Professor Dungeonmaster shows how to run D&D mass combat the fast, easy way. Patreon: / dungeoncraftyoutube Dungeoncraft Facebook : / 1620296361377654 Music: "Fury of the Dragon's Breath" by Peter Crowley Bandcamp : petercrowley.ba...
Another great source for ideas is the historically influenced fiction manga Kingdom, which is remarkably similar to the Illiad in how it is lays out stories of combat and war, but with more visuals. You know, because it is manga. Broadly, it focuses on individuals and their experiences in their unit, while periodically giving us a larger view to contextualize what is going on, but then focussing back in to points where indivudals, often great generals from history, clashing against one another.
@@deanlol Yes. Wikipedia: "Kingdom (キングダム Kingudamu) is a Japanese seinen manga series written and illustrated by Yasuhisa Hara. The manga provides a fictionalized account of the Warring States period primarily through the experiences of the war orphan Xin and his comrades as he fights to become the greatest general under the heavens, and in doing so, unifying China for the first time in 500 years."
Best way to describe it was if the Illiad and the Paradox studios video game Mount and Blade had a chinese baby. The way the battles are laid out, especially what tactics are used here and there, are a perfect opportunity to use the phase framework laid out in this video, providing major descriptive moments and skirmish possibilities galore.
Personally, I'd use modifiers to die rolls rather than extra dice. Easier to control the probability that way, with 5% increments. Then I'd make it clear that what the players do in game will affect the modifier that applies to the final battle. So they'd have to go on adventures to build the army, arm the army, fortify the base, whatever. Tougher adventures get bigger bonuses in the final battle. Then at the battle, the skirmishes would be a second opportunity to earn more bonuses. All of these adventures and skirmishes could have lose conditions that don't involve PC death, so if the players fail it just means lower chances of success in the final battle.
I was thinking modifiers as well, or possibly more dice but not more d20s. Probably d6s' or maybe set up goals for the PC's where possible and depending on how well or poorly things go for them the modifier dice could range from d4's-d8's. Things like greater numbers could offer Advantage, but then terrain could counter that with Disadvantage.
@@mandodelorian4668 This is exactly what I do! With added rules based loosely off of the Trojan War RPG and Testament RPG mass combat rules from Green Ronin if I need more rules or detailed combat. Narrate the combat- set up skirmishes that earn bonus dice- and go from there. Keep it fast and focused on the PC's. I don't let PC's get killed in the 'battles' that are narrated so I don't have them make death saves. Not the way I want my PC's to die (Unless its agreed upon beforehand for an epic story death). The PC's are rockstars- so they will either get away, captured and ransomed etc. Makes for another great 'skirmish' battle to escape! Helps grow their names and standing as well!
Thank you for showing us your method. Once again, I am grateful for your videos. As for my technic for mass combat, I now use Risk's mechanic because I enjoy the idea of adding another layer to victory: major victory or a minor one. On a major defeat, the army will most often retreat unless they have something to defend. Or at least make up sturdier defenses for the next day. On a minor defeat, the army might just lose ground or lose an important pawn on the board. I like any technic that helps me make up things along, that drives my creativity while GMing! :D
I recently ran a mass combat session, before seeing this video. As mentioned in this video, the players rejected the premise because they didn't feel their characters would command a troop. They instead carried out covert objectives to tip the scales, before the war started. They also played as commander NPCs, for the actual battle... so I could play test my concept. I abstracted the concept of a troop, and applied D&D combat stats for familiarity. HP were the number of men a single unit had (I chose 10), AC was the avg AC of the unit (no bonuses), and a graph square equaled 30' with a unit being able to move 30' unless they used move action in place of attack. There were other nuances, but it was somewhat simple and received well. I like the suggestions in this video, though. I felt my solution was still a little too much, in terms of rules and manageability. I think I'll blend the two approaches more.
This is easily my favorite video of yours because I LOVE the idea of a small group of players who can wade through armies and army busting is a cooler spectacle than dragon slaying. But I never really got into warhammer (even tho it has kickass lore) ever since I started 5e like 3 years ago I was trying to have my campaigns do at least 1 or 2 player VS army encounters because In the beginning I was keeping CR Ranges low to familiarize myself. I play online so it’s really easy to put 500 miniatures on the screen by copy/pasting I used a mix of 4e minions and a “mob dice” cleaving system of my own design so that the fighter would roll like 3d10 on their turn (a d10 per attack) and could slay 20 on their turn with good rolls and keep parity against the wizard/sorc fireball spam. By the end each of them could count off slaying like 2-400 enemies after a 5 hour session and we felt pretty cathartic about the body piles... but 1500 kills as we know is a really small ass army in fantasy, luckily for me I had 5 “hack n slash” player types who LOVED that system and how They could maximize by positioning themselves amidst the mob as I would mass delete tokens off the screen as the level 12 Polearm Master sprinted in a straight line flourishing their weapons reach! More recently, I have used the Monster Manual swarm rules and just said “This Bigass Token is 500 Soldiers” and the party would battle it similarlly to a tarrasqe and it’d have like 250 hit points that they could easily spam top tier damage at and kill it in a few rounds, put like 10 of those down and they slay 5000 abstractly in about 1/3rd of the time as the mob dice system. The campaign I did that for had more Thespian and Roleplay characters so they LOVED this system But when it comes to Army VS Army, I made the mistakes of Rolling out allllllllllllll their bullshit, bullshit that no one really cares about the nitty gritty of. I’ve come to a similar system as you, except I use d100s that I roll every round or so,m and just narrate the battle that unfolds around them, similar to a monsters lair actions if one side rolls exceptionally high then reinforcements go to the players vice versa. But i certainly will take that Transition Saving throws idea! Because it’ll really help the next siege scene I have in mind. nowadays, i do not have the time to be as indepth and mathematic as i was 3 years ago, and frankly dont care to be. Man i really ranted passionately on this but thanks again for this video and thanks anyone who care to read or skim through this onslaught of text.
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 way to spoil that new Netflix movie, professor. And I only had a 1/2hr left to watch! On a serious note, bravo for an elegant solution to mass combat. I love it
just in time for my arch’s big conclusion next week 🙏🏻 i was going to do something similar but you always manage to make it seem more structured than what is in my head. thanks again for your masterful advice
This video was validating. I have been using similar rules for mass combat. If there are more NPCs than PCs in a battle, I roll for each side at the start of each round. I will have pairs of NPCs engaged with one another, and remove one from the table for each failed roll. Unpaired models will look for another enemy to base next round, and players usually fight the unengaged models first. This way, the PCs have to deal with fewer enemies if their side is winning the battle, and vice versa. Fast and dynamic, and my players don't get bored watching me do maths.
This honestly your greatest video. Crisp clean and everything makes sense. You've captured all the best elements of combat with your skermish but with the dice rolling with the d20 at the end is perfect because it allows the players to see that yeah you may be a badass but your still one guy there's a greater conflict at hand. Bravo 👍
Thanks for saying so. It's scenes like that that take me a couple hours to set up & film. It can get frustrating and I wonder if it's worth the extra effort. So this comment has made a big impact on my decisions moving forward. Cheers!
I do it like normal combat close to the players, but where they aren’t, I use the battle mechanic from *Lathan’s Gold* (a solo module for the first version of D&D). I had to write the charts by hand since I don’t have the book, and there’s a lot of looking at the charts when calculating, but it works. Only goes to 150 attackers and 150 defenders though, and I didn’t want to calculate more columns for more attackers/defenders. So when there’s, let’s say, 1200 fighters on each side, I calculate 150 of them first, then the next 150 etc. until I’ve done all of them. Edit: To make it not so repeatable, I decide AC and all that based on the army, or just roll a die if I haven’t decided. So even if one part is winning, three other parts of that army could be losing because they have an AC of 2 (I never changed their AC to 5e’s AC numbers, it’s still from 0-8 because I’m lazy)
You mentioned the FB grp. I went to join the other day but noticed it's a public grp. For whatever reason I don't like joining public FB grps no matter the hobby. Maybe it's just me and my idiosyncrasies but I'm guessing I'm not alone. Something to ponder. (for both of us?) Good vid, as always, PDM.
Really like this video thanks. One thing to increase the sense of control/impact the players feel they have might be to give them a choice of objectives with differing difficulties and bonuses to the battle roll. For example. "there is a small group of artillery on the western flank to get to it you'll have to get through 1 skermish (extra roll of the initial combat die) taking this out would give your side a minor advantage (+1 on the battle roll), alternatively you can see the enemy general at the back of his army but you think you can see a way through (optional perception or intelligence roll?) to get there you'll have to go through a lot of troops (3 skirmishes adapted by the degree of success of the perception roll) and it'll be a tough fight when you get there but if you manage to take him out it could turn the tide of the battle (+5 to +10 on the battle roll). If you want to go longer give the armies hit points and dice based on this (EG. 1d20 per thousand men/hp)
I think Matt Cloville is doing something along these lines for a more elegant (read complicated) system that is linked to forces the player made and likely will care about. But I agree that is is hard to a merger of RPG and Wargame. It was hard with Mechwarrior and Battletech game working together to make a story that was really good.
Your no non-sense approach to everything is great! The biggest take-away I have from all your videos is that COMPLEX doesn't equate to better. As someone who started gaming with the blue box basic set of Dungeons & Dragons I'm happy to see this philosophy.
This is pretty good timing for me. I really like the way you approached this. I have done the fog of war approach in the past and find that really works well. Great topic.
This is exactly what I was looking for after scratching my head thinking about how to integrate a block wargame into my campaign, this will work better. Oh and take it from me gonorrhea is a huge disadvantage
This is Outstanding I am definitely going to be incorporating these ideas into my own game. For the longest time I've been scratching my head about how to do mass battles in a meaningful and logical way. Prof DM has come up with a really fun, simple and logical way to determine what happens in Warfare . Thank you!
You guys need some Savage Worlds. Ive tried almost everything out there, and it’s quick Mass Battle system creates the most cinematic and rewarding RPG battles I have ever experienced.
I usually like crunch in my battles, but I really like your system. It's fast, easy and flexible, kind of like my girlfriend. Great videos keep up the great work. Every time I think I have seen all your vids, others pop up. I love it.
This is exactly what I do but I let the PC's earn dice that can affect the main battle through their skirmish battles. With added rules based loosely off of the Trojan War RPG and Testament RPG mass combat rules from Green Ronin IF I need more rules or detailed combat. Narrate the combat- set up skirmishes that earn bonus dice- and go from there. Keep it fast and focused on the PC's. I don't let PC's get killed in the 'battles' that are narrated so I don't have them make death saves. Not the way I want my PC's to die (Unless its agreed upon beforehand for an epic story death). The PC's are rockstars- so they will either get away, captured and ransomed etc. Makes for another great 'skirmish' battle to escape! Helps grow their names and standing as well!
Well, I don't know, it feels way too simple and with no player agency wich is something I like to give to my players, So one idea would be to make the skirmishes "loosable" even if characters dont die, so for example in the "Killing the orc warchief" skirmish he might be able to flee if players don't get there on a given number of rounds or reinforcements may come to aid the warchief and make the characters retreat. Given that, give a +1 ti the characters for every skirmish they win and -1 for every skirmish they lose (or more depending on the importance of the skirmish and by how much they won/lost) to the final roll. Ideally I would also give the characters the chance to choose which skirmish to take but that's a whole lot of work for the DM depending on how you deal with encounters.
If the GM was willing to put in the work, they could even provide players with more difficult skirmishes in which to engage that provide a greater bonus to the final die roll. "You can take the hill and provide reconnaissance for a +1, or you can flank the rear guard and attack the battle wizard for a +2!"
Punish them for not caring! Make the army mutiny after/during the fight if it gets bad enough. Make there be consequences. Even if it happens 1-2 weeks later, in a tavern/camp while everyone is resting and retreating from a trailing enemy force. You could even have multiple factions within the camp fight during the attempted coup. There could be loyalists like bodyguards, servants, captains, commanders, etc. This would add a LOT more spice to a campaign, even giving a reason for level 20 characters to continue. You can work your way up to riches, but also get smacked back down to rags. This would also encourage players to have back up plans, escape routes, bug out bags, etc. There is SO much potential for large scale war in D&D. While games like WH40k focus on winning the games, D&D offers an opportunity to explore options of winning through diplomacy, tactics, and moral. It would be a far more interesting campaign if your teams rogue led a squad of rogues behind enemy lines to poison their food, or steal supplies, or plant an enchanted scroll that opens a portal summoning one head of Takhisis. Adding that D&D flavor to the traditional strategy war games D&D was inspired from. Plus if you lose, being chased by your former soldiers make for a spicy twist in a campaign. They could even pop up as bandits a year+ later after a failed coup. Bandit armies were basically how many warlords got so dangerous throughout history.
I like having small skirmish encounters with objectives that impact on the final result. Advantage is a fast way of resolving the outcome without getting bogged down too much in the details. I might go as far as designating different coloured dice for each section of the larger force to see which one pulled their weight and which ones swung the battle. Mass combat rules in basic D&D companion rules are the best ive seen but require a little crunching of numbers prior to the battle to determine the forces battle rating and has similarities to your advantage system as bonuses can stack for a superior army or one in a fortification but your system is simpler and has more story/narrative flexibility where you just can describe what happens without referring to tables for %casualties for each side.
One of my favorite channels...can't disagree more though. Massive battles like you described at the beginning are among the best, if not THE best sessions we've ever had. There was one that lasted three sessions, it was between two player characters. Each gathered allies and plotted against each other for the entire arc. I used a skill challenge that granted them certain advantages for the eventual battle. The actual battle is what lasted three sessions, momentum going back and forth and ultimately ending in a fight with just a handful of characters still alive (including the other player characters). We talk about the Battle of Isseldor every time we're together. It was 10 years ago. That takes a very seasoned, patient and invested group though. For casual, newer players in a campaign that's only going to last a year or so - this simplified system is FANTASTIC.
@@daniellugo6461 Thanks, it was fun! Advantages would be stuff like better equipment for units, more units (like convincing minor lords to help your cause), control of an advantageous geographical feature and finally, determining mechanics of their "traps" (hidden ditches, secret seige engines, tar on the battle field etc) Laid out the mini's but implemented some minion rules - 1 hit dead, 2 or 3 hits for better units. Main characters had HP's
I am an ardent fan, and player, of 2e's BattleSystem game, as well as 2e's BattleSystem Skirmish rules (mini's game with a thin veneer of RPG over the top). The mass battles rules of 2e BattleSystem is a totally different game than the RPG... I enjoy both, for very different reasons. I've run a couple of RPG-based mass battles, on the tabletop, using BS rules. Great fun, but everyone who plays understands that it is a different game, even though the results are used in the RPG campaign. A fellow DM has done the same, several times, incorporating the results into the RPG campaign, after the results are known. It works for us... The RPG players are also mini's enthusiasts, so it is all good. As a DM with 39 years of experience, I've taken your tact many a time: simplify a very complex role playing situation, reducing it down to a simple, few die rolls. Had two players go off to a month-long merchants' fair, 100+ leagues away, by ship, leaving the other two players behind. Rather than role play the whole mess (one Paladin competing in jousting/fighting tournaments, and a thief plying his trade of pick-pocketing, for 30 game days...), I rolled some dice to determine their success: both were ridiculously successful. Then I said, "There is a chance of a catastrophic storm, on the voyage home, which could sink the ship, killing everyone. I'll give it an Ought-Five chance. I'll roll it in front of you..." "*Ought-Five, exactly!*" [Both players screamed:] "NOOOooo!!! Are you KIDDING me?!?!" It's been a running joke for around 15 years now, and counting, "Ought-Five chance, and, 'No', I won't roll it in front of you..." LOL! Too much fun! Cheers!
Really inspired me. I think I'd like it to be a little bit less random, so may roll 1d20 per side, and an advantage such as a dragon or healthier army adds 1d4 to your base roll. That way its the same ammount of dice, but bad luck won't cancel out having a larger force as the highest and lowest threshold has changed, but the ammount of dice rolled and reasons for rolling them remain the same.
1st edition had loyalty rolls. Mistreat the henchmen and hirelings. Then, players should expect a large number of NPCs that will become rebellious, saboteurs, or go AWOL. That army your party is hiking towards. That now makes your party that many fewer for them to kill. What is worse is your army might be more powerful than the army you intend to battle. Because that is why you brought them along in the first place. Your henchmen should be the lieutenants, and one is the captain. If the captain gives orders concerning the hirelings. You best follow the captains lead or leadership conflicts will emerge. The captain is the voice of the NPC army, and knows your appetite for risk exceeds the will of ordinary men.
I've thought of this topic many times. Basically came to the similar conclusion of coming down to dice. I have thought of one other scenario that I given some serious thought. To keep it simple 100% orcs 100% good guys elves, dwarves whatever. The first roll takes 25% of the army that lost the roll. So now it's 75% orcs and 100% good guys. Another roll 25% losses to the army of whoever loses etc. The point being that during the battle, things could sway to either side. So for example say it's now 75% orcs and 25% good guys. DM to players...what do you do? Keep fighting? Go for reinforcements? Run from the battle to the nearest good guys stronghold? And mind you...the good guys are losing, so there are orcs still everywhere. Do you try and get through enemy lines? Which basically ends the battle according to the dice, and brings the story back to the players. I never thought of your stages where it brings it back to the players sooner. I like that. What do you think? Good video, and an interesting topic. Thanks Prof. Cheers!!
Arthurian RPG? Did someone say "Pendragon"? I've not checked out the latest edition, but my old one had pretty simple mass combat rules baked in. Along with things like knightly tournaments.
I have never run a battle with 1000s or 10,000s of troops but I like an idea I saw from another DM. Break the factions into equal sized groups, like 1000 men x 10 groups for a 10,000 man army paired off with a similar number of orcs (e.g. 8 groups of 1000 orcs each). Then have each unit roll to 1d20 hit, modified if needed. It they hit, they do 1 HD of damage of damage. In this example every hit would eliminate a unit entirely unless it was full of elite soldiers. After round 1, it should be about 25% causalities and will resolve quickly after that. It is a lot more rolls than what he is suggesting, but my players like battles and this takes 10 minutes of real time to complete.
Love it. I would play with it by giving the players more (or the enrmy less) dice for each skirmish that they complete successfully. Also, small battles can come down to one single dice roll at the end, but big epic wars at the end of campaigns could be best 2 out of 3.
How i have Done large combat is just do make it into a cinematic. And the end resault is already decided, like human Army vs monsters, now the humans Will win even if the players do nothing. But the losses Will be 70-80% for the humans. And there are more monsters out their. But durring the discribtion of the battle i give them oppertunites to act and aid the Army, like throw spells on the balistas making them larger, killing more giant monsters and therefor saving 10% more add a few of these where the humans have 80-90% remaining forces instead of Only 20-30%. Now Also give the players a chance to prep, like placing traps, assasinate enemy commanders, poison water supplies, or even summon weather in their favor. And in combat all units have 1hp except bigger ones they get like 3 and each attack Only does 1 damage, and a crit could be 2 or even 3 damage if they plan it out.
I remember moving someone's house on a hot summer day where they had no electricity. And going from the sun to the shade and watching the sun go down I realized the nightmare of an opponent who can make or break camp without campfires and who can march at speed or even launch attacks at night. Orcs get a d20 if attacking near dusk or at night.
I like a lot of your videos and this one like many is well made and love it big fan but as an avid war gamer and rpger I hate this but that's mine and my players opinion we do like you said is add warhammer rules or use the MCDM mass combat where you can have your armies fight as your players can attack the bosses but we are all avid wargamers more than we are rpgers so that's just our opinion love ya man keep making videos
You stare across the battlefield at the thousands of orcs in file. The orcs bang their long pikes against the ground...then realize they marched hundreds of miles carrying the dumb things for a castle siege.(players +1d20) The orcs swear as one, as your hear the clatter of a thousand pikes hit the ground at the same time. Doh!
Ogre dysentery, is happening in my next game! Totally using this system in my current campaign when the players reach the point of a mass battle which will be soon.
An excellent video! I’ve been thinking about trying to integrate the TSR Dragon Dice as a war element for my game but this seems to be much much easier to handle. I can see some tweaks but honestly, it provides bedrock to move forward from.
For true mass combat I prefer to adapt the rules from FGU's Bushido RPG. It is easily scale-able from tens to thousands of troops in the field and the PC's actions can have a direct impact on the outcome of the overall battle, if they survive.
Max out at 15 HP?!?! This is extremely intriguing to me! Could you please explain this a little more in depth and your thought process on this house rule or point me in the direction on the vid that will? Thank you!
I like this idea. I tried once (and only once) to have a large epic battle in D&D. It sucked - lots of dice rolling and record keeping. Totally lost the effect I was going for. With this system I can see an actual military campaign taking place. The Hero's preforming valiant assaults or staunch defensive actions to gain the +1 on a successful encounter or -1 on a failure for the battles final outcome. The PC should feel that their actions had an effect on the overall battle.
Great stuff, Professor! A future video request: how do you adapt Shakespeare to D&D? I'm in King Lear this winter, and it's got me itching to play some Shakespearean D&D!
What if your players have to traverse through a large-scale battle, to get to a smaller scale, battle within the same war, to cut the head off the snake?
I image-searched “CMON orc”, looks like they might be from a board game called Zombicide Green Horde? I never found orcs particularly interesting but these models / PDM’s paint job and especially his Orc Lair video make me wanna run something with them!
Great video. Btw ive constructed my own version of your patented Ultamate Dungeon Tile and im having some trouble keeping my home made saw dust flocking attached after massive use at many game table and many many players so far. I used the polyurethane seal at the end and an glue all coating but still some peices fall of here and there. I love the idea thank you for coming up with it. Any thoughts on how i could make it more durable would be appropriated.
Shake it off outside. Add more glue. The result is it may be dark and wet looking, but that's a better price to pay than sawdust in your house. The only thing worse would be Ultimate Glitter Terrain!
This can be useful for deciding how the story will go, outside of PC interference but extrapolating PC autonomy to a couple of rolls wont feel like DND to anybody. you have to zoom into their piece of the fighting. Magic would be like technological levels, just one spell slot more on one side would devastate the odds for the less civilized.
Is there a good way to give the command power to the players or one of them? My plan is to have the players end up with at least a fire team under their command and one of them beign a high command but I don't know if it is a good idea to do this... Players will be players.
this kinda reminds me of the Warmachine in the Frank Mentzer Green Companions book but without the Algebra? Professor Dungeon Master did you ever play with these rules as written and if so to what effect?
So an apt way to play this would be to just focus on the skirmish and ad lib the results... The Fire Emblem series coined a whole sub-genre of JRPG(the SRPG) off this analogue, and the RTS genre, here in the West, usually does the same thing. We're in good company.
So either super-deterministic: Things happen exactly as the DM wants and the players can't really affect the outcome. Or super-random: Everything determined on one throw of the dice and the players can't really affect the outcome. How is that fun again?
He touched on the difficulty of making players CARE in the war game genre. I think the point here is to determine a winner and a story result rather than role play the whole damn thing.
IMO the simplifying for skirmish level is too much. Its always fun to have the characters+ a few allies+ remnant troops slug it out with some bad guys. Sure a manageable skirmish or 2. Terrain with minis is always some fun. Unless everyone wants that.
