War in table top RPG's?

[Kroack]

There's no evil dictator at all. Hehe.

[ristarr]

I think the best way to find out about how to add warfare in an RPG would be to contribute to a new ransom for a campaign setting about war in a fantasy environment.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/rosspayton/codex-of-war-a-new-world-4e-dandd-campaign-setting

[Kroack]

I think the best way to find out about how to add warfare in an RPG would be to contribute to a new ransom for a campaign setting about war in a fantasy environment.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/rosspayton/codex-of-war-a-new-world-4e-dandd-campaign-setting

Interforum advertising ftw!!

[Setherick]

I think the best way to find out about how to add warfare in an RPG would be to contribute to a new ransom for a campaign setting about war in a fantasy environment.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/rosspayton/codex-of-war-a-new-world-4e-dandd-campaign-setting

Interforum advertising ftw!!

That's right and with $871 left to go in the ransom. You guys need to open up your wallets and break out those credit cards. And then tell two friends and have them do the same. And those two friends, tell two more.

[nbneil]

The Hard Boiled Armies supplement over at RPGNow was pretty helpful for giving some ideas on running wars in D&D.  It's pretty obvious, but had some good hints.  I used it in our New World campaign for one of the battles and with some tweaking think it could be pretty cool.  It's mostly about some flavor text and modifying a few of the mechanics.  I'll probably use it again to have some tactical battles on a larger scale.  Hopefully it goes smoothly next time.

[sarendt]

The reason military sci-fi is basically retreads of WW2 with sci-fi dressing is because military sci-fi fans have huge boners for WW2 and will never get sick of re-reading the battle of the bulge but with robots.


That's a goddamned dirty lie.

All of my RPG battles have been retreads of the Battle of the Five Armies.


trap sprung

LOTR is WW2

I believe it was WWI... Tolkien was in WWI, wrote alot of the foundation for the similarion while in the trench's, or so I am told via the history of the LoTR stuff...

The Hard Boiled Armies supplement over at RPGNow was pretty helpful for giving some ideas on running wars in D&D.  It's pretty obvious, but had some good hints.  I used it in our New World campaign for one of the battles and with some tweaking think it could be pretty cool.  It's mostly about some flavor text and modifying a few of the mechanics.  I'll probably use it again to have some tactical battles on a larger scale.  Hopefully it goes smoothly next time.

Details?  Which hints stand out?  What were the mechanism's that they suggest changing? 

What did your players think of the battle?  Could you describe how the battle was played out?  Did you use tons of Mini's or just draw stuff on a map? 

-Scott

[Sean-o-tron]

As a tangent, the newest episode of The Bear Swarm! Podcast is about mass combat.  It's mostly them brandishing huge chubbies for Legend of the 5 Rings' mass combat system, but there's still some interesting bits.

[Tadanori Oyama]

As a tangent, the newest episode of The Bear Swarm! Podcast is about mass combat.  It's mostly them brandishing huge chubbies for Legend of the 5 Rings' mass combat system, but there's still some interesting bits.

Didn't know it had one. I should probably read the book, since I own it and all.

Alot of games where leadership is a major focus have mass combat rules, Exalted and Warcraft being the two that I've read through.

And there is Reign, the One Roll Engine game where you play national leaders. I haven't gotten that book yet (though I will) but I imagine one has to deal with army level combat in that setting.

[sarendt]

And there is Reign, the One Roll Engine game where you play national leaders. I haven't gotten that book yet (though I will) but I imagine one has to deal with army level combat in that setting.

If you get a chance to read any of those, I would enjoy hearing your thoughts about them.

-Scott

[sarendt]

As a tangent, the newest episode of The Bear Swarm! Podcast is about mass combat.  It's mostly them brandishing huge chubbies for Legend of the 5 Rings' mass combat system, but there's still some interesting bits.

Just finished this podcast, I was impressed, I enjoyed their points and the detail of why they liked one way or another.  I would recomend this to anyone who is interested in adding a bit of 'War' into you game.

-Scott

[Tadanori Oyama]

So what exactly are you looking for with war? There's mechanically expressing battle and tactics in a game system and then there's replicating the emotional and mental state of the civilization currently involved in a war. The two methods of play are very different, though they can be used together.

[sarendt]

So what exactly are you looking for with war? There's mechanically expressing battle and tactics in a game system and then there's replicating the emotional and mental state of the civilization currently involved in a war. The two methods of play are very different, though they can be used together.

I am looking for both, defiently used togeather.  To me a war is not something one could drop into a game, not very realisticly at least.  The article I started with reviews some of the ideas that there is a 'TON' of stuff that goes into waging war.  Troops need to be massed, trainned, outfitted, moved to the 'front' and then resupplied and fed.  This shouldn't happen in a vacuum, even if its happening hundred of miles away the rumors should be flying!

On the other side, towns that aren't on the front would be missing major man power, they should simply 'feel' different if the players have been there.  Possibly there should be funerals going on if the war has been going on for a while.  Town folk with amutated limbs should be wandering the land. Towns on the front could have nearly no one in them, folk would tend to move away lest they and their family get killed or captured.  Some buildings would be looted destroyed possibly.

Creating a war in a game world I believe could be a great addition to the background of the game, even if the players don't choose to be involved much.  If it is developed slowly and the players get to hear both sides point of view maybe thier isn't a wrong side, individual players could choose different sides to side with.  Just moving around the country side would be more of a challenge as passing through one sides lines could be a whole encounter in it self, to roleplay or fight as the players choose.

Does that help explain what I am looking for?  I have lots of ideas, I just wanted to expand my ideas and maybe include some real play examples to base the ideas off of.

-Scott

[sarendt]

Some more thoughts I had.

If the players are involved with the war, how do their actions effect the outcome of it?  There are simple answers, in a given battle, if they fight and do well that battle goes well, less cassulties on that side etc.

What if the players have to choose from multiple options.  Go to this town and help hold the bridge there, or travel to that mountain pass and hold it. Sneak behind enemy lines and harass the enemies supply lines, capture a general from the other side and return him to our side.  

If the war is dynamic, the situation should change regularly, each desision the players make leads to a new battle field with new tactical options, with new benifits and challenges from the last time they looked, so to speak.

An example:  The players choose to help defend the town so to prevent civilian casulties, thus the mountain pass has been takin and reinforced with a hastiliy built fort, but the players managed to recruit more troops from the town they saved so they have a little more resources to work with.  Having preserved the bridge gives the players the option of moving behind enemy lines, but they must move out quickly before the enemy closes the gap.  The general that was moving forward with his troops because they were winning now feels unsafe and moves his command tent to a much more secure location.

The more I think about it, as the GM, you need to have a fairly complicated set of situations built to handle the first few desicion points the players make and still keep things moving.  Making a flow chart seems like a reasonable idea for the war and the choices the players make.

-Scott

**modified for sig

[clockworkjoe]

Reign is the best RPG for organizational shit like war (or political intrigue, civil war, etc)

It scales from lowly street gangs to world shaking nations.

Each organization (company in the game's parlance) has its own stats like a character

Battles are fought as opposed rolls - but characters can influence the rolls with specific missions

sneak into the enemy camp and burn a few wagons of supplies - gives the enemy a penalty to their roll for hte next battle

Set up a clever plan to trap the enemy - big bonus on the next battle roll


In short, Reign is amazing and the best fantasy rpg to tackle shit like that

[Tadanori Oyama]

I follow but you have to pick one to really bring out to the front. It's like the show mentioned with emphasis on other subjects: if you try to emphasis everything than you're actually emphasizing nothing. If your players are actually fighting the war as soldiers then they'll see the front lines, deal in small scale combat, and be able to see some of the effects of the war if they move from one conflict area to another.

If your players are directing the war from higher up then they won't be experiencing the war first hand in the same way, they'll deal in mass combat, and will be able to see the more complex issues beyond the front lines due to their more distant perspective.

You could make the players front line officers and try to blend the two. This is, in my opinion, extremely likely to overwhelm the players.


Well now I want to pick up Reign even more.