3.5 Tatical Play - Requesting Assistance

[Barbarian Horde]

So I want to do an invading army for my next session. I do not however want to create a +6000 sheets on both sides for all of the soldiers, blacksmiths, hunters, cooks, etc. So I wanted to dumb it down a bit. My idea was to create tokens representing 250 units as a swarm. A few for siege machinery such as siege ladders and trebuchets. Each player receiving command over tokens I designate to them.

So my question to the community is if someone has done something like this before and if so a better way to improve upon the idea.

[Inevitability]

The Mob template from Cityscape?

[exelsisxax]

Protip: don't. Players have no meaningful way to interact with huge armies unless they're high-level casters. If the players aren't directly participating in something, handwave it.

What exactly are you trying to do?

[OldTrees1]

Be careful with the design of the units.

1) If the group is as durable as the sum of its parts, then the battle will last longer than the already long battle.
2) If the group takes on aspects of its parts, then beware aspects that become overpowering in numbers. I created a mob of Crusaders with Martial Spirit. They made their side invulnerable.
3) Do not mix individual and group units. The PCs are very vulnerable targets if under focus fire from a couple group units. (Although having a PC in a group be represented by a unique trait did work well).

[flappeercraft]

On DMG2 there was a template for what you want it but I don't remember the exact name.

[Barbarian Horde]

I'll look for that template.

Players wont be able to break the swarm up into smaller swarms ether. I'm just trying to keep things as simple as I can.

As for the other post.. I'm creating war. The combat I only intend to last as long as normal combat. The difference is instead of their characters. It will be their troops that ether win or get slaughtered. Which in return creates the next part of the story.

[Scorponok]

I've done this with 6 PCs taking on about 12 soldiers. It is possible, but just be prepared to spend around 3+ hours on the battle. As a DM, there are things you can do such as roll attack and damage together, and group like-units together - example, have all the archers go at once, then the mages, then the soldiers.

It's not even the DM that slows things down, but I find the majority of players will strategize and talk/disagree about tactics every single round, and one round of battle can take 10+ minutes due to this. I set up one battle area, and have soldiers off the battle area but still visible to give the PCs a sense of it being a large battle. Inevitably, they will wander into the other areas - which means you start a new round of battle.

[Loasty625]

Protip: don't. Players have no meaningful way to interact with huge armies unless they're high-level casters. If the players aren't directly participating in something, handwave it.

What exactly are you trying to do?

I agree here. I think the most interesting thing for the party may be to allow them to work as a tactical unit while the great war wages on. You describe what the big picture of the battle is, and the PC's go head to head with the enemy commanders, or go on a mission to sabatoge supply lines, or lead an insurrection in a city that's been taken. This allows the plays to be a part of a war without just becoming one of the soldiers.
However, if you want them in the battle here's what my DM did for my group.
The army was broken into different groups some number strong (I forget, but you can decide. 20? 50? 100?), with the party members as leaders. Instead of 6 second rounds we moved in 6 minute rounds, and the battle grid represented a huge area, each square or hex holding one unit of the army. My DM made each PC have a unique affect on the unit they commanded. The scout's group moved faster and dealt extra damage, for example. This allowed us to still feel like our characters identities mattered while letting us move with the large group.
As for the specific mechanics? I forget. I don't know how damage was represented exactly. I do remember multiple opposed rolls deciding which group lost more fighters. Also that armies that lost enough men (and morale) would route, though I forget how they worked exactly. I think the miniatures handbook has advice and mechanics for some of this stuff.