So it occurs to me that RPG rules are really just a bunch of interconnected mini-games of varying complexity.

Most focus quite a bit on the skirmish combat mini-game, but there are still travel, exploration, social, investigation and other mini-games.

when looking at the mass combat mini-game, I can't help but wonder at the best way to adjudicate it.

Exactly how much should mass combat diverge from skirmish combat? Should engaging a hostile army on the field of battle resemble a 20x20 room with 3 orcs, only on a larger scale or should the resolution schemes be completely different.

How complex does a mass combat system have to be? Should it be on roughly the same level as a dedicated medieval wargame or streamlined and abstract?

How long should it take to resolve? Many people like skirmish combats to last only a short round or three, but if you want to run something like the battle of Helm's Deep, should it be over in just a few minutes or should it take the better part of an entire session to play out?

What RPG's have the best mass combat rules?

Any thoughts or opinions would be appreciated.

Savage Worlds and the D&D Companion set have the best rules every published for mass combat. They cover lots of stuff, but aren't too fine grained.

I actually don't like the idea of leaving it to random chance. I like to make a list of advantages. The army with the most checks wins the battle. If one side has two or more checks than the other side, the battle results in a total rout. If one side is only ahead by one, the battle results in a win, but with heavy casualties. If they are tied, the battle will end unresolved and fighting will continue later.

Highest Command Roll
Most Powerful Sorcerer
Number of Troops
Many More Troops (can count twice)
Diversity of Troops
Highest Level of Technology
Much Higher Level of Technology (can count twice)
Highest Percentage Veterans
Best Supply Chain
Best Supply Chain (can count twice)
Terrain Advantage

PC actions can revolve around doing things that change the checks on the list: Kill the other sides best wizard or be a better wizard, come up with a better battle strategy (Command), destroy the other team's standard bearer (Command Penalty), take a better position (Terrain) or personally defeat a special unit that cold turn the tide of battle (for example, kill the ogre unit in the goblin army).

For example, the 300 at Thermopylae had:

Highest Command Roll
Highest Percentage Veterans
Best Supply Chain
Best Supply Chain (can count twice)
Terrain Advantage

Xerxes had:

Most Powerful Sorcerer
Number of Troops
Many More Troops (can count twice)
Diversity of Troops
Highest Level of Technology

Thus, the battle continued for a few days.

I would use Chainmail.

Quote from: Cranewings;444763I actually don't like the idea of leaving it to random chance. I like to make a list of advantages. The army with the most checks wins the battle. If one side has two or more checks than the other side, the battle results in a total rout. If one side is only ahead by one, the battle results in a win, but with heavy casualties. If they are tied, the battle will end unresolved and fighting will continue later.

Interesting idea. How do you determine which side has which number? Are these metrics assigned to each side by the players and GM before the combatants take the field?

The big question I have is about the time involved with running mass combat. Your scheme seems like it would play out rather quickly, but what I'm wondering is if the entire battle of helm's Deep should be adjudicated within minutes, or if it should take a good amount of time to develop tension and drama?

Quote from: Shazbot79;444772Interesting idea. How do you determine which side has which number? Are these metrics assigned to each side by the players and GM before the combatants take the field?

The big question I have is about the time involved with running mass combat. Your scheme seems like it would play out rather quickly, but what I'm wondering is if the entire battle of helm's Deep should be adjudicated within minutes, or if it should take a good amount of time to develop tension and drama?

I always assign the numbers ahead of time so that I can present options for the PC's actions and have the smaller fights written up.

Well, the battle at helms deep is a siege, so you have a little more room to let it take a long time, but yeah, you can resolve it in minutes.

What can take a long time is the player's actions. If they decide they are going to turn the tide by removing the enemy veteran unit, resolving that fight could take an hour. If the party decides they are going to try and rally the troops and make a better command roll - it can be over right away.

There just isn't any point in rolling dice for that kind of combat. It isn't really random, and even if it was, one side is probably so skewed that the dice are just a formality. If it comes down to a tie, I'd flip a coin.

Quote from: danbuter;444755Savage Worlds and the D&D Companion set have the best rules every published for mass combat. They cover lots of stuff, but aren't too fine grained.

Yeah, I love the Savage World Mass Combat rules...even used them for Necessary Evil once.

Honorable mention goes to Cinematic Unisystem, specifically Army of Darkness...since it uses an adaptation of the Savage Worlds rules (both books were written by Shane Hensley).

Its interesting that more systems don't have mass combat rules, since lack of these is something that might skew how the GM runs games (to try to avoid the hole in the system). In our group we had one 3E game explode partly because of lack of a workable mass combat system (it had a pirate theme...). The game that appeared in Design and Development recently "Thousand Spears" or something similar seems to be big on mass combat though I don't have any particular verdict; "Under the Moons of Zoon" which I was excited about there last month looked like it had OK mass combat rules...

As far as length of combats go, I think a whole session of Helm's Deep would be boring, but I'd probably want the PCs at least to use regular rules, with how they do influencing slightly the course of the overall battle. I wouldn't want it over in minutes if I've spend a long time, as GM, building up the scene and having the PCs talk to the besieged people etc. etc.


Also: unrelated, but I always thought it would be awesome to have mass combat rules that tie into the rules for Swarms (since these are basically "units" of rats or fire ants or scarab beetles or whatever). I don't know of any system that does that, though.

When I used them in Necessary Evil, we used the Mass Combat rules straight (which allow for abstracted rolls by the PCs that affect the overall success or failure of their side)...but when one of the PCs caught up with one of the major bad guys, we went to the normal rules to resolve that.

Playing great in game.

Human Light Infantry Swarm

HP 100
AC 13
Damage 3d8+3

Human Heavy Infantry Swarm

HP 110
AC 18
Damage 3d8+3

Swarms can't be healed. When the swarm is reduced to zero hp, it disperses.

This could be kinda awesome for a game of D&D / Pathfinder where the players are strong enough to fight whole groups anyway.

Of course a group of 50 guys has way more HP than 100 if you are fighting to a man, but sense most units will break up once they lose about 10% of their force, this works just fine.

You could also have elite units with say, 500 HP because they hold together almost no matter what.

In gaming terms, Ive always tried to keep mass combats abstract and free-flowing. By showing the enemy armies as a series of relevant coloured D6 dice, and the hero armies a different colour.
 
The number on the dice represents the health and effectiveness of the unit, with bigger value dice D8+.
 
Dice rolls to determine battle flow, outcomes, wins and losses is a random mix of Risk Boardgame mechanics and just "roll the dice".
 
It worked very effectively for my Pendragon campaign.

Quote from: Cranewings;444808Human Light Infantry Swarm...

Interesting translation of the idea into 3.5! I actually wanted to do it the other way around, design mass combat rules first and then have swarms work off of that, but I guess it could work.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;444821Interesting translation of the idea into 3.5! I actually wanted to do it the other way around, design mass combat rules first and then have swarms work off of that, but I guess it could work.

I'm running Pathfinder E6 right now. The party is first level right now but it really isn't much of a climb to 6th. I've been thinking about making this game into a super hero game.

So anyway, next week, they are meeting their first super villain. An infernal, ogre blooded sorcerer with super strength who comes riding into town on a magic disk, breathing fire and fire balls all over the gate guard and making his way to the castle. "Rid this city of clergy mortals and I may yet let you live."

So the people panic and start butchering priests. The PCs need to protect their own cleric, maybe save some in the market, and if they are feeling extra lovely, make their way to the temple district and help people there. I'm probably going to use the human swarm rules for mobs of 0 level commoners.

Angry Mob

HP 20
AC 10
Strike +0
Damage 1d4 + Grab

It's going to depend on
(1) what range of approaches your taste allows
(2) how significant the battle is

The first edition of C&S presented a full set of miniatures rules, and OD&D had both Chainmail and Swords & Spells. Even if a spectacular wargame is feasible and desirable for the most major events, though, it might not be what one wants all the time.

King Arthur Pendragon has rules focusing on the knight's experience leading troops in the fray, going from one 'encounter' to another.

The BECMI D&D Companion set (and the Rules Cyclopedia) includes the War Machine system that takes a very high-level view, producing a quick mathematical assessment. The Master set adds sieges, and one of the Gazetteer releases adds naval rules.

The hex-and-chit strategic game got at least a couple of D&D versions, one for Dragonlance (which also got an Axis & Allies style game) and one for Mystara (depicting the War of the Master referred to in Master of the Desert Nomads and Temple of Death).

With the exception of pendragon, I usually try to keep my large-scale combats fairly abstract.

RPGPundit