Occasionally people bring up wanting to do mass combat. I?m not sure if this is true for most people, but if you are like I was you probably have only heard of the Warhammer mass combat systems.

Recently I started discovering many more systems with more an emphasis on simulation and less on displaying miniatures.

Here is a short list and review of some systems:

WRG 7th - This is the most detailed and complicated of the systems available (not necessarily best simulation though, just most detailed).
Warrior http://www.fourhorsemenenterprises.com/ - an newer version written in a more understandable style, its considered the American version of WRG 7; WRG, DBA, and DBM are all written in an "interesting" style that may give some people trouble trying to understand them.

De Bellis Antiquitatis (DBA) - the simplest system in this list, fairly easy to understand (once you get past the language which is English, but academic convoluted English)

De Bellis Multitudinis (DBM) - a more complicated version of DBA, designed to handle larger battles

Medieval Warfare http://www.saga-publishing.com - one of my personal favorites, morale has more play in this system, specifically designed for medieval battle

Archon (also called Piquet) - an interesting set of rules, less focused on matching between troops, has a deck of event cards that make the battle more flowing in an effort to be more like a real general?s perspective of a battle.

Here?s a more complete list with longer reviews: http://theminiaturespage.com/rules/med/land.html

My favorites are probably Medieval Warfare and Piquet.

What are other people opinions of mass combat systems they have seen?

If people want I can find some battle report links and post them. I think that is one of the best ways to find out how a system works short of playing it.

Scott

I have no experience running or playing in a mass combat situation, but would love to have a system that adequately covers that, even if it is only in the name of rules completeness. Thanks for the info, and I keep watching this topic for updates. Isn't this subject going to be covered in The Flower of Battle as well?

I believe that mass combat is going to be covered in TFOB.

The only mass combat i've previously done in an RPG is while playing WFRP, and that was a slightly abstracted, "figureless" version of WFB. I play both systems, so i know most of the stats in WFB terms, and the system there is easily resolved with three rolls of d6. Worked very nicely.

To date, i have run one tactical skirmish in TROS. I resolved it with an opposed Tactics skill roll between the PC in charge and the enemy sergeant each round. I admit it was rather quick and very dirt, both the decision to do this way, and the fight itself, but basically it did the trick.

I most definitely look forward to The Flower of Battle.

GUPRS used to have a mass combat system that you could down load for free. I can't remember exactly where it was, but it isn't a bad system. It is abstract. You calculate army strengths and use the PCs strategy, tactics, leadership and weapons skill rolls to determine the out come. It could probably be easily adapted to TROS while waiting for TFOB to come out....

NT

yea, i was only talking about less abstract games, there's a whole heep of abstract wargames.

What is the plan for TFOB - abstract (one dice roll resolves the whole combat), or less like some of the games I mentioned before?

Scott

I think that perhaps mass combat could be handled as a sort of macroscopic version of individual combat, with move and countermove, feints, diversions, charges, sets and retreats all acting much the same way as maneuvers.

TRoS combat is by far the most realistic I've ever seen, and quite a bit of fun besides. We've discussed adapting it to social combat, why not adapt it to mass melee as well?

Wolfen wrote: I think that perhaps mass combat could be handled as a sort of macroscopic version of individual combat, with move and countermove, feints, diversions, charges, sets and retreats all acting much the same way as maneuvers.

Wolfen wrote: TRoS combat is by far the most realistic I've ever seen ... why not adapt it to mass melee as well?

Its now long out of print, but ICE did a WarLaw for Rolemaster detailing mass combat, sometime before '96. I've been looking for it for years, but as I remember it, it had a great balance between abstractly dealing with huge forces and allowing characters to control the flow of battle.

There's a copy of Warlaw on e-bay right now for $99. I suppose THATS why I haven't been able to find it . . .

Chris wrote: There's a copy of Warlaw on e-bay right now for $99. I suppose THATS why I haven't been able to find it . . .

I was not impressed by War Law. It would be better to spend your money by buying everyone you know copies of TROS and TFOB!

Eamon Voss wrote: It would be better to spend your money by buying everyone you know copies of TROS and TFOB!

I was not impressed by War Law. It would be better to spend your money by buying everyone you know copies of TROS and TFOB!

I wasn't actually suggesting anyone SPEND $99 to get Warlaw, just that it was a good product and out there. Hell, there are thousands of things that $99 could go towards - a large percentage of my RENT for one. . .

I had forgotten about War Law. Wow $99, not that I would ever sell any of my RPG collection, but I should probably take that off the self and take a look at it, when I get a chance. It has probably been over ten years since I bought that.

<Sigh> Yes. I never got around to ordering it, then ICE had to go "revamp" RM with a new edition, then they filed for Chapter Seven. I guess someone, somwhere rolled high on the E "Failing Sales" Crit Table . . .

I was kinda startled to hear somebody paid that much for it. I enjoy it, it works within the framework of RM and can give a few insights into massed battles for RPG's. I am not going to use it for TRoS though. I am (very eagerly) awaiting the arrival of Flos Duelatorium (TFoB)...

I picked up both War Law and Sea Law on Ebay, then sold 'em for a profit. Both were absolutely superb for depicting combat, but at the expense of being a stand-alone game. One of the best aspects was 'unit skills', in which units could be trsained or rated in scores of skills; additionally, by includeing specialists withjin a unit, gave the unit a skill base. In essense, units were PCs, and grew with time. It would have been interesting to have players control mercenary or regular military units in a campaign using the WL rules, but as a medium for resolving RPG battles, it was too complex.

Darth Tang wrote: In essense, units were PCs, and grew with time.

You know, GURPS seems to get short shrift around here. Is there a general "GURPS sucks" vibe on the Forge that I'm just oblivious to because of the fifty thousand metric tons of GURPS material on my shelves?

Anyhow, for way less than $99 you can pick up a copy of GURPS Compendium II ($23.95 suggested retail). It contains the mass combat rules first seen in GURPS Vikings...or maybe it was Horseclans...whatever. They're in there.

The more the PCs risk, the more they as individuals can turn the tide of battle. But with that risk comes a greater possiblity for harm to a given PC.

Jason Kottler wrote: Anyhow, for way less than $99 you can pick up a copy of GURPS Compendium II ($23.95 suggested retail). It contains the mass combat rules first seen in GURPS Vikings...or maybe it was Horseclans...whatever. They're in there.

As I noted above, there was also a free download version of the GURPS mass combat rules. I thought there were quite handy. The rules allow for tactical advantaves of certain types of troops (cavary vs infantry or pikemen negating cavalry), individual risk, and a bunch of other things.

In terms of skill names, they over lap with TROS, eg, strategy, tactics, leadership, weapon skill etc. In addition, certain outcomes are based on the level of success, which could easily be converted to the number of successes for use with TROS.

For a very abstract approach PENDRAGON has a good mass battle set up. The rules are spread between a number of books, however. They also change bit by bit between editions, so can be a bit hard to follow.


NT

Wolfen wrote: Yes. With the concept of mass melees being scaled up versions of individual duels, this concept is very fitting. I can easily imagine each commander running multiple "duels" with engaged units. A given unit can split pools to deal with two other units, etc. I like this idea muchly.

Guys~

Okay, I'm relatively new to the forum (long time reader, first time poster sort of thing), and I think I've got this right- TFoB is going to have rules for mass combat, correct? For hundreds of units? If so, then I'll gladly wait for the book to come out. I'm trying to find a way to replace my Birthright War Card system with something a bit more substantial and malleable than "200 units can do X." Does anyone know the scale of TFoB? That'd be useful to know.

Gawd, I ask a lot of questions. If I begin to irritate some, my apologies. I'm trying to make my campaign a good one. :)

Thanks,

Charles

r_callen221 wrote: TFoB is going to have rules for mass combat, correct?

r_callen221 wrote: Does anyone know the scale of TFoB? That'd be useful to know.

r_callen221 wrote: Gawd, I ask a lot of questions. If I begin to irritate some, my apologies. I'm trying to make my campaign a good one. :)

That's the kind of concept I have been going with, although a unit may not have to always split it's pool, if it's big enough - given that many men in a large unit fighting a smaller unit will be unengaged at any one time, it makes sense that such a unit could at times fight on two fronts without (much) loss of efficiency.

Wolfen wrote: See, I disagree Brian. A unit that big will have enough dice to be able to split between two smaller units without worry, but against another unit of equal size, it'll want to use all of it's dice. A unit of equal size and a smaller unit attacking the one would force it to split it's dice, or maneuever so as to limit the effectiveness or block off the smaller unit.

Wolfen wrote: Dicepools in this case shouldn't be a matter entirely of skill. Dicepools should be a matter of overall effectiveness. A small but elite unit of mercs might have a dicepool larger than most units it's size, or a well armed and armored one. Weapon range should definitely be in place, as well. A unit of pikemen is going to be able to slaughter a unit of swordsmen, unless the swordsmen manage to get inside the pikes, in which case...

Wolfen wrote: Dude, is someone already working on this aspect?

Wow, this has thread has really exploded.

We're working on some neat, neat stuff for TFOB. I'm stoked about it. The plan is to make the rules in the book modular, almost like an encyclopedia of optional combat-related rules and ideas. We'll have an abstract mass combat system, something more tactical, and something that focuses on being in the fight, like what 7th sea or Pendragon does. It's going to be a pretty big frickin' book, I think. I we really want to finish it this summer. Yikes.

Jake

Cool, cool. If it can do everything I'm thinking of, I'm gonna have to buy two copies simply because the first one will be ruined by the drool.

Oh, and Brian.. E-mails?

toli wrote: As I noted above, there was also a free download version of the GURPS mass combat rules. NT

Darth Tang wrote:

toli wrote: As I noted above, there was also a free download version of the GURPS mass combat rules. NT

You noted, BUT YOU DID NOT SAY WHERE!

Pony up the address, or prepare for the Hubcap of Shame!

Brian Leybourne wrote:
What I was getting at is that there's a limit as to how many men in a unit can fight another unit.

Darth Tang wrote: You noted, BUT YOU DID NOT SAY WHERE!

Brian Leybourne wrote: BTW, not much of the GURPS mass combat stuff is anything that I would want to emulate or draw from in TROS - it's far too much number crunching and "cold", missing all the fun of TROS fighting.

Brian.

google?

Darth Tang wrote: google?