This means war!

[Lloyd Dupont]

I am preparing a campaign, vaguely inspired by the Viking raid of England. The key word here is: vaguely, don't bother me with historic accuracy, it's not even in our world!

Moving on, there will be this land where kinglets are at war for dominance against each other, and our players and their compatriots will land here to third party the conflict and make some easy picking.

Now I am working on preparing that, putting a monastery here and there, an army here and there, a mystery or two, some towns and villages... And I am suddenly struck by a question. How long were those medieval wars? It looks to me, to my ignorant eyes, if 2 armies face off, there might be a bloody battle... and then the victor can more or less steam roll the countryside. (Mostly) Works in video game too (I mean there might be multiple army pack that couldn't help due to travel time and will pose later problem). This seems antithetical... Any tip how to handle that and drag the conflict out?

i.e. campaign preparation tip for a long drawn-out conflict between 3 parties... (in fact, ahem, there might even be a fourth...)

[g33k]

Offhand, I'd keep each group on the smaller side.

Sure, the victorious army can go on to pillage the countryside... but it isn't far to the next border, where there's a fresh army to put some limits on your tired one.

Also, many times a city/castle will present a hardpoint... you may be finding easy pickings in the countryside, but need to stay beyond the reach of a sortie, or their projected concentrated power will be able to take your distributed foragers/pillagers -- one big extended meal eaten as hors d'oeuvres, rather than the entree of a fixed battle.

And if you stay far from the hardpoint, you come close to the borders, and the aforementioned "Yet Another Army" issue, where they might decide your gathered loot looks awfully yummy.

Then there's the webwork of treaties, mutual-defense-pacts, alliances, strategic marriages, etc etc etc.  Some "external" armies may not be willing to stay out of the fight.

 

FWIW & all that.

[Lloyd Dupont]

Good advice all! 🙂

[Tirapheg]

Merry England had domething to say about sieges, which was an important part of medieval warfare mostly left out of consideration in rpgs. Dysentry among the ranks laying siege would effectively weaken the forces, and possibly bring a swift end to the siege. Also, besiegers would have to make sure their supply lines for food were open, or try to source it locally. Which brings the possibility of the besiegers running out of food as they deplete local stocks. 

Edited July 20, 2023 by Tirapheg

[Lloyd Dupont]

3 hours ago, Tirapheg said:

Merry England had domething to say about sieges, which was an important part of medieval warfare mostly left out of consideration in rpgs. Dysentry among the ranks laying siege would effectively weaken the forces, and possibly bring a swift end to the siege. Also, besiegers would have to make sure their supply lines for food were open, or try to source it locally. Which brings the possibility of the besiegers running out of food as they deplete local stocks. 

good tips! 🙂