Who Should be in Command of this Army? [3.5]

[Scalenex]

500 1st level Commoner Conscripts with a spears and padded armor
50 1st level Warriors with long bows and light armor
50 1st level Warriors with have swords or axes and heavy armor
50 1st level warriors with polearms and medium armor
10 2nd level warriors with lances, swords, heavy armor and heavy war horses
5 1st level Experts with good skill ratings for Hide, Spot, and other recon skills, light armor and a simple melee weapon
3 Experts with the skill set necessary to direct the building and use of simple siege equipment like catapults
2 Experts to relay the leader's orders through drums, horns, flag signals and the like. (the other troops understand the signals but aren't qualified to give them)

1 5th level Fighter
1 5th level Paladin or Hex Blade (50% chance of either)
1 5th level Scout or Ranger (50% chance of either)
1 5th level Sorcerer or Wizard (50% chance of either)
1 5th level Cleric or Favored Soul (50% chance of either)
1 5th level Bard
1 5th level War Mage, Duskblade, or Battle Sorcerer (33% of any)

Assuming no class is considered particularly prestigious or untrustworthy by the masses. Assume the battlefield commander is respected enough that the other PCs classes and the regular troops will unquestionably obey any non-suicidal commands. Assume the PC class characters are optimized for generic adventuring and not for army battles. Also assume the army doesn't have a significant budget for magical items and the PC classes being selfish adventurers are not apt to throw away a lot of their gold on expendable magical items like scrolls, wands, or potions. Assume everyone is human.

The objective is to take the field from a similar opposing force to be able to force the other side to recognize your claims over a disputed border region. The goal is not necessarily to kill your enemy down to the last man.

Who should be the overall commander? Who should lead what units? How should the leader position himself?

Would you use the same general leadership pattern for...

Defending a castle against a force twice as large?
Assaulting a castle against a force half as large?
Occupying a conquered town?
Occupying a conquered stretch of farmland?
Patrolling 50 miles of roads to protect supply lines from organized bandits and monsters with CRs too high for the PC classes to take on by themselves?
To force another group to surrender unconditionally?
Fighting 100 Ogres?
Fighting 50 trolls?
Keeping the force in fighting trim during peace time?

Would you signficantly change the leadership pattern if you tripled the numbers of all the NPC class troops and made all the PC classes 10th level?
What if you had one of 10th level and one of 5th level for each of the PC clasesses? Do the higher level characters necessarily make better leaders or should they be led by the lower level characters so their powers can be deployed more directly?

Note, what I'm aiming for is which class(es) are best suited to lead. If you want to discuss which classes are best suited for killing enemies or what spell and/or feat selections the PC classes should take.

[Roc Ness]

Err... Are you asking us to choose between the 5th level PC class'd NPCs, or are you asking us to come up with somebody new?

[Scalenex]

the 5th level NPCs

[Soren Hero]

id say the high intelligence and high wisdom classes should lead, b/c they can come up with the best battle plans...the wizard and cleric (if randomly picked) would probably be the best candidates for leading the army. The Cleric can lead the whole army while the Wizard draws up battle plans. have the fighter be in charge of the warriors, have the scout/ranger be in charge of the experts, and the bard can sing all day to give the army a boost.

or for a more traditional feel, let the fighter lead the army, while the cleric and wizard provide the battle plans. leaving the ranger with the scouting party and the bard still singing all day to give the army a boost

[Zonugal]

Realistically probably the Cleric as they have the most versatility in spell access (every new day brings adaptability) as well as the heavy armor & martial experience to be a presence on the battlefield. For a more behind the stages commander though I'd shift the Cleric into a Cloistered Cleric from Unearthed Arcana placing skill points in both Knowledge: Architecture & Engineering (for laying siege/setting up fortifications) and Knowledge: History (for military tactics & maneuvering).

[Gavinfoxx]

The Wizard or Bard should lead. They have all knowledge skills (history is tactics), and likely haves a rank in each at least, and maybe some spells to improve his checks. Is the Cleric a Cloistered Cleric?

Anyway, appropriate checks for army leadership include skills like...

Diplomacy
Perform (Orate)
Intimidate
Knowledge (History)
Listen
Spot
Sense Motive

[Gamblerjoe]

a leader should have charisma. the most important quality in a leader is the ability to communicate and relate to people. he has to earn their trust and loyalty. wisdom is also important because it is directly tied to ones ability to make good decisions. int is obviously important, but still comes after cha and wis. the leader should have advisors who are hard working and intelligent.

overall, id say a cleric or favored soul with a good charisma. a religious figure is likely to have been groomed for leadership, and is probably well respected. bards on the other hand have a more brash type of charisma. these arent set rules though, you can give a character any background and personality you want.

you most likely have your heart set on the army you built, but i would recommend checking out Heroes of Battle, particularly the system they have for building armies. that army seems pretty realistic, the main benefit of the system is being able to create large battles quickly, and make them properly balanced. there is also some great stuff on siege engines.

edit: im really underselling HoB. that book is designed specifically for what you're doing, and is very well done.

[Gnaritas]

Anyway, appropriate checks for army leadership include skills like...

Diplomacy
Perform (Orate)
Intimidate
Knowledge (History)
Listen
Spot
Sense Motive


Could you explain Spot and Listen?

[Rumpus]

a leader should have charisma. the most important quality in a leader is the ability to communicate and relate to people.

Gotta disagree here, the most important qualities in a military leader are to have good judgement and be calm under pressure. After your soldiers have been around you a while will recognize your ability to make good decisions and resiliency to pressure.

Now, if you are looking to RAISE an army, or whip your people into a frenzy (righteous or otherwise), CHA is important. But, if this is a regularly constituted force (ie at least a little professional), regular military discipline can easily compensate for a commander middling CHA score. Soldiers can trust their commander without liking him, and trust is much more important.

As for who leads, I'd say a fighter with a non-optimized build (ie INT, WIS, and CHA aren't ALL dump stats). A fighter, whether decked out in brilliantly shining plate or with a crooked nose and missing ear, will inspire trust from his troops (he's been there, he's done that, he understands what we're going through and isn't likely to throw away our lives). A martial cleric could fulfill this same role if the army is composed almost entirely of his faith, but if it's composed of different religions, he's a poor choice. I don't think soldiers (and their junior officers) will trust the wizard or the bard unless they have established a reputation for leading (not just surviving) in battle. Not that they won't appreciate them, but they won't trust them as commanders.

This is all just for the first battle though, once a commander has taken his troops through a few battles, soldiers will have a good feel for him (did he make stupid decisions, did he take unnecessary risks, did he let us loot, etc).

[super dark33]

the leader needs to impress the soliders, what means hexblade and paladin are favoured, if the army is 'good' (i.e paladins and clerics of good gods fight) or 'evil' (evil gods clerics and blackguards as elite force), its eiter one of them.

economicly, mounted warriors with heavy armor are very very expensive to train,hold and make the weapons and armor. only lords and their bodyguards can afford and should use it.

the 'Knight' should be a much higher level in order to make their purpose, and there should be more sword/axe soliders with chainmails.
think about it, each full plate costs 1500 Gp! its like a house in an overcrowded city! and not to mention the weapons and tools and helpers they needs to hire, they wont just give away their families and properties to good armor and weapons and their families follow the army (the families will come with livestocks..) its much more logistic then it seems.

and thats why Full plate is irrational for normal foot soliders in the medivel.


and wizards.....

each fireball claims the lives of poor soliders in diffrent games of DnD throughout the world, even a normal adventurer gangcan kill or rout many soliders in their supiriority over them.

[Coidzor]

I believe Jaronk has a discourse prepared about the relative capabilities of PC classes as leaders...

Does anyone have a link handy to it? My googlefu isn't penetrating the morass.

Edit: Found it! Enjoy. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=3065.0)

To sum up some of its points: A leader needs Intelligence and Wisdom for the ability to make good decisions. Charisma gets people to follow him.

The skills that are useful are the Knowledge skills, and especially Knowledge History as it covers wars and tactics and strategy in addition to being useful for gaining strategic advantage ala Heroes of Battle. Sense Motive is also useful to avoid being used or duped, as is Gather Information, though that last one has more potential/use in delegating to others with that skillset.

Diplomacy, of course, gets people to follow orders, aid you, join you, or even, with a sufficient check, buff one's army (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/skills.htm#diplomacy).

Spot and Listen help one be aware of the area and notice potential hazards before they lead to disaster.

Divinations, and good advisers/lieutenants are of value as well, though in this particular scenario, useful divination will be limited to Auguries from the cleric.

So, if the group of NPCs has to hash it out between themselves who is the leader rather than one of them simply being placed into that position, it'll probably be one who excels in charisma without dumping wisdom or intelligence, as otherwise he'd be susceptible to being manipulated out of it by one of the other contenders.

Intelligence and Wisdom are most important to the person coming up with the battle plans, as the field commanders and sub-commanders mostly have to worry about getting the most out of their men as possible with Charisma and class abilities (like bardic music, auras, rousing pre-battle speeches), but wisdom/intelligence is still useful to them in order to see those brief, rare opportunities that open up and to avoid being tricked by any sneaky tactics the enemy employs. Someone with Int and Wis, but without charisma (or at least with a penalty to it and not invested into the relevant skills) is almost certainly going to be relegated to the role of an adviser.

If the bard can get an Admiral's Bicorn or a pair of wardrums, then his inspire courage is effective throughout the entire battlefield. So a bard with wardrums could inspire courage the entire battlefield and even send signals to specific divisions while doing so and observing the battle from a vantage point to be able to direct reserves or what have you.

[Scalenex]

Realistically probably the Cleric as they have the most versatility in spell access (every new day brings adaptability) as well as the heavy armor & martial experience to be a presence on the battlefield. For a more behind the stages commander though I'd shift the Cleric into a Cloistered Cleric from Unearthed Arcana placing skill points in both Knowledge: Architecture & Engineering (for laying siege/setting up fortifications) and Knowledge: History (for military tactics & maneuvering).

Putting a spellcaster in the comand role seems to be a tradeoff since they have less freedom to move about as cast spells where needed. In fact that applies to any class, if they are leading they have less freedom to use their class abilities offensively. Should that be a factor or is any factor there more than made up for by the importance of one's leadership talents.

I'm also using this to figure out what PC class a feudal lord would encourage his children to train under. It was common to train inheriting children in the military and non-inheriting children in the church. I guess this discussion thread is partially to figure out which classes would make a good lord from a strictly tactical perspective. You know what PC classes nobles would train their kids in should probably be it's own thread...

[Coidzor]

Yeah, you gotta throw out the whole real-world analogs and consider it from within the game universe, especially since magic changes things. And very few D&D religions are celibate by RAW.

Bard has the skill list and skill points necessary to snag the skills needed to rule wisely and well, and Bardic Music is the first force multiplier of 3.X D&D. Optimized Inspire Courage on a bard with wardrums will contribute far more combat prowess to the fight than the bard himself individually could. Especially with assistant bards of various dragonfire inspiration varieties all on their own masterwork wardrums and inspiring courage.

And until high levels, the bard's most useful contribution in a large-scale fight is going to be his inspire courage. Though I think a couple of bards with the alternate class feature, "Inspire Dread" or something like that, which debuffs one's enemies would be good as well as part of one's bardic command corps. A rather interesting mental image, that, actually. And depending upon where they set up shop, they can fire off some of their long-range spells and still do their bardic music thing. I'm not sure how mobile they are with wardrums, really... <_< >_>

Plus they're not too bad in a fight, though they don't want to do it too often, and they do have magic, which is always useful.


As to optimized leader... well, it depends on what you're leading. If you're leading a country, a Bardic Knack Bard, Archivist, Cloistered Cleric, or Factotum is going to win out by a lot (note that when I originally wrote this, I'd never even seen Factotums). When it's country leadership that you're doing, short term buffs mean little, while your ability to make correct decisions and make people want to follow you in the long term becomes far more critical. That means high Diplomacy checks, good knowledge skills, etc. Military leadership goes to Cloistered Clerics, Archivists, and Bards... great wide area buffs combined with the skills necessary to get all those Strategic Advantages. Party leadership throws Warblades and Crusaders into the mix, since you don't need so many random skills but your ability to buff your party matters a lot more.

[Godskook]

I'm also using this to figure out what PC class a feudal lord would encourage his children to train under.

To know that, you must answer this:

1.Which classes are 'trainable'(wizard, fighter) rather than 'tappable'(sorcerer). The latter variety will almost never show up as a Lord's obedient heirs(a prodigal, maybe)

2.Which classes are thought to be trainable versus tappable. This will have another dramatic effect on if a Lord sends his children to learn that trade.

3.Finally, which classes are socially acceptable to the Lord's country. Druids, Rogues and Rangers are typically not of noble birth, especially not the firstborn, unless the society has an unusual naturalistic worldview.

[umbrapolaris]

the paladin or cleric, someone with martial aptitude and a strong aura of command.

if i was a soldier i would never follow a rockstar or a scientist on the battlefield ^^ (ok the analogy is extreme :p), i will follow someone who can understand and share my position.

[Gavinfoxx]

Could you explain Spot and Listen?

Ever heard of the term "Fog of War"? In reference to medieval and renaissance and ancient style battles, it talks about the insane amount of dust, smoke, noise and confusion going on. Spot and Listen means you can pick out movements from far away, orders shouted from elsewhere, a unit in trouble, spot an ambush (along with maybe knowledge history), etc. etc.

Also, has the Bard taken Perform Orate as his or her perform skill?