Kingmaker #5 "War of the River Kings" will contain simple mass combat rules that tie into the kingdom building rules.
I got Warpath but i would love some info on how to use it in kingmaker.
In order to use Warpath, you need to know specifically how many soldiers are in each army along with their stats. From there, you're golden.
I must say, the rules in Kingmaker #5 are going to have to be really, really good for me to use them over Warpath's.
Creative Director
|
I must say, the rules in Kingmaker #5 are going to have to be really, really good for me to use them over Warpath's.
Well... in the interest of managing expecations, the mass combat rules in Pathfinder 35 are NOT that detailed or expansive. They were never intended to be. They take up about 4 pages of rules, and are supposed to be VERY simple and quick to use. The goal is to be able to resolve a conflict between two armies without having to map the battlefield out, without having to use miniatures at all, without having to learn an entirely new set of rules, and so that the battle itself, when it comes up in play, can be resolved in 5 to 10 minutes or less.
War of the River Kings is focused on the player characters, and the mass battle element isn't intended to overshadow that. It's handled in a method similar to how we handle kingdom and city building, but even LESS complex (again, mass combat takes up 4 pages, about half the room we devoted to kingdoms and city building), so you can actually pretty easily run "War of the River Kings" without using the mass combat rules at all.
Why? Because the game as it stands right now wasn't built to be a mass combat game, and the adventure paths aren't built to support that. The mass combat rules in "War of the River Kings" are meant to give us some rules so we CAN include those elements in a few adventures, but if we were to build an entire War adventure path, I'd want them to be something more like the size of a book and it would probably NOT focus on individual PCs. It'd be a VERY different game.
That all said, if your group really loves mass combat, "War of the River Kings" should go over quite well. While the mass battles in the adventure aren't the total focus of the adventure, it should be relatively easily to make some changes to the adventure so that they are. Especially if you have a Pathfinder-compatible set of mass combat rules that you happen to quite like.
But again: The mass combat rules in Pathfinder 35 are not meant to be the end-all final solution to the problem. I happen to think they're pretty elegant and fun to use, but they're not a full-on robust book-length supplement.
Well... in the interest of managing expecations, the mass combat rules in Pathfinder 35 are NOT that detailed or expansive. They were never intended to be. They take up about 4 pages of rules, and are supposed to be VERY simple and quick to use. The goal is to be able to resolve a conflict between two armies without having to map the battlefield out, without having to use miniatures at all, without having to learn an entirely new set of rules, and so that the battle itself, when it comes up in play, can be resolved in 5 to 10 minutes or less.
Just what I am looking for as a GM. Simple and easy to use, great.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Well... in the interest of managing expecations, the mass combat rules in Pathfinder 35 are NOT that detailed or expansive. They were never intended to be. They take up about 4 pages of rules, and are supposed to be VERY simple and quick to use. The goal is to be able to resolve a conflict between two armies without having to map the battlefield out, without having to use miniatures at all, without having to learn an entirely new set of rules, and so that the battle itself, when it comes up in play, can be resolved in 5 to 10 minutes or less.Just what I am looking for as a GM. Simple and easy to use, great.
For the grognards, think War Machine, not Battlesystem.
I must say, the rules in Kingmaker #5 are going to have to be really, really good for me to use them over Warpath's.
Glad you like Warpath! ;)
For those who like quick n' easy rules, Warpath also provides quick n' easy combat rules so mass combat can be handled in a single roll or as many as the GM determines; for example, best 2 out of 3, while also allowing for bonuses and penalties from PC actions (for example, for succeeding or failing at a mission to disrupt the enemy's supply lines or some such task).
Also, it should be noted that Warpath doesn't overshadow individual PCs (quite the contrary, as the PCs are expected to become unit commanders, generals, or an entire unit themselves!).
|
On a similar note, has anyone done or planned for something along the lines of letting the PCs expand their kingdom to become THE River Kingdom? Expand to conquer all the other nations, and then from there go further? Say for instance start a war with Taldor, Cheliax, etc.?
*Edit* I mean in terms of home games, not official material.
My expectation is that currently, the players might try to expand into Iobaria, run into plague troubles, then revise their plans and expand south. I suspect they may decide to assault Brevoy at some point, given a few characters' disaffected pasts. Then again, they have yet to meet Pitax, so rivalry may create expansionist desires to the West (!)
The players have currently just about finished Episode 1 (assault on the Stag Lord is all that is left).
Any specific reason why you are asking, fellow dragon? To hear good stories? or to brainstorm mechanical ideas?
|
I suspect they may decide to assault Brevoy at some point, given a few characters' disaffected pasts. Then again, they have yet to meet Pitax, so rivalry may create expansionist desires to the West (!)
I think James said that the 'continuing the campaign' sidebar at the end of the path will give hints on what to do if they decide to continue by taking over Pitax. I could be wrong though
is it just me.. or does someone else also see a connection:
brevoy without a legit ruler
dragons
lots of dragons on the faerie world
legit brevoy rulers vanished (to faerie? where the dragons came from too)
or, how players will discover the arms and crown or some such in the faerie world allowing them a damn good claim on the throne there too..
And then with a expected pile of dead dragons, there should be enough rawmaterials for a pile of dragon simulcras :p
...which btw would give a nice aura of legitimacy in iobaria aswell..
and besides, who is mad enough to argue with some band that rides dragons and have another dozen dragons following their every wink? ;)
is it just me.. or does someone else also see a connection:
brevoy without a legit ruler
dragons
lots of dragons on the faerie world
legit brevoy rulers vanished (to faerie? where the dragons came from too)or, how players will discover the arms and crown or some such in the faerie world allowing them a damn good claim on the throne there too..
And then with a expected pile of dead dragons, there should be enough rawmaterials for a pile of dragon simulcras :p
...which btw would give a nice aura of legitimacy in iobaria aswell..and besides, who is mad enough to argue with some band that rides dragons and have another dozen dragons following their every wink? ;)
I haven't read the later books yet, but I really hope that Kingmaker deals with the vanishing in Brevoy. I'm starting up this week and a couple of my players are investing their backstory significantly in it, especially the dwarf who wants to find out what happened to his clansmen.
|
|
My expectation is that currently, the players might try to expand into Iobaria, run into plague troubles, then revise their plans and expand south. I suspect they may decide to assault Brevoy at some point, given a few characters' disaffected pasts. Then again, they have yet to meet Pitax, so rivalry may create expansionist desires to the West (!)
The players have currently just about finished Episode 1 (assault on the Stag Lord is all that is left).
Any specific reason why you are asking, fellow dragon? To hear good stories? or to brainstorm mechanical ideas?
Well, I'd like to see what other GMs/PCs are planning for their brand spankin' new kingdoms. If I were a player, I'd definitely be interested in expanding MY kingdom's borders. Perhaps challenge mighty Cheliax and other countries for control of Avistan. Who knows? =)
|
Creative Director
|
Kingmaker is not about Brevoy, really. It's about the PCs' kingdom and their adventures in the Stolen Lands. Kingmaker does not have any major Brevic plotlines woven into it, although there is a "continuing the campaign" article in PF 36 that gives advice on how Brevoy might work with a post-Kingmaker campaign.
What's Warpath? Link?
What's Warpath? Link?
It's really simple to learn--no need to learn a whole new system! (Basically, if you know how to run regular PF combat, you can run Warpath.)
I think I'd've liked to see a bit more direct insertion of the PCs - i.e., with some of the expected battles, ways in which the PCs might on a character level directly affect the outcome. The rules as presented tie the armies to the kingdom, and thus to the PCs, but only second-hand. I would generally rather something more like Exalted's "you wear them" approach to unit creation, where the other soldiers on the field are basically just extra bonuses to the PCs' own stats...
That said, the Kingmaker rules seem straightforward enough, and well-connected to the rulership themes and rules the AP has presented so far. They definitely are what is advertised, but I don't think they're exactly what I personally am looking for.
(...I do note with amusement, however, that the PCs, assuming they are level 13 as expected, constitute CR 5 armies all by themselves, the equivalent of 500 3rd level warriors...)
EDIT: Actually, given the not-impossible idea that the PCs will choose to enter the fray themselves rather than letting hordes of faceless spear-carriers have all the fun, the rules for Fine-sized armies produce some weird effects. For instance, to the best of my ability to determine, a 13th level fighter is CR 13, which makes him a CR 5 army by himself, giving him a DV of 15 and OM of +5. A 13th level wizard, on the other hand, is the same CR 13, and thus a CR 5 army, but undoubtedly gains ranged capability and also adds +7 to his DV and OM because of his 7th level spellcasting. This appears to double-count his spellcasting capability, effectively, which is not only weird for PCs but also might point out a larger issue with the rules in general (since most NPC and monster CRs would already include any spellcasting they can do).
|
is it just me.. or does someone else also see a connection:
brevoy without a legit ruler
dragons
lots of dragons on the faerie world
legit brevoy rulers vanished (to faerie? where the dragons came from too)or, how players will discover the arms and crown or some such in the faerie world allowing them a damn good claim on the throne there too..
And then with a expected pile of dead dragons, there should be enough rawmaterials for a pile of dragon simulcras :p
...which btw would give a nice aura of legitimacy in iobaria aswell..and besides, who is mad enough to argue with some band that rides dragons and have another dozen dragons following their every wink? ;)
I too would like to know what happened to Brevoy's ruling family. I know for a fact that my pc's will want to try to take over all if not most of the river kingdoms. Make em 'legit' - not bandit kingdoms. They would like to bring stability and leave a legacy. They are very curious on how to take on 'old' kingdoms like Brevoy.
|
I would have liked a more strategic system where the player's role as generals and the decisions they made would have more of an impact. Don't get me wrong, having an impact as adventurers can be fun (Red Hand of Doom was probably the best campaign published by WotC), but as rulers of a kingdom, I don't think the PCs should get entangled in the fighting that much.
Having a semi-realistic strategy combat system could easily lead to imbalance if either the GM or one of the players has any (wargaming or real life) strategic experience. A veteran of SPI or GMT wargames who ate his teeth on hardcore wargaming would just walk over the opposition.
That's why I am happy with abstract rules (anybody remember the D&D Cyclopedia mass combat rules) rather than having a "wargame in a bottle". I am already bad enough with my years of board game experience in regular D&D combat, as I have to manage players who make basic tactical mistakes :)
When rolling a natural 20 on the Offensive check, the rules say
"you automatically deal damage to the army, even if the result of the roll is lower than the enemy army’s DV"
But how much damage is dealt in this case?
|
Creative Director
|
When rolling a natural 20 on the Offensive check, the rules say
"you automatically deal damage to the army, even if the result of the roll is lower than the enemy army’s DV"
But how much damage is dealt in this case?
I answered this in the Mass Combat stickied thread in this forum already; the short answer is:
1 point of damage.
|
Creative Director
|
I get that, and I can understand the appeal of such a system, but I guess it is just too abstract for me :-)
By removing any positioning and movement from the rules, it feels like any war will come down to "who has the best army". Once both armies are recruited, there's not much an army leader can do to influence the outcome. Mostly, he will add his Charisma (which in the group I'm going to play in, means the best general will be the Sorcerer) and choose whether to be aggressive or defensive. IRL, the best armies did not always win, and that's why men like Cesar or Napoleon are remembered, leaders of strong nations who brought that little extra to battles.
I don't mean to sound too critical, it's not like Paizo had one hundred pages to create a wargaming system. Setting one up in 5 or 6 pages like they did is a feat in itself. And all this is just from reading the system once. It might be different in actual play, but I won't know until we start playing the AP (the DM is waiting to read the entire campaign to start it).
There are other options out there for running mass combat. Warpath. 3.5's Heroes of Battle. Birthright. Battlesystem. If you have one you like or prefer... use that one.
For the majority of Kingmaker campaigns, the simplified mass combat rules should work fine. Maybe in a few years or so we'll get around to doing a big mass combat book... but that won't happen in 2010 or 2011. Probably not even 2012.
For the majority of Kingmaker campaigns, the simplified mass combat rules should work fine. Maybe in a few years or so we'll get around to doing a big mass combat book... but that won't happen in 2010 or 2011. Probably not even 2012.
So you're saying there's a chance! I'd love to see a supplement like this.
Maybe in a few years or so we'll get around to doing a big mass combat book... but that won't happen in 2010 or 2011. Probably not even 2012.
ARRRRGGGGGGHHHHH!
Consider that a vote for green-lighting that project.