Risk + 4e = ???

[DragonBaneDM]

Hiya! I'm currently running a 4e game where the party has brought an end to the gang war between the bandits and worshippers of Asmodeus in Bael Turath by exterminating their leaders.

Now, of course, two of my players want to seize the oppurtunity to take control of Bael Turath, and the fighter has started to have delusions of an empire.

Of course, the two of them believed it was going to be as simple as them saying "Our army attacks. Our empire expands.". Ha!

Wrong.

So, I decided to do things a little...differently than most war campaigns. Throughout this campaign, I'm going to give these two, along with the rest of the party, oppurtunities to use their army. I plan on doing this by using the basic Risk engine.

The first battle is planned to take place in Fallcrest, where Amros Kamroth, who has gone on to become a high cleric of Tiamat by this point in the game, has taken control. So, the party can do one of two things: Sabotage or war. I truly hope they choose the latter.

I'm going to divide Fallcrest up into sections, and the difference will be that controlling these sections helps, but is not the main goal like in Risk. There will also be different types of units with different move speeds, ranges, and damage dice, from Tiefling Scouting forces to Minatour Infantry to Heavy Fallcrest Cavalry and back again.

Then there is the party themselves, which you can see in my sig. They each add in their damage die, retain a large scale version of a few of their powers, and have different bonuses that they give to the section they're in and possibly those around it. For example, the paladin will give bonuses to totals on defense and is a native of Fallcrest, so any faithful to the Lord Warden will recieve bonuses from him.

If a section that a PC is on becomes defeated, the player has to fight a short encounter to see if they become captured or not.

Also, different locations help out a lot. For instance, Teldorthan's Forge will give any units controlling it improved damage dice as long as they remain on it, and the first attack they make leaving it.

Any suggestions, hints, or comments may be helpful. And I'm not having them "run missions like assassinations, poisoning water supplies, and disrupting enemy supply lines". I've always found that...lame. I want to give them the taste of true battle!!!

[DracoDei]

A priori of reading your actual entry, and thus based solely on your title, I will tell you that it equals "You have my attention... whether you can keep it or not is another question..."

And, also before reading... it is a good match-up... they have about the same level of depth and complexity...:smallbiggrin:


Edit: Ok, now I have read it, and paused a while to let it percolate in the back of my brain, then skimmed it again...

This is experimental... it might not work out, and then you will have to figure out some other way of handling things... underline this fact to your players... not so much because it might not work out, but to set up what, if properly done, could be a very memorable experience... because you should NOT pass up this chance to have a battle involving at least 100 combatants... on each side... not counting any minions... 4E has the simplicity to pull it off, and you may not get a chance this good... pick some memorable and interesting battle with closely match combatants on each side, and then say "You know how I said we were going to try something else if this didn't work? Well I kinda lied... were going to give this a shot no matter what happened basically... next few sessions will be taken up with ONE fight..." use a camera, or X/Y coordinants to record the positions on the map of everything when you have to stop, assuming you can't leave it set up... or maybe others have better idea... but, once again... DO NOT pass this up...

Also, the mini-encounters to escape from lost fights should often start with dailies, utilities, and/or encounter powers of your choice expended.

Lastly... RANGE as a property of units? They would have to be very long range seige engines, or LOS limited ONLY rituals or something... or... I dunno... just seems a bit odd to be using the Risk engine with ranged units differentiated out...

[Thane of Fife]

If possible, I would strongly recommend trying the Samurai Swords (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/221) or Axis and Allies engines instead - they both already make allowances for different unit types.

The boardgamegeek link (above) has the rules more or less available. The game itself is more complex than Risk, but not by much - it's kind of like Risk mixed with Axis and Allies.

The rules for Axis and Allies should be available on Avalon Hill's website. They probably won't work quite as well as the Samurai Swords rules will.

Samurai Swords should work well because it already distinguishes between armies led by characters and armies not led by characters.

[Mando Knight]

Chainmail! Good Ol' Gygax's (rolls d20 in honor of his memory) recommended method of resolving huge battles.

[Shadow_Elf]

Have them play Dungeons and Dragons Miniatures and say that each figure represents X number of guys?

If you have miniatures anyways, just find some relevant stats on the Wizards website and give them each Warbands appropriate for their respective Empires. Then watch them carve each other up!