Big Battles in Your RPG
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 сен 2024
- Go to www.AbsoluteTabletop.com to pick up the "Be a Better Battle Master" PDF!
This video discusses ways to effectively introduce large-scale battles into your RPG campaign in a fun, immersive, and cinematic way!
![[Limbus Company - Teaser] Season5 - Oblivion](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8anKuEeZLeI/mqdefault.jpg)
I've seen a lot of videos about dnd DM advice but this video is the most useful of all
Invaluable advice, man! Love the worksheet. Definitely going to use it for the Provokers at some point.
aFistfulofDice FISTFUL OF DICE!!!!!
a tip : you can watch movies on InstaFlixxer. Me and my gf have been using them for watching lots of of movies lately.
@Aden Jason definitely, I've been using InstaFlixxer for months myself =)
Great video. Love you guys at Absolute tabletop! Such great tips from all of you as well as awesome game sessions! Very helpful videos indeed
Love this idea. I have a Set-piece battle in my campaign and was worried about it being too boring for my players, this has helped me a lot, thanks :)
Happy to hear it! Thank YOU!
FUCK YES! More BABGM!
Could you do a video on making interesting and original villains and antagonists? It's one of the things I struggle with a lot.
+SlightlyNotorious Consider the baddies' motivation. Why do they do what they do? Take inspiration from other famous villains. Dr. Freeze of Batman, does it all because he wants to revive his wife, gain revenge, feel something.
absolutely game changing! even as you were speaking, i could already feel the adrenaline rising a little. i kindda really wanted to "Ride out with you!" into that courtyard! i can already begin to see applications for this in session planning as well! and i do need to run a major siege battle latter in my current campaign. thanks so much for sharing this!
How dare you sir! I'll have you know that the battle of Twinkerdon is a very important battle in the history of both gnomes and halflings.
Excellent video thank you
Good job!, really gives a lot of inspiration for large scale fights. (Just had to subscribe to you after your awesome "Dice" roleplaying on the Provokers.)
Thank you. I'm running a SIFRP game and just thought "nope" after reading the mass combat rules, but this saved the day in that department. The game probably won't go in that direction, but I had no good option if it did and now there's a way to do it.
One day i was thinking create my own game based on rpg dyd battle system. Then, i realized that is a bored system, foe to foe, slow, lack of dinamysm. So i conclude that there is a way similar to ur system which makes games more big, rich and deeper, with more variables to play and deal in team
This was so wonderful to read! Thank you! There's an updated version coming this year through Absolute Tabletop!
Second time I've watched this. Essential. Reckon I'll whip up a battle of sorts for a fortnight's time. Thanks Barker :)
Good Job!
While I appreciate your idea you did not really address the issue you presented in the beginning. How do you stop the "fight against the ladders" or the "parachuting goblins" to turn into what you presented as an issue? It would still end up with "There are a dozen enemies, you kill one, next".
I guess the issue presented was if you're running the entire battle as one big encounter. If you want the characters to feel like they're making any meaningful difference at all, they're going to have to be ridiculously OP, compared to the invading force. But because of the mechanics of DnD combat, that's just going to turn into each character killing one or two enemies per round (I have very little experience with other tabletop RPG's, but I'd imagine, unless the system was specifically designed for large-scale battles, you'd face similar problems).
There are also logistical issues. If the characters are facing off against 40 enemies, do you run every individual monsters turn? What about your allied army? Suddenly, you need a 200x200 battle mat and each turn takes 2 hours. But if you don't run each individual monster's turn, what do you do as an alternative? If you don't play your allied soldiers, what are they doing instead? Why are your characters facing an army with no help?
From what I can see, the method presented in the video breaks the entire 'battle encounter' down into several smaller encounters. So you'd run an encounter with the ladders. You draw the walls on your battle mat (or whatever you're using). You have ladders pop up every turn. Throw a few enemies in, maybe a couple of allies, but you're focused on a small area, assume the rest of the battle handles itself. If the characters successfully kick the ladders down every turn, they win, if not you could have them be over-run (If players care about their characters, and they should, they'll retreat when things start looking bad).
In this case, you run every encounter as you would on a normal dungeon delve or hex-crawl.
Exactly! Simply adding consequences and in-combat goals does not solve the problem.
I really liked this!
+Tabletop Gaming with Juce Thanks, Juce! But you can't be mad at ME when Matt uses it to kill our characters in "The Provokers" :-P
BeABetterGameMaster Brasswick will resurrect on the 3rd day. ;)
i like the idea of the phases...and that you root the battle model in fantasy literature!!!
0:49 Since we're on the topic of being better...A way to get better tone out of your guitar is to get a tube amp with a high gain channel rather than using solid state with preset distortion effects or a distortion box. :D
This, Barker, is fantastic.. This is outright useful! =D
A single question, though:
How much fighting would you advice to bring in on the players in the courtyard, for example?
Naturally, they would have to deal with a couple of trolls and really feel tested (Just like the fellowship does in the Mines of Moria).
In fact, you managed to answer almost all of the questions within the video - Great work, man!
+Enliden
Awesome! Happy to have helped! I think that, ultimately, it is at the GM's discretion as to how difficult the battle should be to win or lose. It's also possible that the only way to find out the proper difficulty levels for sure is through trial and error.
Hello, man. I like your videos and they've been rather usefull. But I still have a question on running massive battles.
I'm a newbie DM, and I only ran a few games with my friends. And one of the games is my own one on one campaign.
And the first encounter is a village beeing sieged by bandits. Well I also made variabilty and a hero's right to choose whether to stay at the gates or to go handle kobolds with explosives that's been breaking out of the temple through undergeound passage to blow the gates from inside.
But the problem is that there are lots of NPC militiamen fighting along with the hero. And a lot of bandits. Yeah, i've got a battling ram, but there has to be a defense, so there are like 7-10 bandits and goblins besides.
My idea was that the player could give orders to militiamen, but anyway, he ended up sitting and watching me making roll after roll saying "okay this guy shoots this guy, and that guy hits that guy". I was lucky enough that me and my friend managed to gain fun out of this, by messing around with descriptions of hillarious deaths.
So the question is: even if I have interesting objectives to achieve, there is still much combat stuff, especially if the combatants are NPCs. How do I deal with that? Ignore dice roll for NPCs and just come up with an outcome? Or gather them in squads and come up with home rules for that to lessen rolling? 'Cause rules like "unearthed arcana when armies clash" are not quite my scale.
That's a lot of text =) If you'll read this and answer me, I'll be surprised and also happy =)
I'm not the guy who made the video, but I always try and avoid having my PC's fight tons of infantry. They're heroes not soldiers. Have them be like SEALS. Have them take on a troll flinging boulders or, if you want to have them fight a group hint them towards a creative way to kill a bunch of low level enemies. For instance pointing out a cart of ale near the tavern that might explode
One issue is too much rolling-if npcs are fighting npcs, no rolls need to be made, it should be assumed that defenders fight on their own. If you have a character direct combatants to a dangerous area, roleplay some of them dying in terrific battle, valiantly defending. Or if your players abuse the troops, have their morale break and they flee!
Also, like the other commenter said, keep your players as specialty actors in the battle-npc troops shouldn’t be their focus, the trolls destroying the gates should be their focus. If a player wants to engage with npc troops, shift a part of the battle plan to them-have the goblin parachutists come down on their head! Take the fight to the PCs, leave npcs to do their thing in the background.
Warhammer fantasy battle's goblobber with the goblins with the parashoute
While not done as well; in the 2E DnD Randal Morn trilogy the players in the final installment, the Return of Randal Morn, have to defend Dagger Falls from an invading force. I don't think it's as polished players are still faced with choices as the battle progresses around them.
I'm writing a novel with a mass assault climax and you just gave me the perfect way to design it - saved me hours of toil! Genius!
Is the book out?
@@wolverinehobbit1 not yet
When do you think it will be published
Coming back again and again! For me it’s very helpful!
That is genius!
+Simo I'm humbled, brother! Thanks for watching!
maybe i should try this with a battle system similar to Heroes of Might and Magic...
i'm trying to create my own home made HM&M with story mode.
That was awesome! I can already see this being VERY useful in small-scale encounters as well. The entrance to a cave: You have to deal with a big guard, archers, and someone running to sound the alarm. The consequences are more apparent, and it adds (much needed) spice to even small combat encounters. I love it!
+Levi Huntsman Dude! Yes! This is why I LOVE flowcharts!
My idea for large scale battles is to use dice rolls to show how the battle progresses and then go directly into combat to beat the general. For example, Each player must be responsible for a dice roll and they can decide based on who has the right stats. Before a battle, they need to prepare and so they can choose a constituion roll to train the troops under their command. If they succeed Their units will level up. If they want to fire a barrage of arrows or catapults before charging into battle, another hero has to roll for dexterity, a successful roll will diminish the amount of enemies a hero will have to fight in the battle. There are many more things to do rolling for other stats, but that's the general idea I have.
Very cool. I'm getting ready to run an encounter just like this & like the flow chart concept. cool idea!
+GeneralKetchup57 How did your encounter go? :-)
i'd respectfully submit that mass combat needs to be handled just like any other encounter. use it as a tool of exposition. show something about the personalities of the nations and units at war, show their history. show instead of telling
When I handle mass combat with seemingly no end in sight, what I do, is I reinvision the flow of enemies as "vectors" or "chains" rather individuals. If a zombie horde is running down the hall, I could decide for reach individual zombie what they do, but that's not what I do.
Rather, I treat each miniature as a node along which other zombies will be spawned. A bit like how you would treat a tile on fire setting other neighbouring tiles on fire.
That way, the models or tokens aren't zombies. They are parts of a seemingly endless chain of zombies. The only thing that players can do is direct where the chains are going to go. At the end of the chain, a new zombie is added to the chain, as if all zombies had shuffled one square further down the hallway.
I have found that that works really well and I can see the same working for a more chaotic battlefield where players have to fight hundreds of people. Each action they take ripples down the chain, but the chain isn't broken. It just keeps sliding forwards.
I suppose you could also say that you treat each stream of enemies as a conga-line.
+Alderick van Klaveren Very cool idea, man. Also, a conga-line of zombies...
Hey man. Just found this. Outstanding DM GM concepts. Nice.
I have an huge incoming battle with my home group and this is very, very useful. Thanks Barker!
+Bryan Marshall No problem, dude!
Maybe I'm not understanding this, but how does this solve the COMBAT where it is just boring fighting enemy per enemy? Otherwise this is just a long video of how actions have consequences.
I would dominate the twinks at the Battle of Twinkerton...just sayin'... bahahaha
awesome job man, so exited to get the PDF for this. I was actually using a battle this weekend and had no idea how I was going to do it. this is my lord and saviour!
I liked the flow chart and such but What bothered me on said chart is you created 3 things the players have to deal with yes then you create 2 complications if they failed one of those 3 things. That's fine I like it but the chart doesn't necessarily give you the option to add the benefits or results of succeeding and I feel that's important to note down.
ok it's very cool big battle system... but how do you resolve problems without battle on small focus ?
Great vídeo! Im planning a siege and definetely gonna use this flowcharge
Legend of the Five Rings does a good job with a similar system that abstracts most of the battle so the players are mostly each dealing with a dramatic scene at each stage of the battle.
Kept thinking about shadow of war when minas ithil is loss, and the defenders must retreat and save their people.
This is AMAZING DMing, thank you for the suggestions and inspiration!
Shouldn't be there just like you say more horizontal options not also the option to have more vertical once when one wants to have longer battles with more steps till it is over?
+Drudenfusz Absolutely! When I'm planning my battles (or any session, really), I usually use larger drawing paper for flowcharts because it offers more room. I was just using the chart included in the aforementioned supplement. As always, I encourage you to do what you wish and not be tied down by MY ideas. :-) We are only encircled by the fences we build around ourselves.
This inspired me so much OMG
just what I needed to spice up the upcoming battle in my campaign I was soo worried It would be boring. my players thank you
this is from almost 4 years ago and I still return to this video to get my shit right :) Thx man
This is more about set piece battles than just big battles.
Why did you point at empty air and call it a supplement?
This seems to work well for defense battles where the PCs are defending something, but for offensive battles where the PCs are on the attacking side, there is a lot less for the GM to have control over. This means the GM won't get to fill in all the "phase 1" options, which means he can't pre-plan the consequences of those either. I think a whole different approach is needed for offense battles. Still looking for the magic bullet for those, but this method does seem to work well for defense operations (I've used almost this exact method before and it did work wonderfully).
I think it can be a viable concept for offensive battles with a few modifications.
Row 1 would be the ways the players can get inside the enemy camp/stronghold/bunker/starbase. You as GM can tell the players what options they have to assail the enemy fortress, so that you can control, and you can make those choices meaningfull to the players. It isn't even too much hassle to accomodate ploys you didn't think of if you prepared the layout and garrison of this fort in advance. Can they fly in thanks to a spell and you forgot about that? No problem! What kind of roofing does the fort have? what archers and artillery? Enemy mages? "From above" is just another point of entry to put into row 1 and something you can work with if you planned the basics of your enemy fort sufficiently. If you "build it" and they come, you will have something to put in their way... or if you can't: that's a player succes on row 1! On to row 2!
Row 2 entries then split, the upward triangle is where they get when they're succesfull (privy, officer's mess, armory, supply depot etc.), the downward triangle is the enemy counter-reaction (pursuit, sally-out, reinforcement, capture of the party, Ambush, readying the secret weapon for row 3 etc.)
Row 3 keeps the split entries: each left hexagon is the boss-fight/climax within the enemy camp, each right hexagon the result of previous failure: a complication for the boss-fight, the next stage of the enemy counter-measures of row 2 or some other 3d act set-back to make the final engagement in row 3 more difficult for the players.
Your basic outline is the same, both from plot perspective (the players attack a fort) and (meta)mechanically (flowchart).
One minor gripe I have with this system is that it leaves the rest of the Army on the PC's side a bit out of the loop and rather inconsequential/ineffective. Though, the (easy) solution to that would be that the friendly army could be a collection of mulligans to throw at problems the players decide not to take on to cancel them out... Even so: the players should decide which one. Plus the number of passes this gives should be limited, like, 2 fewer than the number of problems the players can choose to deal with in the fight.
This is really usefull! Thank god that RUclips decided tu recomend it 7 years later xD
Perfect timing too, since I'm finishing up layout on the cinematic combat rules in Adventure Kit: The Battle for Arctor's Vault! Thanks so much for the feedback - more about this soon 😊
This is fan-fu&^%ng-tastic!!!
This wasn't what I was looking for, but this is great!
Another belter of a video. Just hope I remember this for my next battle
Five years later, did this in a 5e session. Still a good approach.
Thanks! It's clearly not exactly what some are looking for, but it's been useful to many! Keep me posted!
What a convoluted way of saying „add goals“
"It's Helmsdeep!"
I love this Idea, gonna use this for the sesion i'll have in a couple of hours, i hope everything works out
Another awesome idea from you that I will definitely use in my games
+kim fontaine (LOWTECHGAMER) Thanks man!
This kind of super simplifies things but it kind of removed the "simulation factor" of the actual battle and makes the player's actions responsible for the outcome. I've always been more of an old school type of player, and more of a simulation kind of guy (and a wargamer). The way I do things is that I actually set up a battlefield map with set attacking units and where they're going to hit and defend from. Each has attack and defense scores. Each "unit" has a certain number of troops and resources (There will usually be maybe three units on a field per side, sometimes two. Sometimes more. It depends on the battle). Each turn, I check odds, roll on a table I wrote out for attrition, and reduce each side. I will often use common sense for this reduction and what happens in the battle as well depending on how the reductions happen. As far as the players go, I will have random encounter sheets specifically drawn up for the battle. Roll on one chart when the players clash with this unit.. roll on another when they clash with this unit. I'll design a whole bunch of random encounter tables specifically for the battle (I love writing those and make them for random generation of stuff anyway. My notebook is full of generative stuff that I design.). So basically, the entire battle is run like a board wargame with random generative role playing elements. It might be a bit much for new players or for players who don't enjoy simulation or old school type gaming, but for those of us who do, this is a great way to do it. You actually get to see the battle play out. But at the same time, this system doesn't bog you down in that first problem that you talked about where you're micromanaging players through all 1000000000 attacking troops. This system gives the attackers the chance to win or lose depending on their force makeup, with, or without character intervention.
Your method strikes me as VERY fun. I was in my FLGS the other day and some guys were playing an Osprey Publishing historical miniature game. Imperial Japanese Forces vs. U.S. Marines. I couldn’t help myself - I’m such a mini-gamer - I watched them play for over an hour. Your method definitely has merit, especially to a battlefield gamer like myself. I’m happy you posted it here for others to see.
@@InspiretheStory It definitely takes a lot more work and preparation to run. As the GM, if you know that there's a big battle coming up, it's going to be a big event. If you're going to run the event in this way, you really need to make it count and put a lot of work into it. You need to be willing to write out random encounter lists for stuff to happen inside the battle durring different time periods as the battle progresses and also for when the players encounter each separate clash of forces. And then be willing to.. wing it and use logic as the "solo wargame" on the tabletop before the players progresses. (You don't need a tabletop of mini's. Heck. I use a white board on my tabletop where I just draw stuff. One large box for one army. One large box for another army. An arrow for it's direction of attack.. Tape measure for distance measurement.. etc..) It takes work. Some GM's aren't going to be willing to put that effort in and are just going to want to hyperfocus on the players and their characters alone rather than the battle. It all depends on what's important to the GM. Do you want the battle to be scripted for your story, or do you really want your world simulated to really see how things go and let the forces fall as they will?
very interesting
This is great design, good job man.
I am new to D&D and am playing a bard. Do you have some advice for how I can be useful in mass combat. So far we have been just going out on our own (four characters) and facing smaller trials but I think we will soon be facing larger groups in battle.
We do have a pack of orcs joining us now to help us out.
basino cingo
Thank you.
Hi mate, quick question.
Do you give each player one of these sheets, or do you as the DM just keep it for your own nefarious purposes?
+k rad
Hey man! This is for me. I'll definitely let the players know that their decisions matter and that they might not be able to take on every encounter simultaneously, but I keep the sheet for me.
Ok, thanks dude!
I'm thinking of playing this out in a week or two in my current home brew, I'm planning to use it in an Indiana Jones "collapsing temple" style. Hopefully this leads to a dramatic frantic run down dark passages as the players are chased by enemies unknown and the temple caves in around them..
seems like the system favors a defeat, if there is always one more thing that the party can handle, also how do we integrate npc involvement, or how do we win?
+Alexander Maxwell There isn't always one more thing than the party can handle. If you want to make the battle challenging, yet winnable, then I definitely recommend including that one extra "thing" near the beginning, but it is ultimately in the GM's power to determine how difficult or easy the battle might be.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by, "how do we integrate npc involvement" though.
@@InspiretheStory The player's are on the side of one of the armies in this war right? What does their army do?
Incredibly useful and great way to streamline planning. Maybe pairing this with Matt's Rory's Story Cube idea could make it even better!
+jehrad0 Love his Story Cube idea and I actually thought about that! :-D Great call!
I'd argue that the first example, essentially minions, works very well. You don't send that many at a single person anyway, considering the moment it isn't their turn they'd be overwhelmed and killed. Because despite having 1 HP, they still HIT as hard as the normal creature.
I actually made a system for combat in large groups in my game called "set combat". One "set" in this context is 3 rounds. The idea is that my players characters and major enemies get to act every round like normal however minor enemies, grunts, and minions only act once per set. Take the number of smaller enemies, divide them by 3, and thats how many enemies go that round. It's not hard to keep track of and it allows my players to feel like they act way more than the minor enemies.
This actually helped me
I've enjoyed pathfinder Mass Combat and Kingdom building rule books, even though I play dnd 3.5 and 5e. They're online free, and really in depth. Just as another suggestion for more ideas.
as for the crunch. the game of thrones rpg did it right by having each unit be treated like an 'average' member of that unit and then just using the regular combat mechanics. as i said in my own video on the topic.
Not gonna lie, this is a pretty neat structure.
I think that it is easily adjustable as well. depending on player actions and the intel they gather, you can revela parts of the structure. So maybe they had a brave rogue sneak out before the battle and check up on the enemy. After a few lucky rolls and cunning decisions of the poor recon, they now now, that parachuting goblins await them. This enables them to prepare accordingly.
It also might help to give them some veteran that helps accept the consequences you might lay out, if you decide to reveal them beforehand (later is always easy sice it's the thing happening).
What I like is rewarding proper preparations and everyhting. So I might give them a system that pretty well allows for solving every encounter. If you spent really hard on making your fortress and impenetrable obstacle, it might be anice reward to easily fend off the invaders.
On another note: That chart could be nicely extended into the other direction. what happens if you solve an encounter or if you solve the encounter incredibly well. so, starting off in the middle and then moving the chart up or down accordingly. maybe up on one half, while the other half fails miserably and moves downward.
So many possibilities!
Awesome! But how are you determining losses on each side? (Sometimes it’s important to know for follow up battles etc...)
Superb idea. I will put it into action immediately. So much better than any mass combat nonsense you see floating around. If we wanted to play a wargame we'd build a sandbox in the basement.
I like the principle that the group most likely can't turn the tides of a battle themselves. A small powerful group can't win a big battle as too much is happining for them to handle. Personally, I would give the players the possibility to prevent some problems and enact countermeasures before the battle starts - even if the battle ends up rather easy because of diligent preperation.
Howdy I'm a long time player but just started getting into the GM chair. Your channel has been really useful, thank you.
I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions for me regarding ammo in games.
I am starting a post apocalyptic style game set in London and one of my players wants to play a soldier sharp shooter. Obviously Britain has less gun availability than the USA and in a P-A setting ammo isn't going to be just laying around.
I want to keep it as real as I can but if a Gunslinger type runs out of bullets they're not going to get much out of the game.
The best solution I've come up with is that I use percentiles and reduce his skill at set increments so he will get penalties but not run out completely. Allowing him to recharge at viable locations.
Does that sound reasonable?
Cheers.
I love the idea of too much to handle and things going wrong, it's very important in stories for more and more problems to arise for the heroes to triumph over
+Blake Bailey Agreed wholeheartedly! Without struggle, there is no feeling of triumph, and vice-versa.
I have done something similar, but used the old victory point system. This is much better, thanks for the battle system idea.
Great stuff! I've been looking for a way to engage the whole party in mass combat and this is gold. I'm GMing a ASOIAF game and now it's all about war. Sadly, being an intrigue-type game, some players would be left out during a battle. Your style gave me ideas on how to involve them. Thanks and keep up the good work.
Good ideas. I've used flowcharts to run mysteries before, where each node was a piece of information that they could find that leads them to another node. So it works pretty well for that too.
I like the idea of using it for battles, but maybe still having units and characters and expanding each round to be somewhere from 4-10 rounds of activity depending on scale. That way you can just ask what they're doing for the first minute (10 rounds for D&D). They wade into a group of 20 orcs. They make all the attack rolls for that minute at one time and each hit is a kill (minion rules). The orcs roll as a group against that character for the time covered (6-8 attacks per round X number of rounds), each hit does average damage (one less calculation). For larger battles, just increase the scales. Maybe have one die roll represent multiple attacks that either all hit or miss. Superminions might take 2 or 3 hits to take out, as opposed to just one hit. Anything that's large enough to seriously challenge a PC or require multiple PC's should slow back down to normal combat to resolve. You could also ramp down if they are low on hit points to increase the drama of them having to retreat.
I haven't tried it yet, but I think that by ramping up and down like this, you could move through the mooks of a battle quickly, while bringing focus to the big bads and other dramatic moments.
a great idea but criminal prices, you can build that whole flowchart on lucidchart for free
I have to say that this video was extremely well put together it answered a lot of questions that I and I know a lot of other people have when it comes to running Mass battles without having to resort to mass battle rules which are usually very dull. So thanks a lot for doing it it was a big help
This is such an elegant way of describing the nature of battle in an RPG. This show has come a long way from that first episode.
This... was a surprisingly amazing and brilliant idea. I've been trying to come up with a satisfying way for quite some time to run massive combat and this setup is actually a genius idea.
Err...this is how i plan all my campaigns and each session...hehe....
Great advice.
Simple but elegant system, very useful!
This is new to me, nice take.
+Alexander Maxwell awesome intro too.
What's wrong with a tabletop wargame????
Great great stuff. Thanks!
Thank you so much !!!!
my favorite part of this was the end :-p
Cause that noise ya made after double tap peace .. :D
+Infinite RolePlay It's not a Barker video without some weird-ass noises, you know?
Awesome!!