[PF] How to run a campaign with war

[arixe]

So ive been playing dnd for a while and i was wondering if there are any tricks for running a campaign with war.

[Bhaakon]

Steer clear of involving the PCs in big battles, at least directly. Have them going off behind enemy lines to gather info, assassinate enemy leaders, steal important magic items, etc. Send them on diplomatic missions to neutral countries. Have them quest after lost magics to aid the cause. Make sure that all these missions (successful or not) have a stated impact on the war effort, so they feel like they're actually involved, even though they're not n the rank and file.

If the PCs do get mixed up in a battle, don't let it be in the front lines of en epic LOTR-style showdown between armies. Give them a limited scope and a simple goal: hold this tunnel against a cadre of flanking enemies, guard the camp from a group of cavalry that broke through the defenses, sneak behind the enemy lines and sabotage their catapults, use these captured uniforms to intercept and misdirect the enemy reinforcements, etc. A classic is having both armies agree to send forth chosen champions to decide the battle instead of throwing away thousands of lives, the PCs, of course, get chosen.

Pathfinder isn't designed to simulate the clash of armies, at all, so trying to make it do so usually involves extensive home brewing and disappointment.

[Duncan_Ruadrik]

what Bhaakon said.

In my early career as a DM, I tried large scale battles, because well... its badass, epic imagery. sadly, it goes SLOW. horribly, horribly, slow.

The most involved I let PC's get into the main battle these days is "hold this section of the wall". that way, when the other sections of the wall inevitably fall, they can have a mad rush retreating. The wall gives them cover, they can kill anything that comes up on ladders or siege towers, and they have a fun time. just go light on the arrows, i.e. not realistic. send one or two at each character every round, and thats plenty.

otherwise, do as Bhaakon said, or avoid it entirely.

[Doorhandle]

Maybe if you just run the tiny section of the battle the P.Cs are involved with? Leave the acutraly progress of the fight to fluff, and don't bother rolling. Just run it as a series of encounters are the players are attacked by waves of enermies. Their allies and the foes they arn't fighting with should just be backdrop.

[Andorax]

Heroes of Battle would like a word with you. It's an extensive 157 page answer to your question.

[JadePhoenix]

Heroes of Battle would like a word with you. It's an extensive 157 page answer to your question.

I was about to say just that.

[arixe]

Thanks my buddy wants to lead an army of werewolves so i was just wondering about the logistics of it all thanks for the help

[Jack Zander]

Many a movie scene has the champions of each side fight through a wave of forces to meet in the middle, and fight while their solders seem to form a nice circle around them in the background (either fighting or watching the epic duel). Fluff the first part of this and say they wade through the minions like butter, and then draw the ring of solders on the grid and get down to the interesting part.

[limejuicepowder]

I had some success w/ mass battles before using auto-loss and timing. The battle I was running involved the PC's defending a gate house along with several dozen soldiers. The villain attacked by summoning a horde of dretches inside the walls, and giants pounding and breaking the gate.

The PC's rolled initiative and got their order. They could move and attack as they wanted, as did the giants (6 of 'em). I then broke up the mook-type fighters in to groups, and at the end of each round they would inflict losses on each other (1 dretch would be removed for every 5 soldiers in the area, while 1 soldier would be removed for every 3 dretch). I also set up a number of events; i.e., the giants took 3 rounds to break down the gate and start wrecking stuff, reinforcements would arrive every 5 rounds, etc.

It was a very lengthy battle (3 or so hours, broken up by some dialogue with the BBEG), but well worth it.

[AslanCross]

Thanks my buddy wants to lead an army of werewolves so i was just wondering about the logistics of it all thanks for the help

Then play it by your friend's interests. Is he interested in the minutiae of logistics and willing to work these out without bothering/boring the other players out? Then that's fine. Let him handle the accounting.

Is he just interested in the spectacle of having an epic conflict happening with him and his close party mates in the thick of it? Then Heroes of Battle's model might fight his interests more.

HoB focuses on the characters, and not on the overall strategic element. Think of war movies like Saving Private Ryan, where the war is happening in the background, and the strategic moves of the armies are abstracted, but the party knows their mission, fights their battles, and sets out to meet an objective that helps the overall war effort.

To do this, HoB's primary system is the Victory Point system, wherein the players go fight smaller, but vitally important missions (assassinate leaders, deal with overwhelming threats that would wipe out the weaker grunts, pierce defensive fortifications, etc.) that earn them victory points. The outcome of the war depends on the threshold of points the players achieve. (I actually prefer the take of Red Hand of Doom, which uses smaller values. The use of hundreds and thousands in HoB was a bit hard to swallow.)

The main issue with inserting a war element into an RPG that was in fact reverse-engineered from a wargame in order to focus on a narrative is that you are, in fact, defeating the point. Unless the entire group is into the strategic and tactical elements of wargaming, "moving around nameless units on a map" is not going to hold the same appeal as "getting to play my character."