particular units do to show off their special status, whether things they wear or musical instruments or something else. In a world where magic works these are enchanted items, which you activate before a battle to provide you special protection against magic.
One other things I'll suggest - Pavises. They provide total cover, if you can hide behind them. That's a bonus to your Reflex save and Evasion. Fireball people behind them, and you probably don't do as much damage as you'd like. Which since they're a fairly common piece of equipment for medieval armies, suggests another way to reduce the effect of some types of magic if that's what you want.
I can see pavises and trenches becoming common sights on place that involves protracted warfare.
The problem I see with a pavis though is it would only really be useful to higher level combatants trying to deal with a caster. Your average ground pounder (1st to 3rd) just doesnt have the hit points to weather anything above the lowest level fireball (5d6). On average he will 5-6 to 17 hit points and your average fireball deals 17 points and Reflex is not exactly a warriors best save. But as they say some chance is better than no chance.
Which brings up the level problem again. If the casters are all running around level 10 and what have you, why aren't the fighters, rangers and barbarians?
Beyond that there is the question of numbers... yes the wizard can fireball a 20 foot burst... but that's one 20 foot burst out of an army... comes down to the same way ants fight something bigger than them, only better since people can use bows and the like.
That would be a good use for pavise carriers actually. Protecting casters from missile fire.
Should be able to get a really nice cover bonus from that, possibly with casters using wands while minimally exposing themselves.
Load up low level casters and specially trained toops (probably rogues and bards with Use Magical Device) with wands and scrolls crafted by higher level casters who are back in the rear echelon or no where actually near the battle.
In some settings it becomes very easy to do. Forgotten Realms comes to mind considering the business the Red Wizards were doing at the end of 3.5. Could also see it in many regions of Golarion with nations like Geb, Cheliax and Nex.
Would also not be surprised if Nex fielded golems. We know they have fielded altered creatures...thanks to the fleshforges. That is specifically mentioned. As is a fortress of bone in Geb that can be animated to defend itself. The pharoh of Osirion has an elder fire elemental as an advisor. Ketepesh's police force/military can even call upon golems to help enforce the law. Every captain of the guard can call on them. All this suggests that in Golarion, magic is a common thing on the battlefields. At the very least it is not rare.
Casters, undead, constructs, abominations, flying troops, summoned beings...all are mentioned as aspects of war in Golarion, Faerun, Eberron, Greyhawk, Athas, the list goes on.
If a 10th level wizard is on the battlefield, I would expect him to be using protection from arrows or stoneskin.
My general assumption has been working with 5th level casters and magic items, both for battlefield and non-combat support for an army.
While a 5 die fireball can kill or seriously wound a group of low level warriors, I see them being used as squad level fire support, similar to grenade launchers in moder armies.
A specially trained 2nd expert could have Use Magic Device +9 (2 ranks +1 Cha +3 trained +3 skill focus). That is almost a 50% chance to use a wand. Under battlefield conditions, that is not bad.
This wand user can serve as a medic (cure light wounds), battlefield controller (entangle), squad support (bless and bane), and communications (whispering wind).
A few higher rank experts (attached to the army command) might make use of wands of create food and water and wands of sending.
Thraxus wrote: If a 10th level wizard is on the battlefield, I would expect him to be using protection from arrows or stoneskin.
My general assumption has been working with 5th level casters and magic items, both for battlefield and non-combat support for an army.
While a 5 die fireball can kill or seriously wound a group of low level warriors, I see them being used as squad level fire support, similar to grenade launchers in moder armies.
A specially trained 2nd expert could have Use Magic Device +9 (2 ranks +1 Cha +3 trained +3 skill focus). That is almost a 50% chance to use a wand. Under battlefield conditions, that is not bad.
This wand user can serve as a medic (cure light wounds), battlefield controller (entangle), squad support (bless and bane), and communications (whispering wind).
A few higher rank experts (attached to the army command) might make use of wands of create food and water and wands of sending.
Thraxus,
I think assuming a max of level 5 for battlefield casters is a good basis. To me, NCO of any sort would be 3rd to 5th. And casters given their more specialized training are probably ranked as NCOs .
Level 6-9 are probably warrant officers assisting the comissioned officers (level 10-15, lietenants to colonels). They may be split between actually field officers and staff officers who are assisting the higher officers.
The Mage-generals are probably only found at the division level (10,000 men and customarily lead by a major general)
Also remember that some battlefield casters may not be wizards, sorcerers or clerics. They could be adepts. especially the wand corps...which eliminates the chance of the wands not working for some spells.
At a tactical level, caster-officers are a bit of a stretch for me. If casters ever go into battle, they'd be given at most an auxiliary role, supplementing the vast majority of mundane warriors with magic. Given the range of most spells, casters can safely operate a little ways behind the melee. Given the usual proportion of casters to mundane in most settings, casters will quickly run out of spells if they just go blasting, and they might end up just destroying the cannon fodder. Fireball fodder?
Higher up the ranks, casters would be primarily advisers to the generals of the army, with enough capacity to point out where a good spell might turn the tide, but that's about it.
Now, magic item squads can shore up the lack of front-line casters, but they also have a limited resource to contend with, and again, their numbers are too small to make a large impact in the tangle of melee.
And the melee. Area effect spells could wipe out dozens at a time, but they will only work before the main parts of the armies start fighting in melee. After which, casters would just be fighting the casters beyond the melee.
Acid flasks and Alchemical Fire might actually be more effective within the melee, given smaller aoe's.
gamender,
I woudl see any casters in an army or navy being essentially their own corps. With support personell in the form of some warriors/fighters who fulfill a role similar to grogs in Ars Magica...their role is to protect the casters. For military structure it would be easiest to confer a rank like warrant officer on the caster while their protection squad would have an NCO with the rest composed of private/tropper/marine/sailor. This would hold true wether the caster was a wizard, sorcerer, cleric or adept.
A unit composed entirely of casters just doesnt work given how magic works in D&D-based systems. In other systems/settings it becomes very possible to have units composed entirely of casters or casters and partial casters.
It all depends on how magic works as to how practical it is to feild them. For example, in a system based on Ars Magica's magic system, if th casters are throwing known spells instead of improvised ones and it is well within their skills, they can throw them all day long without fatigue or loss of the spells.
The same if youare using some variants of True20 or True20 Sorcery. As long as you dont push your skill and make the roll, you can cast all day.
And as i mentioned, in many of the D&D settings there are specific examples of regular almost commmon use of magic in battles.
Gamender wrote: Now, magic item squads can shore up the lack of front-line casters, but they also have a limited resource to contend with, and again, their numbers are too small to make a large impact in the tangle of melee. Which is why I mentioned spells like bless, cure light wounds, and whispering wind. Bless affects a group and cure light wounds and whispering wind will more often be used out of direct combat. Entangle can be used to break a charge or bog down an enemy unit for friendly archers to pick off. Under these circumstances, having 50 charges is not a big hinderance.
Given the real possibility of facing monsters with DR on the battlefield, I suspect elite units are also equipped with vials of silversheen and oils of magic weapon.
Thraxus wrote: Gamender wrote: Now, magic item squads can shore up the lack of front-line casters, but they also have a limited resource to contend with, and again, their numbers are too small to make a large impact in the tangle of melee. Which is why I mentioned spells like bless, cure light wounds, and whispering wind. Bless affects a group and cure light wounds and whispering wind will more often be used out of direct combat. Entangle can be used to break a charge or bog down an enemy unit for friendly archers to pick off. Under these circumstances, having 50 charges is not a big hinderance.
Given the real possibility of facing monsters with DR on the battlefield, I suspect elite units are also equipped with vials of silversheen and oils of magic weapon. probably units who whole role is to kill monster on the battlefields. Not even bothering with casters, just whatever living/undead/construct war machines the enemy has brought with them today.
Monster Corps: "Facing the horrific so you dont have to."
Monster Corps, Undead Divison: "that which is dead should stay dead."
monster Corp, Planar Division: "We dont care where you came from, but you cant stay here"
Monster Corps, Construct Division: "Statues are for museums, not war."
And then... there are the druids protesting the wars in the streets with long stringy hair, plenty of weed flowing, tamborines playing, and giant signs saying "MAKE LOVE NOT WAR" with the peace symbol in the background.
kyrt-ryder wrote: And then... there are the druids protesting the wars in the streets with long stringy hair, plenty of weed flowing, tamborines playing, and giant signs saying "MAKE LOVE NOT WAR" with the peace symbol in the background. kryt, you must not be running into the same druids I am ;)
a free love hippie pacifist would be a welcome change from the bloodsoaked avatars of nature I keep running into. more along the lines of "People are killing each other? great. less of them to damage my forest/swamp/mountains/river/ocean/desert". ;)
-Weylin
Weylin wrote: kyrt-ryder wrote: And then... there are the druids protesting the wars in the streets with long stringy hair, plenty of weed flowing, tamborines playing, and giant signs saying "MAKE LOVE NOT WAR" with the peace symbol in the background. kryt, you must not be running into the same druids I am ;)
a free love hippie pacifist would be a welcome change from the bloodsoaked avatars of nature I keep running into. more along the lines of "People are killing each other? great. less of them to damage my forest/swamp/mountains/river/ocean/desert". ;)
-Weylin Lol, it varies between the two and a few other arch-types, but you've got to admit, typically war, even medieval style war (ESPECIALLY medeival style war with magic involved) tends to do quite the number to the environment it's waged in.
kyrt-ryder wrote: Weylin wrote: kyrt-ryder wrote: And then... there are the druids protesting the wars in the streets with long stringy hair, plenty of weed flowing, tamborines playing, and giant signs saying "MAKE LOVE NOT WAR" with the peace symbol in the background. kryt, you must not be running into the same druids I am ;)
a free love hippie pacifist would be a welcome change from the bloodsoaked avatars of nature I keep running into. more along the lines of "People are killing each other? great. less of them to damage my forest/swamp/mountains/river/ocean/desert". ;)
-Weylin Lol, it varies between the two and a few other arch-types, but you've got to admit, typically war, even medieval style war (ESPECIALLY medeival style war with magic involved) tends to do quite the number to the environment it's waged in. oh definitely. Unless the druids in question have a vested interest in one side or the other winning, they are probably going to sabotage both sides in such a way that ends the fighting near their grove and preserve as quickly as possible.
If i were waging battle near a druid's territory and knew it, I would take every reasonable precaution against harming the area itself...while hoping my adversary was not as wise and soon to be the druids new toy.
Honestly, I think I would fear a druidic army.
You could be facing animals, elementals, treants, various types of fey, centars, and more.
No, I will take humans, dwarves, and elves any day.
In Korvosa, there's a little mentioned Anti-City movement of Druids on the docks. Somewhere on the eastern end of Old Korvosa, if I am not mistaken.
They'd do things like: scare away the Reefclaw population, bringing in (much nastier...CR 1 vs CR 4) Devilfish instead. Wood shape hulls and decking, possibly while, say, a seagull.
Why kill and maim when you can just remove the conveniences of modern living. Let nature do the mean bits.
So, with regards to running Fantasy War games, what have you found good for simulation / DnD results. The Victory Point and Battlefield as a Dungeon, when written well, worked well in a couple of my past encounters. Tides of Dread in the Savage Tide AP also felt very "Modern War" if against pirates.
Multiple waves of individual units, half a dozen golems, some vrocks, some batches of pirates, etc. Lets you deal with them Swat Team style, and assign effectiveness to the total battel.
Later in the Path, you storm a beach defended by tons of demons with siege weapons and land mines. Flight completely negated the land mines, and a few high level buffs negated the planar problems (poison gas, negative traits, etc...nothing that wouldn't be on a modern Chem/Bio threat area) so the 18th or so level characters mopped up. It helped that they were all but untouchable at that point, but the point stands; some tricks simply negate our current tactical thinking.
-t
|
