|
I know of the rules for mass combat - but does one of the books have a section on building one's army for their kingdom?
If not - is there a discussion on this subject in this forum somewhere?
Essentially what I'm looking for is some ideas/guidelines for how long and how frequent a Garrison or Barracks can supply trained soldiers/troops etc for the kingdom.
I'll admit I haven't read past book 2, so any direction as to where to look would significantly help me get started.
Thanks,
Robert
|
|
Thank you for the response. It was quite insightful.
However I think it may just be a bit more complicated to consider than what I was looking for at least initially.
What I'm looking for is something like:
"A barracks can have X trained men at any given time. Trained soldiers are replenished at the rate of Y per turn per barracks up to X per barracks."
"Garrisons can....etc etc."
I wonder if anyone has really considered making guidelines and mechanics for this - or if it's even necessary.
The mass combat rules are good and easy to follow - but one can't engage if they don't have the mass armies to do mass combat with.
Robert
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
The army rules are in War of the River Kings, KM #5.
The rules, as with the kingdom-building rules, are very abstract. Garrisons, Barracks, and other similar buildings do not interface with army creation at all. Castles, City Walls, etc. are relevant to your army's defense value when you have a battle where one side is inside those fortifications.
Maintaining an army IS very expensive, as consumption for an army is paid every WEEK. Everything is handled with BP expenditure as far as creating, maintaining, and supplying the army. There are no rules for supply lines (as there are none for specific trade routes).
Morale, however, is very important, and this is the place where those Loyalty checks finally start coming into play to help your soldiers not lose their fighting effectiveness.
|
|
The army rules are in War of the River Kings, KM #5.
The rules, as with the kingdom-building rules, are very abstract. Garrisons, Barracks, and other similar buildings do not interface with army creation at all. Castles, City Walls, etc. are relevant to your army's defense value when you have a battle where one side is inside those fortifications.
Maintaining an army IS very expensive, as consumption for an army is paid every WEEK. Everything is handled with BP expenditure as far as creating, maintaining, and supplying the army. There are no rules for supply lines (as there are none for specific trade routes).
Morale, however, is very important, and this is the place where those Loyalty checks finally start coming into play to help your soldiers not lose their fighting effectiveness.
So without abstraction or common sense coming in to play:
A kingdom's player could theoretically build a garrison/barracks (or not) and just spend BP for an army and viola they have an instant army?
I understand the combat rules - and I have examined them in book 5; I was just wondering about the time and energy it requires to create an army or upgrade them etc.
And you're saying that garrisons or barracks have no interface with the army creation/maintenance - thus there's no guidelines/info on how many warriors one would maintain - so they're built (mechanically) for the bonuses to stability etc only....?
So if there are no such mechanics in the books - I'm wondering if anyone else feels like I do and they could be good thing - and if anyone has determined some outlines on such a mechanic???
Thanks
Robert
My first ever post!
I think that level of detail went beyond the space available in a 32 page Adventure Path. That's why the rules are so abstract.
A couple of my players have hirelings and are planning to take the Leadership feat soon, so I'm thinking that I might give them some benefit there if they build a barracks or garrison. They currently maintain their hirelings out of their personal wealth using the standard rules not Build Points. It seems to be working quite well; I might reduce the cost of paying them or something. It would be a pretty minor benefit.
I'd be interested to read any mechanics that people come up with though.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
The army rules are in War of the River Kings, KM #5.
The rules, as with the kingdom-building rules, are very abstract. Garrisons, Barracks, and other similar buildings do not interface with army creation at all. Castles, City Walls, etc. are relevant to your army's defense value when you have a battle where one side is inside those fortifications.
Maintaining an army IS very expensive, as consumption for an army is paid every WEEK. Everything is handled with BP expenditure as far as creating, maintaining, and supplying the army. There are no rules for supply lines (as there are none for specific trade routes).
Morale, however, is very important, and this is the place where those Loyalty checks finally start coming into play to help your soldiers not lose their fighting effectiveness.
So without abstraction or common sense coming in to play:
A kingdom's player could theoretically build a garrison/barracks (or not) and just spend BP for an army and viola they have an instant army?
Yes.
There is a huge abstraction here, along the lines of building a castle or cathedral in one month, which we know makes no sense in the real world, but it's a turn-based kingdom game, so things fit into turns.
Early draft kingdom rules had multi-square buildings take 1 month to build per square, which was an interesting compromise, but ultimately scrapped in favor of simplicity.
I understand the combat rules - and I have examined them in book 5; I was just wondering about the time and energy it requires to create an army or upgrade them etc.
I believe that, like building a building, it is simply an action you can take during your kingdom turn. I don't have the book in front of me at the moment, so I don't recall if there is a per-month limit on how many armies you can create (aside from your ability to pay for them).
The sample armies do have prereqs, as you've seen if you've read the rules already.
And you're saying that garrisons or barracks have no interface with the army creation/maintenance - thus there's no guidelines/info on how many warriors one would maintain - so they're built (mechanically) for the bonuses to stability etc only....?
Yes.
They "help support the army" by providing a bonus to Stability checks (which is the abstracted representation of your civil defense, basic militia, city watches, and regular patrols through the countryside).
Kind of like owning a Marketplace or controlling a bunch of road hexes is a boost to your Economy roll, which includes making trade routes with other countries and other micromanaged concepts you might use.
So if there are no such mechanics in the books - I'm wondering if anyone else feels like I do and they could be good thing - and if anyone has determined some outlines on such a mechanic???
Thanks
Robert
I think it's reasonable to consider adding some ability for barracks or garrisons to help offset the cost of raising or maintaining a standard army, though in that case I'd probably think about raising the price of those buildings, as that can save you a ton later on in the game.
If anyone has worked up any more elaborate barracks/garrison/army rules, though, feel free to toss em into the conversation!
|
|
I too am on RRR, and would love to see other ideas others may have. I have re-examined the rules on mass combat and army maintenance again - so that I have a good fresh understanding and will begin to contemplate how to integrate those mechanics into a "recruitment/training" aspect tied specifically to the barrack and/or garrisons.
It will look something like:
Barracks can sustain 100 troops
Garrison can sustain 500 troops
Each turn a barracks gains x D y troops
Each turn a garrison gains z D y troops
(gains = recruited and been fully trained etc. Each are considered 1st level warriors (CR 1/2 each).
Instead of "gaining" you can "advance" half the above number of dice (for it's respective building). Once entire unit is 'advanced', it is then 1st level fighters. CR1)
These are just the most basic outlines that I have considered and not in any way done with a great deal of mental playtesting. I intend to build and draw from that point and see what I can come up with that makes sense.
@JasonN: Interesting that you metnioned "multisquare building" taking more than one month (turn) as an early consideration; that's actually the way I've been handling it in my campaign I'm running. Verisimilitude is important to me and my players (thus my obsessing over needing some better mechanics for creating armies). My game is being handled to move a bit slower and last a bit longer than what may have been originally intended - don't know - but we all see it as a lengthy character lifetime spanning event.
Robert
We had a bit of discussion about maintaining armies in garrisons on this page: link
Edit: Fixed link
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As I discussed in the MASS COMBAT sticky forum, I would like to see army building/usage play a role earlier on in the campaign than just book 5; somehow turning the "invisible mechanics-based people that provide the bonuses to stability" into "visible force" that can be utilized for various events or needs of the kingdom.
The cost (in BP) as written in book 5 is exorbitant (per week); perhaps not so much for 14th level characters that can donate good amount of magical items / gold from adventuring, and an economy in the kingdom that is netting 20 BPs a turn or more. This is no so in the earlier books - currently we're in book 2 - characters are 5th level.
Here's some ideas that I have been fiddling with to accomodate players (in my group at least) who want the thrill of commanding armies in their kingdom much earlier on than just the one book.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
UNIT: a group of soldiers/warriors -- for the purposes of these rules, a unit is a smaller group than an ARMY. UNITS are not useable in the MASS COMBAT rules - but multiple like UNITS can be joined to form an ARMY - as defined by the rules in WotRK (book 5)
BARRACKS
Holds a standing UNIT of 25 troops. This unit has no cost to the kingdom (this is the "invisible mechanics based people that provide the kingdom it's bonus to Defense" etc.)
A barracks can billet and train an additional 25 troops.
This essentially means that 25 troops always remains behind essentially "manning" the +2 Defense; while 25 additional troops can be recruited, trained etc, and moved on to other areas of the kingdom, stacking/joining them into an army - but needs to be "maintained" via BP cost.
GARRISON
Holds a standing Unit of 100 troops. This unit has no cost to the kingdom (this is the "invisible mechanics based people that provide the kingdom it's bonus to Loyalty, Stability etc.)
A Garrison can train and billet an additional 100 troops. If/when this is done, it costs BP per MONTH (turn) based on a Medium army.
Similar to the Barracks, this essentially assumes half (100) is always on staff at the garrison; but an additional 100 can be trained and moved elsewhere provided they are paid for via the BP per month (turn).
NOTE: The "Invisible People" can be combined into the recuited other half of the army (in either building) to form one larger army if need be, to be used elsewhere; this of course increases the cost of the army. However, the Barracks/Garrison stops providing the benefit to the city until the "invisible people" are re-recruited.
All such recruits either existing in the barracks/garrison, or recuited to billet the rest of the building are all equivalent of 1st level WARRIORS (CR 1/2) individuals. Thus it would take several UNITS to form an ARMY (see rules on pg 55 in WofRK that speak about how many 1/2 CR creatures it would take to form an army.
RECRUITING
When a barracks or Garrison is built, the "Invisible People" come with it's construction. Each turn the Warden (barracks) or General (Garrison) can attempt a Loyalty check. If successful, 5 (barracks) or 20 (Garrison) additional troops flock to the banner and join the ranks. (meaning it takes 5 turns (or more - depending on successful Loyalty checks) to fully fill the rest of the building. BP costs the first month recruitment begins (rounded up).
[ALTERNATE RULE: We could allow 2 months worth of recruitment w/ Loyalty check success of more than 5, and 3 months worth w/ check more than 10]
TRAINING
Once the second half of a building is filled from recruitment, the kingdom may attempt to "train" their warriors further. They are trained at the same rate they are recruited (see above). Once an entire unit is trained, they can be advanced.
ADVANCEMENT
All initial recruits are 1st level Warriors. After their first training is completed (the entire unit over several turns) they become 1st level FIGHTERS (increasing their CR to 1, and the cost of the army, but also increasing the units hps.)
This can be repeated for each UNIT as often as they would like - but continues to add to the standing armies' cost.
Once an army can be formed from these UNITS that has a CR of 2 or more, they can inherit one of the Special Tactics. This can be repeated if/when the army is trained to a CR 4 etc (with continued increase in cost).
CONSUMPTION
A garrison that begins to billet an additional unit (beyond the "invisible" 100 that man the building) costs 1 BP minimum per turn as soon as the first warriors are recruited. The same cost is associated to barracks, however, the kingdom spends 1 BP for every 4 barracks (minimum 1; round up). If/when the UNITS are trained and advanced, the consumption will increase appropriately based on the new CR of the creatures in the UNIT.
These Consumption costs are applicable at all times when the units are not deployed, used, etc (essentially at times of peace). If an ARMY is mobilized, deployed, or used in any way in defense of the kingdom (or offensively), the Consumption cost increases to weekly (4 times per turn).
Thats what I have so far. I will admit, I have done no mock units, armies etc using these; this is just my initial instinctive numbers. I'll sit down over the weekend and see how this would work out given a lengthy timeline.
Any comments, feedback, and especially summary of any playtested units/armies using these ideas would be greatly appreciated.
Robert
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
As a side note on economy, I just ran a kingdom turn with the ruler player in my campaign. Their kingdom is almost 3 years old, with a size of around 30 hexes or so. The PCs are around 10th-11th level, though their level is almost irrelevant to kingdom management.
Their income for this turn: 105 BP
For one month.
Don't worry, once you get the economic engine of your kingdom running, you can afford armies. The real loophole is magic item sales, which vastly dwarf everything else you can do for your economy. The income from their Economy roll was 22 BP. Income from selling 5 major and 1 medium item (with one failed roll on a major item) was 83 BP.
That said, I like the mechanic of Loyalty checks being used to recruit soldiers, and I like the verisimilitude of tying it to buildings.
The player in my Kingmaker game that's acting as the General is now building armies, and I'm extrapolating a lot from WotRK to do this - We're working out cost in BP, consumption requirements, etc.
I'm definitely about to adapt the garrison/barracks rules another poster had about a barracks/garrison hosting a base number of "invisible" soldiers as part of it's cost (I mean, a magic shop has a merchant inside, automatically, right?)
My General is really into Roman Legions. He wants to have the army forbidden to enter the cities except to be garrisoned near them, and spend their time doing field training and 'civic works'. The old Legions, he argues, built and maintained the roads to Rome, the aqueducts, walls, etc. So assuming this, is it unreasonable that some fraction of an army's weekly consumption be returned to the kingdom in the form of "BP that may only be spent on roads/garrisons/barracks/walls/towers/military structures"?
Or is it easier to handwave that and say that instead of 2 roads/month, the army allows them an extra 1 road/month per Century (88-100 soldiers) working on it? What about Walls and towers for free? At what point are we abusing the rules, and at what point am I rewarding good planning? Ultimately, he's not doing this to gain BP, but because he staunchly believes in the Roman Example.
|
|
Or is it easier to handwave that and say that instead of 2 roads/month, the army allows them an extra 1 road/month per Century (88-100 soldiers) working on it? What about Walls and towers for free? At what point are we abusing the rules, and at what point am I rewarding good planning? Ultimately, he's not doing this to gain BP, but because he staunchly believes in the Roman Example.
This is good roleplaying and good story fluff.
However I would also say that this is part of the civic duties of the armies/soliders etc. Afterall - it is providing a bonus to loyalty and/or stability by existing in the barracks/garrison. That's the mechanics of it. The abstraction from that can take many forms - in the case of your player - it takes the form of having duties of maintaining the roads etc. What could be more stabilizing and/or promoting loyalty than seeing hard-working loyal soldiers out protecting the town and serving the public.
Furthermore, the kingdom could decide to run a "promotion" edic or even a Festival using them to further the stability or loyalty. As per the Edict rules. Again that is the mechanics, and the abstraction can take the form of the armies doing civic duties out in the public's eye and being lauded over.
This is a good way to describe the promotions being done.
In the real world, our military has things like air shows on air bases. Fire fighters do similar shows, and so do our police forces. It's certainly has a cost to put these events on (hence the cost in BP for a promotion), but the up-side is that they do generally tend to give a bit of awareness, and appreciation among the masses about what it is these people do for our communities. (hence the increase in stability or loyalty).
Robert
Or is it easier to handwave that and say that instead of 2 roads/month, the army allows them an extra 1 road/month per Century (88-100 soldiers) working on it? What about Walls and towers for free? At what point are we abusing the rules, and at what point am I rewarding good planning? Ultimately, he's not doing this to gain BP, but because he staunchly believes in the Roman Example.This is good roleplaying and good story fluff.
However I would also say that this is part of the civic duties of the armies/soliders etc. Afterall - it is providing a bonus to loyalty and/or stability by existing in the barracks/garrison. That's the mechanics of it. The abstraction from that can take many forms - in the case of your player - it takes the form of having duties of maintaining the roads etc. What could be more stabilizing and/or promoting loyalty than seeing hard-working loyal soldiers out protecting the town and serving the public.
Furthermore, the kingdom could decide to run a "promotion" edic or even a Festival using them to further the stability or loyalty. As per the Edict rules. Again that is the mechanics, and the abstraction can take the form of the armies doing civic duties out in the public's eye and being lauded over.
This is a good way to describe the promotions being done.
In the real world, our military has things like air shows on air bases. Fire fighters do similar shows, and so do our police forces. It's certainly has a cost to put these events on (hence the cost in BP for a promotion), but the up-side is that they do generally tend to give a bit of awareness, and appreciation among the masses about what it is these people do for our communities. (hence the increase in stability or loyalty).
Robert
Given that when you build a road (or a tavern!), nobody asks you where the labor came from, I can see your point. The player explains the Labor side and justifies the mechanical bonuses with good RP. Maybe a one-time "good Role-play XP bonus, but further mechanical kingdom rewards might tip the system.
Now, let's suppose he wants to build frontier forts, like the American West. Would it be best to simply treat these as "a watchtower building and an adjacent garrison" (or even, just a garrison) or would it be ok to combine the two into a new building ("Frontier Fort" 34BP, +2Loyalty, +3 Stabilty, -3Unrest) that is exactly the same as the two, but counts as only one building? And it's ok to place these outside of a city limit, because the nature of the building, so that benefit offsets removing the benefits to cost reductions for walls, etc.
I'm looking to run the game with a "Yes, AND..." DM style, but if it'd add too much complexity, but if it's just as easy for him to build Tower and Garrison...
Although, is it acceptable to build structures such as these outside a city? Everything I saw indicated that you had to put them in a city, although, now that I verbalize this thought, One could argue "Fort ThirdHexDown" could be a city, with the only developments in the city a watchtower and a garrison, right?
Somewhere on here there are houserules for adding small settlements not in cities that do not interfear with farms. Basicly, you pay a small portion of the cost to create a city, but only get a small portion of a city. For insance, 4 squares (1 block) or 16 squares. This could then be used to add small buildings like a roadside tavern, watchtowers, and similar constructs without requireing full blown cities. I beileve the 4 square ones could be built in the same hexes as farms. All this really does is spread out your bonuses over your terrain instead of keeping it in the major cities. It makes you both more and less succptible to attack. Its easier to eat away at you, but you lose less when you do lose.
Adding the Frontier Fort I wouldn't be too concerned with. It gives them the advantage of building 2 buildings in 1 turn, but eliminates any cost reduction they could have gotten. Its not that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things.
Don't be afraid to give players nifty bonuses for coming up with neat ideas. The idea for what to do with soldiers is neat. Its basicly taken care of in the abstraction, but that doesn't mean you don't want to encourage that level of thought. Those types of things are what make the kingdom building interesting. Small bonuses, like +1 stability or loyalty, rerolls on checks, or other bonuses they may use in the future, encourage players to come up with creative ideas and add detail to the world. You want that. So go ahead and reward them. It wont be out of line with the little quests that happen. Saving timmy from the lizards gets them +2 stability IIRC. Why shouldn't detailing their soldier's work routine and expanding their kingdom's personality be rewarded?
|
|
Now, let's suppose he wants to build frontier forts, like the American West. Would it be best to simply treat these as "a watchtower building and an adjacent garrison" (or even, just a garrison) or would it be ok to combine the two into a new building ("Frontier Fort" 34BP, +2Loyalty, +3 Stabilty, -3Unrest) that is exactly the same as the two, but counts as only one building? And it's ok to place these outside of a city limit, because the nature of the building, so that benefit offsets removing the benefits to cost reductions for walls, etc.
Allow me to direct you to THIS THREAD.
Within are various options for other types of improvements in a hex - including a Fort which is described simply as a watchtower.
I encourage DMs who have a "Yes" style. The key is not to reinvent the wheel with each "YES". Use the material already scripted, abstract from that, use that as a the mold to build upon.
Someone wants a "fort"....well use a watchtower, it's the closest thing. It's function is the same albeit with a different name, and perhaps appearance.
EDIT: Also i use a FORT as a "barracks" for the purpose of "housing an army w/o increasing the BP expenditure."
Essentially as I've been playing it, existance of armies cost their BP per "TURN" or month. Only when deployed or used in the field does the expenditure increase to weekly. Having them in a Fort (or barracks in a city), does not consider them deployed.
There was a thread in which I discussed all fo these ideas....if I find it I'll post a link.
Robert
|
|
Somewhere on here there are houserules for adding small settlements not in cities that do not interfear with farms. Basicly, you pay a small portion of the cost to create a city, but only get a small portion of a city.
I believe you're speaking of THIS THREAD.
I have made good use and implementation of both the Fort/Mine/Camp ideas presented by Jason N. and the Villag/Town ideas from Berhagen.
Robert
|
|
Don't be afraid to give players nifty bonuses for coming up with neat ideas. The idea for what to do with soldiers is neat. Its basicly taken care of in the abstraction, but that doesn't mean you don't want to encourage that level of thought. Those types of things are what make the kingdom building interesting.
All things considered, you are quite right. This is definitely something that should encouraged, or positively reinforced.
Personally I would steer away from "permanent" bonuses, so as to not tip the scales in the long-run. However, by building upon my earlier suggestion in Promotional or Festival Edicts, you could reward them w/ giving an additional +1 bonus when done in conjunction with - for the same cost. Or providing bonuses to certain events. Lets say you're using the expanded events thread on here, and the road hazard event appears (leaving damage to one of your hexes terrain/roads.) Giving circumstantial bonuses are easy to come up with, and not overbalancing since they're only used occasionally, but still a nice warm feeling when it is. Tying ideas to specific events is a good way to utilize this philosophy.
You could spot rule that since a player was clever enough to roleplay the abstraction and give good description on what the soldiers were doing (in this case in charge of maintaining/building the roads), you grant the kingdom a bonus to the check that mitigates the damage. Or shave off a BP or so of the cost to repair.
Either way, be sure to explain that this bonus was due to the savvy and clever ideas that the player(s) are whipping up, so that they are more likely to try to repeat this type of creative interaction.
I have done this on a number of issues and events. I save the permanent bonuses for story-based accomplishments - like helping the nixie, or Tig the boy, and for things like political agreements/treaties that the leaders establish with neighboring allies, as I described in THIS THREAD.
Robert
In the kingmaker game I currently play in the group just hit level 7 and are just finishing rivers run red. We are just ending our 3rd year and are getting about 80 bp a month with our 3rd city just started. We have 1 standing army in our 2 smaller cities of 50 units and 2 armies in our main city of 100 each. Then again our GM has ruled that armies are payed per month not per week. The idea that a level 3 warrior in an army are payed 40g a week is insane to all of us (1bp = 4000 gold, 100 unit army is payed 1bp a week.) This allows us to actually afford to do this.
We created some odd buildings but our GM simply allows them to add role play bonuses for us. One of the buildings was an aqueduct using a decanter of endless water to supply the fresh drinking water. It really does nothing mechanically but allows for fun fluff to the city.