Book of War Supplement - The Fellowship

[chicagowiz]

I am releasing an "alpha-grade" supplement to the miniatures wargaming rules "Book of War" written by Daniel R. 'Delta' Collins - the supplement is called "The Fellowship."

It's purpose is to allow game referees to include Player Characters into a mass combat scenario and adjudicate their involvement. It covers combat, magic, conversions and XP. I've also put in my designer notes to give you an idea for why I went in the direction I did.

I call these alpha-grade because while I've done some solo-game testing with sample PC parties of 4th/5th and then 7th/8th level PCs, this is limited testing. I'm definitely looking for playing feedback. This is close to what I'm going to use going forward should any of my future D&D campaigns have mass combat... and I'm virtually guaranteeing you they will.

So.. "The Fellowship" -
docs.google.com/document/d/1dD-Ch95HNJBhNVjozdVH29xwmfvyVNQ36KhjmBcem-M/edit?usp=sharing

(I put this here as I didn't want to put it in the Chainmail folder - mods, if you'd rather I talk about it there, my apologies.)

[tetramorph]

Nice work. Thanks for sharing this. I'll let you know if I ever have an opportunity to play test it.

[derv]

I like what you're trying to achieve chicagowiz.

I'm not sure if Book of War will resonate with me or not, but I'm willing to try it out.

Just a quick glance at what you put together, the party figure must be of 10+HD. So a single 10th level Lord, two Warlocks, or any other combination such as five Warriors or Adepts? Would/could you have multiple party figures then? Or did you envision having only one?

Does the party figure represent mixed classes- fighters, magic-users, clerics, all in one?

[chicagowiz]

Jan 12, 2015 16:56:48 GMT -6 derv said:

I like what you're trying to achieve chicagowiz.

I'm not sure if Book of War will resonate with me or not, but I'm willing to try it out.

Just a quick glance at what you put together, the party figure must be of 10+HD. So a single 10th level Lord, two Warlocks, or any other combination such as five Warriors or Adepts? Would/could you have multiple party figures then? Or did you envision having only one?

Does the party figure represent mixed classes- fighters, magic-users, clerics, all in one?

It's quick and simple, just the way I like my games.

A single 10th level Lord would quality as a Hero under Core Book of War rules. There are already rules for Heroes and Wizards. You could be 2 warlocks, 5 Warriors, etc. As long as the PC Party figure represents 10+HD. Could there be more than one PC Party figure? Sure. I think the survivability of the PC Party figure increases the more HD you put into one figure - splitting them up might not work so well. You need at least 20HD in the figure to quality for 2 hits. (I divide the total HD of all PCs in the figure by 10 to get the number of hits, as I assume there are 10 members of the figure, based on the scale.)

Yes, the figure can represent a mixed set - the game referee will adjudicate which unit the PC figures join up with.

[derv]

Jan 12, 2015 22:48:43 GMT -6 chicagowiz said:

I think the survivability of the PC Party figure increases the more HD you put into one figure - splitting them up might not work so well. You need at least 20HD in the figure to quality for 2 hits. (I divide the total HD of all PCs in the figure by 10 to get the number of hits, as I assume there are 10 members of the figure, based on the scale.)

So, unless the party has at least 20HD combined you're looking at the potential for a TPK with one hit

I'm guessing you probably have some specifics as to how to implement the party figure that would reduce that risk.

I generally run low level games, but it sounds like the party should be made up of mid to high level characters for this.

[chicagowiz]

Jan 13, 2015 20:56:37 GMT -6 derv said:

So, unless the party has at least 20HD combined you're looking at the potential for a TPK with one hit

I'm guessing you probably have some specifics as to how to implement the party figure that would reduce that risk.

I generally run low level games, but it sounds like the party should be made up of mid to high level characters for this.

You got it right. 1st through 3rd level characters are your basic grunts and they shouldn't expect to live if they go to war. That's just the reality of it, when you're using D&D mechanics. Unless they want to hire expensive 4th through 6th level soldiers as their "filler."

And that makes sense. At 1st through 3rd, PCs are usually worried about surviving from day to day. As they get into the mid to high levels, things like war and strategic actions are something that they'll be concerned about.

From a risk reduction perspective, I leave that up to the GM, although I do suggest a saving throw vs. Death to survive their figure being destroyed (or rendered combat ineffective for the mass combat scenario).

Delta's writings on the realities of a single (or few) PCs making a difference, from a statistics and "big picture" POV, really made a difference. Here's his thoughts on "Heros" - deltasdnd.blogspot.com/2011/11/book-of-war-heroes.html

(and -- deltasdnd.blogspot.com/2009/12/gygax-on-chainmails-fantasy-scale.html)

[derv]

I'll go along for the ride chicagowiz. If you want to lay out a couple possible scenarios or just have people come up with their own, I'll see how it plays and try to give some constructive feedback. Is there any specific type of feedback you are looking for?

Without trying it, it would seem to me a PC might be better off(and more flexible) as a lone figure with an entourage then combined as a party. Though, in the post you linked to, Delta suggests that this is already an abstract reality of the troop formations who have serjeants, lieutenants, and captains as leaders among normal troops. So, it seems that goes against his basic design theories and that his ideal minimum is 10HD, whether a 1:1 "hero-type" or 1:10 normal troops.

[chicagowiz]

Jan 14, 2015 16:30:10 GMT -6 derv said:

I'll go along for the ride chicagowiz. If you want to lay out a couple possible scenarios or just have people come up with their own, I'll see how it plays and try to give some constructive feedback. Is there any specific type of feedback you are looking for?

Without trying it, it would seem to me a PC might be better off(and more flexible) as a lone figure with an entourage then combined as a party. Though, in the post you linked to, Delta suggests that this is already an abstract reality of the troop formations who have serjeants, lieutenants, and captains as leaders among normal troops. So, it seems that goes against his basic design theories and that his ideal minimum is 10HD, whether a 1:1 "hero-type" or 1:10 normal troops.

Play away. I had a mixed middish level PC party and a higher level PC party.

Basically, what Delta is saying is that until you are 10th level, you don't realistically have a chance to stand alone. What I've done is to try and abstract group together 10+HD of PCs into a figure, and give them some additional bennies, especially for magical abilities. Fighters do get the shaft, although the +1 bonus to-hit for every 3HD is nice.

The way I understand it, the Hero+entourage rule combines two figures into one physical figure, but they attack/defend as two separate figures. (Hero is one, the 10 guards are the other). A PC at 9th level could have 9 additional guards, but they attack as one figure, so he is abstracted into the figure. That's also why I average out the HD for the attack roll - giving a figure a +3 to hit is a pretty awesome thing. But averaging out over the figure makes sense, because again, you really need to be 10+ in order to get that status.

[derv]

Delta (Dan Collins) gave mention to chicagowiz supplement over here today

Delta's Blog

[desertscrb]

Cool idea, chicagowiz. Thanks for sharing your document.

Regarding what happens to PCs in the group if their figure is destroyed in the battle, instead of a saving throw for each character, you could have each character roll on some kind of table, like this:

1. Knocked unconscious, fully recovers after battle
2. Knocked unconscious, needs 1-6 days to recover
3. Knocked unconscious, needs 1-6 weeks to recover, permanent loss of 1-4 hit points
4. Comatose, needs 1-4 weeks to awaken, loss of limb or eye and 1-4 hit points
5. Comatose, needs 1-4 months to awaken, loss of limb or eye and character must retire from adventuring
6. Killed, body mostly intact (may raise from dead)
7. Killed and dismembered (no chance of raising from dead)
8. Killed and dismembered (no chance of raising from dead)
9. Killed and body never recovered
10. Killed and body never recovered

Characters less than third level roll d10, fourth-fifth level roll d8, sixth-seventh level roll d6, eighth level or higher roll d4

[chicagowiz]

derv, thanks for the link. I was abroad and didn't see this.

desertscrb - great idea.

[derv]

Hey chicagowiz, I finally got my copy of BoW from Lulu. I've been reading it over and putting together a small scenario which I'll include below.

What I'm not sure about with your supplement is it's inclusion of magic. Did you intend for a PC party that included a magic user to be able to use spells? Or must it be composed of at least 75% magic users? BoW's magic users of even rank 1 are based on an 11th level wizard. If a PC party of sub 10 HD characters that includes a low level magic user is permitted to cast spells also, it would seem to make them too powerful against normals and possibly imbalance the game. What have you found?

Divided Destiny

Background:
Legend has it that when King Mi-Vok-Kurrot died, they buried his remains in a tomb amongst the forested Fidelity Hills. He had two sons who immediately caused a division of loyalty amongst the kingdom over who should be the rightful heir to the throne. A great war broke out that lasted for 5 years to the day of the King’s death when a forest fire erupted from within the Fidelity Hills. Some claim it was of mystical origin, ignited by the dead king’s passion for his lost legacy. The fire spread from East to West in a 50 mile furrow of intense heat that would continue to burn unnaturally for 5 months. The result was the end of the great war and a kingdom that would remain divided, North and South, for 500 years. The legend claims that whoever, of noble blood, possesses the bones of King Mi-Vok-Kurrot, within the 5th month of the year the sign of the Serpent Star is seen, will once more rule the kingdom united as in days of yore.

Today, the armies of the descendents of the great Mi-Vok-Kurrot meet, amongst the forested Fidelity Hills, to determine their destiny through the spilling of blood and breaking of bones.

Layout:
A playing area 4 x 6 feet. At it’s center is the hill that contains the King’s tomb with 6" of level ground on each side. There are four steps of 10 foot rise in elevation of roughly 3” wide. The hill is considered heavily forested, so mounted movement is prohibitive and missile fire is restricted to close range (1/3 max range). Also, no indirect fire is possible. Armies are broken into smaller sized units of players choice and placed at ground level on opposite ends of playing field.

Objective:
This is essentially a “King of the Hill” scenario. The army that takes possession of the tomb or the one that has the most men at the highest elevation by a certain turn, is the winner. Optionally, point values could be awarded by each step of elevation gained per figure (1-4 points) at the end of the game.

Army List (234 points each):
8 archers ( 56 pts.) MV 12, AH 4, HD 1 leather, short bow

12 light infantry (48 pts.) MV 12, AH 4, HD 1 leather, spear, axe

16 med. Infantry ( 80 pts.) MV 9, AH 5, HD 1 chain, sword, axe

Commander (50 pts.) MV 12, AH 6, HD 2, Atk 1 Dam 2 magic chain, shield & sword

Options:
Replace 1-2 med. Infantry with a PC party figure of 1 HD.

Double size of forces for a longer game.

[chicagowiz]

derv -

A single Magic User can be in a PC Party figure and cast spells. They must know that spell in order to cast that spell. Whereas the Wizards in BoW are assumed to know the spells given in BoW. Also, I include spells in the supplement for the MU to use ONLY if it can affect more than 10 targets in a figure (to mimic that a figure can affect at figure at a 10:1 scale). So I don't think it will be overpowered. Especially since the MU needs to be 7th to 8th level to have even one or two of the really good spells.

As a note, I wouldn't replace infantry figures, I would just have the PC Party as an additional figure. I don't see the PC party figure as being part of a balanced battle. I wrote the supplement to allow for a PC party figure to participate in a battle that is part of an overall OD&D RPG campaign. I don't even know, nor do I really want to consider, how to assign points for a PC Party figure, given that they are such a mix of a figure and abilities. By nature, a battle in a campaign is going to be driven by the nature of the campaign and the forces involved.

I don't see Sauron particularly caring that his forces aren't point-balanced against Gondor's. So too, I see a campaign battle as not being balanced. Trust me, my players would nuts themselves if I brought out the orc and goblin armies against Enonia in full force. It would probably be about 10:1 there.

If you want to go down that road, of assigning points to a PC Party figure, good luck! I hope you make your SAN saves.

[derv]

Feb 23, 2015 11:40:23 GMT -6 chicagowiz said:

derv -

A single Magic User can be in a PC Party figure and cast spells. They must know that spell in order to cast that spell. Whereas the Wizards in BoW are assumed to know the spells given in BoW. Also, I include spells in the supplement for the MU to use ONLY if it can affect more than 10 targets in a figure (to mimic that a figure can affect at figure at a 10:1 scale). So I don't think it will be overpowered. Especially since the MU needs to be 7th to 8th level to have even one or two of the really good spells.

That clears things up a bit. I wasn't sure if your 75% rule for Special Abilities was meant to apply to spell casting too.

Another piggy-back question, is it assumed spells are already prepared before the battle and once used, they are forgotten? Basically, following the same Vancian rules as D&D and ignoring BoW Wizard General Abilities as Dan suggests under "Converting Spells".

As a note, I wouldn't replace infantry figures, I would just have the PC Party as an additional figure. I don't see the PC party figure as being part of a balanced battle. I wrote the supplement to allow for a PC party figure to participate in a battle that is part of an overall OD&D RPG campaign. I don't even know, nor do I really want to consider, how to assign points for a PC Party figure, given that they are such a mix of a figure and abilities. By nature, a battle in a campaign is going to be driven by the nature of the campaign and the forces involved.

That works for me.

What I was attempting was to incorporate the PC Party figure as a replacement for some of the figures, assuming it was only 1HD, and eyeballing the cost (party with magic would cost 2 figs). But, as you point out, there are pitfalls to this method and it doesn't appear to be crucial to your goals.

Thanks for the help.

[chicagowiz]

Feb 23, 2015 16:48:44 GMT -6 derv said:

Another piggy-back question, is it assumed spells are already prepared before the battle and once used, they are forgotten? Basically, following the same Vancian rules as D&D and ignoring BoW Wizard General Abilities as Dan suggests under "Converting Spells".

Yep, exactly.

Feb 23, 2015 16:48:44 GMT -6 derv said:

That works for me.

What I was attempting was to incorporate the PC Party figure as a replacement for some of the figures, assuming it was only 1HD, and eyeballing the cost (party with magic would cost 2 figs). But, as you point out, there are pitfalls to this method and it doesn't appear to be crucial to your goals.

Thanks for the help.

Right - my whole purpose for this wasn't to supplant Daniel's excellent rules when using just as a miniatures wargame, rather I wanted a way to (relatively) seamlessly integrate a mass combat mechanism into an existing OD&D (and AD&D) campaign. So that when my players cause WW3 in my world, they get a WW3 experience. In that arena, there isn't so much balance and trying to assign points.

I imagine you could, but each party is going to be of different values - some may be magic heavy and could be worth more, some might not have a single spellcaster, and worth no more than a Med/Heavy infantry unit.

[derv]

Couple more questions chicagowiz. As I mentioned, I generally run low level games with D&D. So, I generated a mixed party of mid-level PC's so we could use spells as you laid out and to give the party a little better survivability with higher HD.

The party consists of:
Two 5th level Swashbucklers 5+1HD, magic sword +1 and chain +1
Two 3rd level Swordsmen 3HD
One 5th level Thaumaturgist 3HD
One 5th level Curate 4+1HD, magic mace +2

This gives me a party figure with MV: 9", AH:5, HD:2, +7 attack bonus, 2 spells/turn, Atk:?, Dam:?

What I'm not sure about is the effect of magic armor on AH, how to calculate how many attacks per round with a mixed figure, effects of magic weapons, and damage delivered during melee. Should a party figure like this be considered similar to a Hero figure in BOW? Or should they be treated as a standard figure, in which case I'm a little uncertain about the attack bonus. Maybe it should be averaged?

[chicagowiz]

Mar 5, 2015 14:11:03 GMT -6 derv said:

Couple more questions chicagowiz. As I mentioned, I generally run low level games with D&D. So, I generated a mixed party of mid-level PC's so we could use spells as you laid out and to give the party a little better survivability with higher HD.

The party consists of:
Two 5th level Swashbucklers 5+1HD, magic sword +1 and chain +1
Two 3rd level Swordsmen 3HD
One 5th level Thaumaturgist 3HD
One 5th level Curate 4+1HD, magic mace +2

This gives me a party figure with MV: 9", AH:5, HD:2, +7 attack bonus, 2 spells/turn, Atk:?, Dam:?

What I'm not sure about is the effect of magic armor on AH, how to calculate how many attacks per round with a mixed figure, effects of magic weapons, and damage delivered during melee. Should a party figure like this be considered similar to a Hero figure in BOW? Or should they be treated as a standard figure, in which case I'm a little uncertain about the attack bonus. Maybe it should be averaged?

Move: 9" (assuming you've found the slowest member of the party)
HD/Hits: 2 (5*2 = 10, 2*3 = 6, 3, 4: 10+6+3+4=23, 23/10 = 2.3, round down to 2)
NOTE: the +1 per 3HD is BoW HD, not OD&D HD. You would need a party to total 30 OD&D HD or more to get the +1, so in this case, your party gets no bonus
AH: 5 (I'm going to assume you've done your homework here, or taken the most prevalent armor, looks like you're saying Chain?)
Attacks: 1 attack per round for the figure
Damage: Conduct melee per BoW Core rules. There is no damage, you are rolling against the targets' AH. Each successful hit vs. the AH is a hit off the target figure's HD/Hits. One the target has 0 HD/hits, they're dead, Jim.
Missile Attacks: None
Special Abilities: None
Magic Attacks: Calculate against figure as if normal men. (BoW HD is not > 2)
Turning Undead ability: Yes (cleric)
Spells: 2 per turn.

The effect of magic armor on AH - good question. Since I'm abstracting, if the players really wanted to take the magic armor into account, I would do the Exact method of calculating AH (Exact AC - Take the average of the AC values, rounding down. Then use the Exact AC chart to determine AH.). For each +1 on that magic armor, I suppose I would go back to AD&D and reduce the AC by that amount. If that works for you, great! If not, how would you think magic armor should matter? (for context, see how I abuse magic weapons below.)

How to calculate how many attacks per round with a mixed figure - One attack per round. Abstracting here, so although you in 1:1 might get multiple, in BoW, all of the strikes/hits/etc are abstracted into that single roll. If you're hero level, 10th level, then those multiple attacks matter, per BoW rules.

Effects of magic weapons - abstracted into the BoW core attack rules. In my OD&D, plussie weapons don't affect the attack roll.
Damage delivered during melee - see BoW core attack rules. There is no damage, it is only your successful roll versus the target's AH that results in a "hit." That "hit" is the "damage." If the target has 1 HD/Hit, they're dead. No need to calculate damage, it's abstracted. So - getting to magic weapon damage. In my OD&D, plussie weapons only mete out extra damage. That +1 is abstracted into the "hit" on the figure. Now that being said, IF the party had a metric crap ton of monster cutters, like over 75% of the party has +2 weapons or the like, I might be willing to think about a "check" roll on successful hits to see if I would add an extra "hit". But that's only if they're like a nuclear force attacking. Abstraction, abstraction. In a huge battle, those little +1 swords aren't going to turn the tide, unless they do something a lot more powerful.


Should a party figure like this be considered similar to a Hero figure in BOW? - nope. Not a single person is even above 8th. With your party above, this is the equivalent of shoving a bunch of captains together and pushing them out on the field. They're going to absorb more hits (HD/Hits 2 instead of 1) and possibly have some spells, but at the end of the day, they're not that powerful. Delta's math convinced me. Do the math and you'll see.

[derv]

Mar 6, 2015 9:24:05 GMT -6 chicagowiz said:

HD/Hits: 2 (5*2 = 10, 2*3 = 6, 3, 4: 10+6+3+4=23, 23/10 = 2.3, round down to 2)
NOTE: the +1 per 3HD is BoW HD, not OD&D HD. You would need a party to total 30 OD&D HD or more to get the +1, so in this case, your party gets no bonus

Excellent, this is what put me into a tail spin to begin with. The +7 attack bonus I came up with made no sense to me for using the Core rules, which led me to look at the Hero stats with their "Attacks" and multiple hits of "Damage". I need to keep my BOW and D&D HD straight when making conversions.

I will be smacking myself in the head at this time and mumbling, "you dummy"

Now that the cobwebs are cleared out, I think I've got it.

Thanks 

One observation, it does seem possible that the party could double their HD and number of attacks if they buy, beg or borrow appropriate war horses. That would bump their movement rate up too. What do you think?

[desertscrb]

Mar 6, 2015 16:11:42 GMT -6 derv said:

One observation, it does seem possible that the party could double their HD and number of attacks if they buy, beg or borrow appropriate war horses. That would bump their movement rate up too. What do you think?

Book_of_War said:

For non-aggressive mounts (like horses), take the lesser of either double the rider's HD, or the sum of rider & mount's HD.

So if the party averages 2 HD afoot, mounted they would be 4HD, with a move of 18 (medium warhorses) or 12 (heavy) and two attacks instead of one.

[chicagowiz]

Mar 6, 2015 16:11:42 GMT -6 derv said:

I need to keep my BOW and D&D HD straight when making conversions. I will be smacking myself in the head at this time and mumbling, "you dummy" Now that the cobwebs are cleared out, I think I've got it. Thanks 

One observation, it does seem possible that the party could double their HD and number of attacks if they buy, beg or borrow appropriate war horses. That would bump their movement rate up too. What do you think?

You're welcome.

But yes, for sheer HD, they could... IF the party has > 20 OD&D HD, then they have 2 or more BoW hits. And therefore would double that with horses. I would rule that they could not cast spells from horseback, and it's unlikely I would allow missile weapons either, unless they had that as part of their character to begin with. Averages and abstraction. If 75%+ of the figure can do a thing, I'll usually rule the figure has that ability.

[chicagowiz]

Just as a follow up, since this is about 2 years old.

I've successfully used my Fellowship rules in 5 tabletop RPG/mass combat scenarios and they've worked out great! I've not had to adjust my rules any.

[tetramorph]

Awesome. Thanks for the reminder.

[Deleted]

Not sure how I missed this thread, quite intriguing!

[desertscrb]

Apr 11, 2017 9:09:19 GMT -6 chicagowiz said:

Just as a follow up, since this is about 2 years old.

I've successfully used my Fellowship rules in 5 tabletop RPG/mass combat scenarios and they've worked out great! I've not had to adjust my rules any.

How did you end up handling it when a unit containing the player characters gets eliminated in combat?

[chicagowiz]

Apr 22, 2017 16:14:08 GMT -6 desertscrb said:

How did you end up handling it when a unit containing the player characters gets eliminated in combat?

We've agreed that all would get "Save vs. Death" - failure means I roll on the chart that you provided!