This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

B/X (or similar) combat with lotsa participants

Started by languagegeek, April 10, 2013, 04:40:00 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages1 2 3
User actions

languagegeek

April 10, 2013, 04:40:00 PM
I'm running a Labyrinth Lord game and we're getting close to the end. The players have made allies with four different groups and have amassed quite a bunch of warriors. So it looks like there will be some kind of battle with appx 50–70 combatants on each side.

Any suggestions on how to run this? Are there OSR games close enough to B/X that I could swipe out a combat system that manages quick'n'easily these kinds of numbers? I'd like the PCs' parts of the battle to be zoomed in while the rest of it goes on in the background.

Thanks

gleichman

#1
April 10, 2013, 04:43:39 PM
People are always bragging about how quick combat is in B/X, how long would it take to handle 70 combatants per side?

How long to you want to take to handle 70 combatants per side?
Whitehall Paraindustries- A blog about RPG Theory and Design

"The purpose of an open mind is to close it, on particular subjects. If you never do — you\'ve simply abdicated the responsibility to think." - William F. Buckley.

languagegeek

#2
April 10, 2013, 04:53:45 PM
Quote from: gleichman;644774How long to you want to take to handle 70 combatants per side?
It's less a question of how long than how interesting. 140 d20 rolls per round tracking AC, HP, and # To-Hit will get stale fast.

gleichman

#3
April 10, 2013, 04:58:32 PM
Quote from: languagegeek;644776It's less a question of how long than how interesting. 140 d20 rolls per round tracking AC, HP, and # To-Hit will get stale fast.

How many d20 rolls per round tracking AC, HP and # To-Hit aren't boring?
Whitehall Paraindustries- A blog about RPG Theory and Design

"The purpose of an open mind is to close it, on particular subjects. If you never do — you\'ve simply abdicated the responsibility to think." - William F. Buckley.

SineNomine

#4
April 10, 2013, 04:59:20 PM
Quote from: languagegeek;644776It's less a question of how long than how interesting. 140 d20 rolls per round tracking AC, HP, and # To-Hit will get stale fast.
Just break them into like units of 10-14 and run them as if they were single monsters. D&D's most ubiquitous combat mechanics were derived from Chainmail wargaming anyway, so it's trivial to just turn the clock back a little.
Other Dust, a standalone post-apocalyptic companion game to Stars Without Number.
Stars Without Number, a free retro-inspired sci-fi game of interstellar adventure.
Red Tide, a Labyrinth Lord-compatible sandbox toolkit and campaign setting

K Peterson

#5
April 10, 2013, 06:34:12 PM
One option is the D&D Companion Set (or Rules Cyclopedia) War Machine rules. I'm not sure how enjoyable they'll be, because you'll have to do a number of calculations to get each force's Battle Rating, and then potentially take into account battlefield variables. But perhaps you can make it interesting by engaging the PCs in some set-piece battles ("heroic actions" against monsters or high-level opponents), or having them perform some tactical recon, to potentially shift the results of the battle in their favor.

flyingcircus

#6
April 10, 2013, 07:01:17 PM
I would just use Hordes of the Thing by WRG at least that's what I do, if you have the 15mm fantasy figures, if not, you can always use cardboard squares with troop pictures on them, I've done that in a pinch as well.
Current Games I Am GMing:  HarnMaster (HarnWorld)
Games I am Playing In None.

RPGNet the place Fascists hangout and live.
"The multitude of books is making us ignorant" - Voltaire.
"Love truth, pardon error" - Voltaire.
"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" - Voltaire.

Exploderwizard

#7
April 10, 2013, 07:18:12 PM
What are the forces like? Are we talking 50-70 high level/HD opponents per side or several high level opponents and lots of fodder?
Quote from: JonWakeGamers, as a whole, are much like primitive cavemen when confronted with a new game. Rather than \'oh, neat, what\'s this do?\', the reaction is to decide if it\'s a sex hole, then hit it with a rock.

Quote from: Old Geezer;724252At some point it seems like D&D is going to disappear up its own ass.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;766997In the randomness of the dice lies the seed for the great oak of creativity and fun. The great virtue of the dice is that they come without boxed text.

The Traveller

#8
April 10, 2013, 07:23:53 PM
Quote from: K Peterson;644810One option is the D&D Companion Set (or Rules Cyclopedia) War Machine rules.
Oh yeah I remember those, the most dangerous type of soldier within that system was a well trained leather clad spearman with a shield.
"These children are playing with dark and dangerous powers!"
"What else are you meant to do with dark and dangerous powers?"
A concise overview of GNS theory.
Quote from: that muppet vince baker on RPGsIf you care about character arcs or any, any, any lit 101 stuff, I\'d choose a different game.

languagegeek

#9
April 10, 2013, 08:34:38 PM
Quote from: Exploderwizard;644818What are the forces like? Are we talking 50-70 high level/HD opponents per side or several high level opponents and lots of fodder?

Several mid level opponents and lots of 1 or 2 HD fodder.

estar

#10
April 10, 2013, 09:23:43 PM
Quote from: SineNomine;644778Just break them into like units of 10-14 and run them as if they were single monsters. D&D's most ubiquitous combat mechanics were derived from Chainmail wargaming anyway, so it's trivial to just turn the clock back a little.

Pretty much what I do except I break them down into logical fights so a area with 14 fighters is treated as a unit, another area may have a group of 6 and so on.

Exploderwizard

#11
April 11, 2013, 08:58:42 AM
Quote from: languagegeek;644834Several mid level opponents and lots of 1 or 2 HD fodder.

If you have very much in the way of magical support, the fodder will be toast after a round or two anyway then the numbers will be more manageable.

One way to do it is to concentrate on the main members of each group, and base the outcome of the fodder war on how well the leaders are doing. For example if there are 10 or so leaders per side and one side loses 2 and the other 4 members after a couple rounds then apply those casualty ratios to the rest of the force.
Quote from: JonWakeGamers, as a whole, are much like primitive cavemen when confronted with a new game. Rather than \'oh, neat, what\'s this do?\', the reaction is to decide if it\'s a sex hole, then hit it with a rock.

Quote from: Old Geezer;724252At some point it seems like D&D is going to disappear up its own ass.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;766997In the randomness of the dice lies the seed for the great oak of creativity and fun. The great virtue of the dice is that they come without boxed text.

KenHR

#12
April 11, 2013, 11:22:06 AM
Morale rules will also do a lot to make a combat take a lot less time.
For fuck\'s sake, these are games, people.

And no one gives a fuck about your ignore list.


Gompan
band - other music

Bill

#14
April 11, 2013, 12:11:06 PM
Quote from: SineNomine;644778Just break them into like units of 10-14 and run them as if they were single monsters. D&D's most ubiquitous combat mechanics were derived from Chainmail wargaming anyway, so it's trivial to just turn the clock back a little.

This works well if many of the combatants are nearly identical.
Print
Go Up Pages1 2 3
User actions