Just what the title says.
- Have you used D@W as part of a long-running campaign?
- For sessions featuring D@W: Battles, how much table time was typically spent resolving large-scale battles?
- Was every player (and the Judge) generally invested in running D@W?
- Do you notice a "sweet spot" in using it (e.g., a range of PC levels where it works best, or a particular scale)?
A more specific sub-question: When you run D@W battles, do they usually play out in a "combat as war" fashion a la standard ACKS, or does the temptation to allow for epic clashes of vast armies shift the game toward more of a "combat as sport" style?
Sneakers - ΦΘΗΝΑ ΠΑΠΟΥΤΣΙΑ 2020
I also used Domains of Wars in my last campaign, but only Campaigns. For my current campaign I'm planning to introduce a smaller scale for mid-range battles where the unit size is 6 infnatry or 3 cavalry.
IMO, Domains at War: Campaigns is a near-essential supplement for high-level ACKS play, with a huge amount of information and assistance for all sorts of domain-type logistics.
Domains at War: Battles is an optional way to play a minigame inside ACKS. It's a very fun minigame, but you can get all the rest of your ACKS gameplay done without dipping into Battles.
Battles - used in my campaign. All of one PC party involved. 1st battle took about 6 hours but included marching, scouting, end of battle, and set up of secondary battle. 2nd battle ( bigger one) took up about the same. Part of the time was the learning curve.
Campaigns - used for supplemental rules setting up, for scouting and information, etc.
We all had a good time and there was a lot of room for individual heroics and roleplay despite mass combat. The PCs were 7 and 8 with henches 3 to 5 (platoon scale). Only experience so far.
I would agree that it is pretty much required for domain play.
Edit: combat as war, although the PCs were able to win by baiting a cavalry charge and finishing off enemy commanders and toughest units with magic and commander on commander combat. It had an epic feel.
A hopefully slight tangent. Here's something I posted elsewhere about ACKS in general, and the role of D@W in ACKS as a whole:
Whether you use Starter, Campaigns, Battles, or Campaigns & Battles in combination,1 you stand in that long and storied tradition from whence RPGs came. However you use them, you continue that tradition, carrying it forward along with RPGs.
As to the OP, I have yet to use them. I am currently without a gaming group, though I have a couple of possibilities I plan to pursue. And I will at least use Starter. if I can get the group interested, I would like to use the full Campaigns & Battles, mixing wargaming using Battles with the RPG campaigning.
> Have you used D@W as part of a long-running campaign?
Yes, Battles once or twice. Used Campaigns mostly for information on wages and supply costs and such, rather than for procedures like reconnaissance or the battle resolution system.
> For sessions featuring D@W: Battles, how much table time was typically spent resolving large-scale battles?
It was a pretty good chunk of the session. I had used Battles before playing the Fangs scenario to get familiar with the rules, but my players were largely unfamiliar with the Battles rules (none of them have the book), and we played a little fast-and-loose with strategic initiative.
> Was every player (and the Judge) generally invested in running D@W?
Hard to say. They had spent a lot of time and money hiring mercenaries, some of whom got wrecked, so that was frustrating for some of them. The mage had a good time killing leaders and cavalry with fireball.
> Do you notice a "sweet spot" in using it (e.g., a range of PC levels where it works best, or a particular scale)?
We were around 7th level with platoon-scale armies. I've also kicked around doing "squad scale" like James K, but I'm not sure you really need the Domains at War rules at that point, versus just having your three cavalrymen or six archers act on the same initiative and roll a pile of attacks.
I'd used Battles in a somewhat less structured way the last two engagements of an old campaign - around 4th/5th level, and I'd broken things down to the platoon and squad level, due to the relative sizes and compositions of the forces.
It was honestly more like one Heroic Foray that I happened to "bunch" all the various mercenaries/brigands together and used a single attack for the group against PCs with the indicated Hit->PC HP conversion for the size of the unit.
And, this was all on my side of the table, which honestly, I think is fine for the level/scale we were at - just me, the Judge, treating a group of 30 men or whatever as a big "blob of monster" that attacks and does XdX damage.
Oh, also, it helps that the melee combatants were of a level that various bonuses comspire to make 1 hit == 1 kill for normal men, which made it real easy for me to work break points for the units when the fighter waded in. Very Chainmaily?