http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/unearthed-arcana-when-armies-clash
The temptation to start my campaign with an orcish invasion of the characters' home base is almost insurmountable. 
Don't think I'll ever use this rule set, but I like that it exists.
Stands of 10 individuals? So, if I have 200 soldiers in one unit, I need 20 minis?
in my Birthright campaign we have battles of thousands of soldiers on both sides... Maybe I could salvage these rules by just upping the scale of everything, but what about PC involvement?
I'm a bit disappointed, I was expecting something more like the good old Warmachine of D&D companion box...
Delazar78 wrote:
Delazar78 wrote:
Dig it!
Delazar78 wrote:
* My suggestion for homebreed rules:
- Warlord with Cha bonus for morality checks, or damage reduction for stands.
(A pack of optional class features. it wouldn´t be a subclass, but a variant class, where some core class features are replaced)
- Warmage: sorcerecer variant (not subclass) (a D&D equivalent to musketeer?)
---
* Can a ogre stand (big saze) to join to a mixed orcs and goblins stand (medium and small)? My opinion is only two steps of size.
* What about "musou effect" wheren only a character can defeat complete squads? (for example videogames like Dinasty Warriors or Hyrule Warriors)?
* XP reward for destroyed warmachines? (cannons, catapults, giant crossbows, battleships..)
* What about mind-afecting spells? and war beasts not used to explosions and great noises? What if magic is used to controll war beast?
* What about combo units? For example one wearing a tower shield, a second firing a crossbow and a third one reloading crossbows.
* Could a 1st level illusion spell be used to create a smoke againts enemy shooters in the battlefield?
* Is magic too expensive to be used in the battlefield? and the alchemy?
Anyone catch how a Beastmaster is set up? Are both the beast and the PC separate solos, or are they together, a single solo stand?
Uncertain.
I'm looking forward to giving these a try.
Anybody have any idea if these rules are playtest rules or final rules?
Delazar78 wrote:
The_White_Sorcerer wrote:
Delazar78 wrote:
SO is unearthed arcane rules a playtest of things before anything is published via splat book? Not complaning that means most things should come out much more balanced then previous splat books that for the most part expanded content and powerlevels up and not outward to diversify.
To scale battles should just mean to scale your scale. The rules seems very easy to do that right now. if you need bigger battles have each miniature represent more soilders and larger squares over all.
CCS wrote:
cowleymen wrote:
Pretty cool. I can see incorporating these into the final battle in Rise of Tiamat. Can't wait to try them out.
My initial thoughts:
Great start! I was getting very excited reading through this. This is definitely the right overall tactic to take.
Now, on to my critique.
Problem 1: Solos are too powerful.
-A solo that is no more than 1 square away from an allied stand is just as powerful as a stand 10 creatures. There is little reason not to create units composed of one stand surrounded by 4 solos, as that would be as effective as 5 stacks. Why have 50 ogres, when you can get the same results with 14?
Analysis of Problem 1: They apparently attempted to partially address this by making solos unbelievably take up the same space as a stand of 10 creatures--which means that more opponents can surround them and attack them at once. However, while this sounds like it would do something, because they are no more vulnerable than a stand in general (and less vulnerable than a regiment stand!) this actually does absolutely nothing to weaken them.
An argument could me bade that since solos are intended to represent more powerful creatures, that situation doesn't come up. However, saying they represent "powerful creatures" isn't a meaningful statement without some sort of definition (CR or level). DMs running mass battles with miniatures likely want to know such parameters. Likewise, defining more power as simply "more powerful than the stand they are attached to" solve nothing as it allows creatures to go from solo status to nothing status (ghost on the battlefield?) based on where they happened to be, and is too relative to be useful to the majority of DMs who want to use these sorts of rules.
Since there is no limit to the number of solos that can be joined with a stand, you can likewise just stack them all together. Why have that 50 ogres only attacking 5 times, when you can have 10 ogres in a stand, +40 solos standing on their shoulders and get 41 attacks! Plus, when the stand dies, 10 ogres can just reconstitute another stand and your ogre pyramid of doom continues onward! Again, it isn't about people actually making crazy scenarios like this--it's about rules telling us what we need to know so different DMs don't have to make judgement calls about craziness. When it comes to setting DCs in 5e, or assigning damage from the environment or such, allowing the DM to just be flexible and make a ruling is excellent game design. In this situation (battlefield logistics) it isn't as effective design.
Partial Solution to Problem 1: Unattached solos are always treated as isolated.
-I don't like it (it doesn't feel very heroic), but at least it's a house rule that might get the job done as far as overall power. This fails to address the issue of unlimited solos in a stand.
Lesser Problems: Here is a small list, with commentary.
-Initiative for Skirmishers and Regiments: Using the best Dex mod in a skirmishing unit isn't well-balanced. You would just always try to throw someone fast (even just a solo) into a unit, and then not worry that it is composed of stands of big sluggish war sloths.
-Aid Configuration: Just needs a better name. Something with a more battlefield evocative feel.
-Defend Configuration: This feels weak. I suppose you can combine it with Dashing to get slightly more defensive mobility, but the situations where it is superior seem limited. I don't see it as a popular choice, and since there are only 3 choices of configuration, they all need to be appealing options for common situations.
-Damage Carrying Over: The fact that damage that destroys a stand carries over to "adjacent identical stands" will just encourage units that look like patchwork quilts, where two adjacent stands are always different. It doesn't make a lot of sense to have your forces be placed in stands of orcs-hobgoblins-orcs-hobgoblins, but the intelligent evil warlord does just that, because it makes them signifcantly more resilient to damage.
-Broken: Why not refer to this as the more traditional "routed"?
-Need Example Troops: The sample NPCs that seem appropriate are guards and scouts. Maybe knights if you want to go heavy elite units. That's rather limited. We really need a short list of pre-statted out NPC blocks that are ideal for normal human (and other) troop types. Regular infantry, heavy cavalry, light cavalry, archers, pikemen, whatever. Sure, I can just take guards and put different arms and armor on them, but I'd like to see a bit of tweaking for variety, and I'm sure the D&D design crew can do a better job at that than I can. With nothing but MM guards composing your forces, you are going to be slaughtered by orcs and goblinoids.
Dougan_Axehammer wrote:
sirkaikillah11 wrote:
It has some intresting ideas, there are diffentitly pieces here that I will incorparate into the mass battle system I am currently using in my 13th age campaign. I hope that they do more with this system and give some examples of units and battles.
Dougan_Axehammer wrote:
CCS wrote:
Addendum to Partial Solution to Problem 1: Here are some more elements that might help the problem I stated.
-A creature must have a CR of at least 1 to function as a solo.
-A solo cannot command a unit unless it's own level or CR is higher than that of the unit
-If a larger solo joins with a stand, the stand's size is treated as the size of the solo while joined
-No more than 2 solos can effectively function as part of the same stand. Up to twice as many solos can join a stand, but additional solos cannot take the Attack or Cast a Spell Battle Actions.
Dougan_Axehammer wrote:
* For me the stands/squads/battalions have got a collective hit points pool like the swarm monsters.
* What about cavalry? They are units, a mount and a humanoid. Some spells could work differently.
* Spells with aligment key. In a squad could be mixed soldiers with same allegiance but different aligment.
* Magic rituals. Lot of soldiers also can mean lot of people collaborating to do some magic ritual. For example praying together to the war god before the battle.
* Siege engines trowing stones with magic runes, for example a teletransporting rune to send war beasts to the other side of the wall.
* A simple wizard could use a familiar (or an animal controlled by mindaffecting magic) to throw a bomb to a camp to cause a fire.
From real History, by Harald Hardrada.
As soon as Harald landed in Sicily he started plundering there too, and laid siege to a large and populous town. He surrounded it, because he realized that the walls were too stout to be broken down. But the townsmen had plenty of provisions and all other necessities to withstand a siege. So now Harald thought up a scheme: he told his bird–catchers to catch the small birds that nested within the town and flew out to the woods each day in search of food. Harald had small shavings of fir tied to the backs of the birds, and then he smeared the shavings with wax and sulphur and set fire to them. As soon as the birds were released they all flew straight home to their young in their nests in the town; the nests were under the eaves of the roofs, which were thatched with reeds or straw. The thatched roofs caught fire from the birds, and although each bird could only carry a tiny flame, it quickly became a great fire; a host of birds set roofs alight all over the town. One house after another caught fire, and soon the whole town was ablaze. At that all the people came out of the town, begging for mercy – the very same people who had been shouting defiant insults at the Greek army and its leader for days on end. Harald spared the lives of all those who begged for quarter, and took control of the town.
This is an example how rpg games can do things there aren´t in the standard wargames.
We will try the rules on hex map.
I like it so far. This is still rough and even if they do not fill some holes that could cause problems latter on, I will use it. I can always patch those holes as well, not that it matters to the larger community.
I agree that if you are going the route of epic battles, then the scale is not all there, but again, I have a different perspective. Whenever I have had the party involved with armies coming into conflict they only see a portion of the full battle going on, that the area off the battle matt is much of the same as their area. Whether they are trying to flank and ememy army or are trying to bolster the center lines.
I recall during the playtest that if a solo were to encounter a stand the time changes back to 6 seconds and you basically 'zoom' in as ten rounds happen within that 1 minute span the rest of the battle is progressing at. That way a stand is getting 10 attacks on one solo. That sounded great to me. It can be risky, but a character downing ten soldiers in a flurry of blood in steel in the time of one minute is an awesome pay off. Other stands witnessing one of their fellows ripped apart in such a manner would be subjected to a morale check and maybe at disadvantage if the character turned next toward them.
Hopefully they still have that in mind, though I can understand why not as it kind of stops the flow and can cause to spotlight to shift greatly. Regardless, that is what I plan on doing for such a situation.
Istbor wrote:
Brock_Landers wrote:
I've just skimmed through it so far, but it looks like a decent start. It will need advanced options, IMO, like scaling up (this looks to be more on a skirmish level, than a true warfare level), non-grid miniature battles, siege warefare, naval/arial battles, and other option for turning it into full-bore miniature wargame (because I enjoy that sort of thing). I'd also like to see some advanced options for integrating things like strategic-level resource management (warchest spending, baggage trains, popular support, etc.) for playing campaigns.
anybody try this yet?
Anybody make up some units?
Haven't tried it yet, but after reading through half of the pdf, I'm starting to predict a few things that I may want to do when me and my group are able to try it out.
First thing i think I'll need are war game minis to represent stands. I am currently trying to find cheap, uniform color minis that have a variety of types within each color group to represent skrimishers, regiments and solos. The more variety and the higher the number of minis I can obtain the better. I just don't want to have to spend a lot. Otherwise I think the best option is to use d6 sets.
The second thing I think will be necessary is to have a token to place beneath each mini, to represent the commander. That way if a commander is taken out, you can visibly see it and it won't get lost while you're trying to keep track of the elaborate battle.
Third thing, I think that it would probably be a good idea to number each mini that represents a stand so that each player can keep track of each stands' status and stats more easily. If not I think it can easily become too confusing.
Last thing, I think that this system is better played on a hex grid so you don't have to think about the diagonal movement stuff.
Ultimately I think WotC should look into providing an affordable boxed set with all the necessary minis and tokens to run these rules for them to work as easily as they want it to. The system has a very board game feel to it, which is interesting, but I think it requires the elements of a board game to be played in a way that won't be a pain to keep track of.
More thoughts... I think that these rules work best for moderate scale warfare (or concentrated areas within a larger war). I feel that for larger scale warfare I would rather use a simplified form of the Basic D&D percentile system (found in the Cyclopedia). For smaller scale I would rather use the skill challenge mechanics from 4th edition, with each PC commanding a small group with one of their best skills (one that makes sense, ie religion for the cleric to preach) while fighting minions. I like the new system they presented, but since it is a bit complicated I'm hoping they'll make a few options similar to the ones I've mentioned to make for a quicker battle. The system they presented is nice though because it really accounts for what your units can do, which I feel makes it pretty fun. Maybe they'll present different options when they release some sort of large scale war supplement (hope it's a boxed set with minis etc).
A dying solo makes up to ten death saves at the end of the round, one at a time, to determine its fate.
BoldItalic wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
All in all, I am excited to try it out, and luckily one of my groups is in a prime situation for such a battle to take place! I will try to remember to record what happens so that, if nothing else, I can share it with you and help start vetting this.
As others have mentioned, this seems perfect for the final battle of Rise of Tiamat. I may need to up the scale, but I was extremely confused about how to handle the council scorecard's impact on the final battle and Tiamat's strength if summoned. Now I feel that I can definitely use the information at the back of that book as a guideline for setting up a large scale tactical conflict with stands along with various objectives for weakening Tiamat using these rules.
Basically the way I see it, if you score high enough on the council scorecard, you get additional units from that faction to utilize in the final battle. The players start out at a disadvantage, but I'd frame the entire thing so that the fight would be evenly matched if they do an average job impressing people over the course of the campaign.
Very excited. I'll have to make some tweaks (as others have mentioned) but I'm glad to have a basic framework from which to operate.
Now to get started building out an appropriate hex-map/tokens in Roll20... 
Darth_Caffeineus wrote:
I prefer the 13th Age PC focused mass combat rules
http://pelgranepress.com/site/?p=17221
Sands666 wrote:
What I would like to see is a lot of support on how to incorporate these rules into the STORY of your game. For instance rules and examples of Sneaky missions that will allow you to assasinate the enemy commander, or convince a young copper dragon to come to your side's aid in the war. Or good debuffs or buffs you can apply as the result of failing or succeding at quests in the Role Play side.
DnD stories can definitely use rules to resolve the great battles in epic fantasy stories, but ultimately we need to stay close to the PC's story.
I'm not sure if I understand the rules completely. If a solo is attached to a stand, who takes damage first, the solo or the stand? Does the solo get to make an attack in addition to basic attack of the stand as well?
Impalpable wrote:
From the rules, there appears to be nothing stopping an attack from directly targetting a joined solo. The solo simply is treated as a separate target from the stand. Attack one or the other.
A couple of thoughts and questions on the battlesystem:
The system appears to magnify issues inherent in CR vs PC level. After the PCs get up to 5th level or so, individual CR 1/4 and 1/2 monsters like guards, goblins, orcs and other humanoids just aren't all that threatening - they die quickly to multiple attacks or spells. This means that footsoldiers in your average army will struggle to do meaningful damage, and will quickly fall against mid-level PCs, assuming the PCs have stands of their own to avoid isolation. However, instead of killing individual orcs, the PCs are now wading through entire regiments single-handedly, which seems less believable somehow. I can understand high level PCs being an unstoppable force on the battlefield, but 5th level seems a bit soon. Or maybe that's as intended - higher level PCs need higher level counters for a balanced fight ... it just seems like it should be different on such a large scale.
How do you think these rules would work alongside the "Handling Mobs" rules in the DMG? One of the downsides I see to this system is the amount of dice rolling for large groups of enemies, and abstracting this to a formula could greatly reduce the time needed. For example, a regiment of 50 Scouts (5 stands, 2 longbow attacks each, +4 to hit) firing at a unit of orcs (AC 13) would get a 2 to 1 hit rate, scoring 5 hits, causing 30 (5d8+10) damage and destroying 2 orc stands.
Chethrok_Bloodfist wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
I recall seeing someone else's description for what CR represents in 5e.
It's like the signs at amusement park rides that warn, "You should be this tall to ride this ride."
That's it. Nothing more. I like that.
ChrisCarlson wrote:
So, it was a long time coming, but I was able to finally run through the session in which we used the mass combat rules. I did change one thing, and that being a solo, even while not isolated, takes an attack from each creature in a stand, if the solo creature is not in a stand itself. This harkens back to the battle system as it was presented while still during the playtest ( or perhaps it was just after it ended?).
I felt that fit the gritty theme of this particular campaign.
Please keep in mind that these creatures used were modified and do not reflect the exact stats from the book.
The Armies:
Player side - Imperial Garrison of the mountain outpost of Delram. (or what remained of it)
1 unit (regiment) consisting of:
2 stands of dwarven guards
1 stand of Human soldier
1 unit(skirmisher) consisting of:
1 stand Dwarven crossbowmen
2 stands of Human Longbowmen
+ 4 player characters ( lvl5 Tempest Cleric, battlemaster Fighter, Totem Barbarian, Wild Magic Sorceror and one NPC commander
Within fortifications
Enemy side - Frost Fell Horde
3 units (regiment) consisting of: (each unit is the same)
1 stand of Human Gladiators
2 stands of Human Tribal Warriors
2 units (skirmisher) consisting of
2 stands of Human Tribal Warriors equiped with bows and accompanied by 1 Druid per stand
+ NPC commander (tempest cleric lvl 7)
+ 3 mantlets (ten feet wide) and one battering ram
+ 2 Ogres with boulder throwing action! (modified)
Win/lose conditions are pretty clear cut.
Win - Defeat enemy army through either attrition or forcing the enemy to terms or retreat.
Lose - The outpost falls and over half of the civilians seeking shelter in the halls withing are slain/captured.
The players made sure to array their defenders pretty wisely. The small wall and tower were manned with longbowman with a couple stands in the keep as well to make use of the arrow slits. One of the melee units was positioned both at the keep's door to help butress it which the rest was set back on the wall in case of scaling ladders. The other melee unit was set further in the keep near the rooms housing the villigers as an Alamo.
They had also gathered sizable stones and aquired all of the lantern oil for a quick solution to the battering ram.
Though the defenders had an elevation and cover advantage the mantelets allowed a good number of archers to get close as well as a few stands to accompany the ram. Some quick useage of a improvised molitov took care of one of the mantlets and a high damage scorching ray took out another.
The enemy succeeded in inflicting casualties to the defenders on the wall but each time the ram was brought up the harrassement was too much to make it to the keep doors. So the enemy brought up its artillery. I made a modified boulder attack (bascially a bludgeoning fireball but with a rock, slightly weaker) The ogres pelted the wall with these boulders to prevent sustained ranged harrassment of their battering ram forces and nearly took out the Sorcerer who failed his dex save.
The Battering ram had a few successful knocks in at the door but the defenders were pelting the operators pretty heavily. Finally most of the gathered oil ended the life of the battering ram and it's crew. When the Ogres moved up to finish the job, a tandem attack with Guiding Bolt and another molitov made quick work of one. The other was successful in making it to the Keeps sturdy Iron Wood doors and was able to break through before it fell to the numerous magics and arrows.
The remaining regiments made the gruesome charge through the defenders missle range but were able to crowd into the doorway for bloody melee. They as well chose this time to use their scaling ladders to try and divide the defenders.
The barbarian chose to hold the keep along with the defenders while the figher and a stand turned back the scaling ladder stands and counter attacked on his own, engaging the Tempest cleric.
Several bloody rounds later and the battered defenders dispatched the last willing combatants a round after the Fighter (with 7 HP left) felled the cleric. Then enemy failed thier will save and routed.
The day was won.
The defenders had lost half of a melee unit but rallied to stay in the fight. Only one of the skirmisher stands remained.
The horde lost an entire melee and skirmisher unit in the final tally along with their leader and ogres causing them to flee the field.
I left out some details and play by plays due to lack of time and not wanting to drone on but I think it ended up pretty well. The fighter did engage a skirmisher stand solo and took some knocks but rally strikes and second wind kept him up enough to stand against the Cleric NPC. The Barbarian used his Rage dmg resistance (bear totem) and shield combined with magic sword to grim effect in the keep's entrance. With some amazing max heals from the Player Cleric he withstood the onslaught of the Gladiator stands and a modified warrior stand (who gained just the base rage dmg resistance). The latter gave him some pause as their attacks were tearing into him pretty good and he could not simple decimate them as other lesser stands.
The enemy spell casters played havoc with the defenders on the wall with called lightning and the like but those indoors were safe from such trickery and were able to keep the majority of the enemy repelled or at a distance for a lot of the fight.
The group also enjoyed the 'slow down' of the fight between the fighter and the NPC cleric as they duked it out for their 10 rounds for the one normal mass combat round. More that I would have thought, I would worried that such forced spotlight would make them more on the bored or anxious side but the toe to toe fight made for good imagery and a great climax to the battle.