When you fail to pay "food consumption" for an army, it states "all your armies increase their shaken and weary conditions by 1".
And any army exceeding 4 shaken or 4 weary is bad -- as it immediately disbands and causes the kingdom 1d4 Unrest as well as 1 RUIN. which is per army that disbands, not just the first each turn.
Is this PER ARMY (not fed) ?
Or simply (if any army is not Fed) ?
In other words, we have 10 armies but can only feed the first 6.
The last (4) go unfed -- what is the result?
(a) All (10) armies disband due to 4+ weary/shaken.
or ?
(b) All armies simply gain a single point of shaken and weary.
While I realize food is critical to morale, logic suggests the penalty would be limited to those units not fed - or at the least, worse for them specifically.
In either case, it suggests the Nation leaders are better off feeding their armies first - before their citizens, to avoid the possibly worse impact to their military forces.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Congratulations, you've just discovered why on many occasions in history, the military was well-fed and looked after while general populace was starving and destitute.
Thanks, I definitely agree that "an army lives off its stomach" :D
Does this sound like a fair resolution ?
4/10 armies not fed.
the following happens
(1) all armies get 1 weary and 1 shaken
(2) each unfed army gets double the penalty (so +2 shaken/weary)
my rationale is: you get (1) month "warning", by second month those unfed armies disband - each causing 1d4 Unrest and 1 Ruin.
Leaving the other (6) armies close to disbanding as well -- unless the kingdom prioritizes feeding them and works to remove the accumulated shaken/weary conditions.
This opens up the roleplay possibility to force an enemy to surrender by occupying their farms -- forcing their nation to use resource points to feed the armies or risk all the armies disbanding.
^ Your resolution sounds and feels fair to me.
I think that it's a good compromise between RAW (at least, based on what you've provided in your first post...), which would lead to your scenario (a) , vs what may've been RAI(??), which would be your scenario (b).
If it makes sense to you, then go with it; if it works for and doesn't take away from any of the fun for your group, then it's the right call for you.
Carry on,
--C.
Unfed armies should very quickly resort to looting and brigandage, slipping from player control and becoming small hostile factions terrorising a region.
Hopefully, there aren't dug-in to fortifications, and near nice fat villages.