This week my wife and I took our second foray into the Book of Battle. After a brilliant First Charge she usually gets slaughtered—and I mean slaughtered—before she can Withdraw for a second charge. We've run Lindsey 490 three times now (well, 2 rounds—reset, 3 rounds, reset, 1 round die again). The first two were botched mostly because of our inexperience with the rules. But the third was lost when when, on Round 1, when Elad got a "partial" Unit Roll and had to execute an Attack vs. Two maneuver. So we rolled three (Archers, Archers and Badder Berserkers) and she chose one (Archers) and I chose one (Badder Berskers). Holy smokes, was that a mistake. Sir Bran got his ass handed to him with 45 pts of damage in one shot. Game over. Round 2.

To be fair, Greg told me in another thread months ago to "avoid using Berserkers at all in the early battles." I'd forgotten that advice, but I'd appreciate some additional pointers from more experienced players on how to gauge the relative strength of combatants. Should I just leave out all enemy troops that can invoke a Passion? If so, for how long? Until there's better armor available? What I really wish is that these "set piece" battles had tailored army lists. The Saxon "Attacking Army" list in the Book of Armies is about useless at Mearcred Creek and Lindsey because you have to navigate your way around mounted troops (we're told there are no mounted troops at Lindsey, except for Octa and his bodyguard) and enemies that can crush your PC with their breath. How long does this situation persist in the GPC timeline? Are there any guidelines for what enemies should be used at each "level?" I mean, should I be comparing weapon skills or something? I guess I'll have to start generating my own custom tables so I can actually roll to get a random result like the book instructs. Fill it full of the weaker troops. But that's not very satisfactory, either.

We have a blast with PENDRAGON until the Book of Battles comes out. Then it turns into a frustrating disaster, pretty much every time. Sir Bran barely survived Mearcred Creek after just 2-3 rounds and this time—even after correcting our previous errors and playing it all correctly—he didn't even last one. After a Triumphant First Charge, too. WTF? I can only do the reset-and-dismiss-it-as-a-dream thing so many times before I lose all credibility. I'm looking for anything to have even a ghost of a chance for survival on the battlefield. I guess the only way is to "cheat" somehow—fudge the rolls (hard to do when they're supposed to be made out in the open) or rig the army list with wussies. I'm not asking for everything to be nice and balanced, but, good Lord, the odds seem overwhelmingly against poor Bran. I can always use the newly proposed shield rule (sacrifice your shield to reduce damage). He'll survive, but it's tough to get Glory this way when your hero gets creamed before even breaking a sweat.


Thanks,


T.

Don't use Book Of Battle, if it lessens your enjoyment of the game. It's as simple as that.

Battles are nasty but I've not found them overly so. However, as Sir Trout says, if you're not enjoying the BoB experience, then the best advice is to not use it.

I've run six battles and two sieges; the scripted ones from the GPC - Mearcred Creek and Lindsey - plus several county sized battles of my own, during which time there's been only one casualty out of 6PKs. That's with Berserks and all still in the mix.

Don't use Book Of Battle, if it lessens your enjoyment of the game. It's as simple as that.


Thanks, UT, but not quite the advice I was hoping for. Seems to me this thread is full of posts from people looking for errata or tweaks to make the system more playable/enjoyable. I'm not one to give up that easily! But one does have to wonder how any knight could ever live to middle-age, much less old age, when battles are so tough. I think what I'm going to have to do is to introduce a curve on the army list. I don't want to leave off the baddies, but making it so Sir Bran has just as good a chance encountering the elites as the rank-and-files makes no sense to me. Although I understand the good designer's penchant and reason for using a flat roll, there are precedents for curves too (3d6-10 Battle Events, come to mind).

I guess we're going to go with last night's result—apply the new house rule for sacrificing one's shield, which will just barely allow Bran to survive the battle—again, albeit with a shattered shield arm—again. And I'll give him a Hate (Badder Berserkers)—again (he already has one for normal Berserks). Very little Glory though this year—again, because he won't be able to participate in the follow-up adventures in 490. *Sigh.*

T.

Battles are nasty but I've not found them overly so. However, as Sir Trout says, if you're not enjoying the BoB experience, then the best advice is to not use it.

I've run six battles and two sieges; the scripted ones from the GPC - Mearcred Creek and Lindsey - plus several county sized battles of my own, during which time there's been only one casualty out of 6PKs. That's with Berserks and all still in the mix.


Then we must be doing something terribly wrong, which I can't see. We've only fought two battles, but have been unable to last more than2 rounds. Don't know how we could be that off on the rules or that unlucky, but one of the two must be true.


T.

Having only 1 PK is making things harder. I assume you pad out with extra NPCs? As I had 6 PKs (now 5) there was more capacity to soak damage and fight defensively. Tactics change depending on the size of the battle. It's a subtle point but one which my PKs have become aware of. In the smaller battles, fighting aggressivly is a viable option and often necessary in order to get anything other than an indecisive result. In the larger battles it's all about staying alive, fight defensively, withdraw etc etc,.




Don't use Book Of Battle, if it lessens your enjoyment of the game. It's as simple as that.

Thanks, UT, but not quite the advice I was hoping for. Seems to me this thread is full of posts from people looking for errata or tweaks to make the system more playable/enjoyable.


I'd say that's a little harsh. Yes there are errors in the book - just as there are in the GPC and core rule book - but the system is playable even without the errata. It's possibly to run a battle with the vanilla rules and a few reasoned guesses when you reach a grey area. BoB works for me and along with BoTM is my most used supplement.

Of course it may not be to your taste, so I'd say run a few more battles and then decide. There is always the alternative of the 5.1 rules or perhaps simply a narrative approach of your own.

You might find this useful.

http://nocturnal-media.com/forum/index.php?topic=970.0

This is a breakdown of my first use of BoB during the battle of Lindsey and the questions raised (and answered) afterward.

Then we must be doing something terribly wrong, which I can't see. We've only fought two battles, but have been unable to last more than2 rounds. Don't know how we could be that off on the rules or that unlucky, but one of the two must be true.

Have you checked out the online battle that we ran on this board a couple of years ago?

http://nocturnal-media.com/forum/index.php?board=23.0

If you are doing something wrong then you might spot it going through the worked examples in that sub-forum.

Also you may note that a battle is more survivable when you have multiple squires (not that it did me any good, see my sig...) and followers.

Regards
Luke

I'd say that's a little harsh. Yes there are errors in the book - just as there are in the GPC and core rule book - but the system is playable even without the errata. It's possibly to run a battle with the vanilla rules and a few reasoned guesses when you reach a grey area.

Don't want to ruffle any feathers, but I'm looking at 702 posts asking for clarification and/or house rules for BoB in this forum and I've marked up my copy with almost all of them (errata anyway). There's lotsa red ink on them pages. I've not had as much success "winging it" but then I am still learning the ins and outs of the system, not to mention PENDRAGON in general. Perhaps I bit off more than I can chew, but it all looks so damn fine!

Best,


T.

Have you checked out the online battle that we ran on this board a couple of years ago?

No! Thanks a bunch! I'll check it out.


T.

This is probably quite rich, coming from a noob like me :) Anyway...


It is a bit hard to know why your player gets creamed early in battles without going into nitty gritty. But I'll assume that battle roll leading up to the first charge is against Battle Intensity -20 (disengaged), and +5 (area). Consistently failing this roll is either a hard case of bad luck, or a unit leader with too low battle skill. You should win this roll most of the time. This enables you to use your lance, and against saxon footmen the +10/-5 should help nicely. What happens next is important though. It is very common to succeed too well in the first charge and end up surrounded by enemy soldiers. Withdrawal is probably wise on the second round unless you roll a really spectacular battle test, then pressing through the enemy ranks might be easier. Expect to take a few licks, but with the defensive bonus in withdraw and armor you aught to have a good chance of retreating one or two areas. Perhaps even end up disengaged. But the important thing is that the Unit intensity will be lower, and that is the lifesaver. If the unit intensity is still to hight, you could consider withdrawing a second time. And so on. The thing is that you really don't want to stay in the killing zone more than you have to. It is after all the killing zone :)


While the system have some warts I like how the system makes battles really dangerous. Everything I've said above is just probabilities, and you never know if you'll survive a battle no matter how tough you are. But experienced fighters will know when to hold back and don't rush headlong into the action. And I especially like how having a spectacular success often leads to spectacular danger the next round. If you want to live, slow and steady is more sensible. But where is the glory in that? :)

Thanks, Arkat, that's helpful. I can reproduce what happened here easily enough, 'cause we recorded it. Keep in mind that some of this is different than what's in the BoB, but I scraped it from this forum and the posted errata:

FIRST CHARGE

Opening Intensity 20 + Starting Conditions -10 + Battle Events -2 = Army Intensity 8 THEN Battle Size (Huge) 10 + Battle Zone 5 + Unit Cohesion -20 = First Charge Intensity 3

First Charge Bonus +10 against Berserkers. The knights crashed through the line resulting in a Triumph (Unit Result -2) right into the Enemy 2nd Rank.

Adding the First Charge Army Intensity of 8 to Unit Result -2 = Final Army Intensity of 6

ROUND 1

Army Intensity 6 + Battle Events -6 = Army Intensity 0 THEN Battle Size (Huge) 10 + Battle Zone 10 + Unit Cohesion 0 = Unit Intensity 20

Elad (Battle 19) rolled against Unit Intensity 24. Elad got a Partial Success. So he took Attack vs. Two (the only maneuver available to him). No chance to Withdraw. We rolled three d20 to randomly determine enemy. I rolled Badder Beserkers, Archers, and Archers. My wife chose archers and I chose the Badder Berserkers because I didn't want to choose archers twice—plus, I announced the rolls (in the spirit of the "transparent" nature of the game) and choosing archers would look like I was obviously choosing the wussie troops and giving Bran a pass.

So, to make a long story short, Sir Bran didn't oppose the archers, who missed. Then came the Badder Berserkers. With a WS of 27 they only needed a 13 to crit and they did. 45 points of damage. Boom.

At that point we just stopped. We could probably accept this more if Mearcred Creek hadn't had similar results. I think Bran lasted 2 round in that one.

By the way, since this is a solo campaign, Bran fights with two "battle buddies" so we can achieve the various unit results.

Finally, this is not a death sentence for Bran. If I use the new "splintered shield" house rule he'll be reduced to 7 points (although come to think of it, I haven't checked the 2-handed weapon description to see if there's additional damage lurking there). He could slip into unconsciousness and maybe take up to another 6 for the fall to the ground. But—really? Is it supposed to be this hard? What am I missing?

First thing, I'm going to start customizing my enemy tables to have a curve. That way, Big Bads don't have to be omitted altogether, but they'll be much more rare. Doesn't seem right that Elite Troops should be encountered with the same frequency as regular troops.


Thanks,


T.

What you describe are exceptional circumstances coupled with an unusual setup and, from the looks of it, a few errors.

Circumstances first. Luck (and bad luck at that) meant you faced the worst enemy possible on the second round. Even with 3 choices the odds are against that. Also you don't say what combat action your player chose. All Out Defend is what you really should be doing here, just to get through the round. Even a rookie knight with base 15 WS would oppose that 27 with a 30 (WS 15 + Defend 10 + Onhorse 5). Using that stance, the odds of you meeting Bad Berserks AND losing to them is very, very low.

Now it might be the case that you are using the All Out Attack Berserk option rules here (and therefore not opposing the WS roll) but that is not how the Berserk attack is defined in BoB. Berserkers are listed as being Fanatics, and Fanaticism works as a passion; BoB p45. "Fanaticism is possible. Fanaticism, a rare condition, is like a Passion, but works continuously all day of a battle. The number shown already has its Fanaticism bonus, but roll the Passion to see if it gets a Critical."

This makes sense (IMHO) on two counts. One. I see the All Out Attack as being a huge overheard swing or roundhouse blow that requires time and space, something you don't have in the crush of battle. Berserks are getting the bonus through ferocity alone. Two, I am guessing Greg designed it this way to ensure that Berserks remained formidible opponents even in campaigns not using the optional combat manoeuvres (All Out Attack etc). The Fanatic Passion simulates the same effect, to a degree.

Even if you did play it as an unopposed attack, using an All Out Defend would allow you to oppose it with the odds on your side.

Unusual Setup. You stopped the battle after the first casualty. I understand why you did this (as you only have one player) but this further tilts the outcome to appear harsher than it really is. If a battle buddie had gone down in Round 2 I presume you would have continued. This means the already slim chance of meeting and losing to a Berserk is reduced further by the 1 in 3 outcome you suffered. In a battle with 4 or 5 PKs or buddies, this would be a negligible problem.

Finally, I think you have some errors;



Army Intensity 6 + Battle Events -6 = Army Intensity 0 THEN Battle Size (Huge) 10 + Battle Zone 10 + Unit Cohesion 0 = Unit Intensity 20
Elad (Battle 19) rolled against Unit Intensity 24.


If the final UI calculation was 20 why is your commander rolling vs a score of 24?



Elad got a Partial Success. So he took Attack vs. Two (the only maneuver available to him). No chance to Withdraw.


That is not your only option. BoB p.29 "This special type of stand fast occurs when the unit commander has failed his roll and the Intensity gained a critical success...[snip]". Clarified here http://www.nocturnal-media.com/forum/?topic=603.msg5101#msg5101 (http://www.nocturnal-media.com/forum/?topic=603.msg5101#msg5101)

Your commander did not fail his battle roll.

Play it through a few more times, with a few more battle buddies if need be. As you only have one player perhaps add a kludge that says if he or she is downed by a freak result they can swap the outcome to a battle buddy instead. Even without that, I'd be amazed if the final outcome was the same.

Only time for a short answer: but I think you have overlooked the fact that withdraw is possible on a partial success. So whit a decent battle skill you should be able to get out of the heat most of the time. Even if you are double attacked the +10 bonus (and the +5/-5 bonus from being mounted that applies to all footmen attackers) should give you a decent chance to ge away.

If the final UI calculation was 20 why is your commander rolling vs a score of 24?


I can't answer for Taliesin, but a mistake I made the first time ran the battle system was that I thought that the "roll against the higher of battle intensity or enemy commander's Battle skill" that applies to the initial army commander battle roll, should apply to unit commanders' rolls.

When I figured out this battles became a lot easier to survive :-)

Thank you all very much for responding to this. It is helpful.
Also you don't say what combat action your player chose. All Out Defend is what you really should be doing here, just to get through the round. Even a rookie knight with base 15 WS would oppose that 27 with a 30 (WS 15 + Defend 10 + Onhorse 5). Using that stance, the odds of you meeting Bad Berserks AND losing to them is very, very low.

Ah. There you go. We have NOT been considering all the combat options. I knew I had to be missing something. Bran just rolled a normal attack. Too, I guess I haven't come to terms with how crucial the various combat options are. I had regarded them as options for color more than necessary for survival, but I obviously need to change that perception.


Now it might be the case that you are using the All Out Attack Berserk option rules here (and therefore not opposing the WS roll) ..."

No, I did that part right, thankfully.

Even if you did play it as an unopposed attack, using an All Out Defend would allow you to oppose it with the odds on your side.


... This means the already slim chance of meeting and losing to a Berserk is reduced further by the 1 in 3 outcome you suffered. In a battle with 4 or 5 PKs or buddies, this would be a negligible problem.

Not following this...


If the final UI calculation was 20 why is your commander rolling vs a score of 24?

My bad. That's a typo. Should've been 20.


That is not your only option. BoB p.29 "[i]This special type of stand fast occurs when the unit commander has failed his roll and the Intensity gained a critical success...Clarified here...[snip]"

Thanks for that link, looks like srhall79 was interpreting the rules in exactly the same way, with the same frustrating results. This is an editorial problem (and there's lots of stuff like this in BoB, IMO). Can't wait for the new version, where these kinds of things are cleaned up and clarified.


Your commander did not fail his battle roll.

True, but I thought I came across some errata (In think in this very forum) that said the options on the bottom row (including Withdraw, etc.) should be struck out. So I guess I misinterpreted the errata, cause it sounds like they should be in there after all. Very frustrating. I've played a half-dozen battles now and still don't have my head around all of the rules, options and exceptions.


Play it through a few more times, with a few more battle buddies if need be. As you only have one player perhaps add a kludge that says if he or she is downed by a freak result they can swap the outcome to a battle buddy instead. Even without that, I'd be amazed if the final outcome was the same.


Thanks again for taking the time to help me. We'll try again tonight, perhaps.


T.

Only time for a short answer: but I think you have overlooked the fact that withdraw is possible on a partial success. So whit a decent battle skill you should be able to get out of the heat most of the time. Even if you are double attacked the +10 bonus (and the +5/-5 bonus from being mounted that applies to all footmen attackers) should give you a decent chance to ge away.


Yes, see my response to Sir Pramalot. I thought I had some errata that said to strike the results on the bottom of the Partial Success table (p 22), which is what I did. So I thought the only option available was to Attack vs Two.

T.

Only time for a short answer: but I think you have overlooked the fact that withdraw is possible on a partial success. So whit a decent battle skill you should be able to get out of the heat most of the time. Even if you are double attacked the +10 bonus (and the +5/-5 bonus from being mounted that applies to all footmen attackers) should give you a decent chance to ge away.


No, I understand that part, thank goodness!


Thanks,


T.

Ach. The cloud of frustration that I was experiencing over this event has blinded me to the obvious—there already is a curve built into the flat d20 roll, based on the number of weak combatants to monstrous ones. Should have perceived that immediately. I guess there's no need for a curve after all, unless I want to make the Big Bads even more rare. But I stand by my comment that it would be nice to have dedicated army lists for each of these "tent pole" battles.

Best,


T.

This means the already slim chance of meeting and losing to a Berserk is reduced further by the 1 in 3 outcome you suffered. In a battle with 4 or 5 PKs or buddies, this would be a negligible problem.

Not following this...



I was trying illustrate how exceptional your scenario was. Having the enemy crit UI (1 in 20), choosing a bad berserk (roughly 3 in 20) failing him to beat him (odds vary), losing the 1 PK in your party of 3 (1 in 3) etc,.

On the subject of all out defend, with just 1 PK in your campaign, I would 100% recommend that you make full use of the tactic when needed, not just in battle.



Only time for a short answer: but I think you have overlooked the fact that withdraw is possible on a partial success. So whit a decent battle skill you should be able to get out of the heat most of the time. Even if you are double attacked the +10 bonus (and the +5/-5 bonus from being mounted that applies to all footmen attackers) should give you a decent chance to ge away.


Arkat - Just FYI. That +10 bonus has been reduced to +5. Withdraw is a very good manoeuvre, it was just a little too good. :)

Okay, so we ran Lindsey again last night. Better luck now that I understand you have more than just one maneuvers available if the Unit Intsensity crits on you and your commander gets a "partial" (which happens with alarming frequency). Anyhoo, we made it through FIVE rounds this time before Sir Bran suffered a major wound in one of those inevitable 2-unit attacks. He was left horsed, with 9 points. We had to pause, and hope to pick it back up there tonight to get to the final outcome.

Thanks, all. I still have some questions on capturing foes for ransom, etc., but will start new threads.


Best,


T.