High levels and large battles

[mucco]

It is generally accepted that a high level party is able to win wars with little difficulty. In case of a situation with high-level characters on both sides, when/how does it become useful to have armies again?

Post any situation in which you think an army is advantageous, compared to just exploiting a few 20th level characters.

Assume mid-op, without the extra strong stuff like Incantatrix or Dweomerkeeper, but including T1s.

[Glimbur]

Armies are (in theory) better than a few adventurers at taking and holding territory. Sure, your 4 people can roll in to town and kill anyone that opposes them, but actually keeping up law and order is trickier. With sufficient spellcasting you can make it happen, of course, but that is because Magic Does It Better (TM).

[ChaosLord29]

Why you still need armies:

High level adventuring parties are not necessarily loyal to a single nation and thus kings and rulers desire to have something that can combat these heroic individuals should they decide to roll into the capitol and try and depose him.

A high level adventuring party cannot be everywhere at once, even if they have a powerful sorcerer capable of teleporting them anywhere all at once. If they're fighting half your army one front, they can't very well be fighting the other half at the same time. It's hard to defeat a party of high level adventurers in any given battle, but they by themselves cannot win a war.

Raising an army of low level warriors and soldiers is considerably cheaper and less time consuming than trying to level up a party of four to six individuals to ECL 15-20.

High level adventuring parties often have bigger concerns than petty squabbles between mortal kingdoms and may very well be preoccupied on another plane just when your kingdom might otherwise need them most. Just because they're off saving the entire planet from elder devils and monstrous creatures from beyond doesn't mean that your next door evil kingdom is going to play nice.

Tarrasque Fodder. Enough said.

Armies are impressive. What other king/queen/ruler let alone your own peasantry is going to take you seriously if all you have to show at the siege is a team of 4-6 individual warriors, however shiny their armor and weapons are. It's a political necessity, even if it's not always expedient.

What happens if that team of adventurers bites off more than they can chew? What if they get trapped on the fifth level of Hell by a conniving Devil? What if the Vampire Lord beguiles them into serving as his thralls? What if they all roll natural 1s and wind up devoured by the epic level tentacled thing now threatening to gobble up everything else in it's path? Do you wait for another band of heroes to make their same mistakes? No, you send in your army to do through attrition what the heroes couldn't do through pluck, courage, and skill.

[mucco]

I should clarify more what I have in mind.

Suppose two (or more) similar empires are at war. Both empires have a handful of high-level characters, above described. Both empires might have access to a large army of level 1 to 5 characters, but none of the empires is entirely willing to use it, fearing large casualties.

In which strategical situation is having an army advantageous over not having it? In which situation would one empire prefer to use this army rather than just send the high level big cannons? In which situations is the risk of losing large amounts of people worth a gain? How can an army in an open field be effective, with the support of high level characters, against similar forces?

[whibla]

"A Natural 20 is always a hit"

One advantage of an army over a small group is action economy. One thousand low level archers fire their bows. 50 of them will hit. If they only have a single available target the chances are that target just died.

Sure, a high level party has, potentially, great defenses, and awesome fire power, but most of those can be overcome by specific lower level abilities.

Besides, if one group of high level characters are off dealing with their opponent's army, what's to say their king will still be on the throne by the time they've finished? What were the opposition's high level characters doing while this was going on?

Armies are for fighting armies, taking and holding ground, intimidating and inspiring the populace, besieging and occupying castles, and so on. Yes, high level characters can swing the tide of a battle, but they wil not win it themselves, especially in the face of equal opposition and overwhelming numbers.

[NichG]

I had a high level group of PCs simultaneously fight three invading armies on three fronts a thousand miles from eachother. They actually lost one front, but managed to hold the other two. It was interesting in that they had to split their group, so some people who had relied a lot on support from the rest of the party had to stand on their own. The reason they lost the one front wasn't that the army beat them down by the way (against the regeneration, invisibility, flying, etc, etc the army couldn't even get them with the action economy), its that the army caused enough damage to that area and advanced far enough that there really wasn't anything left to save at that point.

Practically speaking, I'd say that an army is good for being thorough. PCs are great for killing 'that one guy' or killing 'lots of people in this area', but if you have to make sure there aren't any foreign spies entering the city, you need a person at each entrance, and PCs aren't going to stand around. If you need to get every single refugee from a place rounded up because one of them might be carrying the MacGuffin artifact that has been shielded from magical detection, an army is better at it than a group of PCs. You need to burn a city, hire PCs; you need to loot a city quickly, an army will do better and they won't steal the most important item for themselves (won't even recognize it, most likely).

[Aharon]

Buffs work on low-level guys just as well as they do on high-level guys. Assuming a standing army and sufficient ressources, you can enhance your army quite a bit. Here, examples without cheese are given:


Metamagic School Focus: -1/Metamagic
Practical Metamagic: -1/Metamagic

Focused Specialist 2/Master Specialist 3/Incantatrix 3
int 18
race 20
level 22
age 24
Spellcraft 11+int 7=18
+7 circumstance
Ring of Spellcraft +8 (6400 gp)
Ring of Spellcraft +8 (6400 gp)
Amulet of Spellcraft +9 (8100 gp)
Headband of Spellcraft +9 (8100 gp)

Artificer 8
int 18
race 20
level 22
age 24
item (4000) 26
Artificer 8
Cleric 9
Bard 4
Wizard 7
Wizard 5/Incantatrix 3

Prayer (Cleric 3, Paladin 3) DC 45/54 40 ft./Widened 80 ft.
Blessed aim (Blackguard 1, clr 1, pal 1) DC 39/48 50 ft./Widened 100 ft.
Righteous Wrath of the Faithful clr 5 DC 51/60 30 ft./Widened 60 ft.
Interfaith Blessing (Cleric 2) DC 42/51 20 ft./Widened 40 ft.
Widened Persistent Allegro (Bard 3) DC 42/51 20 ft./Widened 40 ft.
Persistent Recitation (cleric 4, Purification 3) DC 42/51 60 f./Widened 120 ft.
Elation (Clr 2, BoED), DC 42/51, 80 ft./Widened 160 ft.

+2 morale STR
+2 morale DEX
+5 ft. movement
+3 AC
+5 ranged attacks
+2 ranged damage
+6 melee attacks
+6 melee damage
one additonal melee attack per round when making full attack
30 feet movement


when high level cleric is doing the routine:
Widened Persistent Crown of Glory (Glory 8)
+4 morale bonus on attack rolls,
saves, and skill checks, immunity to
fear effects, and temporary hit points
equal to your caster level (maximum
20).
Widened Persistent Lion's Roar (Cleric, Courage 8)
+1 morale bonus
on attack rolls and saves against fear
effects, plus temporary hit points equal
to 1d8 + caster level (to a maximum of
1d8+20 temporary hit points at caster
level 20th).
Sacred Heaven Pal 4
+2 sacred AC, retain dex bonus to armor while flatfooted/against invisible opponents

Those buffs make a 1st level warrior dangerous to a 5th level character, and I'm sure there are others.

Of course, the best use of troups is fodder for Polymorph any Object. Unlike objects, they will be able to keep fighting if they are dispelled - and PaO makes for quite good fighters.

[bigstipidfighte]

Volley Fire rules from HoB mean that commanding a unit if low-level guys is often a better use for a mid-to-high level fighter type than trying to smash in the enemy's face. Doubly so if AoE buffs are being handed out.

Yes, this unit can still be taken out with one fireball, but that's also one action the wizard didn't spend Dominating the fighter in question.

[jackattack]

Because you can't get a party of level 20 characters to hold a pass for a year, or collect a copper from every peasant who crosses the bridge over the river, or maintain order in a conquered city until the population accepts the new ruler, or a host of other things. Characters provide the fantasy equivalent of air superiority, or shock and awe. It still takes infantry to win a war.

It is also likely that an army is actually cheaper than the high level party. You can get a dozen or more solders or mercenaries for the same money you have to pay a high level character, even hundreds more if your kingdom practices conscription or mandatory service.

Plus, hope springs eternal. There is always a chance that your army might overwhelm the characters, or that a champion might suddenly appear in the rank and file.

[Tvtyrant]

Or you make good use of feats and have your soldiers fire ranged acid touch attacks at the enemy, with tons of damage between them.

[SowZ]

So a gnomish settlement with about 300 soldiers a sorcerer and a bard was being besieged by an army of 5 trolls, a hill giant, 200 goblins, a siege engine, 200 orcs, 5 dark elf wizards, a band of 30 human mercs, and a huge worm. The party of PCs, while they did more than all the soldiers combined, COULD not have done it without the army of gnomes. They positioned them to hold off the mass of forces on flanks, watch their backs, swarm and slow down the stronger mobs, maintain defenses/traps, etc. etc.

Just because the players did more than the army, didn't mean the players didn't need the army. Since without both groups the gnomes would have lost, both groups were equally necessary. What adventurers can do in supporting an army they cannot always do without an army.

[bigstipidfighte]

Or you make good use of feats and have your soldiers fire ranged acid touch attacks at the enemy, with tons of damage between them.

To be fair, at that point I'd have to assume optimized 20th level characters as well, which is not what the OP laid out when asking the question.

[mucco]

To be fair, at that point I'd have to assume optimized 20th level characters as well, which is not what the OP laid out when asking the question.

Yeah, I'm assuming Invisibility and Resist Energy exist. And, you know, stuff T1s can cast after level 3.

An army will not, and can not, hamper in any way directly a group of mid-op level 20 T1s. We're talking people who are too bored to fight and will bind a demon to do the work for them, with his invincimode DR 15/cold iron. They do not need to spend actions to dispatch ordinary soldiers.

Also, I'm talking on a strategical level. Not counting aftermath - I'm not interested in how adventurers can rule after the battle.


examples without cheese

Ring of Spellcraft +8 (6400 gp)
Ring of Spellcraft +8 (6400 gp)
Amulet of Spellcraft +9 (8100 gp)
Headband of Spellcraft +9 (8100 gp)
Yeah. Also, Incantatrix Artificer PAO. See the OP.

NichG raised a couple interesting observations.

[Oscredwin]

Disagree with one point



Armies are impressive. What other king/queen/ruler let alone your own peasantry is going to take you seriously if all you have to show at the siege is a team of 4-6 individual warriors, however shiny their armor and weapons are. It's a political necessity, even if it's not always expedient.


You're not showing up with 4-6 individuals, you're showing up with Hercules, Merlin, Beowulf, Mab, and maybe Saint Peter and William Tell. All of which are equal to their legend. That's better than an army.

[Aharon]

+spellcraft

That's just in the example to do it at as low a level as possible, and I don't consider +skill items extraordinarily cheesy. You can reach the same goal with a higher level Artificer and without the Incantatrix. The principle - low-level goons can be made important with buffs - remains.

[Maugan Ra]

Wars are about more than simply slaughtering the other army. If you start a war, it's because you want something that the other side has. Territory, resources, that sort of thing. Taking and, more importantly, securing those things is what the army is for.

An adventuring party or similar group of champions cannot be everywhere at once. They have their place in a war, most definitely, but they cannot fight it by themselves.

[dantiesilva]

The only point I see high level party being more useful then an army is when the forces are dug in and you do not want to lose to many forces. After all with the arrow volley ability that was mentioned above and the acid touch attack that was mentioned above a level 5 group of 20 could do a lot of damage saying if you combine the two now that is 5d6 a person out to 60ft because of spectral hand. For a grand total of 100d6 focused on one area, that is like emptying a caldron of acid into a trench, it will engulf anything in its path. Best part is you do not have to hit any one persons AC you are attacking an area which does not move and has a AC of like 10 to hit. And if the army really wants to show of their power they line up 20 hulking hurlers and do the same thing. Sure the PCs can do it quicker and more effective, but they also do not want to just sit their, the PCs are more the leaders of bands in the army or generals, that way they are still needed but are able to move around a lot more and thus don't have the castle feeling that is very annoying for almost any DM. Its why I don't let my PCs make castles, because then refuse to leave it in fear someone will take it over. In the end what I am saying is if you want to do a war game it should start from low levels that way they work their way up, or they themselves are a strike team sent in to weaken the heavily fortified positions. Need a dragon killed send in the PCs, need a mountain pass guarded send in the army because the PCs will get bored eventually and make a wall or something and then leave.

[ka_bna]

Wars are about more than simply slaughtering the other army. If you start a war, it's because you want something that the other side has. Territory, resources, that sort of thing. Taking and, more importantly, securing those things is what the army is for.

An adventuring party or similar group of champions cannot be everywhere at once. They have their place in a war, most definitely, but they cannot fight it by themselves.
This. And http://www.clausewitz.com/readings/Principles/#IIIa

[Yahzi]

The mundane army has two roles in D&D:

1) Occupation. Essentially, making sure the peasants pay their taxes.

2) Scouting. Among high levels, he who strikes first wins. Thus, the army serves the same role mooks do in a dungeon; walking in front until something kills them. Then, the party kills whatever revealed itself.

Smart people know this, so when your army rolls in, they match it with their army. When one side's mooks start to loose, their high levels have to pitch in, which reveals their location, which means the other high levels get to insta-gib you. So its in your best interest to make your mooks beat his mooks without your help.

[strangebloke]

What the heck is a group of 20th level PCs doing fighting a war? They can probably topple both goverments and split the loot.