# Mass Battles in TTRPGs: Which Rules Fit a Campaign That Goes to War? Published: 2026-10-27 Updated: 2026-10-27 Match rules to campaign needs: pick fast abstraction, mapped 5e control, or persistent formation warfare based on prep and player roles. ## Article I’d pick [Savage Worlds](/item/savageworlds) for a fast battle, D&D’s 2017 UA for unit control in 5e, and Kingdoms & Warfare for repeated battles with lasting army losses. The choice comes down to prep time, battlefield control, campaign fit, and how your characters affect the outcome. - D&D UA: Mass Combat (2017): Keeps battles within 5e, with unit actions and room for hero missions. It remains playtest material, so I’d plan for DM rulings. - Savage Worlds: Mass Battles: Uses 10 Force Tokens for the stronger army and a proportional total for its opponent. I’d use it when character scenes matter more than moving formations. - Kingdoms & Warfare: Adds unit cards, deployment, and damage that carries between battles. I’d choose it when commanding armies is a regular part of play. Quick Comparison System Prep and pace Battlefield control Campaign carryover Character impact D&D UA, 2017 Moderate prep; fast to moderate play Unit actions and positioning Strength losses; recovery needs rulings Command, direct combat, and missions Savage Worlds Low to moderate prep; fast play Broad army decisions Force losses shape later battles Actions and missions affect battle results Kingdoms & Warfare More prep; longer battles Formation deployment and maneuvers Unit damage and recovery Command abilities and linked encounters My starting question: Do your players want to command formations, carry out missions, or manage a war? That answer tells me where detailed rules will earn their table time. TTRPG Mass Combat: Which Rules Fit Your Campaign? How to Run Mass Combat in D&D Without Overshadowing Your Players ## 1. D&D Unearthed Arcana: Mass Combat (2017) Wizards of the Coast released this playtest on February 21, 2017. While the overview compares trade-offs, this section looks at how D&D handles war at the table. This is unfinished material, not current 5e core rules. ### Preparation and Battle Time Create a record for each formation with its creature type, count, size, Battle Rating (BR), morale, commander, and map space. Add the creatures’ BR values, which are based on Challenge Rating, to get the unit’s total BR. Morale and the commander’s Charisma modifier determine initiative. ### Battle Scale and Tactical Control The rules handle hundreds of combatants by tracking formations instead of individual creatures. Assign each unit’s map space before play, allowing more space for larger creatures. Each unit has five actions to choose from: Attack, Dash, Defend, Disengage, and Guard. You still make tactical choices, but you don’t have to track every creature. ### Campaign Compatibility and Continuity Battles use opposed BR checks to reduce a unit’s strength in chunks rather than count exact casualties. BR loss measures attrition, not a precise death toll. It tracks battle damage, but it doesn’t cover supply lines or rebuilding. ### Character Agency and Battle Consequences Characters can command units, fight at character scale, join a unit, or split off for a side mission during battle. The DM should decide how that mission affects the larger fight. For example, a mission might improve morale, boost effective BR, or take an enemy unit out of the battle. Savage Worlds leans further toward speed and abstraction. ## 2. Savage Worlds: Mass Battles ### Preparation and Battle Time Savage Worlds Adventure Edition (SWADE) gives the larger or more powerful army 10 Force Tokens, then assigns the opposing force a proportional number. It’s the fastest, most abstract option in this comparison. Quality matters more than headcount: elite troops, better equipment, terrain, and fortifications can all shift the ratio. Tokens can represent troops, vehicles, ships, or any meaningful force unit. You don’t need a unit-by-unit roster, making this a good fit when you want to resolve a war quickly and return to character scenes. ### Battle Scale and Tactical Control Each round, commanders make opposed Battle rolls rather than Knowledge (Battle) checks. The side with more Force Tokens gets a bonus equal to the difference between the two totals. The GM can also account for leadership, terrain, fortifications, and other battlefield conditions. Successes and raises translate into token losses. The focus stays on overall battlefield advantage, not individual formations or weapon ranges. ### Campaign Compatibility and Continuity SWADE uses the existing Savage Worlds character framework, so the party can play through normal encounters alongside the abstract battle. Token losses represent troops killed, routed, captured, or destroyed - not an exact casualty count. For named NPCs who need their own outcomes, use individual scenes. ### Character Agency and Battle Consequences Characters can help their commander through combat, magic, or social actions. They can also take on missions that change battlefield modifiers. A character might sabotage enemy artillery, rally frightened troops, scout a flank, treat wounded soldiers, or negotiate with a wavering allied faction. The GM should state the consequence before the scene begins, so players know how success will affect the army-level result. This approach suits recurring wars where personal missions still matter, though it offers less room for unit-level maneuvering. Kingdoms & Warfare takes this further by tying battles to command decisions and campaign consequences that carry forward. ## 3. Kingdoms & Warfare: Warfare System ### Preparation and Battle Time Kingdoms & Warfare requires persistent unit cards, commanders, terrain, objectives, and deployment limits. Each unit tracks Attack, Power, Defense, Toughness, Morale, Command, speed, abilities, and a casualty die that records its remaining strength. Large battles can take a full session. Reusing standard unit cards cuts prep time, but that saved effort supports deeper command play - not faster battles. ### Battle Scale and Tactical Control Command centers on formations. Each side uses a 4 × 5 deployment grid, with 20 spaces for infantry and artillery. Cavalry and aerial units follow different deployment rules. Unit turns include movement, attacks, and maneuvers. Attack tests target Defense, while Power tests against Toughness determine casualties. Command tests govern maneuvers such as Follow Up, Rally, Retreat, Set for Charge, and Withdraw. Players direct formations, so deployment and army composition matter more than where individual soldiers stand. ### Campaign Compatibility and Continuity Units carry damage between battles, making recovery part of campaign planning. Failed Morale tests can also cause losses, so the casualty die tracks more than troops killed. The GM should set recovery procedures rather than assume units reset automatically. Warfare doesn't model every part of taxation, territory, or supply chains. Domain and intrigue procedures cover broader organizational and political play. The trade-off is continued tracking: war stays part of the campaign, rather than becoming a detached encounter or one-off battle minigame. ### Character Agency and Battle Consequences PCs can shape battles through commander abilities, orders, and rallying formations. Separate character-scale encounters can also run alongside the army battle. If a character leaves command to fight directly, apply commander limits and communication rules consistently. Command decisions matter, but players also have a second layer of rules to handle. The next section compares these differences in play speed, tactical depth, and campaign impact. ## How the Systems Play During and Between Battles Use one shared scenario: the PCs defend a fortified river town, then face two later battles in the same war. After the first victory, assume 25% of effective strength is lost, then choose between pursuit and withdrawal. This is a comparison benchmark, not a reported playtest. Across the same war, defending walls, crossing a river, and pursuing an enemy on open ground should feel different. Preparation and Resolution Time Compare prep work and the decisions players must make - not exact session length. System First-use prep Repeat prep and pace D&D UA, 2017 Moderate. Later battles need little prep once units and BR are built. Savage Worlds Low. Later battles stay fast because force tokens carry forward, rather than unit rosters. Kingdoms & Warfare Moderate. Later battles require more work because unit conditions and objectives persist. Speed is only part of the comparison. Terrain also needs to change how the fight plays out. Battle Scale and Tactical Control Run the same fight across three terrain states: walls, a river crossing, and open ground. Keep siege rules separate from open-battle rules. System Terrain and siege effects D&D UA, 2017 Use BR for force quality, but handle walls and crossings as separate terrain problems. Winning at the town does not guarantee a successful pursuit. Savage Worlds Apply the edition’s force-ratio rules at the crossing and on open ground. Do not assume formation-level movement. Kingdoms & Warfare Positioning changes the risks of pursuit or withdrawal. Check siege rules separately before treating the town’s walls as decisive. After combat, check how each system carries the war into the next battle. Campaign Compatibility and Continuity Track only what affects the next fight: remaining force, morale, commander status, and retreat state. The benchmark’s 25% loss means reduced fighting strength, not necessarily deaths. System Campaign fit What carries into the next engagement D&D UA, 2017 Best for 5e campaigns that want war rules within D&D’s structure. Carry surviving strength into pursuit or withdrawal. Set house rules for recovery and replacements before the next fight. Savage Worlds Works best when token losses and recovery between scenes represent the war. Separate routed troops from permanent losses before setting the next force ratio. Do not assume detailed supply tracking. Kingdoms & Warfare Best for campaigns that make warfare a continuing layer of play. Unit damage persists, so recovery matters. Pursuing immediately means entering the next engagement depleted. Character Agency and Battle Consequences Compare where player choices take effect: at army scale, at hero scale, or both. System Commander decisions Hero missions and front-line scenes D&D UA, 2017 Choose whether surviving units pursue or disengage. Start a hero scene, resolve its objective, then return to army play. Savage Worlds Weigh continued fighting against withdrawal as force tokens fall. Let hero missions influence the army result. Agree on any effect that carries into the next battle. Kingdoms & Warfare Weigh immediate gains against lasting unit losses. Link character missions to objectives that affect the retreat or next engagement. Specify what the character scene changes: reinforcements, a commander’s survival, or a safe retreat. ## Advantages and Limits of Each System The table below translates the earlier rules comparison into trade-offs at the table. System Principal advantages Principal limitations D&D UA: Mass Combat (2017) Tactical control within a familiar 5e framework. Best for tactical 5e battles when the group accepts playtest adjudication. Preparing rosters and switching scales add work and table time. Savage Worlds: Mass Battles Little setup keeps battles moving, with the focus on commanders and character contributions. That speed comes at the cost of formation-by-formation maneuvering. Kingdoms & Warfare Rewards investment in extended warfare and long-term military choices. Rules and roster upkeep offer less value for a single clash. Deeper command options don't automatically give every player an active role. The main differences are prep, control, and what carries over after the fight. Test the rules before you expand the battlefield. For UA, try representative BR matchups and morale checks before the session. Keep core battle effects separate from optional mission bonuses. Set each optional mission’s benefit, failure cost, and limit in advance. That way, the mission neither becomes irrelevant nor guarantees victory. More prep can mean more GM bookkeeping - not more player choices. Keep battle rules separate from domain and intrigue rules. Use Kingdoms & Warfare’s broader layers when between-battle decisions matter, rather than treating them as required overhead. ## Which Mass-Battle Rules Fit Your Campaign? Match your battle rules to how much prep, table time, and player control your campaign needs. Campaign need Recommended fit What to plan for One quick clash Savage Worlds Mass Battles Prepare only the modifiers that matter. Skip formation mapping. Siege or set-piece battle 2017 D&D UA for mapped unit control in a 5e war scene Prepare unit maps and conversion notes. Leave room for playtest rulings, and add siege or supply procedures as needed. Recurring tactical battles Kingdoms & Warfare for repeated formation-level decisions Reuse unit cards, and set aside table time for deployment and maneuvers. Hero missions Savage Worlds for abstract battles; 2017 D&D UA for mapped play Decide when to switch between army and character play. Persistent army, resource, or territory management Kingdoms & Warfare, with added rules where needed Prepare a command layer that carries between battles, plus recovery rules. Check for gaps in supply, administration, diplomacy, and territory. Before choosing, ask your players where they want to spend their time: commanding armies, carrying out missions, or managing a campaign-long war. Use that preference to decide which parts need detailed rules and which can stay abstract. ## FAQs ### Can I adapt these battle rules to another RPG? Yes, but plan to rework unit actions, damage, morale, and scaling, then adjust pacing and complexity. Treat the rules as modular add-ons. Fit coordination, resources, mission objectives, and tactical movement into your RPG’s initiative, damage, and movement rules. Start with small skirmishes before moving to larger battles. Keep the core rules consistent to maintain balance, and add optional subsystems only when they serve the story and give players meaningful choices. ### How do I keep non-commanders engaged in battles? Give each player a specialized role with clear responsibilities, whether that means managing electronic warfare, boosting unit shields, or providing artillery support. Add battlefield objectives players can act on: rescuing civilians, securing key locations, or disabling hazards in their surroundings. These story-driven goals let non-commanders make tactical decisions beyond direct combat - and make their contributions matter to the unit’s success. ### How can I balance hero missions without guaranteeing victory? Focus on story-driven objectives - taking control of a location, protecting NPCs, or escaping overwhelming forces - instead of defeating every enemy. Use threat meters with clear stages that grow more dangerous, and let threats change in response to player decisions rather than fixed encounter math. Keep ammunition, medical supplies, and other resources limited so that fighting or retreating becomes a meaningful choice. Tie victory to the mission’s story and requirements, not just to draining enemy hit points. {"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"FAQPage","mainEntity":[{"@type":"Question","name":"Can I adapt these battle rules to another RPG?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Yes, but plan to rework unit actions, damage, morale, and scaling, then adjust pacing and complexity. Treat the rules as modular add-ons. Fit coordination, resources, mission objectives, and tactical movement into your RPG’s initiative, damage, and movement rules. Start with small skirmishes before moving to larger battles. Keep the core rules consistent to maintain balance, and add optional subsystems only when they serve the story and give players meaningful choices."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"How do I keep non-commanders engaged in battles?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Give each player a specialized role with clear responsibilities, whether that means managing electronic warfare, boosting unit shields, or providing artillery support. Add battlefield objectives players can act on: rescuing civilians, securing key locations, or disabling hazards in their surroundings. These story-driven goals let non-commanders make tactical decisions beyond direct combat - and make their contributions matter to the unit’s success."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"How can I balance hero missions without guaranteeing victory?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Focus on story-driven objectives - taking control of a location, protecting NPCs, or escaping overwhelming forces - instead of defeating every enemy. Use threat meters with clear stages that grow more dangerous, and let threats change in response to player decisions rather than fixed encounter math. Keep ammunition, medical supplies, and other resources limited so that fighting or retreating becomes a meaningful choice. Tie victory to the mission’s story and requirements, not just to draining enemy hit points."}}]}