Running combats with multiple participants

[KemperBoyd]

Yesterday, I ran Ruins of Atlaia for my group which has the potential of huge battles against multiple foes. I did some house ruling to manage these and thought that i would share them with you:

1: Enemies are divided into initiative groups of about 5 or 6 enemies per group.
2: Generic enemies, like the soldiers in that scenario, are further divided into two categories. Frontline and reserve. Everyone who can directly attack a player character is a frontliner. Everyone else is in reserve.
3: Characters who use melee weapons just declare an attack. Characters who have a ranged weapon can either shoot at someone in reserve or at the frontliners.
4: When a character hits a frontliner, it's decided by random who in the frontline he actually hits, unless he calls out a specific attack against someone who isn't a generic enemy.

It worked pretty well. Granted, in that particular combat the player characters were all in the same place and formed a line to face the enemies, with two bowmen taking cover behind them, but if the player characters would be divided by the enemy, I would have just formed them into two or three frontlines.

The frontline system allows you to run combats without minis or intricate maps, but it also allows for combat to remain more cinematic which I like, and I like the idea that player characters basically hit whoever they can in a situation like this.

 

[Clovenhoof]

I also use Initiative groups for mobs, pretty much like you do.

An encounter usually starts at some distance, so there's usually time for some preparations or ranged attacks first.

I also ask my players to point out their battle setup - we don't really duke it out with miniatures on battle maps, but we use minis/tokens to make clear who stands where.

Then, while I do use generic enemies, I don't make them all identical; there usually are leaders of some sort, and some fighters may be more battle-hardened than others. If applicable, the players get to decide whether they want to attack the weakest link first or take down a leader instead.
When attacking generic enemies, I just mark their HP down in the order they are written on my sheet; i.e. the characters are assumed to stick to one target unless the players specify otherwise.

As I recently described in a different thread, I try to take morale into account, without making a "system" or "rules" out of it because morale is inherently illogical to begin with. But some guidelines are:
* if the enemies suffer heavy losses or lose ground, especially early in the fight, they may break and rout;
* not everyone wants to fight to the death; some opponents will yield / ask for quarter once they've taken "enough" damage.

 

[KemperBoyd]

I also use Initiative groups for mobs, pretty much like you do.

An encounter usually starts at some distance, so there's usually time for some preparations or ranged attacks first.

I also ask my players to point out their battle setup - we don't really duke it out with miniatures on battle maps, but we use minis/tokens to make clear who stands where.

Then, while I do use generic enemies, I don't make them all identical; there usually are leaders of some sort, and some fighters may be more battle-hardened than others. If applicable, the players get to decide whether they want to attack the weakest link first or take down a leader instead.
When attacking generic enemies, I just mark their HP down in the order they are written on my sheet; i.e. the characters are assumed to stick to one target unless the players specify otherwise.

As I recently described in a different thread, I try to take morale into account, without making a "system" or "rules" out of it because morale is inherently illogical to begin with. But some guidelines are:
* if the enemies suffer heavy losses or lose ground, especially early in the fight, they may break and rout;
* not everyone wants to fight to the death; some opponents will yield / ask for quarter once they've taken "enough" damage.

I like most of what you said. I too have leaders and tougher warriors in the crowds, and the players can concentrate on them if they like. When it comes to mooks, I like the system where they just hit someone, the way you do when you are outnumbered.

And time for preparations and ranged attacks are a must for me: I hate GM's who hobble archers and slinger by going "you are attacked and now the enemy charges and hits you" even when the players aren't ambushed.

Morale is another big thing for me: in the last combat the players were outnumbered but quickly dropped the first wave of enemies. A Stygian lieutenant tried to rally his men, but the players charged the enemy and killed three more of them, and also the lieutenant. This broke their morale and they fled.

 

[KemperBoyd]

I've now finished GM'ing the Tales of the Black Kingdoms and I learned some lessons here which i thought i could share:

- it's perfectly OK to say from time to time that "you meet a few enemies along the way but you kill them". Howard didn't spend multiple pages every time Conan killed someone, and in the rpg context there's really no reason to slow down play every time the players meet someone in a situation where it doesn't really matter if they fight or not. It's also more interesting than saying "you meet no enemies along the way", and gives the players a feeling that they are actually participating in a larger battle.

- I have absolutely no idea how to turn sorcerers in fights. Quaridan died like a little bitch, achieving absolutely nothing in the combat before his death.

- mid-level barbarians with high strength and constitution are terrifying.

 

[Clovenhoof]

- I have absolutely no idea how to turn sorcerers in fights. Quaridan died like a little bitch, achieving absolutely nothing in the combat before his death.

Well, what did you try? Most spells are pretty much All Or Nothing, i.e. either the target is screwed or the Sorcerer. The following spells should be effective in combat:

Gelid Bones --> Makes target helpless. However, for the spell to get through you must first make a successful Touch attack (i.e. target can only dodge and not parry), and then beat its Will save with your Magic Attack.

Dread Serpent --> imho the single most deadly spell in the game, considering the low-level availability and the fact that most classes have poor Will saves.

Draw Forth The Heart --> high-level requirements, but a Win-Win for the Sorcerer. Even if the target makes its Fort save against the spell, it still takes 4d6 damage, which may trigger a Massive Damage save if you roll high enough.

Greater Telekinesis --> can use anything including rocks lying around.

Summon Demon --> need I say more?

 

[KemperBoyd]

Well, what did you try? Most spells are pretty much All Or Nothing, i.e. either the target is screwed or the Sorcerer. The following spells should be effective in combat:

He summoned demons, but the demons were massively uneffective (Black fiends are too easy to neutralize by grappling ) and he never managed to hit with a death touch. Maybe it was just bad dice rolls, but sorcerers seem to be really hard to run as serious opponents without making them too powerful. One problem is that a sorceror is a an easy target for ranged weapons and since they don't usually have armor or too many hit points, they go down fast.

 

[Ichabod]

Well, what did you try? Most spells are pretty much All Or Nothing, i.e. either the target is screwed or the Sorcerer. The following spells should be effective in combat:

He summoned demons, but the demons were massively uneffective (Black fiends are too easy to neutralize by grappling ) and he never managed to hit with a death touch. Maybe it was just bad dice rolls, but sorcerers seem to be really hard to run as serious opponents without making them too powerful. One problem is that a sorceror is a an easy target for ranged weapons and since they don't usually have armor or too many hit points, they go down fast.

Until they teleport (manifest) away. Now, Black Fiends *are* terrible on offense.

They aren't terrible on defense, being immune to a party's normal attacks. Playing defense is certainly a worthwhile thing for them to be doing since the way you get a sorcerer to be effective is to not let it get attacked. Once attacked by anything remotely partyish, a scholar is going to explode into fine red mist.

If you want a sorcerer to be effective in combat, have live screens, terrain/obstacles, escape routes, or don't even bother having the sorcerer actually be present (preset traps). Sorcerers in Conan aren't supposed to be slugging it out nor are they artillery like they are in D&D. They are severe annoyances who can screw parties over indirectly - mind control, curses, summoning combatants. Don't run around trying to touch attack enemies, immobilize/weaken/confuse enemies and then finish them off with save or die.

Best fight we ever had against a sorcerer, the sorcerer was in another room and there were monsters keeping half the party busy. When the party made it to the other room, the sorcerer exploded.

And, yes, played straight, barbarians with high STR tend to be terrifying. This is why straightforward battles are often boring. Spread enemies out to eliminate Cleaves, pepper barbarians at range to soften them up or just force a ranged battle situation, can't really take away 2h weapons because of Versatility but can take away good 2h weapons, hit them with stuff requiring Will saves, grapple them, trip them, have high DV enemies with Power Attack, immunity sucks as it can make an entire party useless but halving damage might be interesting.

 

[KemperBoyd]

If you want a sorcerer to be effective in combat, have live screens, terrain/obstacles, escape routes, or don't even bother having the sorcerer actually be present (preset traps). Sorcerers in Conan aren't supposed to be slugging it out nor are they artillery like they are in D&D. They are severe annoyances who can screw parties over indirectly - mind control, curses, summoning combatants. Don't run around trying to touch attack enemies, immobilize/weaken/confuse enemies and then finish them off with save or die.

The party had surprise on their side (they entered the sorcerer's fortress with supporting warrior through a secret passage and achieved perfect tactical surprise), and I had decided that if they succeed with it, they are in a better position to attack, because the sorcerer would only have some flunkies there to defend him and no time to plan anything elaborate and no way to flee his tower. So he was not ready, which might have played it's part.

And, yes, played straight, barbarians with high STR tend to be terrifying. This is why straightforward battles are often boring. Spread enemies out to eliminate Cleaves, pepper barbarians at range to soften them up or just force a ranged battle situation, can't really take away 2h weapons because of Versatility but can take away good 2h weapons, hit them with stuff requiring Will saves, grapple them, trip them, have high DV enemies with Power Attack, immunity sucks as it can make an entire party useless but halving damage might be interesting.

Actually, the terrifying barbarians were NPC opponents. Reasonably high DV and high damage attacks are a terrifying combo, even when the barbarians are outnumbered