Limiting a Players army.

[Omegas]

Looking for any good (book) rules that indicate any kind of limit on a players entourage. I got a player with a companion, familiar, exotic mount, mercenary followers, two constructs, and they can summon creatures.

This is the only info I could find and I am uncertain what book it possibly came from.


Limiting a player’s army = A player is limited to one companion, conjured combatant (spell), familiar, and mount on the game board at a one time. Constructs decrease the party’s experience so they can have as many as they want. If mercenary Followers or Cohorts die it hurts a player’s leadership score, so a player may have as many as their leadership score will allow. With the exception of familiars and mounts most creatures act as they see fit on a battle field. The player only has time to issue one simple command in a six second round (free action), and that’s provided the creature(s) can hear and understand the command. Beasts require a Handle Animal check to obey and extra-planar creatures are not always fluent in common. Summoned creatures know who summoned them and they normally attack who “they think” are the enemies.

I did not think there was a limit on construct as when they are destroyed their maker gets damaged. Nor did I know they effect EXP perhaps by counting them toward the party size.

Mercs do make lousy combatants but he uses them mostly for ranged attacks, and the party has worked well to keep them alive.

Also if Summoned creatures dont always have common I have been using them wrong. It would make since if every so often there was one that did not, and this would promote mages to invest in speak language. For the most part it is rare for any player to pick up the 4 elemental tongues.

I dont want to deflate my players teamwork, nor do I want to expose them to an encounter tailored against their style, but there should be some kind limit to the number of entourage one player can bring to the field. I am just not finding it in the book.

Thank you for any book references.

.

[Toliudar]

The main danger with a large entourage is that resolving their actions takes up a disproportionate amount of game time. If the other players are getting restless or resentful, it's time to talk with the player OOC about cutting back. This is of course less of an issue in PBP.

Similarly, if the player is hogging the limelight, and you're getting a vibe that other players feel useless or underpowered, deal with it OOC.

And of course, if you as DM simply consider it too much of a PITA to keep track of all these things, just say that.

The quotation sounds like it came from the miniatures handbook or something similar. I'd be inclined to be less rigid with numbers. If you think it's fun to reinforce the fact that elementals don't speak common, go for it. It certainly is a small counter to the power of casters.

So: the limit is what you and the player would care to set. Most people don't bring a large entourage into a dangerous situation because it ends up being not quite so much fun (on top of any concerns about dead or not-so-useful minions), not because there's a rule about it.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Ban Leadership. It's broken anyway.

Wild Cohort is fine, though.

[Omegas]

Actually the whole party is on board. They want to see how far they can take it and I am sure it wont be long until they "believe" they can face something they cant handle. The thing is when they cross that line the casualty rate will probably be high and it could take a lot of what they have been working for. Its a slippery slope that I was hoping there where some book rules on.

Its true that it takes a bit longer but none of them seem to mind. Still looking at their side of the field makes it hard to judge an effective encounter.

[Toliudar]

I'd think that the presence of multiple minions would make it easier to communicate that an opponent is too much for them to handle. Nothing like having a baddie squash half a dozen minions with one spell/swing/big rock to give the group a wake-up call.

Minions generally require some kind of commitment of resources - resources that abruptly go away when someone pushes your shield guardian off a cliff. As long as the players are okay with having their precious gold invested in things that might go up in smoke, and are enjoying the army-building, I fail to see an issue.

[Emperor Tippy]

Don't limit them. If a player wants to invest their wealth into golems and the like than let them, it tends to make them alot weaker than normal thanks to fewer magical items.

The only good adventuring golem costs 138K to buy (74K to create). Then add in the cost of a permanent Telepathic Bond so that the player can direct it. And if you blow all your WBL on them then it works out as a CR 16 encounter when you are ECL 20.

Spending 200K or so on an advanced shadesteel golem (get it over 21 HD and it qualifies for epic feats) can be well worth it but large armies of constructs just tend not to be worth it. You end up breaking WBL to get an army that is really useful.

Leadership, Mind Rape, and similar methods of getting armies are worse. As is Ice Assassin and Simulacrum.

[Jergmo]

You should look into Heroes of Battle (assuming you don't already have it) - it will likely be a great help in scenarios with player forces like this.

[Omegas]

Ok here is the thing. The whole party is crafters. They all make something but not the same things. They are all grinding money and exp to make this stuff and they are not advancing in levels. Thus their EPL is not rising. I have been exposing them to slightly higher then normal CRs but this is only providing them with more EXP and Gold to mill into more stuff. They can keep this going indifferently.

Here is an interesting point = Is it true that construct count to the party size. If so this would balance out the EXP if not the gold?

[Emperor Tippy]

Players don't get to break WBL. Regardless of what they do they aren't supposed to have more wealth that that, whether they craft, steal, or wish up that wealth is irrelevant.

If you want an IC reason for the limit then just say that individuals can only handle so many magical items (including constructs in the vicinity) before the strain causes them to explode.

[Omegas]

Normally I would agree. But just because they are at their max WBL is a poor reason to suggest that the creatures the continually defeat are penny-less. Thus far they are eating up (years) age but that is hardly a limit in any D&D standard.

Still your point has merit.

I have read Heros and it gives many good ideas on how to work with team work in a war field, but I can not recall them indicating a max party limit. I will read it again tonight.

[PoisonAlchemist]

Well, what are they defeating? I know the monsters I give my party typically don't walk around with +1 magic items and my NPCs are built to not need much in the way of weapons and armor. Throw some totemists and beasts at them for a while. VOP druids and monks. Maybe thieves beat them to the tomb/dragon/whatever. Maybe there has been a sudden demand for a material and the price has skyrocketed to 500% PHB value. Maybe they want to make something special and must go on a month long journey to find the appropriate technology and components. Get creative.

[CTrees]

If you want an IC reason for the limit then just say that individuals can only handle so many magical items (including constructs in the vicinity) before the strain causes them to explode.

Mwahahahaha I would love this. Reverse pickpocketing copper pieces with light cast on them until things start exploding... yes... or simply building dozens of fine constructs and having them fatally swarm my enemies...

[Omegas]

Mwahahahaha I would love this. Reverse pickpocketing copper pieces with light cast on them until things start exploding... yes... or simply building dozens of fine constructs and having them fatally swarm my enemies...
I think he is refering to the telepathic link.

Well, what are they defeating?
Currently they are facing an averaged of +5CR encounters, Varying from No gear mobs to Low gear savages. Most all of the loot is Savage Items thus half value. A nice trick to throw some geared encounters without high loot returns.

[Varil]

The easiest way to keep players from "grinding" is to remember that the DM is in control of how encounters turn out, ultimately. Up the scales and don't be afraid to start destroying those minions they're trying to build up. Don't be vindictive, but make it clear that the encounters aren't going to scale back just because the players themselves refuse to level.

Basically, if the players are increasing in power, so are the encounters. Don't count the golems as extra players, but try to estimate what CR the players(and their army) actually represent, since their levels clearly no longer reflect it.

Or start having thieves target them. If they're known for collecting riches, it'd make sense for them to become a mark for some enterprising thief. Turn it into an adventure(Such-and-such the famous thief makes off with their loot, suddenly the players have to use skills like tracking or gathering information to hunt him down.)

[opticalshadow]

you dont need a guide to limit an army, IMO it jsut comes down to agreement. i love playing dread necro, and my control limit gets insane, yet a way i get to have fun with it is by having them do things in the back round (running my lair and such) while onyl keeping a couple of brutes as body guards.

id suggest the same apply. the agreement is generally, my turn (combined with my other creatures) cannot take more time then (X) the time of anyone elses. the last group i had, it was no more then 2 times longer, or a few minutes, whichever was shorter. id suggest a similure rule for time matters.

for power matters, we have gentlemens rules. the same things that druids clerics and wizards do, and thats jsut generally not being stupid strong.

[Thomasinx]

Normally I would agree. But just because they are at their max WBL is a poor reason to suggest that the creatures the continually defeat are penny-less. Thus far they are eating up (years) age but that is hardly a limit in any D&D standard.

I have two questions here:

1.) Are you keeping track of their character's age? If these players are human or a few other races, their life is ticking. If you tell one of them "by the way, your strength, dex, and con just went down by one due to age", they might stop wasting time.

2.) Why are you letting them spend all their time crafting? Crafting takes 1 day per 1000 gold in the item price, so they are spending the vast majority of their time not adventuring. The world shouldn't stop for them. If they need to kill a dragon, they need to kill it now or there could be repercussions. Another option is for baddies to attack their workshops, or a den of thieves to rob them blind (and they've got to go hunt them down quickly to find their stuff before it gets fenced off).

[Gavinfoxx]

I have two questions here:

1.) Are you keeping track of their character's age? If these players are human or a few other races, their life is ticking. If you tell one of them "by the way, your strength, dex, and con just went down by one due to age", they might stop wasting time.

2.) Why are you letting them spend all their time crafting? Crafting takes 1 day per 1000 gold in the item price, so they are spending the vast majority of their time not adventuring. The world shouldn't stop for them. If they need to kill a dragon, they need to kill it now or there could be repercussions. Another option is for baddies to attack their workshops, or a den of thieves to rob them blind (and they've got to go hunt them down quickly to find their stuff before it gets fenced off).

But... characters SHOULD have downtime. Why is it vital to limit their army in general? Just let them have an army or whatever... really...

[Solaris]

But... characters SHOULD have downtime. Why is it vital to limit their army in general? Just let them have an army or whatever... really...

Because DMing shouldn't look like an accounting session.

[Morph Bark]

Cohorts don't decrease a party's XP, so that is probably not an official source you got that from. :smallconfused: Likewise, if followers die, your Leadership score drops by 1, but if more followers die after that, the Leadership score does not drop further (while it does do this with repeated cohort deaths).

With constructs it would depend I'd say. If the players created them, they invested their resources in them and thus should count as being a part of that player, and as such not get any XP. If it travels along with them, then maybe it should get XP and thus decrease XP for the rest of the party, but that is dependant on the DM. Same goes for undead and other creatures.

[Ranting Fool]

I do find that players who build up a large number of minions can make things take time (more so if it is just one player who has a whole bunch of things to do that take ages while the rest of the party sits around waiting for their single action)

Me and my players don't have a set limit as such, more of an understanding that if each turn of combat takes too long then it's just not as fun (that said having an smallish army could be rather fun from a RP point :smallsmile: )

Leadership gives you one nice cohort 2 levels lower then you.... and a vast number of rather squishy warriors/commoners/experts which could die in horrid ways to AOE. There is a fair number of spells that work on the targets hit dice/total HP (which minons tend to have less then masters) which could be used to put them in danger but not risk wiping out your party (Though constructs tend to be immune)

But the best way to keep a party moving along if they are spending TOO much time crafting (Down time is a good thing, and so is crafting, just to a point) is deadlines... like others have said... That evil dragon won't always be sitting around just waiting for someone to come along, the evil cult of evil will be going around doing evil type things and if our heroes don't get out and stop them then bad things will happen (Maybe not to the players but to NPC's they like or towns/shops/kingdoms they have invested time in)

Also I often like to point out that the players "Arn't the only group of heroes out to make a name for themselves (Unless they are) " I often have a party of slighly weaker NPC heroes who the party often hear about/meet who go around sorting out quests that the party never get round to. So when there is a shady halfling selling a map to the long lost temple of loot and your party say "Cool, lets just grind for a bit and craft a ton more stuff that temple isn't going anywhere" unless they make sure the shady halfling doesn't speak to anyone else they'll find out some other brave heroes have been to the Temple of Loot and found great riches/Died in a horrid fashing but destroyed the place.

Oh dear I seem to have ranted on a bit to much there... I had a point to make somewhere in there... Good luck finding it :smallbiggrin:

[Ranting Fool]

Because DMing shouldn't look like an accounting session.

There is always some accounting being done but always best to avoid too much.

Yay for spreadsheets :smallbiggrin: I WILL teach my brother (one of my players) the right way to use one or i'll end up beating him to death with an Excel For Dummies guide!

[Ingus]

Wow, large army.
Cool.

As a DM, I suggest you to throw against them a dragon.
Dragons are always the best way to counter large underpowered armies.
They have fear effects, high HP, DR, caster level (and so AoE spells), a strong AoE effect (breath weapon) and they're big and mean.

As per your description, your party is minimum 8th level.
A good CR11 challenge is a mature adult black dragon in a swamp.
So cohorts, mounts and so on will probably flee as the dragon attacks and as a bonus point acid breath ignore hardness.

Your PCs are crafters, so they may flee as well, reorganize, and chose a more fitted way to procede (advance a level anyone?)
If they don't, well...
Ouch!

[GutterFace]

As a DM i encountered this a few times. I usually have around 4 players at a time. and sometimes you get into the snag of a Ranger, a Paladin, a Wizard, and a Cleric. True story, even at bare bones this is:

1 Ranger + companion
1 Paladin + mount
1 Wizard + Familiar + summoning spells
1 Cleric(evil) + raise dead

it got to the point where keeping track of everything was madness.

so i did what i could do to limit xp and gold gains when they would pull shenanigans. give them choices.

When they were all around level 8 they wandered into a field outside of the main town and ended up facing a Bronze Dragon they clearly could not beat. But the dragon is intelligent and made them bargain. He took half their money and any gems they were carrying in exchange for their lives. This eliminates usage of their "pets" and severely depleted their cash.

The best part of DMing is to challenge your players with non combat choices. anyone can be a swarm summoner and ruin your day. but can they talk their way out of getting kidnapped at the inn at night? can they solve a mystery with combat pets? no. just invent side quests to fool with them and take their war party out of the equation. :)

[Thomasinx]

But... characters SHOULD have downtime. Why is it vital to limit their army in general? Just let them have an army or whatever... really...

It's normally fine to give characters downtime, but it should be kept to a reasonable amount.

One option would be to introduce a 'wandering encounter' chance. (like how wandering monsters were introduced to discourage people from always taking 20 on search checks in every room, everywhere. Basically have a 5% chance for any given day that something time-critical happens in the city or locale near wherever they're working, interrupting their work.

There's also the possibility of making players want to reduce their horde on their own.

One such option has been proposed by several people: Fear auras. Never underestimate the effectiveness of a decent fear aura... especially if you have a few wights sneaking up behind the players to catch anyone running directly away. Having their minions converted into enemies is a great way to discourage large amounts of weak minions.

Another option is to send them in a cave or dungeon without much space. It doesn't matter if they have 50 people with them if only 6 can fit in the room. Even more so if all 50 have to make a jump check over a pit-trap, or a climb check to get past a wall. Once the weaker minions become dead-weights, they might start thinning the herd.

As for one of the OP's initial questions: I dont believe there is an actual limit on the size of an army players can lead. There are several mechanics out there specifically addressing army vs army battles (ie, -large- armies). However, an army is only effective in certain ways: ie fighting out in a large open space against lots of weak enemies without AoEs, or against strong enemies that aren't using their AoE's intelligently.

[Omegas]

Also I often like to point out that the players "Arn't the only group of heroes out to make a name for themselves

This is a pronominal point of view. They may be ready for every other fight in a big way but a second NPC rivel group could be doing twice as many missions. Eventually the second group could surpass their army and take all the jobs.

As for down time I believe in two factors.

If there is a time oriented campaign like - "you have a little less then a year to find out who killed the high king before then next king is crowned," then down time should be kept at a minimal until the mission / campaign is complete.

If there is not a stringent time line, then down time should be in abundance. Simply put no village would survive if every week an Orc attack revenged their homes and stole their supplies. Generally conflict should only arise in desperation or when the risk does not out weigh the reward.

Here is how I handle age. This is an accepted game variant but I would have to look up where and when it was published. http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=240478

[Fatebreaker]

Compromise with generosity. What does that mean? Follow my on this.

Give the players a base they need to protect. Whatever in-game justification is necessary for this, do that. Maybe the king makes them nobles and gives them a fief they need to protect. A knightly order asks them to watch over a chapter house while the order goes on crusade. You know your world better than I do, so whatever works for you.

Why do this?

Suddenly, the players have to leave their army to defend their base. Occasionally let them use the army to defend the base, or on nearby quests. Let them cherry-pick members of the army as specialists for missions. The army becomes a pool of resources, so they still get use out of it, but you can also run missions that are just the party and their immediate followers (familiars and mounts and stuff) without all the riff-raff.

Talk to your players, explain how this is a little bit of give and take; you want them to enjoy their army, but you also want to run some smaller games now and then, too. If they enjoy the logistics of an army, they'll love the logistics of defending a castle or something.

They keep the army, but don't disrupt your game with it. When you're ready to run an army game, it's special instead of a drag.

How does that sound?

[Omegas]

How does that sound?
Sounds grate but so was the idea of having a rival hero group stealing all of the good missions. I think we are a little off track.

I really dont need methods of roll playing, to destroy their army. As many of you have shown great ideas, I am just as creative. To be honest I am just as curious as what the rules are on this as they are.

I have looked through as many books as I could. on this subject. and found little about it.

These are the facts I have found

= > The destruction of a Construct causes damage to the creators hit points. Also it is considered a magical item (at 1/2 normal value for a standard PC), thus wealth by level should be a factor. Constructs do not advance in levels, unless they are something more then the standard construct. So receiving a portion of the EXP as part of the party level does not make since unless it explicitly say they count... (some where in the books? As we all know a rule can be hidden in any part of the book that does not apply to the subject at hand.)


= > Familiars = state that they can not also be a companion so you can clearly have both a companion and a familiar on the field for one player. It does state that you do not receive more then one familiar for multiclassing in wizard/sorcerer.


= > Mercs and cohorts are clear. You can have as many as your leadership score allows and if more then one dies in a single battle then your only penalized once.


= > Summoned monsters = It flat out says in the spell description "If you can communicate with the Creature." I never cough that and by that line it suggest that none of the summoned creatures understand common. I know it is there but I also can not find the limit on casting summon spells. My experience says you can only have one active spell at a time, I know this it is hard wired in my memories, but I am not finding it in the 3.5 books. If not it could get really out of control fast simply by summoning an insane amount of monsters.

These are the Questions I seek answered. I do appreciate your advice but I am more looking for book facts.

[Ranting Fool]

Summoned monsters = It flat out says in the spell description "If you can communicate with the Creature." I never cough that and by that line it suggest that none of the summoned creatures understand common. I know it is there but I also can not find the limit on casting summon spells. My experience says you can only have one active spell at a time, I know this it is hard wired in my memories, but I am not finding it in the 3.5 books. If not it could get really out of control fast simply by summoning an insane amount of monsters.

I too noticed this not that long ago, the "I want my summoned bear to attack the mage" doesn't work if you don't have Speak with Animal on. Now the Summoned Monster DOES really like it's master and will defend them but I just ended up ruling that "Anyone who you are actively fighting before Summon is a target for your Bear,anyone you attack or Anyone who attacks you or People you viewed as a friend when you summoned the bear" So if you summon a bunch of critters before a fight and you don't attack they won't charge unless you do or they feel threated.


This is a pronominal point of view. They may be ready for every other fight in a big way but a second NPC rivel group could be doing twice as many missions. Eventually the second group could surpass their army and take all the jobs.

Yay someone likes my ideas! :smallbiggrin::smalltongue:

[Darth Stabber]

Limiting a player’s army = A player is limited to one companion, conjured combatant (spell), familiar, and mount on the game board at a one time. Cohorts (including constructs) decrease the party’s experience so they can have as many as they want. If mercenary Followers die it hurts a player’s leadership score, so a player may have as many as their leadership score will allow. With the exception of familiars and mounts most creatures act as they see fit on a battle field. The player only has time to issue one simple command in a six second round (free action), and that’s provided the creature(s) can hear and understand the command. Beasts require a Handle Animal check to obey and extra-planar creatures are not always fluent in common. Summoned creatures know who summoned them and they normally attack who “they think” are the enemies.

Necromancers around the planes decry this ruling, as do summoners who like to use the 1D3 of lower level versions of Summon Monster and Summon Nature's ally. There isn't even an allowance for a druid's animal companion. If this list is official, then it should be like multiclass XP penalty, completely unenforced. This snippet is so ridiculous that I don't even think that WotC is ignorant of their own product enough to have published it (considering that the they have printed multiple spells that violate this rule with a single casting, including 16 of them in the PHB). Also Constructs don't decrease XP, they are part of your WBL (and usually a bad use of it).

[Gavinfoxx]

Omegas:

Where are you reading all of these rules? Most of those rules you are mentioning aren't wotc rules at all.

Are you reading them at dandwiki or something?

Are you, you know, homebrewing these as possible solutions?

[Omegas]

Necromancers around the planes decry this ruling, as do summoners who like to use the 1D3 of lower level versions of Summon Monster and Summon Nature's ally. There isn't even an allowance for a druid's animal companion. If this list is official, then it should be like multiclass XP penalty, completely unenforced. This snippet is so ridiculous that I don't even think that WotC is ignorant of their own product enough to have published it (considering that the they have printed multiple spells that violate this rule with a single casting, including 16 of them in the PHB). Also Constructs don't decrease XP, they are part of your WBL (and usually a bad use of it).I will try to trans late that. I think your assuming it says something that it does not.

I am interpreting the one active summon spell to include any way it can be cast which includes a quantity of creatures from a single spell. What I am getting from it you cant cast a second summon creature spell while one is already active.

The construct I could not agree more with you. But I would not put it past the writers to ping player EXP for a golem.

Companions are listed in the first line. You are permitted to have both a familiar and a companion.

As for raise dead, Rebuke undead it does not address that at all.

I doubt this is an official source or if it is (its likely from the mini D&D game) This is just the best info I was able to find and I am interested in the facts. I dont think anyone has ever questioned the limits players are aloud to bring to the table. They simply assume the DM will step in when it becomes a burden or Lime light hog.

[killem2]

I would ask yourself if it is hampering your play style as a dm. Are they tripping over one another in combat? Is your physical play area too small for them?

That is sort of the issues I am facing with my group.

We have as far as PCs go: A Rogue, fighter, ranger, ranger, cleric, barbarian, wizard, wizard. Then, there is a bear cub, a riding dog, elven hound, wolf, two medium vipers, familiar and a swindle spitter. To to mention, anything the wizards summon on to the field that might take up a spot.

Unless it is seriously hurting the way you can conduct your game, then I would just let it keep going. Find some campaigns that are curved to adjust for the bigger party and let them keep adventuring.

If it gets to far out of hand, put the group to the test, give them a really hard battle, see if they make it, if they don't and a total party kill happens, then next session lay the rules out for the the extra bodies.

In my sessions, handle animals has a maximum, of no more than your total handle animal skill (with bonuses) in hit dice to control at one time.