# D&D Wargaming-- Good vs Evil [Waiting List Recruitment]



## Fieari (Feb 25, 2004)

I spent several hours some days ago reading through "How would you defend a mountain fortress" in the archived threads section, and was enthralled by it all.  It was really fascinating stuff.  I was wondering if there'd be interest in running a message board game in a similar style, although with a slightly lower power system.

My thought would be that there would be two sides, a monstrous one, and a humanoid one, in war with each other.  The players would be generals of an army under their care, and would get to design their army and deploy it as they would see fit.  There'd be two threads, one for one army, one for the other, and on the honor system, players would not look between the threads.  When battles occur or scouts report, I'd be the go-between.

I was thinking that each general would get the same EL, by Upper Krust's Immortal Handbook method, which they would be allowed to distribute as they saw fit... though I think a level cap'll also be instituted... no giving a single unit more than X CR.

Would anyone be interested in something like this?  Any suggestions for setting, sides, story, etc?  Thoughts on the rules for set up?

EDIT: The following rules were developed over the next four or so thread pages and are summarized here:

```
ARMY CREATION RULES
-------------------

[b]Point System[/b]
You are allocated 1000 points (to begin with) that may be used to "buy" units 
for your army.  You are not required to spend all your points immediately, but 
may only spend them while in your own country and not under seige.

As you fight, your reputation increases, and you are given more points with 
which you can buy CR.  Even defeats can increase your reputation, depending on 
the nature of the defeat.

[b]Purchasing CR for individual units[/b]
In order to purchase CR, square the CR value, and subtract that number from your
point total.

Table 1: Common CRs and Point Values
CR	Point Value	CR	Point Value
-------------------------------------------
2/3	4/9		11	121
1	1		12	144
2	4		13	169
3	9		14	196
4	12		15	225
5	25		16	256
6	36		17	289
7	49		18	324
8	64		19	361
9	81		20	400
10	100		21	441


[b]Unit Support[/b]
Units with a CR above a certain value known as the "baseline" require support.  
Support required is both in terms of numbers of units, and point value of those 
units. For each unit that requires support, you must have at least a number of 
other, weaker units equal in number to the point value of that unit.  The point 
value of these units must also equal the point value of the unit they are 
supporting.

[i]Cascading Support[/i]
If you have units above the baseline you wish to support other units, you may.  
These units also require support-- however, the support units to this support 
unit contribute to the CR and unit numbers needed.

Example: The baseline is CR5.  You have a CR7 unit, which requires 49 support 
units and 49 support CR.  As part of that support, you wish to add a CR6 unit, 
which requires 36 support units and CR.  To support the CR6 unit, you use 36 CR1
units.  These 36 CR1 units count towards both the CR6 unit AND the CR7 unit.

Counter Example: The baseline is CR5.  You have two CR7 units, each of which 
require 49 support units and CR.  You may not support both with the same 49 CR1
units, you must have 98 CR1 units instead.

[i]Baseline Calculation[/i]
The baseline unit, that is to say, the CR of units that require 0 support is 
dependant on your current total points.  The formula is as follows:
	BaselineCR = sqrt(TotalPoints * 1/40)
This is the same thing as saying
	BaselinePointValue = TotalPoints * 1/40

The following chart describes the baseline CR for various point ranges.

Table 2: Baseline CRs by Total Points
Total Points	Baseline CR
----------------------------
1000		5
1440		6
1960		7
2560		8
3240		9
4000		10
4840		11
5760		12
6760		13
7840		14
9000		15
10240		16
11560		17
12960		18
14440		19
16000		20

If you have a total point value between these points, and wish to calculate a 
baseline CR to a fractional precision, feel free.

[b]CR Caps[/b]
No unit in your army may have a point value greater than 1/4 your total points.

Table 3: Maximum CRs by Total Points
Total Points	Maximum CR
--------------------------
900		15
1024		16
1156		17
1296		18
1444		19
1600		20
1764		21
1936		22
2116		23
2304		24
2500		25
2704		26
2916		27
3136		28
3364		29
3600		30

[b]CR Rules[/b]
In order to accomadate customized creatures (which are welcome) and to have a 
more realistic and fairer value for most monsters, we are using Upper Krust's 
modified CR values and system from his "Immortal's Handbook".  The PDF for this 
system is provided free at the following thread:
[url]http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=66470[/url] 

The PDF available for download at that location provides a list of CRs for most 
of the standard creatures in the D&D universe, and you may use these values.  
The column to use is "Silver Rule" which is the fourth number next 
to each monster.

[i]PCs and NPCs[/i]
PC and NPC classes are handled more easily.  When using a PC Race with a PC 
Class, one Level equals one CR, two levels equals two CR, etc.  

NPCs, on the other hand, are worth CR2/3 per level.  So a unit with two levels 
in an NPC class is valued at CR1.333

[i]PC and NPC equipment[/i]
These units come equipped with whatever equipment they can purchase with the 
gold they are allotted in section 13 of that PDF, reprinted here:

PC Equipment Value: Level * Level * Level * 100 gp.
NPC Equipment Value: Level * Level * Level * 25 gp.

This gold may not be pooled with other units.  This is each unit's personal gold
with which to buy equipment for him or herself.  The equipment purchased, 
however, may be used to outfit others.

Table 4: Gold by Level
PC gp	NPC gp	Level
---------------------
100	25	1
800	200	2
2700	225	3
6400	1600	4
12500	3125	5
21600	5400	6
34300	8575	7
51200	12800	8
72900	18225	9
100000	25000	10
133100	33275	11
172800	43200	12
219700	54925	13
274400	68600	14
337500	84375	15
409600	102400	16
491300	122825	17
583200	145800	18
685900	171475	19
800000	200000	20

[i]Using Equipmentless Units, or Adding More Equipment[/i]
At your discretion, you may also create PCs or NPCs without equipment, or with 
higher or lower level equipment then they would normally have.

When doing this, modify the CR of the unit as follows:

For each level of equipment REMOVED from a unit:
	Subtract CR0.2 per level for PCs
	Subtract CR0.125 per level for NPCs
For each level of equipment ADDED to a unit:
	Add CR0.2 per level for PCs
	Add CR0.125 per level for NPCs

[b]Unit Experience[/b]
PC and NPC units will gain experience and level up due to battle.  Starting 
units begin with an additional amount of experience equal to half of what they 
need to reach their next level.

This experience may be used for item creation purposes, for wishes, or for 
whatever experience is needed for.

[b]Additional Resources[/b]
Your army is also given 250,000gp to dispose of as it desires.  This may be used
to purchase additional equipment or materials and components needed for units 
with the required feats to create items.

Additional funds may be obtained through various methods during the actual game.

[b]Purchasing Equipment[/b]
All prices are as listed in the core books.

[i]On The Subject of Horses[/i]
This game makes a distinction between three different types of horses, as opposed to only two in the core books.  Normal, Combat, and War.

Horse: Cost, 75 gp light, 200 gp heavy. Will stay away from battle without a DC20 Ride check.
Combat Horse: Cost, 150 gp light, 400 gp heavy. Will go into battle, but will not attack, and will leave combat immediately if rider lost.
Warhorse: Cost, 9 pts light, 16 pts, heavy. Will go into battle and attack with its rider, and will continue fighting even if its rider is lost.

Please note that Horses and Combat Horses can be purchased as gear, but Warhorses must have their CR be taken into account and truely be part of your army.
```

GOOD ONLY Rogue's Gallery - Don't click if evil!

EVIL ONLY Rogue's Gallery - Don't click if good!

EDIT2: IT HAS BEGUN!

*Evil* --- Evil vs Good: D&D Wargaming
*Good* --- Good vs Evil: D&D Wargaming

Still open to recruits though.  Additional armies added as soon as both sides have equal ready commanders.


----------



## Fieari (Feb 25, 2004)

Oops!  Posted this in the wrong forum... thought I was in "Talking the Talk"!  If a moderator would kindly move it?


----------



## Piratecat (Feb 25, 2004)

No problem.


----------



## Uriel (Feb 26, 2004)

I'm a minis nut, so I'd be into a Wargame using D20, if that is what you are proposing.


----------



## Fieari (Feb 26, 2004)

As I mentioned, what I had in mind was something similar to This thread except that instead of just suggesting how someone else deploys their units, you get direct control over your own armies.  The ranks would be made up with characters designed by you, and they would be deployed as you desire, and then when actual confrontations occure, I'll do the number crunching and dice rolling to figure out what happens (to both sides).

A little more specific than just wargaming with D20.  Additionally, the war isn't the only thing going on... you're going to be generals, so you need a PC as well (which will be part of your army... you can make yourself an epic guy if you want, at the cost of army power, or make yourself weak and get a stronger overall force) and as generals, there'll be roleplaying as usual.  And seeing as how this is a war, politics will be involved, and you'll need to negotiate to cross forign territory if you might need to do that at some point, and you'll need to worry about reprecussions to the landscape and civilians and... etc etc etc.

It's still D&D, but on a larger scale.  Wargaming with a lot more to worry about, you could say.


----------



## Radiant (Feb 26, 2004)

well, I just sold my 6 armies of various wargaming systems but this sounds interesting. I'd love to play.


----------



## Fieari (Feb 27, 2004)

*bump*

Also, again, asking for setting thoughts?  Rules thoughts?

Specific thoughts I'd like comments on: I think this would work well as a mutating game... that is to say, the players aren't constant.  As long as there are an equal number of generals on either side of the war, I'd be able to grow or shrink the players as needed... in groups of two, of course.

Which would mean we could start with two players.  Who wants to be good, who wants to be evil?

Some restrictions that I think will make things grittier... no raising the dead as anything but the undead, which are in general weaker than the living, and even when they aren't, they're vulnerable to a large number of spells and things that only effect them, and do so quite well indeed.  This also means that attrition is possible.  Without this limitation, stocking enough clerics of sufficient level in your army means that armies could take their time and suffer almost no net losses over the course of a campaign.

I'm slightly unconfortable with epic levels right now, but I also don't want to ban epic levels right out.  I was thinking that anything with epic levels counts double their CR towards your army's max.  This means that you'll need to use any epic level stuff more strategicly and carefully.  What do you guys think about this subject?

Similar to the epic level stuff... Gate is also a tricky spell... you could summon an infernal or celestial army of theoretically limitless size.  I'd personally be in favor of banning this spell... thoughts?

I'd also like to encourage the "large masses of troops" epic style imagery.  An army of orcs or skeletons or whatever that cover the landscape like fields of corn just strikes me as cool.  That might not be the best tactical distribution of resources though, so I think some sort of rule needs to be imposed that forces large numbers of units... opinions?

What EL/CR do you think would be good for an army?

I'd also like terrain suggestions.  The "good" countryside should look different than the "evil" countryside.  Mood is important in these matters.  And of course, mountains and lakes and rivers and seas are important for tactics... I think the boundry between the nations should be something difficult to cross, to make reinforcements and supply chains difficult and important.  Like, a desert, or mountain range, or an ocean between the realms.  Well, maybe not an ocean... but a large lake, or a raging river....

I await your responces eagerly.


----------



## Radiant (Feb 28, 2004)

ok, I have to correct myself. After reading through the siege discussion I must say that with all those epic powers flying around these fights are so far removed from conventional tactics that my limited D&D experinces sure as hell won't be enough to manage the burocratic nightmare of that magic explosion.


----------



## Pyrex (Feb 28, 2004)

Fieari said:
			
		

> ... but I also don't want to ban epic levels right out... I'd also like to encourage the "large masses of troops" style imagery...




An easy solution to both problems would be that any creature above CR2 has it's CR squared when figuring how many CR worth of toops each player gets.

Fer ex, you could have each player start off as a captain in charge of 100CR worth of creatures.  After a couple skirmishes you promote them to generals in charge of 1000CR worth of creatures.


----------



## Fieari (Feb 28, 2004)

I like that idea... but instead of just "Square CRs over 2", just square everything.  Which means being able to have EVEN MORE of the really little guys.

So, assuming you get 100CR to work with.

By UKs rules, Kobolds (and Goblins, for that matter) are 2/3 CR.  So each Kobold counts as 4/9 CR to your total, which means you could have 225 Kobolds (or Goblins, or any other 2/3 CR creatures) running around.

On the other hand, if you wanted to stock your army with Nightmares (CR9)... well, you could have one, and have 11 CR left over, so you could have a CR3 creature riding that Nightmare.  Not really that effective unless you're allowed more CR.

That should do nicely.  Since territory and cities'll be important, you'll want to have large masses of creatures, simply for flexibility.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 1, 2004)

Okay... still need some more generals.  Actually... I think I'll call you "Dreadlords" and "Battlelords" instead, so I don't have to keep track of what rank to call you if I decide to have rank advancement like that.

For those of you frightened by the concept of how to deal with magic in combat... well, be secure in the knowledge that your enemy probably doesn't know how to deal with it either.  But then, medieval generals wouldn't know how to deal with gatling guns or airplanes either.  Modern warefare evolved and people learned how to deal with it, so I'm sure you can learn to deal as well.  Neat little emergant tactics will come out, I think, and we'll also discover what kind of units are most feared in D&D warefare.

This information, I think, will be of interest to many people.  Your works will be studied by other DMs.  You may go down in history books!  How's THAT for incentive?

Who wants to be evil, who wants to be good?  I think both evil and good are equally balanced, as while evil can produce undead and all kinds of horrible monsters, good are given all kinds of weapons that deal specifically and harshly with those kinds of threats.

I think I'm going to start you off with 1000CR to do with as you see fit.  That means 12 Nightmares, and 28CR to have riding them, or 11 Nightmares and 109CR riding them.  Alternatively, it means 2250 Kobolds or Goblins.

As a Battlelord or Dreadlord, you'll gain reputation after each victory or defeat, and you'll gain additional CR that way.  Yes, even defeats will gain you CR in certain situations (think how Pearl Harbor pulled the US into WWII) but defeats bad enough may gain you deserters, so be careful on that score.

So we'll work our way up from medium magical armies to epic armies eventually, and I think the entire ride will be very interesting.

Potential Lords: go ahead and post your intial army here.  Future reinforcements will be designed in the IC thread, however.


----------



## LazarusLong42 (Mar 1, 2004)

I'm definitely interested--I'd prefer to play good, and the base concept will be an actual army (of humans) built from squad level up.

I assume that the CR for, say, a Ftr1, is still 1 under UK's system?  Can you post a link to it perhaps?


----------



## Jemal (Mar 1, 2004)

I'ld love to get in on this.  I'm not too familiar with the 'uk' System.. I'm assuming that's a system used in the UK?


Will it be 3.0 or 3.5 D&D rules?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 1, 2004)

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=66470 is a link to Upper_Krust's thread where he posts the pdf with his CR system.  UK stands for Upper_Krust, not United Kingdom.  Sorry, should have clarified.

Unfortunatly, I do not have the money to purchase 3.5, and only have the 3.0 core books.  I do have the Draconomicon however (just bought it yesterday!) and so if you want any dragons or dragonriders, anything from that book is available.

1CR = 1 Player Character Level

Also, when reading the monster lists in that PDF, use the 3rd column... that's "Golden Rule, Rounded Down"


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 1, 2004)

I'm definately interested.  Currently pondering some variety of eeevil army...

If you don't have the books, the 3.5 SRD can be found here.


----------



## Jemal (Mar 1, 2004)

So for our General (IE character), do we square his lvl as well to figure out CR, or is it 1cr = 1 lvl as in your last post?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 2, 2004)

For all characters and creatures, find the CR of that unit, then square that number, and subtract it from your total of 1000.  For most creatures, you can just look up the value on UK's chart.  For the standard player races and classes, just take the class level.  But always square the number when building your army.

You can make up your own critters as well, subject to approval, and the CR for those things such as you make up will be based on UK's system.

I did neglect to mention you get to have gold too... 250,000 gp.  That's enough gold to outfit 1000 lvl one Fighters, plus a little bit extra.  More gold will also come in-- in the form of spoils, and also when you get additional CR.

The gold may be used to purchase equipment, or to purchase materials for your wizards/other item making units to make things.  You may give wizards and other item making classes up to half as much additional XP as they need to gain their next level, and this XP may be spent as normal.

Units DO gain experience from battle, and experience gained this way will NOT count against your CR totals.  In the same manner, dragons age normally, and when they gain more CR with age, this CR is not counted against you.

Supplies, such as food and water, will be supplied free at the population centers on your side... but you'll need to get those supplies from your population centers to your front lines somehow.  I leave that to you.

Have I left anything out?

I'm currently sketching out some terrain.  When I've got a map, I'll submit it for your approval... before the game starts, I'm more than willing to take suggestions.


----------



## LazarusLong42 (Mar 2, 2004)

Fieari said:
			
		

> I did neglect to mention you get to have gold too... 250,000 gp.




<eyes light up> 



> Supplies, such as food and water, will be supplied free at the population centers on your side... but you'll need to get those supplies from your population centers to your front lines somehow.  I leave that to you.




Er... do you mean, you'll leave that to us in an RP sense--or do you mean, I should have a group of commoners to caravan supplies, and those non-combat troops count against the 1000-point limit?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 2, 2004)

I leave that to you in an RP sense... unless you WANT to allocate CR to them.  Otherwise, it'll be commoners who have no fighting capabilities and do not count against your 1000 points.


----------



## Jemal (Mar 2, 2004)

I'm tempted to lead the Undead Hordes of the evil army, but the inherent weaknesses of an actual army of the dead..  Must think...


----------



## LazarusLong42 (Mar 2, 2004)

*The Light Brigade*

This army posting will be mvoed into the RG once it's recalculated.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 2, 2004)

Jemal said:
			
		

> I'm tempted to lead the Undead Hordes of the evil army, but the inherent weaknesses of an actual army of the dead..  Must think...




That's exactly what I'm currently working on.  I wanted to try Demons, but when dretch start at CR3 it just wasn't working.

Currently the main body of the army is Zombie Kobold crossbowmen with skeletal wolf light cavalry.  Undead have huge inherent weaknesses, but my main force is virtually immune to arrows...


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 2, 2004)

LazarusLong42 said:
			
		

> Not all of the statblocks are worked out yet, but I figured I'd post the general overview of the brigade.
> 
> ------------
> *First-Level Supra-units*:
> ...




So, what, your cavalry charges into battle making clop-clop noises using coconuts?  You may want to allocate some CR to mounts... 

Also, Fieari, I assume that PC/NPC levels come with their appropriate equipment in addition to the 250kgp alotted to the army?


----------



## Tonguez (Mar 2, 2004)

This sounds like fun - if there's still room and I can get my head around the system - ...


----------



## LazarusLong42 (Mar 2, 2004)

Pyrex said:
			
		

> So, what, your cavalry charges into battle making clop-clop noises using coconuts?  You may want to allocate some CR to mounts...
> 
> Also, Fieari, I assume that PC/NPC levels come with their appropriate equipment in addition to the 250kgp alotted to the army?



 I assumed that mounts would be considered "gear", given that they are listed in the PHB as such.  If this is incorrect, Fieari, please let me know


----------



## Jemal (Mar 3, 2004)

Pyrex said:
			
		

> That's exactly what I'm currently working on.  I wanted to try Demons, but when dretch start at CR3 it just wasn't working.
> 
> Currently the main body of the army is Zombie Kobold crossbowmen with skeletal wolf light cavalry.  Undead have huge inherent weaknesses, but my main force is virtually immune to arrows...




Allright, they're yours.

Now that leaves me with three choices...

The Magi Nation -  an army of Spellcasters.
The Mongul Hordes - Human Barbarians and Druids
The Dragonic Empire -Several dragons(Younger ones of course)


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 3, 2004)

Interesting options.  The concept of a small army of high-cr (say 4x @ CR15) occured to me as well.  Of course so did the one-man lvl-31 Druid army...

*goes back to trying to make the undead work...*


----------



## Tonguez (Mar 3, 2004)

Pyrex said:
			
		

> Of course so did the one-man lvl-31 Druid army...




Hell! you were thinking of that too!

So much for hit them with waves of summoned swarms!!!!


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 3, 2004)

Something about being able to cast a _Widened Enlarged Storm of Vengeance_ from nearly a mile away appealed to me (there's also just something wrong about _Maximized Elemental Swarm_ too...)


----------



## Fieari (Mar 3, 2004)

Okay.  Sorry I wasn't able to reply to anything yesterday... I was acting as an election official in Maryland.  I'm back now though, but it'll take me a bit to make sure everything posted here is okay.

As for equipment... check "Factor 13" in Upper Krust's list.  Equipment modifies CR... so if you wish standard or PC equipment levels for your characters, you may have them, but this'll change the CR.  Note that all these factors go into each individual's CR -FIRST-, then the squaring happens.

Checking your math now for the rest of what you have.  Will edit this post when I'm done.

As for whether the game is still open to players: The answer is yes.  Post your side and army, but please note, that each side must have equal members.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 3, 2004)

The paladins obviously retain the their 'Summon Mount' ability, but do warhorses for his 'War1' cavalry need to be purchased as equipment or allocated as CR?  

I'm asking because arguably a heavy warhorse is a stronger combatant than the War1 riding it...


----------



## Fieari (Mar 3, 2004)

1st lvl NPC starting gp with which to buy equipment, according to my DMG, is 900gp which can be used to purchase mounts or whatever that warrior needs.

My original intent was that the 250,000gp would be used for giving out all standard equipment, but I've since had a change of heart, especially after noticing that UK modifies CR if you have standard equipment or are unequipped.  So instead, you have a choice: Use "Unequipped" CR values when computing CR, and then use your 250,000gp to equip them, or use the "Equipped" CR values, and use your 250,000gp on whatever else you want.

By the way, I'm doing my own math here, and a War1, with NPC Equipment, is 0.7 + 0.124 = 0.824.  Square that and you have 0.678976.  Multiply by 4, and you get 2.715904, which is a little higher than what you put down for your list (you said 1.777 for 4 warriors)... and since you base your higher calculations on this single lower calculation, everything up from there was mucked up.

Here's the numbers I get...


```
First-Level Supra-units:

Infantry Squad: 3.715904

1 Corporal (Ftr1 - PC Equipment) = 1
4 Privates (War1 - NPC Equipment) = 2.715904

Cavalry Squad: 3.715904

1 Corporal (Pal1 - PC Equipment) = 1
4 Privates (War1 - NPC Equipment) = 2.715904

Archery Squad: 3.715904

1 Corporal (Rgr1 - PC Equipment) = 1
4 Privates (War1 - NPC Equipment) = 2.715904

------------
Second-Level Supra-Units

Infantry Platoon: 52.57952

5 Infantry Squads = 18.57952

1 Staff Sergeant (Ftr4) = 16
1 Sergeant (Ftr2) = 4
1 Priest-Adjutant (Clr3) = 9
1 Priest-Adjutant (Clr1) = 1
1 Mage-Adjutant (Sor2) = 4

Cavalry Platoon: 55.57952

5 Cavalry Squads = 18.57952

1 Staff Sergeant (Pal4) = 16
2 Sergeants (Pal2) = 8
1 Priest-Adjutant (Clr3) = 9
1 Mage-Adjutant (Sor2) = 4

Archery Platoon: 55.57952

5 Archery Squads = 18.57952

1 Staff Sergeant (Rgr4) = 16
2 Sergeants (Rgr2) = 8
1 Priest-Adjutant (Clr3) = 9
1 Mage-Adjutant (Sor2) = 4

------------
Top-Level Supra-Units

Company: 277.31808

2 Infantry Platoons = 105.15904
1 Archery Platoon = 55.57952
1 Cavalry Platoon = 55.57952

1 Lieutenant (Ftr4/Exp2) = 25
1 Master Sergeant (Pal6) = 36

Special Artillery Squad: 60

1 Artillery Commander (Sor6) = 36
1 Artillery Adjutant (Sor4) = 16
8 Bombardiers (Sor1) = 8

The Knights of Light: 51

1 Knight Commander (Clr5) = 25
2 Knights Brewmasters (Clr3) = 18
8 Knights-Errant (Clr1) = 8

------------
The Light Brigade:

3 Companies = 831.95424
1 Special Artillery = 60
1 Knights of Light = 51

All commanded by:

Lieutenant Colonel Carmina Tavarr -- Ftr4/Exp6 = 64
Command Sergeant Major Donnis Zim -- Pal8 = 64

Assisted by:

Meshach, Rorshach, and Horshack -- Carmina's three falcons = 3 [statted as eagles]
Julian Nell, secretary to the colonel (Exp1) = 0.25

Total allocation: 1074.20424 pts.
```


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 3, 2004)

UK's CR calc doesn't use the standard wealth tables.  He uses lvl^3 * 100 for pc's and lvl^3 *25 for npc's, so that War1 should only have 25gp worth of stuff if he stays at .678 CR.  900gp would require between 2.2 "pc levels worth" of equipment increasing his CR to .92^2.

But you still haven't answered the fundamental question.  Is a warhorse a creature or gear?  If so, are all trained animals considered gear?


----------



## LazarusLong42 (Mar 3, 2004)

Hrm.

I was assuming that, since we were using the "rounded-down" rules for creatures, that the same would apply to NPCs and PCs--i.e. CR 1 for PCs, CR 2/3 for NPCs (Just as an NPC goblin War1 was, you said, CR 2/3).  Could you clarify this? 

Also, as Pyrex asks... are mounts considered "gear" or "CR"?  I hadn't actually thought about heavy warhorses being stronger combatants (mainly because with the old money constraints, I was going with light warhorses.)

Also, Pyrex:  Most excellent reference in your "Title".


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 3, 2004)

Anyhow, here's what I'm looking at for the moment.  Not sure how
well it'll fare, but...


```
Ghost Cleric 10 (CR 15.7    ->            246.49)
  Corrupt Touch, Draining Touch, Telekinesis

Wraith Adp 1 x4 (CR 4.6     ->   21.16 ->  84.64)

Wraith x10	(CR 4       ->   16.00 -> 160.00) 

Sk Wolf x250 	(CR 1.25    ->	  1.56 -> 390.00)

Zm Kobold x1000 (CR 1/3     ->	  0.11 -> 110.00)

Total:                                    991.13 CR
```

The cleric (general) and Wraith Adepts are unequipped.

The main body of the army is 10 companies of 100 Zombie Kobold crossbowmen led by a wraith and guarded by 20 Skeletal Wolf light cavalry.

The remaining skeletal wolves are a reserve force.

The Wraith Adepts serve as aides/personal guard.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 3, 2004)

LazarusLong42 said:
			
		

> Hrm.
> 
> I was assuming that, since we were using the "rounded-down" rules for creatures, that the same would apply to NPCs and PCs--i.e. CR 1 for PCs, CR 2/3 for NPCs (Just as an NPC goblin War1 was, you said, CR 2/3).  Could you clarify this?
> 
> ...



Hmm.  The difficulty here arises in figuring out the CR for things not on the long list.  Since humans aren't on the list, I then did the math for what the NPCs would be... but forgot that since the list rounds down, I should also round down.

I think you're right.  NPC classes SHOULD be round down to 2/3s.  Forget what I said before, your math does indeed work out.

Mounts are a special case... they could be considered gear or considered CR.  I say pick one or the other.  You're limited in either respect, after all... limited cash, limited CR.

I'm looking up the price for a warhorse now... but I can't seem to find it.  I know it has to be around here somewhere... anyone know?


----------



## Tokiwong (Mar 3, 2004)

I am intrigued is it too late to say yay and jump on the bandwagon?


----------



## LazarusLong42 (Mar 3, 2004)

Light warhorse is 150, heavy warhorse is 400; military saddle is 20, and barding costs on top of that (4 times "standard" armor cost).


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 3, 2004)

Hv Warhorse is 400gp.  According to UK, a Hv Warhorse is CR 3.5.

A War1 with enough equip to purchase a Hv Warhorse has his adjusted CR changed from .7^2(.49) to .92^2(.85).  The Hv Warhorse effectively "costs" .36 CR.  

Each warhorse that is purchased instead of assigned CR adds a free 3.15 CR to the army.  This is huge.  This makes War1 cavalry dominate the scenario.


----------



## LazarusLong42 (Mar 3, 2004)

Pyrex:  What if we stipulate that mounts don't attack?  Frankly, it's always seemed unnatural to me that you can use your mount's attack as well--have you _ever_ read a description of this happening in a fantasy novel?

For the most part, those cavalry, with Ride-By Attack, should be charging for one attack with their lances each round, and riding by--their horses should not be attacking at all, but be merely a means of conveyance.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 3, 2004)

I see.

Horses can be purchased, Warhorses must use CR (or a lvl2 paladin or higher).  Light or Heavy doesn't matter, just whether it can fight at the same time as the rider.

The only fantasy novel that had the mounts attacking with the riders that I can think of is C.S. Lewis's "A Horse and his Boy" in which Calorman warhorses are said to be trained to fight with hooves and teeth alongside the rider.  The fact that one of these warhorses was a talking warhorse helped too.

And there's still room!  Ii'm not capping the number of players for a while, I don't think... this game is mostly going to be about bookkeeping, and I'm going to be keeping EXTENSIVE notes as such.  May even break out my m4d C++ sk1llz and code a little application to help out.  At any rate, more are still welcome.


----------



## Jemal (Mar 3, 2004)

I'm assuming you're outlawing the LEADERSHIP feat, or at least making it virtually useless in this game..
Otherwise people would just stat up a lvl 31 Sorc, take Leadership, Epic Leadership, Legendary Commander, and have an even BIGGER army than 1000 CR.


BTW, i can't seem to open UK's PDF...

What are the CR values for NPC classes and PC classes with/without appropriate gear value?

And are those gear values the same as in the DMG?

Also, do we get to select our army's feats, etc?

An army of barbarians with powerattack/cleave would kick ass.


----------



## Tonguez (Mar 3, 2004)

Jemal said:
			
		

> An army of barbarians with powerattack/cleave would kick ass.




They certainly do - Heavy Infantry with (almost) the speed of cavalry and some funking power clobbering! (I used them in one of my games and they was awesome!)

Pretty much the four factors that determine success in warfare are

Mobility (Speed), Versatility (able to work in any terrain), Defense capability and Attack strength - a raging armoured DR/- Barbarian has them all covered


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 3, 2004)

Jemal said:
			
		

> What are the CR values for NPC classes and PC classes with/without appropriate gear value?




PC classes are .8 CR/lvl.  An additional .2CR/lvl gets you "standard" PC equipment of level^3 * 100gp.

Fieari has stated that all NPC classes are 2/3 CR/Lvl.  As I understand it you can then either add .125CR/Lvl to gain level^3 * 25gp or you can add .2CR/Lvl to get level^3 * 100gp.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 3, 2004)

As to Leadership... it's "Sortof" allowed, although not by name.  Your Battlelord character has this army under his command, right?  And he/she is leading it, right?

Okay, that was a stretch.  No.  Leadership is outlawed.

Pyrex handled the CR thing.

PC classes get feats, which you can select.

Gear values are as stated unless a balance problem crops up, in which case I'll house rule it.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 3, 2004)

Fieari said:
			
		

> Gear values are as stated unless a balance problem crops up, in which case I'll house rule it.




As stated where?  In UK's doc or in the DMG?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 3, 2004)

Did UK have a gear value chart and I didn't notice it?

Oh!  I think we just had a miscommunication.  I meant, "The price value of individual gear items" are as stated (in the core books) unless balance issues pop up, in which I'll house rule it on a case by case basis.  For example, if the price for something that isn't of much use to an adventuring party (and is thus cheap) is seen to be of GREAT value to an army, I may need to bump up the price a bit.  Probably won't happen, but I said it just in case.

I only just noticed that UK had a guide to gold values for different level characters... and right next to the CR adjustment for equipment too!  I must be blind or something.  UK's values look pretty good to me though... and since it's a simple mechanism instead of a chart, easier to implement.


----------



## Tonguez (Mar 4, 2004)

Point of clarification if we use a standard PC race with class levels does the race count as CR 0 (eg say a Dwarf Fighter 3 - is he Cr 0.8 X 3 (2.4) or Cr 0.8 + 0.51 X 3 (3.93)?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 4, 2004)

The former.  If a PC race, just use the class.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 4, 2004)

Looks like LL's other question got missed, so I'll try again...



			
				LazarusLong42 said:
			
		

> (2)  For statblocks, I assume standard arrays?  (i.e. [15 14 13 12 10 8] for PC-leveled characters, and [13 12 11 10 9 8] for NPC-leveled characters)




Is this how you want to handle ability scores?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 5, 2004)

PC Characters get standard point buy, NPCs get standard array.

Of course, standard point buy means that if you want, you can use standard array as well.  They work out the same.  So if you want to min/max some mages or barbarians, go ahead.  If you don't want to bother, use the array.


----------



## nameless (Mar 5, 2004)

I'd love to try my hand at this game, too, if you'll have me. I've got an idea for a Greek Mythological Monster army that I actually think could be competitive.


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 5, 2004)

I would love to take part in this as well. What books are allowed for making the characters? Can I have prestige classes and the like? (Marshals and Tactical soldiers would be nice.)

EDIT: I'm not sure if I have the right formula, but for a 6th level pc class human, it's 36 CR worth? I plan on having 6th level rangers, 6th lvl fighters, 6th lvl healers, 6th lvl marshals, and 6th lvl war mage's. am I correct in my calculations that I would get 27 creatures to divide among these classes? Also, I recomend that thier be a CR maximium, because I know my proposed army wouldn't have a chance against an advanced CR 31 dragon.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 5, 2004)

I only own the core books and Draconomicon.  Anything from other books, you'll have to supply me with the relevant information (and is, of course, subject to approval-- probably will be approved, but then again, that's assuming you aren't trying for something REALLY game breaking).

Let's see some more armies!  When I think we have enough to start, I'll make the IC threads.  Recruitment won't be closed at that point, as more Lords and armies can be added mid game... but having a headstart may provide an advantage, so the sooner you get your stuff together, the better for you.


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 5, 2004)

(look at the edit on my post if you haven't already)


----------



## nameless (Mar 5, 2004)

Here is my rough army sketch:

3 Harpies (Aello, Octpete, Calaeno): 8 -> 64 x 3 = 192
3 Medusae (Stheno, Euryale, Medusa): 7 -> 49 x 3 = 147
9-Headed Celestial Pyrohydra: 15+1=16 -> 256
Androsphinx: 15 -> 225
Fiendish Chimera: 11+1=12 -> 144

And me, Perseus (Level 6 Paladin) 6 -> 36

Equipment is forthcoming, but I haven't factored it into the CR of anybody, and will simply purchase it with my 250,000. I'm assuming that I can customize the feats of each individual creature (at least the intelligent ones), but do I get standard arrays for the Harpies, Medusae and Sphinx as well?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 5, 2004)

How about if I say that no more than 1/4 your allotted CR can be used up in a single unit?  That's CR15 for 1000.  Or 1/8, which would make a CR11 limit.

What say ye the players?  Not making any calls until I hear what people have to say...

And yes, 1000 / 36 = 27.7777


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 5, 2004)

I think 15 is a good max. 

To explain the classes I was talking about. They come from the minitures handbook, a wotc source. It deals with war. I don't have the book with me, but here is an outline of what I was asking about.

Base class- Marshal- gets "auras." He can have a minor and a major up at the same time. a minor grants a bonus equal to his cha mod
a major grants a bonus dependant on lvl (max +5 at 20 lvl?)
aura radius- 60 ft

Prestige- Tactical soldier- a team fighter. gets abilities that give armor boni to adjacent allies and allow him to intercept blows of adjecent allies. 

Prestige- War Hulk- a mass combat warrior. gets no base attack bonus, but recieves a +2 str every lvl. can hit multiple enemies with a single attack and throw bulders.

that's all I can think of for their abilities, but I may run some spells from that book through you as well. (when I have it with me I will tell more, if someone doesn't by then)


----------



## nameless (Mar 5, 2004)

I could live with a maximum of CR 15. Obviously I'd like to keep my CR 16 Hydra (because the mythological one had 9 heads and reducing that isn't nearly as cool =D), but it's probably better that we don't allow the invincible single-unit army.

Going down to CR 11 would seriously change my entire plan though, since the Sphinx and the Hydra would have to go. On the other hand, I could bring in Circe the Enchanter 11 and give Perseus a Pegasus and a few levels up, so maybe it wouldn't be all bad. =]


----------



## Fieari (Mar 5, 2004)

Ouch, those auras sound like a little bit more bookkeeping than I'm comfortable with at this stage... the fact is, units are going to be going in and out of that range throughout combat.  I don't like the idea of having to keep track of that.  Maybe once we've run a few scirmishes and I've gotten used to keeping track of a couple hundred units in heated combat?  I'd rather keep things a little simpler at first.  I mean... heck... I'm already going to have to worry about area of effect spells, and those tend to be instantaneous in duration!

As for that 16CR hydra... after a few scirmishes, you'll get more CR... when your total CR is only 1024, you'll be able to have a CR16 creature under the 1/4 rule.  1,156 for CR17, 1,296 for CR18, etc.

Under the 1/8 rule, you'd need 2,048 CR before you could have your hydra.

Any more votes from the players?  I'm certainly not going to make a straight CR cap, since eventually I -do- want to see how epic levels work out in warfare, but having single unit armies also doesn't appeal to me either... as I said, waves of flesh marching across the fields just has an awesome feel to it.  Supported by gryphons or dragons above, that's a cinematic picture right there.

Oh, and by the way, you have factored equipment into your CRs... at least for Perseus you have.  When you make a lvl6 paladin have CR6 (squared for point purposes)... PC equipment for lvl6 is factored right in automatically.  Without equipment, your paladin is CR4.8, using 23.04 points.


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 5, 2004)

While trying to create my army, I realized that the smaller I go the better. (aka fewer high lvls are better then lots of low lvls) So after I kept adjusting them to be smaller and smaller, I realized that I was defeating the whole purpose of the game. I think that the max should be lowered even more, (to maybe 4, with one or two able to be 6) or the cap should be highered. Another idea would be to divide us up into 2 groups of 4, with each of us making a "mini army." then four teamates combine to make a larger army. they then individually direct their forces against the opposition, who is likewise set up. my suggestions are only if we want this to be a large scale battle, I am still in if we stay how we have things.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 5, 2004)

What if each unit you have must command a number of units equal to it's point value?  So a CR10 unit must have 100 units beneath it.  If you have a CR5 unit under there, that CR5 unit must command 25 units beneath it, but those 25 units also count towards the CR10 unit's total.

That would nessisitate larger armies while still allowing a small number of powerful units... exactly the sort of thing we're looking for.

This could be combined with the 1/4 rule to keep things reasonable.  Otherwise you could have a level 22 druid ring off the bat, and fill up the rest of the army with 500 level 1 fighters... or have a higher level druid and even more kobolds.  What would happen then is the little guys would be ignored, and the high level commander would be the only thing used, and if we wanted that, I'd just be running an epic level standard game, not a war.  A CR15 unit supported by 225 other units sounds pretty fair to me.


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 5, 2004)

Sounds good to me. Here's what I'll use:

1 CR 10
100 CR 3

I'll use Humans with levels.

EDIT: fixed some mistakes.


----------



## Jemal (Mar 5, 2004)

I've planned on either 

Barbarian hordes filled with lvl 3 barbarians and a couple higher lvl commanders (druids or high lvl barbarian/sorcerors)
OR
Magic Nation filled with about 20-25 lvl 6 sorcerors, filling the rest with either a higher lvl leader or some lower lvl meat shie.. er, Fighters.

I'll stat them both up and post them, then decide which one.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 5, 2004)

Fieari said:
			
		

> What if each unit you have must command a number of units equal to it's point value?




That doesn't work well if someone wants to build a smaller army where thier foot soldiers are >1CR (like, say demons).

And how do you define 'command'?  My undead horde doesn't have a classic 'chain of command' because all the intelligent undead are high-cr.  (the bulk of my army are mindless skeletons & zombies)

I vote to set a CR cap of 1/4 (15.8CR^2) and just leave it at that.   (I like nameless' greek idea and think it's worth letting him persue for now)

If you're dead set on large armies of low CR creatures, just say x% of your CR has to go to low CR creatures.


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 5, 2004)

Here's my army then:

Torgar, Human Barbarian 5/Frenzied Berserker 10

Seylena, Human Swashbuckler 3/Fighter 2/Dervish 10

TaRue, Human Wizard 5/Incantatrix 10

Regis, Human Rogue 5/Assasin 9/Shadow Dancer 1

Tyreus, Human Cleric 10

EDIT: Frenzied Berserker, Swashbuckler, and Dervish are from Complete Warrior.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 5, 2004)

Hmm, the classic adventuring party.  That ought to be interesting...

Tyreus, did you know that the 'Improved Metamagic' ability of the Incantatrix was errattaed to apply once-per-spell instead of once-per-feat-per-spell?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 5, 2004)

Pyrex said:
			
		

> That doesn't work well if someone wants to build a smaller army where thier foot soldiers are >1CR (like, say demons).
> 
> And how do you define 'command'?  My undead horde doesn't have a classic 'chain of command' because all the intelligent undead are high-cr.  (the bulk of my army are mindless skeletons & zombies)
> 
> ...



Command needn't be taken literally... I just mean that you need a certain number of supporting units for every "high powered" unit.

I do see the problem that this creates though... and I think a good solution might be to allow a baseline CR that doesn't need other supporting units.  And if this baseline is based on the total points you have, this can scale nicely as well, which is one of my design goals.

So, let's say that for 1000 points, base line units are CR5 and lower.  CR5 units and below do not need supporting units.  So in this case, the baseline unit is 2.5% of your total points or lower.  To easily determine how many points you need to have a certain CR as a  baseline, multiply the point value of your unit by 40.

So, in order to have CR6 units be the baseline, you'll need 1440 points.  In order to have CR7 units be the baseline, you'll need 1960 points.  For CR8 units, 2560.  Etc, etc, etc.

Again, I'm not implementing this rule without player input.  What say you?


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 5, 2004)

All the 'support unit' concept does is effectively increase the CR cost of high CR units a little.  It just degenerates to people taking huge clusters of CR 1/7 ravens and calling them 'support units'.

I think we can simplify the math and achieve the feel you're going for by setting a CR cap of 1/4, a baseline of 1/40, and stipulate that half your CR has to fall under the baseline.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 5, 2004)

Okay.  Let's try to break that, theoretically, for just a moment.  A theory states that the smaller your army, the more powerful.  Assuming that's completely accurate (it's not, entirely...), the optimal army by anything we describe would be half the army made up of CR5, followed by two CR15s, which is the smallest it can be made.  That's a mere 22 unit army... more of a squad, really.

Under the system I described above, which granted, is considerably more complicated to work with...

A CR15 creature requires 225 support units and 225 points for itself.  225 CR1 = 225 points, meaning that you could then have another CR15 creature with another 225 CR1s.  If you wanted the support units to be CR2, well... you couldn't.  You'd have to mix it up, since 225*4=900, and you've already spent 225 points.

I think the optimal system as such would be to have larger numbers of slightly higher CR units... to average out your amry level a little more... which isn't to say that single powerful units wouldn't be useful, but it all depends on how you use it.  Don't forget all that gold either... assasination gear could probably be contrived that makes single units VERY risky indeed.  Insta-kill spells exist, remember... and Ressurection is not available.

On the other hand, having some players have armies with higher powered units, and then combining forces with teammates in coordinated strikes... well, that's strategy and tactics, the sort of thing the game is going to be about anyway.


But again... thoughts?


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 5, 2004)

You still haven't adequately defined the criteria for a support unit.  Using my degenerate example of the CR 1/7 raven above 225 ravens to 'support' the CR 15 creature only costs 4.5 CR which is plenty cheap to have 4x 'supported' CR 15's.

That's why I recommended tracking support by CR. (i.e. 500 CR worth of high-power beatsticks require 500CR of baseline-or-lower 'support' troops)

Ex: 5x Lvl 10 (equipped) PC's leading another 500x Lvl 1 (eqipped) PC's.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 5, 2004)

Ah... middle ground, and most restrictive.  Spending 225 points means you must spend at least 225 points on at least 225 other units.  So you could have 11025 ravens to support your CR15 unit.  And you know what?  That sounds darn cool to me, how about you?


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 5, 2004)

We're almost there.  It's the 'at least 225 other units' part that's still bothering me because it stops cold any army whose basic foot soldier is >CR1.

A Barbed Devil (CR14 -> 196) should be able to be supported by 22x Imps (CR 3 -> 9 -> 198).


----------



## Jemal (Mar 5, 2004)

OMG!  THE BIRDS, THE BIRDS!!!

I only have one problem with your baseline CR 5 thing... one of my armies is baseline CR 6.. (Wait... a Lvl 6 w/o equipment is CR 5, right?)

Hmm, actually that might work...


----------



## Fieari (Mar 5, 2004)

Well, adding in the baseline concept, that units of CR_n_ and lower don't require support-- that should solve that problem.  Baseline CR is sqrt((1/40)*CurrentPoints)... that is to say, the point value of the baseline unit is (1/40)*CurrentPoints.  Which is CR5 when constructing initial armies.

With that said, your barbed devil will be able to be supported by his twenty-two imps.

For those of you who wish to play and haven't been able to follow very well, as soon as rules are hammered out a little more, I'll post a summary.  You won't have to do any math, it'll all be worked out into tables.

I think this thread'll be kept as rule discussion.  A rogue's gallery might be best for armies... one for good, one for evil. Organization is going to be needed, desperately needed.


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 5, 2004)

I think that our army should be set. Example: 1 CR 10, 400 CR 2, 100 CR 4, 10 CR 6

I suggest this only because I wouldn't want to have my entire army obliterated by 4 CR 15's. This way armies are equal and victory relies on stratagy and tactics, not a 15th lvl Frenzied Berserker.


----------



## Tonguez (Mar 5, 2004)

Too much maths - I'm confused!

But I can still have a Purple Worm right?


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 5, 2004)

Can I make a Mercenary group that works for the highest bidder?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 5, 2004)

No, you can't work for the highest bidder, because I want players to stick to one thread or the other only, for scouting purposes and such.

As I said, don't worry about the math unless you want to.  I'll post charts you can look up.

I'd considered the concept of structuring armies more carefully like that... but it really limits your options.  With such a system, you'd not be able to have kobolds vs humans, just to pick an example.  You wouldn't be able to have eleven thousand ravens fill the air.  Anything that doesn't fill a specific CR would be out.  I like a little more variance.

I'm also assuming that since the two sides will have multiple Lords, they'll be playing to their strengths and supporting each other.  A single druid, or two for that matter, can't defend an entire kingdom from armies. The druid might be able to crush what he finds, but if he can't find the armies... if, for example, the Light Brigade (posted earlier) split up into squads and scattered across the evil lands, torching towns and spoiling fields... what could two druids do against that?  They'd have to be EVERYWHERE at once, and each victory against the light brigade would be a small one... the Light Brigade would be gaining reputation and moral... and little by little evil would be worn down.

On the other hand, if someone on the good team makes up an equivelent level guy, then there're direct counters... both on the defensive and offensive.  Variety helps.

It isn't just army vs army... it's army vs land, army vs civillians, army vs politics.  All can swing the tide.

Besides... 250,000 gold can buy some nice equipment, tailored to your specific needs.  I think that may change the battlefield considerably.


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 5, 2004)

I was only kidding. Have you decided on anything? I think a chart is a good idea.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 5, 2004)

Charts and all rules so far have been added to the first post on the first page.  Go check it out.


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 6, 2004)

Good job and thanks. About attacking and defending, do we need to purchase a castle? How will prices be calculated for such things? I think I've decided on 1 CR 15 with 225 CR 1's for support, and 22 CR 5's.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 6, 2004)

Fieari said:
			
		

> With that said, your barbed devil will be able to be supported by his twenty-two imps.




This doesn't match with what you posted on the first page.  Does a Barbed Devil require 196 CR of supporting units, 196 individual supporting units or both?

Edit:  Also, you have a typo.  Lvl 3 PC gear should be 2700gp.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 6, 2004)

Tonguez said:
			
		

> But I can still have a Purple Worm right?




Nope.  According to UK, a Purple Worm is CR16, we're starting with 
a cap of CR 15.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 6, 2004)

Pyrex said:
			
		

> This doesn't match with what you posted on the first page.  Does a Barbed Devil require 196 CR of supporting units, 196 individual supporting units or both?
> 
> Edit:  Also, you have a typo.  Lvl 3 PC gear should be 2700gp.



I'll admit, I didn't -really- look too closely at that math or the numbers.  Checking now, a Barbed Devil is CR16 by UK, and so no available until you gain 24 more points to use.  But assuming you have them, you'd need 256 support, which is both in terms of units AND point value.  Imps are CR3.5, so are worth 12.25 points each.

So to fufil the point value requirement using only imps, he'd need 21 imps, and then he'd require 236 other units of any CR.  236 ravens would do.  Whatever it takes.

The Barbed Devil's little organization (not actually required to be organized) would have a point value of Ravens+Imps+Devil = 4.81 + 257.25 + 256 = 518.06... only slightly over half the point value of a 1024 point army.

And I'll correct that typo right away.


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 6, 2004)

Will I just post their write ups on the new threads your making?

Made a mistake, will fix shortly.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 6, 2004)

Yeah.  Let me get 'em up....

GOOD ONLY Rogue's Gallery - Don't click if evil!

EVIL ONLY Rogue's Gallery - Don't click if good!


----------



## Uriel (Mar 6, 2004)

Throwing my hat into this one, Elves, although I'm not sure yet if they are surface or Drow....


Mmm...Drow on Dire Bats.


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 6, 2004)

So I'm good right? (using humans)

CR 15 x3
CR 1 x325

Just making sure this is valid. Do I now just write 'em up?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 6, 2004)

No, that ain't right.  CR15 x 3 = 675 points, which you can't possibly support with 1000 points to use.

You could have CR15 x 2 = 450 points, and then have 450 CR1's with 50 points left over...


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 6, 2004)

Sorry, I thought that after 500 CR I could choose any units for some reason.  

CR 15 x2
CR 1 x500

There we go.

What was determined for mounted combatants? If I have 100 CR 1's on heavy war horses do the horses get to attack/trample?

Can I have epic items, assuming I can afford them?


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 6, 2004)

Pyrex said:
			
		

> Tyreus, did you know that the 'Improved Metamagic' ability of the Incantatrix was errattaed to apply once-per-spell instead of once-per-feat-per-spell?




Sorry I forgot to answer. No, I didn't. Does that apply only to the incantatrix ability or to the epic feat improved metamagic too?


----------



## Tonguez (Mar 6, 2004)

Tyreus said:
			
		

> What was determined for mounted combatants? If I have 100 CR 1's on heavy war horses do the horses get to attack/trample?




I'm pretty sure that the ruling was Warhouses cost CR, normal horses (non-fighting) are gear. - Which does raise the question of mounted archers - are the horses (ridden only, don't kick) gear?

Also are the following numbers right and by the rules?
*1 Druid Lv18 *  - > 14.4 = *207.36*
*2 Bards Lv10* - > 8 > 64= *128*
*10 Templated Rangers Lv3* ->2.63+2.4+0.2 = 5.23-> 27.3 = *273*
*50 Barbarians Lv2* -> 1.6  > 2.56 = *128*
*25 Monk Lv3* - > 2.4 > 5.76 = *144*
(880.36 - not finished)

PS I suppose the Template means I have to be evil


----------



## Uriel (Mar 6, 2004)

Tonguez said:
			
		

> PS I suppose the Werewolves mean I have to be evil




This has nothing to do with official D&D Lycanthropes, but i have always had a problem with each Lycanthrope being Evil, Good etc...

Having been into various mythologies since before I started playing D&D (back circa 1981), I thought it was silly that every Werewolf etc...had to be CE.
If anything, CN sounded more appropriate. Just my opinion, and meant in no way to contest the rules/Fieari.


----------



## Uriel (Mar 6, 2004)

Fieari, I saw that someone posted the link to the 3.5 SRD right after you mentioned not having 3.5, so are we 3.5?

As well, which books are available to us to use?

Could we get a show of hands (posts_ as to how many Good and Evil players we have right now?

I could either go Elves or Drow as my core Army, and I will happily fill in on either side if there is a lack of one/overwhelming imbalance.

*********************************************************

Across the night sky two Duellsts faced one another,weapons and magic ready, their mounts silently winging to and fro as they exchanged no words about the coming decision.

Upon his Dire Bat mount, Encades Serenlu smiled a smile that only centuries of torturing captives and praising Demonic masters could bring, a madness in his eye that the pitiful _enemy_ across from him would soon learn, as he was eviscerated slowly over the coming days.Readying his envenomed bolt, the Drow prepared for an easy victory...

....................................................................................................


Yndren Avendane gritted his teeth against the hatred burning deep within his heart. Coaxing his Giant Owl into a higher position and preparing to unleash a suprise upon his _Enemy_, the Grey Elf remained calm in the face of battle. The Dark Elf might survive the Lightning Bolt that was about to engulf him, but his bat surely would not, and it was an ever so long way down to the ground...

Both Elves looked upon one another and thought simultaneously _there can be only One..._


----------



## LazarusLong42 (Mar 6, 2004)

Wow, I hadn't checked in for a couple of days, and... Fieari, you've given this TONS of thought.  I commend you.  That said, one thing still nags at me--and should for anyone planning to use cavalry.

A regular ol' horse is described in the PHB as reluctant to go into combat--in fact, controlling one in combat requires a DC *20* Ride check--which no support unit is likely to get except on a 16 or higher.  A warhorse is trained for combat, and requires no Ride check to control in combat.

Would the following definitions be suitable/acceptable?

Horse:  Cost, 75 gp light, 200 gp heavy.  Will stay away from battle.
Combat Horse:  Cost, 150 gp light, 400 gp heavy.  Will go into battle, but will not attack, and will leave combat immediately if rider lost.
Warhorse:  Cost, 9 pts light, 16 pts, heavy.  Will go into battle and attack with its rider, and will continue fighting even if its rider is lost.

Also, you said NPCs receive standard array--I assume you meant standard NPC array, right?


One last... well, call it a suggestion.  Can I recommend that gear not be purchased "by level"?  The basis for this suggestion:  both gear lists are balanced with each other.  (1 CR of NPC gear is worth the same as 1 CR of PC gear, to two significant figures at least).  May I suggest instead the rule:

A characters' gear adds an amount to his CR equal to (cube root of gear value)/23.2.

A 1st-level NPC would normally come with 25 gp in gear.  If you instead start him with nothing, that calculation means he still drops to CR 0.5416, as per the original instrcutions.

This means that a PC with 99,000 in gear is not paying the same CR penalty as one with 65,000 in gear, and fits with your rule in the rules-block indicating that we can calculate fractional CR for our CR baseline.

OK... that was longer than I'd wanted, but those are my thoughts.  Obviously, I need to recalculate my army based on all of these changes, but I was rather expecting that anyway.


----------



## LazarusLong42 (Mar 6, 2004)

Show of Hands: I'm *Good*!

(LG at that.  Never played LG before )


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 6, 2004)

I'm *good* too. (for now, mwahaha)


----------



## Fieari (Mar 6, 2004)

On the subject of 3.5-- I haven't actually looked at the SRD yet, having spent most of today working out math for army balance.  Can you summarize the differences between 3.0 and 3.5?  What's the benefit of one over the other?  I'm willing to be convinced to change, but on the other hand, I don't want to have to spend too much time learning a new system if the benefits aren't big enough.

On Calvary-- The combat horse looks great to me... just what we need.  I'll add it to the rules block.

Could you explain your equipment CR thing again?  I don't quite understand your reasoning...

Everyone Wishing to Play-- If you have a preliminary army, would you add it to the rogue's gallery in the appropriate section?  I don't need statblocks yet, but having your points assigned would be nice... and of course, as an added bonus, by replying to the thread, we automatically get a hand count for bookkeeping.


----------



## LazarusLong42 (Mar 6, 2004)

Sure... I think I messed up the figures before.

The "levels" of NPC and PC gold are entirely balanced--kudos to Upper_Krust for that one.  Eight "levels" of NPC gold--i.e. 1 CR--are worth the same as five "levels" of PC gold--1 CR--to a very close approximation, at least.

What I'm proposing is that CR be based on equipment, rather than equipment available being based on CR.  In other words, I'd like to be able to purchase 3.7 CR of equipment for a PC.  The formula to extrapolate would be:

CR = (cube root of gear value)/(23.207944)

or

CR = cube root of (gear value/12500)


Let's take a base NPC War1.  Strip him of his gold--he is now CR 2/3 - 0.125 = 0.54166

If you give him, say, 127 gp of equipment (chain shirt, a longsword, and a heavy wood shield), that's not really spending 2 "levels" worth of gp (200), but it's way more than one "level" (25).  We can extrapolate by saying that equipment is worth:

(127/12500)^(1/3) == 0.21659 CR

And that this NPC is therefore worth:

2/3 - 0.125 + 0.21659 = 0.75826 CR == 0.57495 pts.

If we're willing to do the math for it, can we use such an interpolation?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 6, 2004)

Oh!  I see now... you want even more fractional precision in the case where your units aren't using all their gold.

Sure, if you're willing to do the math, I don't have a problem with it.  Your logic seems reasonable to me.  You're just making a curve instead of discrete jumps.


----------



## LazarusLong42 (Mar 6, 2004)

Mucho cool!


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 6, 2004)

1.) How do we go about attacking? 
2.) Is there going to be a map? 
3.) Do we get a fortress to start with, or do we have to buy one?
4.) Are we allowed to make alliances?

Sorry for all the questions. (Don't feel bad about taking your time answering them either.)


----------



## Fieari (Mar 6, 2004)

1) It's going to be played a bit like a regular D&D game, and I assume also like most PBP games here.  You control the battlelord... that's you.  You give orders, your orders are carried out.  You say March, they march.  You say Halt, they halt.  You find the enemy, and you say kill... then the fight happens.  Preferably, when you say kill, you also detail some tactics as well.

Finding the enemy might be tricky, of course... and ambushes are deadly.  Scouting will be important.  Divination magic might be helpful.

2) There will be a map.  I'm still open to suggestions for features you want on it.  The terrain in the two countries will NOT be the same, and the terrain between the two countries will be rough going... I'm thinking there'll be an ocean off to one side, a river off to another, and between them will be a desert and a mountain range.

In this I'm borrowing a little from C.S. Lewis's "A Horse and His Boy"... Calormen wanted to invade Archenland and Narnia, but there was a desert in the way.  Lack of water makes having an army cross it difficult... there's an oasis in the middle, but that can't support large numbers of men and horses.  So the best way was to go off at an angle to reach a river, which would supply the water needed to get across.

The mountain range I would throw in because it adds yet another alternative to the desert crossing problem, and of course history has all kinds of cool war stories involving crossing armies over mountains.

So I've got the MIDDLE terrain pretty sorted out in my head.  I just need some cool ideas for terrain in the actual countries themselves...  cities on hills are cool, as are cities set on river islands.  Interesting plataues?  Canyons?  Forests?  Swamps?  Moors?  What say you?

3) "Large Towns" and larger have castles and fortresses associated with them, according to the DMG.  I'll let you pick from those for a home castle.  No need to buy one.  Of course, you may not need much use of your castle either, depending on how much on the offensive you go.  In "How to Defend a Mountain Fortress" 90% of the suggestions included the phrase "Don't play defensive.  Get out of your castle and be proactive about this!  Sitting still will get you dead!"

4) All good players are automatically aligned, as are all evil players.  This is why good players get their own thread seperate from evil players... because you'll be communicating with your teammates, but not with the enemy.

If you so desire, you can coordinate attacks and things.  If you do not so desire, and want more glory for yourself, you could go off and do your own thing.  This is D&D, but at the same time, slightly different.  It keeps the "do what you want" style of play, but has optional instead of mandated cooperation.  Of course... cooperation on your team will likely help considerably...

On the other hand, there are to be no alliances with the enemy.  You both want each other dead.


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 6, 2004)

Thanks alot, this is gonna be fun...

EDIT: I see a problem with not having a visual aid. I would like to create a fortress from scratch, but I don't know how to show anybody, short of mailing pictures. Any ideas? (maybe scan drawings and post them as attachments?)


----------



## Tonguez (Mar 6, 2004)

Fieari said:
			
		

> On the subject of 3.5-- I haven't actually looked at the SRD yet, having spent most of today working out math for army balance.  Can you summarize the differences between 3.0 and 3.5?  What's the benefit of one over the other?  I'm willing to be convinced to change, but on the other hand, I don't want to have to spend too much time learning a new system if the benefits aren't big enough.




3.5 changes some spells, improves the Druid and has Rangers that make slightly more sense. DR is very different but most of the bases are pretty similar (personally I say stick with 3.0 - since ALL of us know it)

BTW here is the Marshall Class from the Minatures Handbook (WOTC site). Its pretty cool and perfect for this scenario, the Auras just add bonuses to various manouveres made by the armies (eg +1 to Attack roles or DR 1/-), the biggy is the Marshalls ability to grant an extra move action to allies. Anyway If you do consider it then one of my Bards will be a Marshall

oh and how are you going to calculate Morale - you know most armies are lost in the rout?...


----------



## WizWrm (Mar 6, 2004)

Just a side note: this is a really excellent online 3.5 SRD. It's much easier to navigate than the .docs at WotC, and I'd say it's much easier to use than the books for PbP, when you're gonna be online anyway. Here is a mirror for the same SRD, by Sovelior. The second address has pictures (taken from the Art Galleries on the WotC site).


----------



## Fieari (Mar 6, 2004)

Ah, that is easier to read.

My only concern now is the statement that "Druids were made more powerful."  I'd never seen druids as being anything like weak in 3.0... the concept of them being more powerful frightens me considerably... if we went 3.5, I'd still be keeping 3.0 Druids.

However, we _do_ all know 3.0, and since I'm only reading through 3.5 now, I'm not familiar with it enough to feel comfortable using it.  Maybe if I were running a more conventional game... but the amount of math and bookkeeping and checking I'm going to have to do makes me think that if I tried using 3.5, I'd go insane from massive detail influx overload.

I've looked at the Marshal, and it doesn't look like as much of a headache as I'd earlier thought.  The only difficulty I see is that the specifics of those auras aren't available there, and being a college student, I (by definition) have very little money to spend on buying books.  So you're going to have to provide me with those kinds of details.

Also, as a side note, the preliminary army maths in the rogue threads look good to me.


----------



## WizWrm (Mar 6, 2004)

Are you sure about that 3.0 thing? I don't actually own the 3.5 core books either, but my PbPs (use a non-d20 homebrew system for my RL game) are all 3.5, and I've found no difficulty in using the 3.5 SRD as a reference. The changes are small enough, and unless you have the 3.0 rules totally memorized, you and your players will probably have to refer to an SRD anyway, and the online one is much easier than flipping through a stack of books. The 3.0 SRD is no longer online, and some of your players may not have the older versions of the books, or may not even be familiar with the old system.

As to the druid, you ought to take a look at it first. They got spontaneous casting of _summon nature's ally_ and a couple other tweaks, but haven't been significantly "improved."


----------



## Fieari (Mar 6, 2004)

Okay,I'll toss it up to a general vote. Next, oh, say three posters who are playing weigh in with 3.0 or 3.5.  WizWrm already has a vote for 3.5, Toungez already has a vote for 3.0.


----------



## Dalamar (Mar 6, 2004)

I'm interested in joining the Evil team (insert maniacal laughter here), and I'd like to cast in my vote for 3.5. Mostly because I don't own 3.0 books, but also because the CRs in U_K's document are based on the 3.5 versions of the monsters.


----------



## LazarusLong42 (Mar 6, 2004)

I would also vote for 3.5


----------



## nameless (Mar 6, 2004)

3.5 for me also, especially considering the much improved treatment of non-PHB races.

I'd also suggest that you (Fleari) look at some of the miniatures' handbook stuff before you use it. A lot of it is pretty powerful compared to the core books, especially in this context.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 6, 2004)

Fieari said:
			
		

> ...Checking now, a Barbed Devil is CR16 by UK...




*goes and checks again*

Oh.  Oops.  I've been using the 4th column the whole time.  That significantly knocks my army out of whack.

Speaking of which, should we be using column 4 instead of column 3 anyway?  Appendix 3 in UK's doc states that column 3 is biased towards PC's being stronger and that column 4 eliminates that bias.  In the interest of a level playing field it seems that we should be using column 4.

Anyhow, I'm Evil (undead) and vote to use 3.5.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 7, 2004)

Tyreus said:
			
		

> Sorry I forgot to answer. No, I didn't. Does that apply only to the incantatrix ability or to the epic feat improved metamagic too?




It applies to both.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 7, 2004)

Heh.  3.5 it is.

Hm.  Silver Rule does cover that... on the other hand, it also allows more powerful critters sooner, and cheaper.  It makes things more accurate, but if we're going to be COMPLETELY accurate, I note that he has modifiers for "PCs are unashamed muchkin powergamers" and I'd probably have to distribute those around liberally (heehee).

Anyway.  So we have evidence that PC classes are actually overpowered compared to monsters of equivelent CR under the Golden Rule.  Bother.  Well, I'm going for as much precision as possible-- if I'm going to allow fractional CR+/- for equipment, I'd probably be a hypocrite not to use the silver rule here.

Okay.  Switching rules to use fourth column.  If this gives anyone extra points, go ahead and use them.

On the subject of Miniature Handbook--
Yes, I can see that it DOES provide some extremely helpful classes for this sort of game.  On the other hand, I can also see that it encourages large numbers of units (stated design goal for this game) and also encourages them to stick together within a close range... which you'll note makes them easy pickings for any mage with a fireball.  That sounds like it will REALLY hurt.  Catapaults too, if any are purchased and used, will hurt this style of play.

I think that balances it pretty well.  And of course, two Marshals can't be used alongside each other, because Auras don't stack.  And they're very visible targets for assasination.

I'm only allowing things on a case by case basis, though.  I don't have the miniature's handbook, so I don't know about anything else in it.

On the subject of Moral--
What do people think about giving armies a "Frightful Presence" value?


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 7, 2004)

Great!  That saves me from having to re-write my army. 

I must've missed the 'munchkin powergamer' modifier...


----------



## Fieari (Mar 7, 2004)

It's actually an EL modifier rather than a CR modifier, but I still find it amusing that it's there.


----------



## nameless (Mar 7, 2004)

I'm gonna move away from the Greek Myth army, I don't think it's got the right feel for this type of thing. Instead I'll throw in my hat with the Armies of Good.


----------



## nameless (Mar 7, 2004)

I'm looking at the CR determination stuff for PC races now, and I'm a little confused. Each PC race has a CR modifier (usually pretty low, but Dwarves and Halflings are pretty serious) built in, which is apparently independent of the CR for any class.

Nobody that I've seen has factored these in yet. Since my baseline unit is probably the Aasimar, I need to know how to proceed, or if I should subtract .5 CR from my units (which is what Dwarf traits are worth).


----------



## Fieari (Mar 7, 2004)

If it's a standard PC race, I've called it that 1 Player Class level = CR1, regardless of whether it's a dwarf or an elf or a human or whatever.

If you want to give a non standard PC race levels in PC classes, follow the Level Adjustment rule.

I've never used Aasimar before, nor do I see them in the SRD (if I missed them, point 'em out)... but a quick google search shows that they're a planescape thing.  Details, please?


----------



## nameless (Mar 7, 2004)

Aasimar are human[oid]s who have celestial blood in their distant past, and currently just hold a small trace of it.

It's normally an ECL+1 race, under the Planetouched entry (similar rules-wise to Drow) in the MM. By the UK system though, they are lower CR than the Dwarf War1's in the MM. Their advantages are pretty minor in a game like this (Daylight at will, +2 to two mental stats), all they have worth noting is a minor resistance to Cold, Electricity and Acid. They probably aren't really worth any extra points compared to the other races, IMO.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 7, 2004)

Ah, here we go.  "At DMs discretion, ignore the impact of racial traits less than +1"  And that's what I'm doing (as long as you're also taking class levels).

You've already said that the racial traits add up to less than 1, in which case you can treat it as a ECL+0 PC race.

However, I still need to see all the details so I can check the math on it myself.  I'll need that anyway, of course.

Edit: Ah, I see it now... right.  Under Planetouched.  I really need to pay more attention.  I also see that it has the same CR as Dwarves and Elves, which adds credence to your claim.  Just thought I'd mention that.  Still need to see stats.

Found it in the SRD too.  Okay... one moment while I check the stats...


----------



## nameless (Mar 7, 2004)

(from 3.5srd.com)
Aasimar characters possess the following racial traits.

— +2 Wisdom, +2 Charisma.

—Medium size.

—An aasimar’s base land speed is 30 feet.

—Darkvision: Aasimars can see in the dark up to 60 feet.

—Racial Skills: Aasimars have a +2 racial bonus on Spot and Listen checks.

—Racial Feats: An aasimar gains feats according to its class levels.

—Special Attacks (see above): Daylight.

—Special Qualities (see above): Resistance to acid 5, cold 5, and electricity 5.

—Automatic Languages: Common, Celestial. Bonus Languages: Draconic, Dwarven, Elven, Gnome, Halfling, Sylvan.

—Favored Class: Paladin.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 7, 2004)

```
[b]Aasimar Traits = CR+0.9[/b]
Ability Score Bonuses (+4)	CR +0.4
Medium Size			CR +/-0
Darkvision			CR +0.2
Spot and Listen Bonus		CR +/-0
Sunlight (1/day)		CR +/-0
Resistance to Acid (5)		CR +0.1
Resistance to Cold (5)		CR +0.1
Resistance to Electricity (5)	CR +0.1
```

I didn't see any modifiers for Sunlight, or the Spot and Listen bonus, so left those modifiers at 0.

Well, at +0.9, these guys are just barely shy of +1.  Just barely.  Since the highest PC race is +0.51, and the rest average at +0.3, my ruling for this specific case is that you add CR1/2 on top of class CR.


----------



## WizWrm (Mar 7, 2004)

Section 9.16 covers Spell-like abilities. For the aasimar's _daylight_, it's +0.003. Section 11 has skill bonuses; for the aasimar it's +0.04. So yeah, they're pretty negligible.


----------



## Tonguez (Mar 7, 2004)

_ooc Sorry guys I'm  be away for a week, so please don't start without me! I'll try and get back asap_


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 8, 2004)

I would like to get my infantry to the tactical soldier prestige class, but it may be awhile. (I have 200 of 'em and they have to be 6 lvl to qualify) When I get a hold of the book, I'll post them if you want.


----------



## Uriel (Mar 8, 2004)

Again, which books are we allowed to draw from? Official/Core or...?

(I'm for 3.5, btw)


----------



## nameless (Mar 8, 2004)

Now that I've (mostly) statted up my army, I've got a couple more fine point clarifications:

1. Gear for monsters: It's clear that leveled characters are built with CR that explicitly contains a certain amount of equipment. Do monstrous troops without class levels get any equipment as part of their CR? If so, how much? And if not, what about the listed equipment that all monsters of that type carry (e.g. a Balor's Vorpal Sword, a Solar's Slaying Arrows Bow, or even a Yuan-Ti's masterwork armor and weapons)? I would assume that the listed CRs would factor in carried treasure, which intelligent monsters will use (thus it is modifies the encounter level). Would there be any difference if a monster was given levels in a class on top of its HD?

2. Ability scores for monsters: Characters with PC or NPC classes get either the 25 or 15 point array for their ability scores. What monstrous troops qualify for the 25 point array? And is it permissible to redistribute the default 15 point arrays that are given to the monsters if the 25 point array isn't used?

3. Feat/Skill selection for monsters: Can non-bonus feats be reselected (i.e. swap an Ogre's Toughness and Weapon Focus for Power Attack and Cleave)? Can skill points be reassigned (per the MM rules on class and cross-class skills)?

4. Summoning magic: Sort of related to the Warhorse CR ruling. If a magic item is purchased that can summon monsters (e.g. Bag of Tricks), should just the gold cost be paid, or is a CR judgment in order?

5. Unbalanced magic items: Since class and equipment are factored separately, what's to stop an army from being a bunch of level 1 characters with 11 levels (0.8 + 2.2 = 3 CR) of gear buying terribly unbalanced magic items with their 133,100 gp worth of gear? Especially when they could buy powerful summoning magic, and get things like huge elementals? Given the baseline unit costs, it's possible to have 40 level 1 Wizards with nearly a million gp apiece.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 8, 2004)

1: As I understand it, monsters have their standard equipment factored into their CR.

4: Items cost gold.  Summoning items require a lot of gold so I don't think it's going to be a problem.

5: I recommend that we restrict equipment by level.  I.E. in order to have 10th level PC equipment the unit must be ECL 10.


----------



## LazarusLong42 (Mar 8, 2004)

On 5:  I would agree with Pyrex, to a point.  Any character should be allowed to have within 2 levels of his or her CR in gear, is where I'd place it.

Of course, if we'd not instituted the level cap and concept of support, you could have simply had an army consisting of a level one character with 360 million gp or so.

Why fight the war with grunts when you can afford to hire fifty or so dragons?


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 8, 2004)

Sorry I didn't mention it, but I vote for 3.5.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 8, 2004)

Don't have enough time to answer the questions posted earlier just this moment, I'll get to them tommorow afternoon.  Just wanted to mention that it looks like we currently have two evil players, and three good ones, so the forces of darkness need another dreadlord.


----------



## Uriel (Mar 8, 2004)

Evil it is, then...just so long as I get word on what books are available to/allowed  me.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 8, 2004)

Uriel, so far only the 3.5 SRD (and mabye the Draconomicon) has recieved blanket acceptance.  Anything else needs to be cleared by Fieari.

Fieari, I've got one more question to add to nameless's list

6)  Hit Dice:  All monster dice at half (d8 = 4.5 as per MM).  First (N)PC die is max.  Second and further (N)PC dice also at half?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 8, 2004)

1) Monsters who are intellegent and have a treasure rating can use their treasure, as this is part of their CR.  However, this treasure is THEIR treasure... you can't pool it.

2) Most monsters have a default set of scores already.  For example, the entry for Aboleth reads "Abilities: Str 26, Dex 12, Con 20, Int 15, Wis 17, Cha 17"  I'd prefer you use those for monsters.  I mean... it's right there set for you.  PCs units get standard point buy (or standard array, at your preference) because player races get most of their abilities from classes, and you can set their class to anything, and different classes need different stats.  Monsters tend to have inherant power, and that power is preset to be geared towards certain stats... and again, the CR reflects that.

On the other hand, if you're using ECL and giving monsters PC classes, then they can have point buy as well.

3) Sure, I'll let you swap.

4) Summoning magic can be purchased.  Since summons have limited duration, cost fantastic sums of money, can be dispelled, is castable by mages anyway which is factored into their CR not added to it, etc etc etc, I think that purchasing said items is fair.

5) I agree with Lazarus. You can have up to 2 higher levels of equipment.  You can decrease your equipment as you will though.

6) Yes.

Allowed Sources:

3.5 SRD
Draconomicon (CRs modified to use UK's system)
Anything Else (Subject to Individual Approval after full disclosure to me)


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 8, 2004)

Fieari said:
			
		

> 2) Most monsters have a default set of scores already.  For example, the entry for Aboleth reads "Abilities: Str 26, Dex 12, Con 20, Int 15, Wis 17, Cha 17"




Aboleths (for example) have great stats, but the default in the MM is that those stats are the result of large racial modifiers on top of the 'standard' monster array of 10,10,10,11,11,11.  An Aboleth with PC levels should have racial mods of Str +16, Dex +2, Con +10, Int +4, Wis +6, Cha +6. (applied after the PC point-buy)

(note:  This is how I arrived at the stats for my wraith lieutenants in the Evil thread)


----------



## Fieari (Mar 8, 2004)

Ah, there you go.  That works.


----------



## Uriel (Mar 8, 2004)

Did the Marshall get a go ahead (Miniatures HB).

I have already posted them on the boards through Lvl 10, I could edit through 20 if need be. The Marshall also appeared on the WotC site as well.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 8, 2004)

Yeah, I figure the Marshal is balanced because it forces you to march in tight formation-- perfect for a stray fireball to decimate entire regiments.


----------



## LazarusLong42 (Mar 8, 2004)

Fieari said:
			
		

> 6) Yes.




Does the first hit die being max apply to NPCs as well as PCs?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 8, 2004)

Yes to that as well.


----------



## WizWrm (Mar 9, 2004)

Well hmm. I've gotten well into creating a good-aligned army, but it looks like the sides are balanced right now. I don't think I'll have time to finish it until later this week, but...anyone out there got another dose of evil waiting in the wings?

BTW, what was the thing with our strongholds? I can't find anything in either the 3.0 books or the 3.5 SRD about the castles that support population centers, or whichever.

Are the 'good' and 'evil' territories going to be mostly rural countryside, or are there going to be big cities too?


----------



## The Goblin King (Mar 9, 2004)

I've got an idea so I think I'll throw in with the side of Evil.  Beware, the Goblins are coming.


----------



## Jemal (Mar 9, 2004)

My army concept's work for both good or evil, so I don't know which to join.. I'll join whichever side is least powerful, to help even things out.  

BTW, Just so I've got everything perfectly straight..

PC characters w/o lvl equivalent gear are (LVL*.8) ^2, and PCs WITH equivalent gear are LVL^2.  THEN either way, I have 250,000 GP to spend.
PC characters use the Standard Point Buy method for stats.

Is that correct?


EDIT: Also, do we need support troops for characters CR 5 or below?


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 9, 2004)

Yes, that is correct.

Re: 'Edit:'  No, (N)PC's and creatures of CR 5 or less do not require support.


----------



## Dalamar (Mar 9, 2004)

My army will be evil to the core, as soon as I get to making it


----------



## Fieari (Mar 9, 2004)

There is no information about making a stronghold in the core books, although I understand there is a supplement which I wish I could afford.  On the other hand, I seem to recal (very vaguely) that the 2e DMG had a few listings for castles and such.  But it's been so long since I've used 2e that such might be a false memory.

In the absense of official rules, making stuff up is more or less fine.

The 3.0 (and I'm assuming 3.5) DMG mentions that towns of "Large" size and larger are able to support "a" fortress, so that's the official rule I'm going by. You are right when you say nothing is said about the fortress itself though.

Both countries will be scattered with population centers of varying sizes... LOTS of thorps, but only one metropolis... and a buch of towns of varying sizes in between.  That will likely make populations larger than what people usually expect, but I want you guys to have room for mistakes... forgetting to guard the back gate of one city shouldn't cost you half your population, for example.

As for making your own stronghold... go ahead and have fun if you wish.  If you don't want to design it yourself, I'll find a generic fortress design for you.  And all fortresses will have a Large Town or larger associated with it, from which your supply train will originate and from whom you will recieve additional CR if your reputation increases.

Fortresses must be mundane in construction unless you want to buy magic for it using your funds.  Your fortress has a standard staff that is paid for by simple taxes (aka, this is flavor that says you don't have to pay for them) but none of the members of this staff are fighting men.  You can of course put your army inside your fortress, or part of your army, or whatever.

If you get TOO extravegant with your fortress I'll nix it, but that's a subjective thing.  And again, if you don't WANT to bother with designing a fortress, you really don't have to.  If you really WANT to, you may.

The size of your town will be linked to the number of units in your army.  Don't ask for an exact chart, because it'll be based on a curve... largest army on each size will get the largest population center, smallest will get the smallest.

Pyrex already answered Jemal's question.

I'm thinking about starting the actual game come the beginning of next week.  How does that sound to people?


----------



## Jemal (Mar 10, 2004)

Sounds like I need to post up my army build.. 

So far I think it loks like this: 
GOOD - Tyreus, Lazarus, Nameless, Wizwyrm
Evil - Tonguez, Pyrex, Dalamar, Goblin King, Uriel

SO, I'm going Good. BTW, these 'towns', do we each get a lot, or one each?  Neither of my army ideas needs more than a town to support them...

I'll post them both into the Good thread and get my allies to decide which helps the cause out more.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 10, 2004)

Jemal said:
			
		

> SO, I'm going Good. BTW, these 'towns', do we each get a lot, or one each?  Neither of my army ideas needs more than a town to support them...




For that matter, my army doesn't need a town at all.  Although I may be preying on other towns...


----------



## Fieari (Mar 10, 2004)

Regarding your towns... it's more like your hometown.  Where your troops come from, in general.  The town itself will be tailored to your army... so if you have an army of goblins, your town will be a goblin town.  If your army is, for example, entirely undead, then the town will consist of the living equivelent of your army (human zombies get a human town, that sort of thing).

You can ignore your town if you like.  For evil, your hometown is a place you can terrorize at your lesuire, probably just for fun.  It's still also a source for future recruits.  For good, your town is also a source of moral-- if something wrong is happening at home, and your soldiers hear about it, and you DON'T go home to help, they're going to complain.  Evil, on the other hand, may have a bigger nastier guy above you who has some order about protecting home turf that you'll ignore at your own personal peril.

Of course, depending on how you play it, having your home destroyed is either going to break your troops, or resolve them further.  Diplomacy may be a useful trait for your leaders.

You need to have A home, SOMEWHERE, in order to get reinforcements of any kind, whether you are good or evil.  This home may or may not be your original home throughout the game.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 11, 2004)

I'm bumping this up to make a little warning:

This is just a warning... that 250 grand can be used in VERY powerful ways.  Don't cheat yourself by not making full use of it.

Someone is finding what I consider to be a devestating use for that money.  I won't say who it is, or on which side (but I'm guessing that if it's you, you know about it already) but I think it needs to be said: Money can purchase AMAZING weapons.  Things that PCs might pass up and thus you wouldn't give a second look might have quite a different reprecussion when faced with armies...

So think about what you want to buy carefully.  It could be the turning point of the game.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 11, 2004)

Fieari, when adding levels to monsters, how should we figure their total CR?

Ex:  According to the MM, a Bugbear with a fighter level is equivalent to a lvl 5 character.  As nearly as I can tell by UK's CR rules, a Bugbear with a fighter level should be CR 3.5

Which should we be using?

Edit:  Must... Resist... Reading... Other... Thread...


----------



## Fieari (Mar 11, 2004)

I'm currently borrowing a computer without PDF support (amazing, I know)... so could you briefly run down the math for UK's bugbear + fighter?  Could you also show the bugbear's normal CR?

I'm pretty sure the system you'll be using is UK's, since we're doing that across the board, but I just want to see the math you worked out.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 11, 2004)

Here's the quick breakdown:

Bugbear Ftr 1
MM:
  3hd+1LA+1 PC-Lvl = ECL/CR 5

UK:
  CR Result 3.005 -> 3.00(golden rule) -> 2.5(silver rule) + 1 (equipped) PC Lvl = CR 3.5

Edit:
Not sure how UK arrived at 3.005, when I did the math here's where I ended up.


Hit Dice x 3 = 1.8CR

Natual Armor x 3 = .3CR

Full Atk Damage = .65CR

Darkvision = .2CR

Stat Boost x6 = .6CR

Skill Bonus x4 = .08CR

Total = 3.63


----------



## Fieari (Mar 11, 2004)

Definitely using UK's system.  When I have access to the PDF again I'll check ALL the math... he might've left something out of the bugbear by accident, and if so, the silver rule still needs to be applied and I can't remember how to do that off the top of my head.  But the system will be used.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 15, 2004)

Just out of curiosity, how are the Armies of Good coming along?

So far us Bad Guys (TM) have one nearly complete army posted, two CR lists with no stat blocks/equip and nothing from our fourth member.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 16, 2004)

Armies of Good have 

Two armies completed (or possibly just REALLY near completed... there may be tweaking needed) 
-- Tyreus
-- LazarusLong42 

Two armies that are allocated, but not statblocked or equipped
-- nameless
-- Jemal

Jemal also has TWO armies allocated, and is apparently trying to decide which one has more synergy with the other armies of good.

So that's what we're waiting on on the Good side.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 16, 2004)

By the way, here's a preliminary map description.  I've scetched it out on paper, but I've not had much luck translating it into a computer graphic to my satisfaction so far, so the description will have to do.

In the far, far north, there is the Silgrey Mountain Range, with a number of distinctive peaks... Twinrov Head, Fireglass Pyre, Green Depths, Wolvenbane Heights, and in the east, Shattershard Cliffs which border the Fireglass Sea (err, Fireglaß Sea).

The Mountains are home to all kinds of terrible monsters, wicked beings, and unspeakable horrors.  Fireglaß Sea isn't much safer... as it is home to giagantic sea monsters.  Perhaps they are sea dragons?  Few survive to determine the taxodermy.

Running down the Silgrey Mountain Range, to the west, is an enchanted river known in the northern countries as the Hatefull River, and to the south as the Cursed (Two syllables) River.  Drinking the water bestows madness, and touching it (while it flows... don't bother using it as a weapon, since it loses all magic when removed from the river) may cause alignment shifting.

Running against this river and running up some of the slopes of the Silgrey Range to the west, is the Misylak Forest.  (Etymology: Cthol Mishrak from David Edding's work, the Belgariad, meant City of Darkness.  Sylvan means forest.  Combining the words creates Misylak... Forest of Darkness)  This Forest isn't much better than the mountains, when it comes to unspeakable horrors.  Despite this, it is rumored that savage and brutal men live there.  Misylak Forest has expanded its borders steadily over the past century.  It used to be no more than a grove, and now it encompasses miles and miles and miles of land.

The land it has been devouring is the Shadowed Moor, a hilly land to the forest's east and the mountain's south.  It contains no rivers, and so water must be obtained by wells.  This land is ruled by a powerful Lich King (NPC) who currently sleeps, leaving the subjugation of the masses to his favored generals.  And subjugated they are.  Races are diverse on the moor, humans, halflings, kobolds, goblins, gnomes, etc... and all are treated equally harshly.

To the south of both the forest and the moor are two geographic elements that seperate these evil lands to the lush, prosperous, and goodloving peoples to the south.  Bordering the Hateful/Cursed River is the "Green Desert".  As hot as any desert, and as waterless, somehow this area is covered by lush grass that survives the heat without any liquid at all.  This grass is not edible by livestock, and it is very easy to die of thirst in this area.  It might be mistaken for the wild plains of the south or the moor of the north but for the fact that no well can be deep enough to find water here.

To the east of the Green Desert are the Lowly Peaks... a smaller mountain range whose caps are just barely touched by white.  Although not nearly as dangerous as the Silgrey mountains, the Lowly Peaks are difficult to cross for large numbers of people, simply because the terrain is so rough.

Flowing from the Lowly Peaks is the River Might, which splits into the Rush River (to the west, filling the Lake Feather) and the Will River (to the east, which becomes the Mind Delta and empties into the Fireglaß Sea).  Surrouning these rivers is a country ruled by a benevolant King (NPC), whose castle and capital is located at the river fork.  The farmlands around these rivers is very lush, and produces more crops than the people need... no one goes hungry, no one needs to starve... in stark contrast to the Shadowed Moors to the north.

There are quite a number of miles between the western edge of this country and the Cursed River to the west, however, and this area is known as the Wild Plains.  The Kingdom will likely expand here as population grows (and it will, with the surpluss of food) but for now, it is simple a beautiful grassland.  Think a meadow, hundreds or thousands of acres in size.  Within two miles of the Cursed River though, the plantlife withers, revealing the ground below.

To the south of the Kingdom is a single, lonely mountain known as the Spire.  The Spire is so tall, it's top cannot be seen above the clouds, and there are always white clouds around it.  These are not low clouds either.  It's massiveness dominates the horizon, and can be seen from anywhere in the lands I have described.  The Spire is said to be where the angels live... but that's just rumor.  It is known that celestial beasts roam the lower slopes, however.




What do you guys think?  Suggestions?  Comments?

Crude ASCII Map:

```
EVIL SIDE
MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
MMRMMMMMMSilgrey RangeMMMMMMMMMS
MMRMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMSS
  RFFFFFFFFF                SSSS
 HRFFFFFFFFFF              SSSFS
 aRFMisylakF    Shadowed  SSSSiS
 tRFForestFF    Moor      SSSSrS
 eRFFFFFFFF                SSSeS
 fRFFFFFFFFF                SSgS
 uRFFFFFFFFF               SSSlS
 lR  FFF                  SSSSaS
  R            Lowly Peaks SSSßS
  RDDDDDDDDDDMMMMMMMMMMMMMMSSS S
  RDDDDDDDDDDMMMMMMMMMMMMMMSSSSS
  RDDDDDDDDDDMMMMRMMMMMMMMMSSSeS
  RDDDDDDDDDDMMMMRMMMMMMMMMSSSaS
 CR              R         SSSSS
 uR               R        SSSSS
 rR        L     R R       SSSSS
 sR       LLLRRRR  R     RSSSSSS
 eR        L        RRRRRRSSSSSS
 dR                      RSSSSSS
  R                       SSSSSS
  R                M      SSSSSS
  R              Spire     SSSSS
           GOOD SIDE
```


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 16, 2004)

Good job! I like it when a GM puts forth the effort and gives the game alot of thought.   When will we be starting?


----------



## Tonguez (Mar 16, 2004)

Fieari said:
			
		

> Running against this river and running up some of the slopes of the Silgrey Range to the west, is the Misylak Forest.  (Etymology: Cthol Mishrak from David Edding's work, the Belgariad, meant City of Darkness.  Sylvan means forest.  Combining the words creates Misylak... Forest of Darkness)  This Forest isn't much better than the mountains, when it comes to unspeakable horrors.  Despite this, it is rumored that savage and brutal men live there.  Misylak Forest has expanded its borders steadily over the past century.  It used to be no more than a grove, and now it encompasses miles and miles and miles of land.
> 
> The land it has been devouring is the Shadowed Moor, a hilly land to the forest's east and the mountain's south.




So can The Dark Hunter claim the Misylak Forest as his own Domain (and its central grove as his Town?) the Green Desert and the Wild Plains - one day all shall be mine!

Oh and does drinking the water of the Hateful River turn victims into depraved bloodthirsty monsters who strike out and attack all in their path? and if so what are their stats? -I can use those guys!!!


----------



## Fieari (Mar 16, 2004)

Make 'em up if you like, just follow UK's CR rules.  More or less though, my intention was that falling in the river will drive you mad.  If you want water-touched units in your army, go ahead and add stats to your liking... however, if your current, non CR adjusted units drink it AFTER the war begins, you're likely to lose units under your control.

And of course you can have the forest, I designed it with you in mind.

Edit: As for when we start... just as soon as we have sufficient armies completed.  I think I'll start it once Evil has finished fully statting up it's 2nd army.  That way, we can begin 2 vs 2, and I'll add an additional army to each side just as soon as both have an army to add.  In this manner, the game will expand.  As long as my bookkeeping works out, there shouldn't be any reason to EVER close recruiting... since much of it I hope will be automated.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 17, 2004)

It seems that drinking from the water is a perfect way to apply the Feral template...


----------



## Fieari (Mar 17, 2004)

Ah!  Lightbulb.  Drinking the water imposes an XP penalty by the following formula:

((XP Needed for Next Level) - (Min XP Needed for Current Level)) * CR Modification


Also, if there are any requests to go west of the river, I can work out a map there as well.  Probably some Nuetral aligned peoples over that away...


----------



## Tonguez (Mar 17, 2004)

Pyrex said:
			
		

> It seems that drinking from the water is a perfect way to apply the Feral template...




So whats the Feral template look like? I was gonna go and make something up but if it already exists...


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 17, 2004)

So I had another brainstorm...

Problem:
Now that we've thrown printed LA's out the window and are using creatures with fractional CR's, how do we decide how much XP troops need before they level?

Intermediate Info:
The formula used in the DMG is *(n-1)*500xp.
i.e. Level 3 = (3)*(2)*500xp=3000xp

Lightbulb:
This works just fine with fractional levels.

Example1:
My general is CR 13.3.  With a PC level being equivalent to .8 that makes him level 16.62.

His current XP is (16.62)*(15.62)*500=129,841xp

To add a PC level he needs to reach (17.62)*(16.62)*500 = 146,422xp

(Note:  Per Fieari, current XP is actually half-way between those values)

Example2:
My crossbowmen are CR .66 (level .825)

Current = (.825)*(1)*500 = 412xp
(Zombie Kobold)

Next Level = (1.625)*(1)*500= 812xp
(Zombie Kobold Ftr1)

Add another level = (2.425)*(1.425)*500=1727xp
(Zombie Kobold Ftr2)

Negative values didn't make sense and neither did squaring low values, so I capped the second value at 1.

It's a little wierd for low-CR troops at low-levels but it effectively works.  (i.e. zombie kobolds are pretty worthless, so they effectively have a negative LA)


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 17, 2004)

Tonguez said:
			
		

> So whats the Feral template look like? I was gonna go and make something up but if it already exists...




It's from Savage Species.  It grants a speed bonus, natural armor, claw attacks, a special attack series based on HD, darkvision, fast healing based on HD, and some impressive stat adjustments.  It's listed as +1LA, but by UK's system will probably come out around +1.5CR.


----------



## Bibliophile (Mar 18, 2004)

Just came across this and thought it would we worth a shot, however, I have a few questions (from reading the info on the first page, and skimming a bit more of the thread).

But, can anyone point me to, or describe quickly, how combat would take place between two armies?  Would we actually have to go through the whole "foot soldier #1 goes there, #2 there, .... #178 there"  or am I missing something?

Also, is there anything that I need to read through the rest of the thread for, or is the info on the first page accurate?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 18, 2004)

It's more or less accurate.  Most of this thread contains the discussion which created the rules.  There are one or two things though, which I don't think I've yet added to the 1st post.  First of which is that you also get a small fortress when you start, and you can either design it yourself or let me assign one to you.  If you enjoy fortress design, that's fine... if you'd rather not bother, that's okay too.  Anything you submit is, of course, subject to approval... and if you want anything particularly extraordinary, you'll need to pay for it with army funds.

Next issue is that once you've looked at an EVIL or GOOD thread, you are irrevoccably either on that side, or not playing.  Looking at the opponent's thread is cheating.  This is of course, on the honor system.

I'm adding PCs (and their armies) evenly.  First two players ready on both sides will be added.  When both GOOD and EVIL have an additional player ready, they'll go in together, and so forth.

As for combat... you are not your army.  You play, in full Dungeons and Dragons style, the LORD of your army.  This may be wargamming, but it is still D&D.  As such, you give your army commands, and it carries out the commands.  You cannot, however, PERSONALLY direct the movement of EVERY man in your army.  You'll likely appoint a chain of command, give orders to those directly beneath them, and expect the orders to be carried out.

Assuming moral doesn't break, there won't be any insubbordination amongst your ranks.

Please note that your orders can include tactics as well as strategy.  If you want your men trained to act a certain way in combat... or even if you want to improvise something, you can order that.  It doesn't mean, though, that you have to order each unit.  You give general kinds of commands, and discipline takes care of the rest.


----------



## Bibliophile (Mar 18, 2004)

Well, I haven't looked at either of the army posting threads, but I have a few other questions.

1) If you include creatures with intelligence scores below normal (i.e.- 1,2,3,etc)  Are they automatically assumed to take orders?  Or do you need to include handlers for them?

2) Also, which teams (good or evil) have spots open?  Which is the most needy of members?

EDIT: Well, I've decided to join the Good side


----------



## Fieari (Mar 18, 2004)

As long as you allocate CR, any creatures you control, you CONTROL.  An earlier example included an army which consisted of something along the lines of eleven thousand ravens.  Yes, you'd still be able to direct your ravens, organize them into groups, send them on missions, etc.


----------



## Bibliophile (Mar 19, 2004)

How do we determine equipment for creatures without levels?

Ex: The Ghale is listed as having "No coins, double goods, standard items"  How would you determine what quantity of items (in gp) that said ghale could be equipped with?


----------



## Tonguez (Mar 19, 2004)

Bibliophile said:
			
		

> How do we determine equipment for creatures without levels?
> 
> Ex: The Ghale is listed as having "No coins, double goods, standard items"  How would you determine what quantity of items (in gp) that said ghale could be equipped with?




I could be wrong (if so I have more work to do) but I assumed that non-leveled monsters are assumed to have no equpment other than the armour and weapons they are wearing (in the stat block) ie a Ghaele gets the +4 Great Sword but no treasure

Any other equipment they get is from the Army fund


----------



## Wrahn (Mar 19, 2004)

I am thinking about throwing my hat into the ring, as it were.  Several questions:

You had talked about banning Gate, but I saw nothing further on this.  Gate (at least the summoning portion of it) now takes XP, has this made you reconsider?

Is there an imbalance to the sides?  What is the division of Good and Evil?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 19, 2004)

With an XP cost... I think that sounds more agreeable to me.  Of course, trying to summon big things still means you have to make a deal, and the other side is under no obligation to agree to said deal.

I'm not actually sure how many good/evil players we have right now.  It's hard to count... since a number of people have recently said they'd LIKE in.  That doesn't mean they all have armies yet though... heck, some haven't even decided what their general army CONCEPT will be.

I -think- we're roughly even at this point though.

Again, I'm going to start up the game as soon as Evil get's itself a 2nd army ready.  Good already has two ready armies (and 2 less ready armies), evil has 1 ready army at the moment (and 1 nearly ready).  Further armies will be added one by one, when both sides have one ready.


----------



## Drakknyte32 (Mar 19, 2004)

I am so in this.

I'll play good or evil, whichever side has less players. I'm going to design an army that will work for either side.

Would it be okay if I have an army of 40 cl5 characters, or do you want really big armies.

I still have to check out the uk pdf and design an army so I won't be ready to go for a couple of days.


----------



## Wrahn (Mar 19, 2004)

With the sides being even, I think my army concept works better in the light.  So sign me up for the good guys.


----------



## Tonguez (Mar 19, 2004)

Wrahn said:
			
		

> With the sides being even, I think my army concept works better in the light.  So sign me up for the good guys.




Sheesh! All you nancyboys want to be good guys - why not come over to the darkside!! MWAHAHAHAHA

Oh and I'm getting my Army done as we speak


----------



## Fieari (Mar 19, 2004)

Regarding 40 CR5 units, that's fine.  It might not be the best choice for an army though... just as a warning.  In fact, from what I've seen so far, I think that such an army might be decimated unless you use it very well.  Diversity is going to be the key... depending on which side you decide to join, you'll see what I mean by example.  There are some VERY good army concepts here that I've seen.

As a guideline, think about the skills, spells and abilities you think would be most useful for an army to know.  Now determine the level you need to be in order to HAVE that skill, spell, or ability.  Next, determine HOW MANY of your army needs to have those abilities... do ALL your grunts need to have cure light wounds?  Or just a few that know Cure Mass?  Do you REALLY need lvl 5 sorcerers?  Or would an army of lvl1 sorcerers do better, since that's all you need for magic missile?

These are the things you should be thinking about.  Maximize your army whenever possible.

With the rules I've set up, I've found I don't NEED to enforce large army rules... they evolve natuarally from the optimal army that you'll want.


With regards to the simple ASCII map above... I'm now determining scale.  As a specific point to look at, I'd like the Green Desert to take -at least- four days to cross by horse, assuming sufficient water is brought along.  Horses vary in distance they can travel in a day, but average at 40 miles.  That means the desert must be at least 160 miles deep.  To even it up, I think it'll be convenient to make it 200 miles deep, making each square 50 miles.

This means that the Shadowed moor is 450 miles from the Lowly Peaks to the Silgrey Range... not shabby.  I think that'll work.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 19, 2004)

Just a quick note:  a 200mi desert takes closer to 10 days to cross by horse (and nearly a month for supply carts).  Unless there's a paved highway, desert slows movement by 1/2.

Click here for more details. 

*ponders "archery" company of 100x L1 Sorcerers*


----------



## Drakknyte32 (Mar 19, 2004)

Alright, since a lot of people mentioned they are becoming goody two shoes lately, I'll be evil. Not something I do often but it will be a new experience.

I now go to see what other armies are being built and to prepare my hordes.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 20, 2004)

Shrinking desert size to 160 miles, making squares 40 miles, which means that on the plains, you can travel one square per day.  It does mean that a horse needs 8 days to travel the desert now, 10 days for a caravan, but that's fine by me.

Getting to each other SHOULD be hazardous, and defenders need a bonus since magical warefare is as devestating or more devestating than modern technological warefare.

WARNING: GAME START IS IMMINENT!  PREPARE TO DO BATTLE BY TOMMOROW AT THE *LATEST*.


----------



## Serpenteye (Mar 20, 2004)

This looks very cool. I'll join evil, if that's ok.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 20, 2004)

IT HAS BEGUN!

*Evil* --- Evil vs Good: D&D Wargaming
*Good* --- Good vs Evil: D&D Wargaming


----------



## nameless (Mar 20, 2004)

Are we to assume that we are the rulers of our individual realms (e.g. Kings), or that we are the generals of the armies (Generals), or are we simply links in the chain of command (Commanders)?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 20, 2004)

Think of yourself as a member of nobility... you have a territory that is "yours"... you rule it.  But you aren't the King, as such.  As a noble, you're expected to have an armed force, which you do, and this armed force can be called up to go to war at any time... such as now.

Nameless, in your specific case, you aren't under the Good country's King, but you are under A King... which is what matters.


----------



## Uriel (Mar 21, 2004)

I'll be ready to jump in Monday.
Tomorrow is my once a week RL game, else I'd be able to jump in then instead.


----------



## Serpenteye (Mar 21, 2004)

My force is ready for play.


----------



## Carnifex (Mar 21, 2004)

Hi,

Are you still taking players for this? If so I'd *love* to join in, and happy to run either good or evil depending on which side needs the extra numbers


----------



## Fieari (Mar 22, 2004)

Current Teams, based SOLELY on who's posted in the Rogue's Gallery threads so far.  Lists sorted by most prolific RG poster.

EVIL (8)
---------------
Drakknyte32
Pyrex
Tonguez
Uriel
Serpenteye
The Goblin King
OldCrowe
Dalamar

GOOD (7)
---------------
nameless
Tyreus
WizWrm
Bibliophile
Jemal
Wrahn
LazarusLong42

Both teams have only three active in game armies at this moment in time.


----------



## Serpenteye (Mar 22, 2004)

How many finished armies do we have on each side?

I consider my army finished. I'm still awaiting some rulings but I'm good (or rather, evil) to go.


----------



## Carnifex (Mar 22, 2004)

Fieari said:
			
		

> Current Teams, based SOLELY on who's posted in the Rogue's Gallery threads so far.  Lists sorted by most prolific RG poster.
> 
> EVIL (8)
> ---------------
> ...





Okay, looks like I'm joining the good guys then!  *heads off to Good armies rogues gallery thread*


----------



## Fieari (Mar 22, 2004)

I'm going to put a temporary freeze on recruiting, till I find out what kind of nightmare 8v8 is to keep track of.  I may open it up to more later, and of course, if anyone drops out, replacements will be welcome.


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 22, 2004)

8v8? I'm gonna need more sorcerers....


----------



## Wrahn (Mar 23, 2004)

I would like to make a proposal:

Ban Epic Spellcasting.

It lends itself to too many abuses in this circumstance.  (With cooperative spell casting).  If we choose to allow it then there should be a minimum DC of around 20.

I have a few questions too:

Is there a mechanic in place for us to get our hands on more money?

What (if any) are the effects of losing our home territory or having our home city destroyed?


----------



## Serpenteye (Mar 23, 2004)

I agree with Wrahn. Allowing epic spellcasting, especially ritual epic spellcasting, would make this game into a battle between individual superpowered spellcasters and make the armies irrelevant. That's not the kind of game this is.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 23, 2004)

The game has _already_ devolved to a fight between individual superpowered spellcasters.  Banning 'Epic Spellcasting' (if/when a caster makes it to lvl 21) isn't going to change that any.  

Given the huge costs associated with Epic Spellcasting do you really think banning is necessary?  (I support a DC dead-zone from 1-19 though.  IMO DC zero spells should be allowed if we allow epic casting)


----------



## Wrahn (Mar 23, 2004)

Pyrex said:
			
		

> The game has _already_ devolved to a fight between individual superpowered spellcasters.  Banning 'Epic Spellcasting' (if/when a caster makes it to lvl 21) isn't going to change that any.
> 
> Given the huge costs associated with Epic Spellcasting do you really think banning is necessary?  (I support a DC dead-zone from 1-19 though.  IMO DC zero spells should be allowed if we allow epic casting)




DC 0 spells are fine until you begin dealing with cooperative casting.  get 500 1st level clerics to contribute level 1 slots, that is -500 DC there. -20 for 10 minutes and you can easily get permenant +5 inherent bonus (DC 235) I would hate to think what you could summon with that or the spells you could level countries with.  For one Feat.  DC 0 spells are a nice idea and I think workable without cooperative casting, but with it, it is beyond broken.

How about this, keep epic spell casting but eliminate cooperative (ritual) casting.

As far as devolving into assassinations of the leaders, perhaps we should set up rules about territory.

Each player starts with a territory, every (time period) it provides him with (an amount) of points to spend on his or her army either for replacement units or to spend on new untis.  Controlling two territories garners the owner (an amount x2) each (time period).  Three territories, three times the amount and so forth.

To hold a territory one must have (a Number) of units holding it and (a different number) of CR in that territory.

It will not eliminate it, it will just make it less profitable to go after a leader and not his territory.  I am actually interested in seeing how this plays out.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 23, 2004)

DC 0 spells cannot be cast cooperatively & must have a casting time no longer than 1rd.

Limit the DC reduction from cooperative casting to either a flat value or a percentage (25%?) of the original DC.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 24, 2004)

Initial Analysis from the DM:

High level units are DEVESTATING.  However, in discussions, it seems that every single high powered thing you can do has a counter that is simple and easy to produce.  Thus, rule #1 and key to waging war in a high magical enviornent-- Protect Yourself From Magic.  Mind blank and forbiddance should be MANDATORY for any kind of conflict, otherwise what you get is a massacre... and it won't be clear which side the massacre is on.  VERY risky.  Too risky.  War needs to be more methodical, or you'll win battles but lose the war.  Slow and steady.

Both sides have powerful units, and weak units.  The powerful units can singlehandedly take out ALL the weak units.  However, the powerful units can also PREVENT the other powerful units from accomplishing this.  Thus, I predict that battles will become focused around COUNTERS.  Say I have someone who wants to cast a Storm of Vengance, but the other side has a magical item that casts mordenkainen's disjunction on a large area.  The key is then getting rid of the disjunction.  The high level unit could do it himself, maybe... but that's such a risk.  Maybe you should send a strike team of non magically embued sneak-theives into the camp.  Or maybe have a pitched battle between non-magical units... and then if the magical item goes down, then things get messy, but in favor of one side or the other.

Just some things to think about.

This first raid that is going on right now was PREVENTABLE.  Tactics are one thing, but good tactics in the face of bad strategy can be like patching the titanic with a box of bandaids.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 24, 2004)

It's definately been interesting to see where the game is going. 

At this point I've realized that the game I built my army for is not the game that's being played.  (which, of course, just makes it all the more interesting)


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 24, 2004)

Now that 'Round 1' is over, I have a request.

We need to ratchet _Scrying_ (and the Mirror) back down to work how they're written in the book.

The major reason Round 1 went down as it did is because _Scrying_ was made far more powerful than the written version.

Thoughts?


----------



## Fieari (Mar 24, 2004)

Yeah, I did allow both sides to scry for abstract concepts, instead of things they already KNEW about.  "Find me the 'Enemy General'"  "Find me any armies within our territory."  Etc...


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 24, 2004)

Yeah, I'm thinking that's got to stop.

I'd like to see the game move back towards armies fighting instead dueling generals.


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 24, 2004)

Sore loser  ...... Just kidding  I didn't make my army for that purpose, but when I saw how vulnrable you guys were I couldn't resist. I was scrying so I knew where to send my troops, not where to cast finger of death.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 25, 2004)

No problem.  It happens.


----------



## Tonguez (Mar 25, 2004)

Tyreus said:
			
		

> Sore loser  ...... Just kidding  I didn't make my army for that purpose, but when I saw how vulnrable you guys were I couldn't resist. I was scrying so I knew where to send my troops, not where to cast finger of death.




_goes up and shakes Tyreus hand - good game_

I think in my case the biggest problem was still being in 'Prep mode' - so looking at doing the RP session 'strategising' with Drakknyte before the actual combat and not expecting a preemptive strike so early on in the game, afterall I still don't know how the mirror was suppose to work 

I hadn't done any defensive magics because I wasn't ready for a battle otherwise Unhallow and Forbiddence should have been everywhere! (we had just received the call to arms afterall!) - you could have at least given us a round to settle in before turning us to dust!!! 

So can we declare that a practice round and start again? (Divine Intervention to turn back time?)


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 25, 2004)

I *did* give you a round... the one with the finger of deaths. It was the *second* round you were turned to dust...


----------



## Drakknyte32 (Mar 25, 2004)

So Tyreus you are the one that killed me.

Thanks it was the nicest thing anyone ever did to me.

And I'm not giving you any more hints than that about what I'm making for my next army


----------



## Fieari (Mar 25, 2004)

If -all- current players are willing to turn back the clock, I will allow it.  General vs. General just isn't as interesting as army vs army.


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 25, 2004)

I would be willing to turn back the clock, but only if I get to remake my army. 

Drakknyte32: Don't hate me because I won, hate me because it was easy.


----------



## WizWrm (Mar 25, 2004)

Leave me out of the voting, since I haven't had a chance to affect the game very much yet.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 25, 2004)

Turning back the clock would allow army remakes for all, now that we've all seen what an assasination attempt looks like.  I'm sure you've all thought of ways to combat that in the future, so it NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN.  Please... please make it never happen again... running that little fiasco took EIGHT HOURS of calculations and die rolling and rule checking and clarification providing etc etc etc etc etc.  Pitch melee battle CAN'T be that complicated.  It just CAN'T!  (actually, the celestial vs mephit part of the assasination thing was the easiest aspect... so that supports my theory)


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 25, 2004)

Hmm, I support starting over *if* we change the fundamental rules of the game a bit to drag everyone back towards the original purpose.

Example:
No magic items over 50kgp.
No casters or SP abilities higher than nth (12th?) level.


----------



## nameless (Mar 25, 2004)

I'd rather not turn back the clock. Sure, there's some things that I'd do differently, but most of us have unallocated resources remaining and now is a dandy time to spend them to fortify against more surprise attacks. And getting a little more strict on the divination/teleportation magics will also go a long way towards stopping further magical assassinations.

An important one that a lot of people used seems to be the Mirror of Mental Prowess. It functions off of Clairvoyance, which has a range of Long (as opposed to unlimited in 3.0). So it can spy and open a portal, but it'll only go a few hundred yards. It also takes 10 minutes to cast, in the same way that Scrying takes an hour to cast. (Greater Scrying takes only a round and lasts an hour per level, but it much harder to get). It makes scouting creatures much more important if a stationary and invulnerable magical sensor can't be used to find every bit of intelligence.

Honestly though, I see some pretty good comeback strategies for evil that good doesn't really have at their disposal. Especially if they band together to ward their fortresses and battlelords.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 25, 2004)

I agree there are definately ways for us to come back.  That's why my 'yes' was conditional.


----------



## OldCrowe (Mar 25, 2004)

I won't begrudge Good their minor victory. I vote we play the game and see what happens.

Re,

C. Rowe


----------



## Fieari (Mar 25, 2004)

Alright then.  Lets see what happens.


----------



## Drakknyte32 (Mar 25, 2004)

Okay it looks like it was already decided but I will put forth my vote anyway.

I *Don't* want to set back the battle. I lost but I learned a lot and there wasn't a lot I could do that would keep the same thing from happening if I tried to stay with that army. My new army is much better equipped to deal with this sort of thing.

It is your decision if we limit scrying/teleportation magic but personally, I think we shouldn't. Isn't the whole purpose of this game to learn how mass combat works in D&D? Teleporting and scrying are an integral part of D&D and we are already learning how to deal with them. If it continues to be unbalancing it will be easy to change in the future.

Tyreus I don't hate you at all. On the contrary I am glad you did what you did. I am new to D&D and it helped me learn a lot about the dangers and benefits of high level magic. Because of this I will be able to make an army that is far more effective now.

I'm still going to get revenge of course, but it isn't personall  .


----------



## Bibliophile (Mar 25, 2004)

mmm... *can't wait for the pitched battles to begin*


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 25, 2004)

Vengence huh? You will only meet a swift defeat.... Do I sense a friendly rival now? Sweet.


----------



## Drakknyte32 (Mar 25, 2004)

Swift defeat huh? Actually the sad part is that I can believe it myself. I've been running some theoretical simulations between what I know of your army and my new one. I give myself a 35% chance of winning the battle and a 55% chance of surviving the battle. Not good odds but better than I would have had with the dragon apparently. The trouble is that I'm really new to D&D. Look at my post count sometime, all my posts have been for this one game, and I've never played a game of it offline before. It doesn't matter how much I design an army or study the game until I'm used to the system I keep making rookie mistakes.

Of course I'm counting on you to beat some common sense into my head  .

So yeah, I'm definately a rival. I may not be much of one right now but I learn fast. One day, when you least expect it, one of my crazy plans will work and I will have my revenge.


----------



## Serpenteye (Mar 25, 2004)

It doesn't really concern me since I have't started playing yet, but I say let the Good side have their victory. They have earned it, and they should enjoy it, for they won't have another.


----------



## Carnifex (Mar 25, 2004)

I gotta say I'm eagerly awaiting my army getting into action. I think the new armies are all going to be better protected than the unfortunate first Evil ones against the whole Scry/Buff/Teleport attack, so doubtless things are going to come down to more actual army vs army combat...


----------



## Dalamar (Mar 25, 2004)

I think it'll be mooks fighting each other, and then the stronger commanders battling each other to turn the tide of battle. I'd be surprised if the mooks of any one of us's army weren't just fireball food. But the point is that the commanders are fighting which will be able to throw that fireball (or what have you) without getting beaten by the other commander.


----------



## Carnifex (Mar 25, 2004)

So will we be restarting the game or not? I don't really mind as I'm not actually in play yet    and if it's going to make your life easier if we do restart, then I vote for that because God knows you're gonna have a hectic enough job DM'ing this anyway, and if we can ease that for you I reckon the game will go much smoother.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 25, 2004)

The official declaration has been to keep going (no restart).


----------



## Wrahn (Mar 25, 2004)

Okay now the question, is the a perpetual thing or is it fight til there is no more good/evil.  If it is the former than I propose that the next entry into the game is 1 good and 2 evil until we even things out.  It give good an edge for a while but will eventually even out.  Once it is full eight on eight, when an army is defeated, the defeated player should be placed at the end of the waiting list (if there is one) and 1 week wait should be imposed, after which a new army is entered by the person first on the waiting list.

On the other hand if it is the latter, Good just struck a tremendous blow against evil.


----------



## Serpenteye (Mar 26, 2004)

Wrahn said:
			
		

> Okay now the question, is the a perpetual thing or is it fight til there is no more good/evil.  If it is the former than I propose that the next entry into the game is 1 good and 2 evil until we even things out.  It give good an edge for a while but will eventually even out.  Once it is full eight on eight, when an army is defeated, the defeated player should be placed at the end of the waiting list (if there is one) and 1 week wait should be imposed, after which a new army is entered by the person first on the waiting list.
> 
> On the other hand if it is the latter, Good just struck a tremendous blow against evil.




Hopefully the latter. If neither side can win the game it is eventually going to feel increasingly pointless to try. There has to be a natural ending to the game.

About our reserve forces (the guardians of our respective centers of power). are they just local defensive resources or can they eventually be used for active offensive warfare?


----------



## Tonguez (Mar 26, 2004)

Serpenteye said:
			
		

> About our reserve forces (the guardians of our respective centers of power). are they just local defensive resources or can they eventually be used for active offensive warfare?




As I understand it only if you spend CR to 'recruit' them 

- unless otherwise stated (ie recruited) the home guard is just civilian militia, for them to be used in the offensive armies they have to be recruited (and thus trained) upgrading them using the CR points..


----------



## Serpenteye (Mar 26, 2004)

Tonguez said:
			
		

> As I understand it only if you spend CR to 'recruit' them
> 
> - unless otherwise stated (ie recruited) the home guard is just civilian militia, for them to be used in the offensive armies they have to be recruited (and thus trained) upgrading them using the CR points..




I was referring to the Celestials and the (I don't know if they know what we got ), not the civilians and the militias.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 26, 2004)

Which celestials?  

I believe one of the good armies is composed of celestials. (which explains the defense force on the other side of the mirror)


----------



## Serpenteye (Mar 26, 2004)

Pyrex said:
			
		

> Which celestials?
> 
> I believe one of the good armies is composed of celestials. (which explains the defense force on the other side of the mirror)




Those on the mountain south of the Good lands.


			
				Fieari said:
			
		

> Anything strange on the other side?  Yes... celestials.  Hundreds of celestials.  And not the little glowing balls, either.  We have aasimar too... strong looking ones.  And then some BIG angels.
> 
> This is all located on the roof of a wooden fortress, surrounded in cloud.




 That description sounded like it was a bit more than a thousand points worth, so I assumed they had taken the mirror to "Mount Celestia". If it had only been an army it wouldn't have looked nearly that awesome.


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 26, 2004)

You assume that only *one* army has celestials.....


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 26, 2004)

Perhaps I should clarify.

I didn't expect that only one army would include celestials, merely my belief that at least one army was composed mostly/completely of celestials.


----------



## Carnifex (Mar 26, 2004)

Pyrex said:
			
		

> Perhaps I should clarify.
> 
> I didn't expect that only one army would include celestials, merely my belief that at least one army was composed mostly/completely of celestials.




I think his reply was directed more at Serpenteye's comment that the celestial host looked more impressive than just one army


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 26, 2004)

Carnifex said:
			
		

> I think his reply was directed more at Serpenteye's comment that the celestial host looked more impressive than just one army




Yes it was.


----------



## Fieari (Mar 27, 2004)

I apologize greatly for taking a day off... not so much for delay of game as for the fact that now I have a couple of mountains of posts to sort through.  (Just so you know, I've been helping my parents move recently)

As it is, it would REALLY REALLY help if someone from each team could summarize what I need to pay attention to.


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 27, 2004)

Fieari: I have posted what I hope is a complete summery of what's happened for both ooc and rogues gallery while you were gone. Welcome back.


----------



## Pyrex (Mar 27, 2004)

Fieari, here's the evil summary.
(Good team, stay away)


----------



## Tyreus (Mar 27, 2004)

I scry here's with _greater scrying_


----------



## Jemal (Mar 30, 2004)

I was gone for a while, now I'm back.  Will finish up my Army ASAP, but finishing up all my OOC "I'm back" posts first.  For explanation, check out my "EXPERIENCE" OOC thread.


----------



## nameless (Apr 2, 2004)

I didn't see anything about this in my quick glance past the rules.

Now that some people are getting bonus/reinforcement CR, how does that affect the baselines and what units can be recruited? And does lost CR below the baseline need to be replenished before bigger units can be purchased?

If support rules need to be followed at all times, what happens when big units become unsuported though attrition?

To make it clearer, what are the rules we have to follow when using the bonus CR points we're given?


----------



## Fieari (Apr 2, 2004)

Lost units below the baseline must be re-supported.  If you are ever in possesion of a unit above the CR cap (probably due to lowering of the baseline due to attrition) you may keep it.  If you ever lose support, your higher level units may stay, but any NEW units obtained MUST be below the baseline unti you have re-met support requirements.

The rules do specify how level caps and baselines rise as you gain more points.  There are even tables supplied for ease of lookup.


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 2, 2004)

As the total CR of your army increases, so does your baseline cap.

BaselineCR = sqrt(TotalPoints * 1/40)

If high-CR units become unsupported due to battle losses, all new CR you gain must be allocated to baseline units until the high-CR units are fully supported again.

There is currently no penalty associated with your high-CR units becoming unsupported.  (except that you can't use reinforcement CR to recruit powerful units until you've replenished your support units)


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 7, 2004)

Has anyone heard from Fieari?


----------



## nameless (Apr 7, 2004)

Not for 4 or 5 days.


----------



## nameless (Apr 12, 2004)

Is this game over? If so, I'm disappointed big time, it was really fun...


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 12, 2004)

Same here.

If Fieari doesn't come back soon, is someone else willing to step up and DM this?


----------



## WizWrm (Apr 12, 2004)

Possibly. Fieari hasn't logged on in nearly a week.


----------



## nameless (Apr 12, 2004)

It's possible that he went on spring break and just didn't tell anybody. I say we give it a few more days before we swipe it from under him.


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 12, 2004)

*nod* That's why I said "...if he doesn't come back..."


----------



## OldCrowe (Apr 12, 2004)

Agreed, there is a good possiblity of Spring Break/Finals intereference here, though we should give him a good throttling for not letting us know in advance   , okay, maybe not that bad of a throttling, real life always trumps game life.

Re,

C. Rowe


----------



## Serpenteye (Apr 12, 2004)

Pyrex said:
			
		

> Same here.
> 
> If Fieari doesn't come back soon, is someone else willing to step up and DM this?




You seem like the best candidate (at least among the evil players). Would you be interested?


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 12, 2004)

I already spend too much time on ENWorld.  As much as I'd like to try DM'ing something like this I'd have to drop out of every other game I'm playing to make enough time; so I'll have to decline.

Thanks for the vote though.


----------



## Drakknyte32 (Apr 12, 2004)

I seem to never run out of spare time so I could possibly do it.

I've never run a game before so I'd need some help though. Perhaps Pyrex watches over the mechanics on the evil side and someone else watches over the mechanics on the good side. And I could act as the go between, telling you what you learn.

I'd prefer it if someone else took up the mantle though. I'm not sure how well I'd do.


----------



## Wrahn (Apr 12, 2004)

I have contemplated running this, but if I did, we would need to restart as I have some rule changes I would introduce, which may change strategies.  In anycase we should probably give Fieari a few more days before we contemplate revolt.


----------



## nameless (Apr 13, 2004)

What rules changes would you propose? I've noticed the following problems:

1. Circumventing the CR caps by buying numerous extremely low-CR creatures (like hundreds of rats) for nearly no points. Most of them aren't so much part of the army as a group that sits around "supporting" the leaders.

2. The map is too big. Armies will never meet on an open field if they can never find each other. =]

3. Low- or non-intelligent troops acting autonomously. The weakness of dumb things is that they have no grasp of tactics, mostly can't communicate, and in the worst case, can't tell friend from foe.

4. Custom monsters getting out of hand. For one, there are just too many of them, but they are also far more optimized than most core monsters/characters.


----------



## Tonguez (Apr 13, 2004)

nameless said:
			
		

> What rules changes would you propose? I've noticed the following problems:
> 
> 1. Circumventing the CR caps by buying numerous extremely low-CR creatures (like hundreds of rats) for nearly no points. Most of them aren't so much part of the army as a group that sits around "supporting" the leaders.




I personally don't see the problem with this since the rules in place say that the CR used for support troops has to equal that of the Big Troops. If as you say a swarm of rats is an ineffective attack force - then they are used CR unavailable for effective units. 



> 2. The map is too big. Armies will never meet on an open field if they can never find each other. =].




Agreed - the Map is Way to big and that makes things way too boring. (we want to fight not spend the whole game on recon and troop movement!)



> 3. Low- or non-intelligent troops acting autonomously. The weakness of dumb things is that they have no grasp of tactics, mostly can't communicate, and in the worst case, can't tell friend from foe..




I think whoever acts as DM should keep this in mind - creatures without 'handlers' attack the nearest target (friend or foe) or else flee - thats the danger of using them. 
However we need also to account for magic as it applies to say zombies, golems and animals etc eg Zombies in games and movies seem to never attack 'allies' (other undead, spiders etc) - so why should they in this? 



> 4. Custom monsters getting out of hand. For one, there are just too many of them, but they are also far more optimized than most core monsters/characters.




So the Good guys have lots of custom monsters aye - thanks for the tidbit

*anyway* I was also gonna vote Pyrex for replacement DM but if Drakknyte is willing...


----------



## nameless (Apr 13, 2004)

Tonguez said:
			
		

> I personally don't see the problem with this since the rules in place say that the CR used for support troops has to equal that of the Big Troops. If as you say a swarm of rats is an ineffective attack force - then they are used CR unavailable for effective units.




The rules say that you need two things to support big units: equal points spent, and individual numbers equaling the points spent. At 1/7 CR, you can get 490 ravens for 10 points, which pretty much nixes the requirement on numbers and limits it to points spent. While technically legal, those ravens aren't really fighting members of the army, and I just think it falls outside the spirit of the game to buy up lots of expensive (CR 5 at the moment) units to support your battlelords and then lip service the other rule with noncombatants.


----------



## Drakknyte32 (Apr 13, 2004)

Indeed. And I'm guessing a lot of armies are using that. It might be a good Idea to drop the number requirements and just require the points.


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 13, 2004)

If we were to drop the 'number' req and just keep the 'points' req we should also reduce the baseline.


----------



## Tonguez (Apr 14, 2004)

Pyrex said:
			
		

> If we were to drop the 'number' req and just keep the 'points' req we should also reduce the baseline.




Fair enough so what do you suggest 
4 = Wyrmling White Dragon, Ogre, Pegasus, Gargoyle 

3 = Blink Dog, Imp, mephit, Triton, Owlbear


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 14, 2004)

I'd have to take another look at the lists, but I was thinking 3 or 3.5.


----------



## Wrahn (Apr 14, 2004)

Two problems here that I see:

First, custom creatures are out of hand, beyond the scope of what was intended and a big hassle for whoever is going to run this.  I would ban custom creatures.

Second is that the way D&D is set up, higher CR creature are disproportionately more powerful than their lower CR counterparts, such that it is likely that the one high CR "battle lord" would be able to defeat the rest of their army.  It seems likely the way to balance this is to drastically lower the CR ceiling, but what is the point of a fantasy battle without fantastic creatures and great heroes.

The problem is that it becomes a guerilla war, with the massively powerful units being highly mobile, striking from suprise.  I would propose a system of territories, which is how an army gains more points.  It would require a certain number of units and unit points to hold a territory and it would require a certain number of unit and a certain number of point to challenge for the territory.  The more territories one has the more points one gathers per time interval.

I would also propose a more structured turn type system and abolish unit experience, in favor of buying unit increases through the point system.


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 14, 2004)

I have to agree on banning custom creatures, though I would still allow some limited customization of stock creatures.

That's the whole basis of the CR system.  It's why we had creatures above the baseline cost CR^2.  If we a) drop the CR cap to 12 and b) require that (N)PC levels take their equipment that'll still leave lots of fun creatures available but smooth out some of the wackiness we've already seen.

Drop the magic item cap to exclude the Mirror, and keep casters below _Teleport Circle_ and we get back into the range of "traditional" fantasy warfare.

How much time is a "turn"?  What limits are you going to place on what can be accomplished in a turn?

I'm torn on the issue of dropping unit xp, I understand why you want to drop it, but keeping your units alive should count for more than sacrificing them for the objective and buying new ones.


----------



## Wrahn (Apr 14, 2004)

What I would propose is that each turn is a period of resolutions.  Every say monday and thursday is a turn day, events are resolved on those days.  The way I was envisioning it is that every turn would be a week, every turn you could move an army to and adjacent territory, you would recieve points for the terrirories you held the previous turn, you could propose any action which could reasonably be done in a weeks period.

The real problem with that are the battles, which was going to be an issue anyway. Going turn by turn trying to get each side to post what they want is going to take forever, while 2 generals fight, 6 other people will not be able to participate.  We are going to need a system to address that as well and a lot of trust is going to have to be placed in the moderators hands.


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 14, 2004)

Hmm, weeks might be a bit long.  It works fine for large, slow armies, but not so well for more mobile troops.  Are you planning on a standard size for a territory (say, for example, a 50 mile square)?

The battles are going to be a problem, but we already knew that.  I'd be suprised if we fit (at least the first few) battles into a two-turn-per-week structure.


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 14, 2004)

Just had an idea on a compromise on the 'unit XP' issue.

In addition to held territories producing points (each turn?), each military action produces points (more to the victor, less to any surviving losers) which can only be used to upgrade troops involved in that action.


----------



## Serpenteye (Apr 14, 2004)

We should be able to have more than one battle or action going on in the same RL time for different units of troops. All players should be allowed to be active at all times.


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 14, 2004)

Each player will be active each turn, but it's still far easer for the DM to run "simultaneous" (i.e. same turn) battles consecutively.


----------



## Wrahn (Apr 14, 2004)

Pyrex said:
			
		

> Each player will be active each turn, but it's still far easer for the DM to run "simultaneous" (i.e. same turn) battles consecutively.




My initial idea is that both generals draw up battle plans, detailing how they are set up and what they would like to do.  The moderate compares the plans and sets them in motion against each other.

At this point I am at a bit of a loss.  The moderator could either finish the battle or post the results of the first "turn" of combat and let the oppposing generals modify their plans accordingly.  The first option allows for quicker turns, the second allows for greater control.  If we go with the second option, I don't think the turn idea is going to work.


----------



## Tonguez (Apr 14, 2004)

Wrahn said:
			
		

> My initial idea is that both generals draw up battle plans, detailing how they are set up and what they would like to do.  The moderate compares the plans and sets them in motion against each other.
> 
> At this point I am at a bit of a loss.  The moderator could either finish the battle or post the results of the first "turn" of combat and let the oppposing generals modify their plans accordingly.  The first option allows for quicker turns, the second allows for greater control.  If we go with the second option, I don't think the turn idea is going to work.




The thing with messageboards and email games of this type is that they do take a long time anyway. Control can be maintained by players posting detailed plans and contingencies too. It is the Dm who will need to keep to the Monday-Thursday deadline as far as I can see.
Also the burden for the Dm is going to be ensuring that the players have ample information in order to make contingency plans viable.

I'd love to institute a rule saying that all combats are to be resolved in three rounds ie 
_1.Initial Actions 
2. Results and Modified Actions 
3. Final Outcomes _ 
(with three days given to resolve) but that might be a bit harsh to some

*Anyway new rules* I've posted a summary of ideas (including my own) below some have gaps and all need discussion but anyway...

*Army Creation*
1. The Baseline for units is (_3, 3.5, 4, ?_?) 
2. Total CR^2 of support units must equal CR^2 of units above baseline
Any creature with a CR less than 1/4 may not be used as support
3. Classed Units (heroes) may be no more than double the Baseline CR on creation _*I'd apply this to BattleLords in future - ignore this rule for now (we don't want to go and recreate our BLs do we?_
4. Customisation - must use a base creature from the core books + templates from WotC products (including website)

*Territories*
5. Each Battle Lord occupies one territory to the north and south of the neutral unoccupied territory respectively.  
6. A battle Lord must invest CR (units) to claim an unoccupied territory equal to ??? CR
7. Armies gain CR for Territories held
_*Personally I'd have different territory types (perhaps based on terrain) earning different CR - thus making certain territories more valuable and giving others reason to attack_
8. Direct combat earns personal CR which can only be used to upgrade units involved in that action

*Actions*
9. A Turn is enough time to complete one combat action (subject to terrain, speed and other effects) _- so how do we account for Speed?_
10. A BattleLord posts 1 Combat Actions per unit each turn but can post free non-combat action at anytime
11. Combat Actions include Troop Movements into Unallied (enemy or unoocupied) Territory, Troop Upgrades, Fortification of allied structures, Attacks on enemy structures, and offensive use of magics (sabotage eg blighting an enemies crops)


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 15, 2004)

So here's what I was thinking...

*Army Creation*
1. Baseline CR 3.5
2. Why not let low CR creatures count for support?  We're just looking at points now, not numbers.  
3. I'd make everyone rebuild their generals at a new CR cap of 12 w/ PC equipment.  This limits full casters to 6th level spells
4. Seems reasonable.  I would still allow some minor customization of templates though.  
8. Troops advance via points gained through combat.

*Territories*
Each Territory has a CR rating.  

You must purchase your starting Territories with your starting points.  (i.e. a CR 6 Territory costs 36pts)

Each turn a Territory produces points equal to its CR.

In order to produce it's points, a Territory must be garrisoned with an equivalent amount of troops (i.e. the CR 6 territory needs to be garrisoned with 36pts worth of troops to produce 6pts per turn)

Each Territory is assumed to have defensive emplacements equivalent to a Landlord PC of it's level. 

A Territory can be upgraded by spending the appropriate number of points (i.e. upgrading a CR 6 city to CR 7 requires 49-36=13pts, just over two turns worth of production)

*Actions*
9-11.  I agree, except troop upgrade should be a free action.


----------



## nameless (Apr 15, 2004)

Your territory rules look pretty cool, but I (for one) am not as interested in playing that type of logistically-minded game. Marking territories and reducing movement to turns or spaces (instead of miles) is simply a little too much of an abstraction in my opinion. I'd be comfortable in saying that a fortress is worth X CR and produces Y CR a turn, and perhaps has valuable surrounding territory. The difference being that fortresses are separated by relatively wide stretches of land with little strategic value. Instead of being a jigsaw puzzle of territories like medieval Risk, it would be a map with key points on it. The rules from the PHB and DMG for overland movement seem adequate for troop movements, as long as supplies are accounted for (in terms of speed of movement).

I like your proposals on the stricter CR limits, and army creation, though. And despite the huge pain it is, I think scrapping all the battlelords is the only sensible thing to do, as some of them (mine at least, and the ghost dragon on the evil side, from what I've seen) are pretty unstoppable except for by another focused battlelord.


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 15, 2004)

Sounds reasonable.  I've just been throwing around ideas to see what everyone else responds to.

I agree that turning the map into a Risk board is a little extreme, but it's just one possible way we could go, not the only (or even necessarily the best) way.


----------



## Drakknyte32 (Apr 15, 2004)

I'd just like to say that, no matter what you guys decide on, I'm not going to play in this game any more. I need more experience in normal D&D before I can present a decent challange in this game.

If whoever ends up running this wants me too however, I will work as an assistant DM. I couldn't run the game on my own but I could help out.


----------



## The Goblin King (Apr 16, 2004)

If I was GM I would skip all this futzing around with troop movements and logistics. I would just assume that it is taken care of by subordinate officers or magic or something.

Basically, your armies all meet on the field of battle.  Many historic battles have taken place in this valley.  The sky is clear and morale is high on both sides.  Good and Evil start at opposite ends of the valley.

Roll for initiative.


----------



## Tonguez (Apr 16, 2004)

The Goblin King said:
			
		

> If I was GM I would skip all this futzing around with troop movements and logistics. I would just assume that it is taken care of by subordinate officers or magic or something.
> 
> Basically, your armies all meet on the field of battle.  Many historic battles have taken place in this valley.  The sky is clear and morale is high on both sides.  Good and Evil start at opposite ends of the valley.
> 
> Roll for initiative.




I agree and think we should do this NOW with our current armies 

- okay we all assemble tomorrow somewhere between the Green Desert and the Hills roll initiative and move accordingly. 

The Battle Lords sit back and watch as their armies duke it out to see who is the winner 

then we go on to the new game with the new rules

I'll volunteer to DM if noone else wants to - but I warn you I'm very loose with rules, give bonusses for actions and descriptions I think are 'kewl' and will ban Teleport spells (but not spelllike abilities) on the Battlefield...


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 16, 2004)

There are a couple problems with that.

Not all armies are designed to form ranks and charge across the valley.

Not all troops are on equal footing during the day.

Also, why ban TP spells but not TP spell-like-abilities?  Seems random and unfair.


----------



## Tonguez (Apr 16, 2004)

Pyrex said:
			
		

> There are a couple problems with that.
> 
> Not all armies are designed to form ranks and charge across the valley.
> 
> ...




Who said anything a about Day time?

All I suggested is that we choose a point where the armies 'meet' - the players can decide whether they are going head to head in battle lines, attacking camps and supply lines and the pc who wins initiative decides whether its day or night

and

It is random and unfair but Teleport is a hassle. However I wouldn't limit any recruited monsters with that ability (but I'll drop this - teleport all you like!)

All I'm suggesting is a one off self destruct, lets through it all down and get on with things rumble...


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 16, 2004)

I'd prefer a mutually agreeable time like, say, just after sunset when it's still light enough to see, but all troops on both sides can participate.

I have no real problem with the concept as we're all going to have to rebuild our armies when Wrahn takes over anyway.


----------



## Drakknyte32 (Apr 17, 2004)

Sounds like a good Idea. Still leaves the question of who's going to DM it though. I could try but I'd mess up a lot.


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 17, 2004)

Tonguez has volunteered to run the big squash, which will probably result in a lot of valuable info for Wrahn when he restarts.


----------



## Wrahn (Apr 17, 2004)

Works for me.  I am not sure I am the concensus for running it though.  I think we can probably give up on Fieari about now though


----------



## nameless (Apr 17, 2004)

I just want to say that the big squash idea sounds magnificiently fun. =]

I'll put my faith in Wrahn as the new DM afterwards, also.


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 17, 2004)

He hasn't been here in two weeks, I think we've lost him.

A'right Tonguez, you're on deck.


----------



## Drakknyte32 (Apr 17, 2004)

Right so let me see if I've got this.

Tonguez is DMing our final battle between the two forces.
Wrahn is DMing the new game we start afterwards.
I'll be an assistant to Wrahn in the new game.


----------



## Serpenteye (Apr 18, 2004)

Will the "last battle" only be for the six armies currently in the game or is it open to all finished armies?


----------



## Drakknyte32 (Apr 18, 2004)

You can take my place if you want serpenteye. I don't really have an army anymore. And I'd really prefer just sitting back and watching both sides fight this battle. 

And after getting soundly trumped twice I want to see just what armies and tactics good uses. But I can't do that while I'm still in the game.


----------



## Serpenteye (Apr 18, 2004)

Thanks


----------



## nameless (Apr 18, 2004)

I'm not looking forward to fighting that dragon for the third time. *wince*

It seems that we're pretty much all ready to rumble, I want to get down to my war room and start banging out some tactics. You're gonna regret crossing the armies of good, Lich King!


----------



## Drakknyte32 (Apr 18, 2004)

You don't have to worry about fighting the dragon. It was mine and I just gave up my place to Serpenteye. Not that his commander will be much easier to fight.

In case your wondering the Ghost dragon was CL 23 with the silver rule. Do you want to see his stats.


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 19, 2004)

To the batcave!  Er, War Room.  

With Tonguez dm'ing that puts you, me & Crowe in charge of the Lich King's forces Serp.


----------



## nameless (Apr 19, 2004)

I eagerly await Tonguez's segue into the big crunch so I may smite the unholy horde.


----------



## Serpenteye (Apr 19, 2004)

Pyrex said:
			
		

> To the batcave!  Er, War Room.
> 
> With Tonguez dm'ing that puts you, me & Crowe in charge of the Lich King's forces Serp.




We are going to kick some serious ass


----------



## Tonguez (Apr 19, 2004)

Okay heres the set up

Where the low hills meet the Grass desert is the *small unfortified* village of Springwell so named for its water source, the last water source merchants heading into the northern lands can use before entry to the Grass desert. Although nominally claimed by the City of Lowgate, Springwell is neutral territory being too remote for any real influence to be had. (ie _*Terrain* mix of low hill country (south) and long grass savannah (north), a village at the base of the hills and a spring and creek beside it_)

It is here that the final confrontation between the North and South takes place - those armies that must strike camp do it here, replenishing their stocks of water. (_I'm assuming the human army from Lowgate and the Orcs from the north are the two camps - any others as required_)

The other Battle Lords and their armies appear soon afterwards following the easiest roads to the enemy - it is evening the last rays of the sun still light the sky but the darkness and all it entails is not too far away. (_its dark enough for daylight sensitive creatures to be effective but also light enough for humans to see_)

I suppose we can continue with the two threads for all your stealthy moves once we get to a final rumble I'll post a third thread where everything takes place...

Any questions? Take your corners - FIGHT!


----------



## Serpenteye (Apr 20, 2004)

Tonguez said:
			
		

> Any questions? Take your corners - FIGHT!




Looks ok, though I could use a day or two IC to prepare.

Pyrex, Crowe?


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 20, 2004)

Looks good to me.

Tongues, if you could find you way to posting a rough map that'd be nifty...


----------



## Drakknyte32 (Apr 21, 2004)

Just here to say my final goodbye to everyone.

This game looked pretty interesting but I'm afraid it's not really my style. And I'm getting more busy lately so I won't have time to help DM it either. I hope you all have fun but I'm moving on to my other games.


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 22, 2004)

Tonguez, you still going to make this happen?

Wrahn, are you ready to start the next iteration?


----------



## Wrahn (Apr 22, 2004)

Not yet, I still have the ruleset I am going to propose to hammer out the final details and let you guys try and convince me to change it to your point of view.  I also was waiting to do that to see if I could find problems and solutions in what Tonguez was planning.


----------



## Tonguez (Apr 23, 2004)

Pyrex said:
			
		

> Tonguez, you still going to make this happen?
> 
> Wrahn, are you ready to start the next iteration?




Waiting for everyone to post - things so far haven't really got anyone into a conflict position...


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 23, 2004)

Oh, well we'll have to fix that then. 

Do all the armies arrive in the area around the same time?

Also, how many armies are active on the good side?  We currently have only two for the Evil side...


----------



## nameless (Apr 23, 2004)

Tyreus has one, but he's not responding. Wrahn and I make 2 at the moment.


----------



## Tonguez (Apr 24, 2004)

So its Pyrex & Serpenteye vs Nameless and Wrahn?
Any others?

And yes you all become aware of each other about the same time (those he need to strike camp have done so stealthily - ie concealed in the Long Grass or in a cleft between hills sort of thing...


----------



## Tyreus (Apr 24, 2004)

Sorry I've been gone for about two weeks, real life has been very hectic. It looks like things are falling apart anyways, so it doesn't look like I disrupted things too much. It looks like it's two on two, but if theres hope for me still just let me know.


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 26, 2004)

Tonguez, where do you want us to post actions?


----------



## Tonguez (Apr 27, 2004)

Okay

So far the only tactics I've had posted mean that the two 'active armies are missing each other and so have nothing to fight yet! (although of the two the Evil guys are doing better)

Post in your respective Good v Evil and Evil vs Good threads and I'll let you know when two sides actually engage each other. Also the nature of the armies pretty much means that conventiaonal warfare is not going to happen anytime soon...


----------



## Pyrex (Apr 28, 2004)

Since we haven't actually spotted each other yet, tactical commentary will continue in Evil OOC...


----------



## Serpenteye (Apr 28, 2004)

Tonguez said:
			
		

> Okay
> 
> So far the only tactics I've had posted mean that the two 'active armies are missing each other and so have nothing to fight yet! (although of the two the Evil guys are doing better)
> 
> Post in your respective Good v Evil and Evil vs Good threads and I'll let you know when two sides actually engage each other. Also the nature of the armies pretty much means that conventiaonal warfare is not going to happen anytime soon...




Actions posted. let me know how things progress.


----------



## Wrahn (Apr 29, 2004)

Work calls and I will be rarely/unable to post for up to a week.  Sorry for the short notice, but then again, that is what I got


----------



## squirrelloid (Apr 24, 2005)

I'll join the evil side... just give me some time to build an army =)


----------



## squirrelloid (Apr 24, 2005)

squirrelloid said:
			
		

> I'll join the evil side... just give me some time to build an army =)




Wow, i totally missed the date on that.  Oh well.  Damn, that sounded like fun.


----------

