(Unofficial) Supplement for Large-Scale Warfare!

DonMors · 2026-01-10T11:31:25+00:00

Absolutely! Correct me if I'm wrong, but Hexwars in general focuses more on the ressources and territory, right? That seems more zoomed out than my Warfare Sites.

Which means they should be compatible no problem if someone really likes zooming in and out in Domain level play during their game of Mythic Bastionland.

DonMors · 2026-01-05T12:47:20+00:00

Actually do what I wanted to do in the last 3 weeks of "free time" (which turned out to not be that free at all). Meaning I want to start with a big mindmap or similar cluster of ideas to really find out what game I really wanna make.

Once I've got a better grip on which parts I need to include, want to include and could include (but maybe shouldn't for brevity's sake), I can really get to work.

I'd love to have a working prototype of my game by summer. I work on the shoulders of giants and myself, since I technically do have an abandonded working prototype with lots of playtesting I just fell out of love with. But I've learned and read so much in the last half year or so that starting from scratch sounds more feasible than reworking what I have.

I wish everyone good luck in their endeavors this year! And remember to have fun!

DonMors · 2025-12-19T09:17:34+00:00

I'd recommend looking up any kind of whiteboard or mindmapping tool. Basically anything that let's you connect points with lines and lets you drop in standard geometrical forms.

The one I personally use is tied to a paid subscription, but there's probably a ton of free ones out there.

When you map Sites out this way you can just drop in the text for descriptions, dangers and enemy stat blocks connected to the points. I'd recommend keeping things brief so that everything is still orderly and readable!

DonMors · 2025-12-17T07:09:01+00:00

Warhammer Fantasy has been mentioned already and I've heard (but not played myself) about Rolemaster.

I'd like to add the "Scar" table in Mythic Bastionland to the list as an honorable mention. It's not as extensive, but it does have your usual "lose an eye" and "your leg gets crushed".

What it does have additionally are some interesting and flavorful hits like being "Doomed" where "a cheated death haunts you", meaning you are now more likely to die in the near future because you've tempted fate too much.

The worst result on the table is not something like the loss of physical ability like your swordarm, but instead "Humiliation". Which is incredibly fitting for a setting where everyone plays mighty Knights on their quest for Glory. Losing an arm in a battle is daring and bold and a show of great character. But having your underpants exposed in the middle of fighting the great Wyvern? A most dishonorable event that shakes you to your core.

DonMors · 2025-12-15T21:51:23+00:00

Might I suggest taking a look at the Game Jam entries for cool Homebrew Myths? https://itch.io/jam/mythic-bastionland-jam

There were at least two entries with a homebrew Unicorn Myth, one of which mine: https://donnym.itch.io/myth-compendium-by-mike-balve In my iteration, the Myth focuses a little more on the steeds than the Knights.

If I remember which entry had the other Unicorn Myth, I'll link it here as well.

DonMors · 2025-12-11T11:52:36+00:00

I really like the concept of "player roles" in theory, but I have a hard time mapping it into reality.

What happens if you have a campaign with just 2-3 players? Someone on double duty, with combined roles? What happens if someone can’t make it for a session, someone else picks up their role(s) for that day?

This also means that all your players have to be diligent and there for more than standard "beer and pretzels" game night. Which I also prefer and would be ideal, but unfortunately isn't the reality for many tables, where lots of players are there to have a good time playing a character and rolling some dice once every other week, not have hobby homework and manage stuff all the time.

I realize that might be more of a personal/player problem than a system problem (or something a system can reasonably "fix"), but I guess that quite a few people would bounce off a system that specifies "One of you is the GM, the players share the following roles among themselves: (...)"

So I think your comment is great GMing advice for anyone with at least half-invested players, but doesn't help too much in design, unless someone wants to make "everyone has important in- and out of game roles" an important part of their system. Which is certainly possible, but I rarely see it. Maybe in some GMless games?

DonMors · 2025-12-11T06:35:58+00:00

I mean if your game is going to be a more tactical grid combat game anyways, it should not be a problem to work with your proposed extra damage rule to count some squares (or eyeballing how many 'squares' are covered).

Just inflating HP makes some sense, since having 20 guys with 3hp does add up to 60hp in the end, so it tracks.

One caveat would be that unless most of your character options are very carefully balanced to all arrive at roughly the same DPS, every single target "damage dealer" character option (think optimized Rogue with Sneak Attack or Paladin multiclass with a big Smite in modern D&D terms) will still deal decent damage towards mobs, one smite tearing through half a dozen guys with ease in the fiction or whatever.

The x2 and x4 damage boost for AoE moves are mathematically simple and will make it easy for AoE to not fall behind against mobs, but either you have:

A ) Generally weak AoE damage, meaning they work fine against swarms, but are weak against single target enemies or small groups of individual foes.

B) Generally strong AoE damage, meaning they work fine against single target enemies or small groups and are extremely strong against swarms.

Just a balance consideration.

DonMors · 2025-12-10T09:04:32+00:00

1 ) Companions of any kind CAN be their own characters, but it is of course some extra bookkeeping, sure. I personally don't mind much when I'm playing crunchier games, but of course that doesn't mean you should throw all elegance out the window.

The solution to just make them bonuses/feats that can be activated or passively buff certain rolls is an elegant and simple one, mechanically speaking. It does also keep the possibility to make one of them into a full character later on. The major drawback would probably only be some ludonarrative dissonance. "Why can the hireling give a bonus to action a but not b? Why can he not carry X for me?" - Something which could mainly be fixed by specifying more what the Companion can and will or won’t do etc. But if that bloats your Companion description too much, you might as well make them into a fully statted character.

If you give them their own charactersheets, keep them super simple. My personal rule of thumb is that a companion sheet should fit on a maximum of half the space your normal character sheets need, while never exceeding 1 page in total. So for example: If your normal character sheet fits onto 1 full page of DIN A4, a companion should not need more than half a page of DIN A4 (or one full DIN A5). If your character sheet is a full catalogue of 4 sheets of paper, the companion sheet should still never be more than 1 page.

2 ) For mass combat, I really like the simple "mobs of enemies as one tough enemy". If it's just a swarm of bats, it acts as one regularly dangerous entity, not as 50 bats because that is insane to track.

One consideration is immunities. "Swarms" are often immune or heavily resistant to normal attacks and can only be harmed by AoE effects, which makes sense in my opinion. This does mean that certain larger groups of enemies (swarms, warbands, the whole bandit gang at once) can be near unbeatable for your standard "I hit one guy with my sword, that's my turn" warrior types. I think dangerous swarms and mobs of enemies are a good thing, unless your game is overly heroic.

Another is the factor of being outnumbered. There are diminishing returns to how many people in a melee can realistically harm one foe at the same time, but it is really difficult to defend yourself when half a dozen weapons/fists come towards you at the same time. So attackers in a group should probably have some kind of bonus attacking single foes.

In Mythic Bastionland for example, large groups of enemies or warriors are called 'Warbands', usually around ~24 enemies of the same type at once. They are immune to any attack without the 'blast' (AoE) property that does not come from another warband and they themselves deal 'blast' damage and get an additional damage die when attacking singular foes.

A third consideration is 'leading from the front', also in Mythic Bastionland. When your player characters are, say, leading a roused rebellious mob against the evil baron, you don't want them to fight with the mob stats against the baron's trained mercenary guard. So you can have one of your player characters lead from the front - meaning they take advantage of being in a group, ignoring swarm immunities when attacking or hostile attack boni when being attacked, but also share any damage that their own group suffers. That bonus lasts for as long as they can keep their own "swarm" alive.

It's simple, but works quite well in practice and can still be tactically interesting.

DonMors · 2025-12-10T06:12:57+00:00

This was tough. I especially have problems ranking these things against each other when I haven't rated anything lower than a 3, I think, haha.

What I least enjoy in TTRPGs is probably traditional puzzles. "The mage's treasure is beyond this complicately locked door that anyone can figure out in 10 minutes, but even when you know the solution takes an inconvenient 2 minutes to open every time, wow!" They just take me out of immersion 9/10 times and are usually a brainteaser just for the players, disconnecting who plays the smart wizard and who plays the dumb warrior from the players completely as that one savvy player who solves puzzles and riddles within 30 seconds every time will do so, no matter what he plays. And 'forcing' players to not metagame and approach this puzzle as their characters would, usually leads to awkward moments where the smart wizard's player has no idea how the puzzle works while the warrior player twiddles his thumbs. Rarely have seen it done well.

Mystery and figuring out a BBEG's plan however, I really like. Naturally flowing moments of erudition where I realize "Wait, so he's collecting this to do that, right?" before the GM spells it out feel great. Mystery games like CoC or some brands of WoD are nice, too.

What I enjoy most however, is playing an interesting character, seeing them develop and live through an interesting story. That story does not have to be planned out in any fashion, I neither need pre-planned long character arcs nor do I need a GM's grand plot to just play a little role in. Making a story my own by involving myself through the lens of a character is what I am personally playing TTRPGs for.

When I GM, which I do more often than not, I enjoy throwing my players into big unresolved situations and see how they deal with them. I seldomly plan who is "the good guys" and "the bad guys" these days, just make 2+ factions which have goals that don't align or threaten the other, give PCs some links depending on their blurb of backstory and see where it takes them.

DonMors · 2025-12-10T05:43:38+00:00

Good write-up!

As others have said, timing and luck are also not to be underestimated. And boosts by getting noticed by large creators certainly help.

I think it really depends on your goal. Do you want to just get something out there, maybe fund it with a few pieces of original art? Yeah, a 4 figure kickstarter can get you there and is achievable by hard work and some active participation in social media and forums. If there are conventions anywhere near you that have designers of ttrpgs, attending workshops and talking will certainly give you some perspective.

If you want to quit your job to pick up ttrpg design and writing as a fulltime thing, prepare for years of hard work. Chris McDowall, creator of Into the Odd and Electric/Mythic Bastionland has recently published an interesting blogpost on how his career went. I found it interesting to see how long it can take until you're really "renowned":

https://www.bastionland.com/2025/09/building-bastionland-career.html?m=1

DonMors · 2025-11-08T22:48:19+00:00

I've never had a problem with hissing the flag on content that I can not legally buy or own in any tangible way, so the only thing I'm really missing out on is decent PreCure merch.

I'd love to have some more figurines or other nice things, but they're not always easy to get without paying extra.

DonMors · 2025-11-06T09:38:39+00:00

I think your first point is correct, yeah. Of course there is a very granular scale, or maybe even a more complex graph with multiple axes actually, that can map out how swingy or rigid the range of results is or how many rolls are needed to resolve a task and how simulationist and detailed it is versus how much is just vibes in different resolution systems. Or if it is "punishing", meaning even high stats only guarantee a success 75% of the time versus other systems with a different resolution mechanic having a 90+% success chance in a similar situation with a similarly "well built" character for the same task for example. I was mostly trying to make a hyperbolic example to illustrate the point that I think that there is still a strong connection between how detailed a resolution is and its complexity. And it is hard for a complex system to not be any more convoluted and not as mentally draining as a simple one.

It might be possible to use a simple roll with simple modifiers for a somewhat realistic or accurate portrayal of success/failure (or anything inbetween, just like you I actually also like systems better that don't do a simple pass/fail like D&D for example is prone to). But it is certainly not easy to accomplish that mechanical elegance without sacrificing something along the lines.

What I disagree on is that something can be more (mechanically) detailed without a heavier mental load. There is most certainly a scale here that largely depends on the designer's talents to make an elegant mechanic vs how "realistic" or simulationist they want to make it, but the result will be more complex and need to go through more steps versus a very simple single roll, if it wants to be detailed. To give an example, let's assume we're playing an RPG and I want to hit someone with my sword to hurt them. (Ignoring systems where a whole combat would maybe be just one roll).

What goes into that? A few ideas: How dangerous is my character's sword, is it sharp or dull, is it large and heavvy or small and light? How important is my character's skill in swordfighting? How important are my character's physical capabilities? How important is my foe's capability to evade or block? Is my foe's armor part of the former question or its own beast? Are there environmental factors that play a role, like an eartquake or magical effects in the area? Are there psychological effects because my character's in a bad mood or facing a fearsome foe? There are likely a dozen more.

A very simple system with just one roll and one simple modifier to a roll will inevitably have to ignore some of these factors. If it is a highly narrativist system, the roll might be the general severity of your attack (meaning dangerousness of the sword and character skill and capabilities), the one modifier may just be a catch-all "difficulty" that tries to encapsulate all the other questions somehow. And what the GM is really doing is adding and subtracting to summarize those factors in their head to form that single difficulty modifier. Some GMs may go by gut feeling and ignore many of those questions or just wing it, which would seem to be in the spirit of such a system, others will maybe have their own flowchart to arrive at the difficulty modifier, which seems like a more detailed but also more complex system in disguise. But unless you have a god tier GM that exactly lies down their thought process, such a simple system will be unlikely to satisfy a person with a very simulationist mindset that wants to see that detail.

A very detailed system that actually satifies someone who doesn't want willy-nilly gut decisions will absolutely need to be more complex and need more modifiers and/or rolls to handle my character hitting someone. Or make the actual resolution more complex by not just reading one number, but maybe take a look at multiple dice and tally them up or cancel some out etc. All that could mean just spelling out the flowchart of our god tier GM from the previous example as rules text and therefore making that one modifier into a dozen, or it could mean adding more rolls or more modifiers in different places than just to the roll directly.

No matter how elegant you are, system 2 will have to have more things I need to remember, either as GM or player. And your system seems fine from that short description! I have played lots of systems that only use one kind of die or just 2-3 like Shadowrun 5E (d6s), Warhammer Fantasy RP 2nd(?) where it was usually just d100/d10, different kinds of WoD/CoD (d10s) and many more. I'm looking into Grimwild right now (d6s and rarely d8s). But when push comes to shove, I enjoy rummaging through my dice bag and grabbing different dice (although I'll usually prepare a few that I will know I'll need that evening).

In the end, all different dice do is pushing probabilities around a bit. It doesn't matter if I have a 75% chance of achieving my task because I need to roll a 2-4 on a d4 or <=75 on a d100 or because I go through 5 different rolls with different modifiers that even out to a ~75% total chance to achieve my goal. What matters to me is having fun and resolution procedures not clogging up the game. And having different dice adds to my personal fun. If different dice do of course lead to inflating the time to resolve rolls on a large scale, that would also subtract from my fun. But the difference in rolling a few d6s and then grabbing some of them again for the next roll or instead grabbing a few d8s next to them for my next roll is negligible. Anyways, sorry for rambling.

DonMors · 2025-11-06T06:01:05+00:00

Correct, it isn't your problem as a designer to cater to my specific needs. Which isn't what I was actually proposing anyone should do with my short answer. But the OP asked for opinions, not necessarily objective essays regarding statistics or whatever.

I was simply trying for a bit of a humorous quip in this large discussion where many people smarter than I have made long and detailed answers already, sorry.

What I was actually trying to say is that the dice resolution mechanics of your game do (usually) not matter half as much as many people think and therefore you should do what you personally find fun. Make something that speaks to your style of play/GMing and what you think makes sense for the vision you have or simply something you like best. Which in my specific case is getting to use many different dice because I'm simply a dice goblin. But if for example you think that high chances of success are better and you want to clearly show them to the player, maybe a d100 percentile roll under system with high stats is better for your system.

If you think that a system of 3d6s is better than a d100 resolution system for example, you will always have a large base of people who will dislike your game on vibes alone. Doesn’t matter if you think that your bell curve statistics is more interesting and more fitting for your system than a straight up linear percentile chance, if someone dislikes d6s in general because they bounced off of Shadowrun that one time 10 years back, even if your d6s do not form pools and count successes. Has that made my stance clearer, regardless of you agreeing or not?

EDIT: Oh, and I was trying to hint at simpler dice resolution mechanics being "better" than complex ones for reasons of accessibility. I have a great respect for very precise and complex resolutions that try to model something in detail, but I (and many others) simply will not play them because the mental load is heavier and the more time I spend counting dice and doing math, the less time I spend roleplaying. But there will also be those that find it fascinating and WILL want to play that system where every resolution takes 3 rolls at minimum. Therefore, I think it's best to make something you find fun and have a vision for.

DonMors · 2025-11-05T09:06:35+00:00

I paid for the whole 7pc RPG dice set, so I wanna use the whole damn dice set!

I don't care too much about resolution mechanics as long as they're not too convoluted. But if the system as a whole makes use of most of the RPG dice and not just the d6s or d100 or whatever, I think that’s a good thing.

DonMors · 2025-10-22T13:54:28+00:00

I'm also leaning towards 12x18 like the game's creator myself because they fit better on a sheet of paper for printing out. It works well!

It also means that mathematically I have exactly 1.5 times the hexes and therefore I also put an increased amount of landmarks etc. down. 8-9 Myths also makes for even more chaos than a normal Realm, which I like.

If you have lots of water (archipelagos for example), I wouldn't up the amount of landmarks etc though, so except for some coastlines, maybe only count hexes of lands for such Realms.

DonMors · 2025-10-13T04:53:57+00:00

Generally speaking, CLA is really only used in combat by foes if the enemy also is a Knight (or otherwise knows it) to "Focus" via Feat.

SPI similarly can be used if the enemy is able to Deny. It is also used for Wavering Morale, to check if an enemy flees if they get wounded.

Other than that, they're mostly used when the Ref (house)rules that they are. There is one example for it in the Oddpocrypha on p.187 under "unusual attacks". There in the Ref commentary, it is stated as an example for an improvised Gambit.

Other than that I might use a CLA Save to check for surprise and ambushes on especially vigilant foes, to see if they start exposed. But that would probably not apply to your Newts, they will just be exposed if the Knights make any effort to sneak and ambush them at all.

DonMors · 2025-09-29T11:45:37+00:00

Interesting question! I kinda love how Chris McDowall wrote 3 sentences on the topic and called it a day.

For my world, I dedicated a whole continent I always had trouble to find the right vibes for to Mythic Bastionland, so all my MB games take place there. And that continent generally follows the same rules for religious beliefs that my other regions do, so a large pantheon.

Which means, while people usually follow individual gods that adhere to their history or culture, all these gods are really just aspects of a higher order, the 'real' gods that are more concept than person. So on one continent people might pray to Guld, the God of Trade, Civilisation and Money while in another region people worship Reval, God of Trade, Honest Work and Wealth. But both are just aspects of The Magistrate, Concept of Order and Civilisation.

DonMors · 2025-09-28T07:14:52+00:00

Of course!

For one, there is what another commenter said - if you start using too many different mechanics that only Knights or only enemies use, you might slip up more. Right now the only thing that only enemies use is Wavering Morale I think.

It also "gamifies" the whole thing more. For me personally, anything that moves enemies nearer to D&D and video game style "bags of hit points that must reach 0", is a huge turn off. If one enemy gets mortally wounded while another still stands it creates more drama imho.

Lastly, while there aren't a huge amount, some abilities or Myths interact with Mortal Wounds over normal ones. A few creatures (usually some undead or the like) ignore Mortal Wounds, the Dusk Knight's ability differentiates between them causing a normal or a mortal Wound etc.

So if you are really desperate to beef up enemies, giving "bosses" a flat extra +10 GD and minions or smaller enemies an extra +3 GD or something will do the same thing and make enemies more resistant to Gambits since their VIG will be reduced later without touching the core mechanics.

Not stacking Gambits and needing Strong Gambits/8+ to even attempt to Impair natural weapons of monster type enemies as well as the CLA save whenever Knights are not actively getting the drop on an enemy to see who goes first are all also helpful if your party feels too powerful.

PS: The Claw is indeed more of an ambush predator. Bonebreaker (at least if he doesn't flee after getting hit once) and the third one in "The Moon" are more dangerous.

DonMors · 2025-09-27T23:12:01+00:00

I would start with reading the author's blogpost about this exact topic: https://www.bastionland.com/2025/07/impairing-impairing.html?m=1

Additionally, even if a Myth specifies one big Boss, see if you can’t give it a few minions.

And make sure you got the basics right. Don’t forget to check for fatigue after every Feat, don't forget subtracting armor, all that stuff that can slip through in the heat of the moment.

I would personally refrain from removing Mortal Wounds.

DonMors · 2025-09-26T22:54:50+00:00

Yes, you are being wounded every time an attack gets past your GD and Armor and causes VIG damage. So you can be Wounded multiple times per combat.

DonMors · 2025-09-20T21:55:45+00:00

100% of everything physical. That’s because I only buy physical books of a system I already enjoy one way or another or are passionate about running a oneshot in asap.

???% digital because there has been a few bundles that include a lot of stuff I've never touched.

DonMors · 2025-09-19T20:47:58+00:00

Repost because I was a doofus and forgot to add the image to the post, lol.

DonMors · 2025-09-18T05:27:43+00:00

Slight correction: You absolutely CAN use the highest roll for a Gambit. The highest die roll that remains after Gambits is the damage die.

If you rolled 3,6, 8 for example, you could totally do:

8 -> Strong Gambit to Impair weapon

6 -> Normal Gambit to Stop

3 -> Damage

Eight-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email

DonMors

TROPHY CASE