'Stormwind Army' Discussion

Credit for original idea goes to Valestrion

Hello again! You probably have gotten PMs from me already. Since so many different people are involved, an in-game discussion might be slow and unproductive. So I think we should focus on doing it through the forums for now. Please treat this as a discussion-thread and try to reply as often as possible.

Essence of the Idea:
1) Give -all- the guilds in Stormwind an opportunity to work together on military-RP and w-PvP in all of their different aspects. Training, political RP around preparation of an army, actual campaigns and campfire activities while on the campaigns. The guilds should as much as possible to allowed to do 'their thing'. (ex: Blades will always be mercenaries, Chapter will be heavily involved in intelligence and morale, like pamphlets or sermons)
2) Work on bettler storytelling during the Campaigns. Role-play and Story come first, with PvP serving the purposes of the role-play instead of story simply being there to give an excuse to meet at 21:03 and zerg each other.
3) OOCly, the leadership is shared between all the guilds. There is no Boss.

The idea is that when there is time for war or training, all the guilds will have to be summoned and gathered in one way or another to contribute forces. This will provide great semi-political RP in the preparation phase.

To be Discussed
Treat this section as a guideline for what to write in your answer to this thread:

1) What is the IC story behind this idea? Is it "Stormwind Army" loyal to the King and answerable to the King, or did all the guilds involved sign a treaty with each other agreeing to aid Stormwind to the best of their abilities, or something else entirely?
2) How should the IC leadership of this group be handled?
3) In what way does your guild wish to participate? (ex: just frontline soldiers, spies and scouts, suppliers and campfollowers etc)

4) Any other point you may wish to bring up regarding this whole idea.

Haven't taken part in military RP for some time now, but one big draw for me at least was the concept of a Uniformed Service. With several participating guilds, not all of which necessarily IC'ly train or enforce any uniform or strict discipline of their own, would this be something that the initiative would attempt to maintain?

Here's my opinion on your "To be Discussed" points, and one that you assumed wasn't open for discussion.

Firstly, while I agree that OOC, there should be a group of people in control, rather than a single general, I think the make up of that group needs to be given consideration. It's not as simple as taking a representative from each guild. Certainly, all the key guilds should be represented, but at the same time, too many people could make things unwieldy. In addition, there may be independent individuals who are not part of a guild or are part of a guild that doesn't want to be involved en masse. I suggest a Stormwind General Staff, who are all equal OOC, comprising the senior officers of the army as follows:

• General commanding

• General second in command

• Brigadier of the Holy Brigade, representing religious orders

• Brigadier of the Noble Brigade, representing feudal forces from the noble houses

• Brigadier of the Regular Brigade, representing regular army units such as the Stormwind Regiment and penal units, who are included in this brigade so that the Stormwind Regiment can keep an eye on them.

• Brigadier of the Mercenary Brigade, representing mercenaries units when engaged

• Surgeon Brigadier of the Stormwind Army Medical Corps, a cross-guild unit representing the field hospital

• Brigadier of the Stormwind Army Intelligence Corps, a cross-guild unit representing intelligence agents

• Commodore of the Stormwind Navy, representing naval units and marines

While having no OOC authority over the other members of the General Staff, the General commanding and second in command would be a published point of contact for other Alliance nations and anyone else wishing to organise a World-PvP event, and would represent Stormwind on the Alliance Military Council. Of course, this shouldn't prevent anyone else making their own contacts, but rather just serves to help people who are looking for a contact but don't already know anyone.

The Army should be answerable to the King as the commander in chief, but be at the disposal of the Minister of War and the Minister of Defence.

IC leadership should follow military principles, i.e. a senior officer should be appointed until he retires, resigns or is removed for disciplinary reasons. Appointments should be agreed OOC by the General Staff, although IC the generals are appointed by the King and the Brigadiers by the commanding general. Having a static leader rather than sharing it around on a rotating basis has two advantages. Firstly, it's important for those of us for whom the Stormwind Army represents a tool for military RP. Secondly, it's important that people both inside and outside of Stormwind know who to contact about the Stormwind Army.

Under the model I used above when describing the General Staff, the Disciples of Light would provide a military unit for the Holy Brigade and a medical team for the Stormwind Army Medical Corps.

Just as an additional thought, I think it would be nice to give the four combat brigades names. I was thinking that we might name them after heroes and important figures, such as Lightbringer Brigade for the Holy Brigade, and Wrynn Brigade for the Regular Brigade.

1) What is the IC story behind this idea? Is it "Stormwind Army" loyal to the King and answerable to the King, or did all the guilds involved sign a treaty with each other agreeing to aid Stormwind to the best of their abilities, or something else entirely?

I'd say something around the lines of having the guilds involved sign a treaty with each other agreeing to aid Stormwind to the best of their abilities in the name of the King/People/Kingdom/Alliance. Naturally any fighting element that fights for Stormwind is loyal to the King so its self explenatory.

2) How should the IC leadership of this group be handled?

I've said quite a few times that the IC leadership is really the least of the problems when it comes down to such a type of RP. What is important is the OOC leadership, in my opinion it should be made up from all of the participating guild's and their officers/leaders in a form of Council where everyone has a say in the action.

For IC leadership however I have a personal suggestion that might or might not work depending on the situation. Take for example a campaign, its Organizers would naturally be the IC leaders of the operation. However given the fact we are speaking now about a campaign but a unit/RP the leadership could always change depending on who is chosen to lead the forces during the campaigns. That way it will be more flexible and it will have more people involved rather than just one person all of the time.

Naturally it can also be led by a Council of representatives, like the War Council so that everyone has a say in the works and everyone controls his own troops ICly depending on the grand plan behind the RP/Campaign.

Joint leadership of all seems to be the best idea in my opinion since everyone will get a say/hand in the matters and it will share the workload of the ones in charge for instance.

3) In what way does your guild wish to participate? (ex: just frontline soldiers, spies and scouts, suppliers and campfollowers etc)

Personally, my people or atleast the RPers in them usually go with front line soldiers, as for me. I can be anything! Geldar usually both cooks for the troops and leads them when he has too so its very flexible!

4) Any other point you may wish to bring up regarding this whole idea.

I must stress ONE thing with this matter, that the most important part of the future campaigns is to have LOTS AND I MEAN A LOT MORE RP than PvP. It needs to have immersion, iron plot line, logic behind the actions our armies take, politics and everything that might bring a war and a army to the fullest of their abilities and immersion.

Thus for campaigns there must be a lot of preparations and politics.

Regarding your OOC General Staff idea, I think it basically means almost every guild a say in the matters, while giving other guilds more than one say and excluding others. Bloodwind, Regiment and penals are in one brigade, but only one of them gets OOC say in the council. DoL&chapter are both in one brigade, but again only one gets a say. Then General&ViceGeneral must also be from -SOME- guild. Which makes it pretty uneven in the end.

I personally believe it is of greatest importance that every guild participating must have OOC say in organization and the form the events are going to take, and no guild should be 'mightier' than others. I do however not mind if one person has a 'prominent' position, ie: makes forum-posts and acts as contact to the outside world.

About the IC loyalties. I believe that King's army is indeed a good call, but I disagree that the Council should be involved in this. In fact, what I mind is the Council->Army influence. I think that Minister of War should not be the 'General' of the army, but I would agree if 'General' of the army is the minister of war.

On the IC-front.

Brigade-system sounds like fun, but may be it can be adjusted to suit the situation? Not brigades, but groups in charge of . For instance, if situation demands it we can have a group&officer in charge of Patrols. If there is insubordination and chaos in the camp, we have some in charge of 'internal' security. It might be a bit more flexible than brigades, while keeping the 'spirit' of the idea intact. However, Brigades overall are a great concept!

The bone of contention, IC leadership. I have no idea what to say on the matter, and suggest we first see who -wants- to lead the army ICly in principle. Since I bet it are so few people that in the end it might as well ammount to permanent leadership for purely practical reasons.

About the IC loyalties. I believe that King's army is indeed a good call, but I disagree that the Council should be involved in this. In fact, what I mind is the Council->Army influence. I think that Minister of War should not be the 'General' of the army, but I would agree if 'General' of the army is the minister of war.

On the IC-front.

I completely agree with this, and especially the bold text. That is the correct way it should be, even if I have to add an 'a' instead of 'the' in the bold text.

However it is worked out in the end, (and im sure it will) The Ebon shroud are happy to join up. But it does not suit us to really be regular soldiers. largly people should not see us fight, it will be too much for alot of people ic. What I suggest then is that we can put ourselves under the general and his ooc staff and equal but to the side of the rest of the army. We might come and rp in camp but ic we will be much happier to go butcher a watch tower behind enemy lines or something.

In most of these PvP wars, there are only about 5 or 6 Human guilds at the most. Could these not all be represented? As its an ooc thing any way the positions dont need to be military. Chief chaplain, waggon master, spokeman from the Smith and Cooking guild for example.

Lexgrad/Dreth wrote:However it is worked out in the end, (and im sure it will) The Ebon shroud are happy to join up. But it does not suit us to really be regular soldiers. largly people should not see us fight, it will be too much for alot of people ic. What I suggest then is that we can put ourselves under the general and his ooc staff and equal but to the side of the rest of the army. We might come and rp in camp but ic we will be much happier to go butcher a watch tower behind enemy lines or something.

Speak for yourself. I for one quite enjoy work as Interrogator!

Hehe, again our method of interrogation might break the geneva convention! Like the idea of Command handing a prisoner over and telling us to make him talk XD

The working alone bit is just cos the living have a hang up about ghouls, shadow/necromantic magic and Armoured knights getting off on hurting things and nicking their souls!

Lexgrad/Dreth wrote:Hehe, again our method of interrogation might break the geneva convention! Like the idea of Command handing a prisoner over and telling us to make him talk XD

They didn't seem to mind my methods the last time.

Nor my fighting style, for that matter. Then again I mostly fought on mage last time since melee on my connection/FPS was hell.

You are the PR departments Death knight though dru

While I think that Valestrion's idea sounds good on paper, but I'm unsure about it's practicality. It would make every guild third in command of their own men. And I'm inclined to hesitate wether it is a good thing.
But... if you play up the positions interaction with the guild (and outright forbid the commander of the army and his second to give direct orders go over the head of their "lieutenants") it could work... in theory. The entire point would lie in making them interact with their direct commander and not be involved with the senior general.
Secondly... brigadiers should be elected for fixed terms by their own brigades. Each guild/group participating in that brigade having equal say. Anything else will benefit the founders and make senior command difficult to attain by new members.
But there should be an option to completely ommit the Brigadiers alltogether if they prove unwieldly or negatively impact the guilds.

The commanding general should be the campaign organiser and this person ought to sit until next campaign (or event, in case the army is used in a non-rp-pvp event/plot). His second should be chosen by him.

Might I suggest that there's an appointed (or elected, if that is prefered) High Constable though? Who has responsibility of organising the meeting of the staff and guilds and being the general contact person of the group?

So that the highest echelon being only:
General+Second (organisers of the campaign)
High Constable (contact person and ooc organiser of the army)
Brigadiers (Field commanders)

A second point is not to refer to it as the but a Stormwind army. That way it doesn't matter if we're IC crushed in a campaign. We're just one out of several armies. It takes a whole lot of impact out of victories and loss, which I think is important.

My third point is a nitpick from my humility. Specifically... using the title Brigadier has one problem: It implies that the groups are indeed brigades. That is to say that this army has a nominal strength of 12 000 men in the field (and then the support branches on top of that!).
Which is about a 100 times more people than we can reasonably expect to field in the best of circumstances and about either 21 or 60 % of the size of Stormwind (depending on if you use 50 or 20 thousand people to go by, both have been mentioned).
More importantly it's a ludicrously high title when most guilds wouldn't even qualify as platoon or even squad in terms of size... (that's not to say ooc numbers should be all that important).
Might I suggest instead taking a leaf from pre-16th century armies (which is indeed the era wow attempts to... for the most part... look like) and name the unit commanders Captain and only the field commander General (and his second Lieutenant-General. Which literally means: The general's right hand). This line of thinking also fits the collection of small otherwise independent groups better as well (since we're actually closer to a feudal army than a modern centralised command when it really comes down to it).

My last bit is: Remember the Quarter Master (either Quarter Master-general or Quarter master-captain) which is the one responsible for organising the camp, maintaining discipline and making sure everyone knows where to set up their tents, where in the formation they're supposed to be and maintain camp discipline.

---

As for how I could attend:
Either as Jayanti (though she's a gnome and not under Wrynn's command) with the Technocratic Republic and helping supplying. Or as Gahalla, helping out the medical corps (but I don't really see Gahalla as a permanent member of an army staff... more like tagging along in the style of Florence Nightingale)

I do not see this third in command thing, In practice the general will turn to the commander and say go take that watch tower. The commander of the guild is free to do as they please to get it done. Its not like the general is going to jump from guild to guild micromanaging everything.

Lexgrad is correct. That's what happened on the last campaign. The general doesn't micromanage the individual guilds, but allocates tasks to them through the guild commander. The only time I gave orders directly to individual members of the Stormwind Regiment was when I had politely asked to borrow a couple of men for a patrol I was leading, and even then the men were assigned to the patrol by their guild commander.

Regarding Gahalla's point about use of the term Brigade, it is a fair comment that we do not have the numbers typical of a brigade, which incidentally is about 4,000 to 5,000 men rather than 12,000, but still the points remains. However, I chose that term because many guilds consider themselves to be Regiments or the equivalent. The next size of unit up from a Regiment is a Brigade. Captain is a rank that might commonly be used within a Guild, whereas Brigadier is a rank above any I have ever heard a guild using.

I don't see the need for a separate High Constable. The job proposed should be done by the generals. There shouldn't need to be someone else to do it.

1) Indeed, and in that way it could work. But it is a tricky thing and I'm still not sure. Even if it is just on a nominal level, the individual guilds are still pretty far down from the deciding factor (if anything it makes own initiatives difficult to work with). But I'm thinking I'd have to see it in praxis to be able to tell for certain.

2) But you listed 4 field brigadiers and one naval commodore Valestrion. That's not one brigade but five (though one naval). This is a division in total.
In effect twelve thousand men and about half of a fleet section (which might very well be another 3000 men). And then support staff on top of that.
The Nominal strength is larger than goldshire and a noticeable portion of Stormwind (possibly as much as 60 or 75 % of the entire city, or possibly 21 to 24 %).
To compare, the alliance's finest unit, 7th legion, is a legion. Which means either a nominal strength of 1000 men (if the "a legion is 1000 men under arms" definition is used) or 5,500 men (if the roman definition is used) or anything inbetween.
This is at least twice that number, if not thrice.
This means that this general probably outranks the leader of the 7th legion and thus also would probably have outranked Bolvar.

But wanting to use something higher than captain since so many guilds uses it is a bit of a fair point.
Though historically captain just means unit commander (and general is actually short for Captain-general, or "Captain of the army in general") and commanded their own household units of vastly different sizes (so the Royal captain was nominally equal to the captain of a baron, even if the royal captain could command up to twenty times as many men).
But if you need something higher... why not go for the two ranks of senior officer between general and captain? Namely:
Colonel (derived spanish for "crown officer" and traditionally in charge of a entire formation)
Major (originally the colonel's "Major sargeant major", of all the shortened titles... this one makes the most sense).

Also... seriously... don't hang yourself up on that most guilds style themselves regiments. Most of us style ourselves that way, but act like companies. Moreover... regiments don't make up brigades. A regiment and a brigade is on equal level, in fact... brigade is often the smaller unit. Both are made up of batallions and both form divisions. (The difference is that the brigade is a strictly field unit, while the regiment is a more permanent organisation). If we use this as a basis... our officers would be commanding divisions, not brigades and be Major-Generals, not Brigadiers (and one Rear-Admiral). Putting the nominal strength at 50, 000 men plus support staff.
That's the entire city of Stormwind. Twice the size of Ironforge and 2,5 percent of "the entire church of the light". Ten times the probable strength of the Seventh legion (I dare say it'd include all the legions the alliance has). Even if you use the numbers me and Exa calculated for the kingdom (7 respective 2 million people) it's still a incredibly large force.
If the alliance (not just the kingdom) lost this army... it would never recover. There's simpy no way an army of this size would not be led by our warrior king.

It's simply too much... it makes winning too important IC. Even 12,000 men is iffy since it's a lot. I know I'm nitpicking really, but I really think this concept is a good one. And the better it fits the lore (or our assumptions thereof) the more I'd like it.
Can't we try to aspire to be closer to a legion (5,500 men... which is about the size of a regiment in modern times)? Making us an equal size formation to the 7th legion.
Yes, it would mean treating the various guilds as smaller units than they claim to be (hardly difficult though, since we neither sizewise nor how we use ourselves tactically are even remotely close to regiments. Besides... captains command companies, not regiments). Using colonel, major, commander (which is the title 7th legion seems to use) or, if you prefer, the much more vague "Marshal" (originally being a noble's military right hand).

3) If the senior officers are elected by the participants and the commanding officer chosen on campaign basis. Which I think is the most fair system (allows everyone an equal chance to command, rather than just the founders) then the High Constable would be the primary contact person and the one responsible for brining the army to active service (ie. call and host the war meetings).

TBH, more guilds need to stop listing themselves as things like regiments, and instead simply be squads, platoons, or companies at most. <.<

Drustai wrote:TBH, more guilds need to stop listing themselves as things like regiments, and instead simply be squads, platoons, or companies at most. <.<

*Coughs* But...

On a sidenote: am I allowed to use some of the ideas from this topic for Kalimdor role play?

Could use some help whipping Dieudonnes, Regiment, Blades and Theramore to read and comment!

I admit that I like Gahalla's general-for-a-campaign idea. And I think that de-facto it might just be what you want as well, Valestrion. If I am not -entirely- mistaken only three people in this 'army' are interessted in organizing inventing w-pvp with any level of serious dedication. Which probably means that we will end up with a 'permanent' general after all.

For brigades, ranks aside, can you elaborate -why- you want division into brigades instead of just guilds?

At then end of the day, I'm not too worried about the terminology for the units, but I'm also not too hard line about having to have the right number of people for that unit. Just because an IRL brigade has 4,000 men, does a Stormwind brigade have to? Should the Stormwind Regiment be forced to change it's name to the Stormwind Platoon because it doesn't have enough men to warrant being called a Regiment? I don't think so.

I don't like the general-for-a-campaign idea. A fixed general is someone people can become familiar with, and who is likely to encourage military acitivies between campaigns, such as training exercises and inter-guild patrols.

The reason for having brigades is to make it easier to include smaller guilds and independent characters who want to be involved. For example, the Noble Brigade would allow independent members of the House of Nobles, who don't have their own private armies behind them, to be part of a unit of people with similar ideals to themselves. In the Holy Brigade, the Shining Strand is another prime example. We see Gahalla and Amaryl on just about every campaign, but they are the only members of the Shining Strand I would expect to see there. Gahalla is likely to work with the Medical Corps, so the Holy Brigade gives Amaryl a unit to be part of.

Excuse me while I wade through the knee-deep levels of unnecessary piffle and get to the core of the matter that concerns me.

1) What is the IC story behind this idea? Is it "Stormwind Army" loyal to the King and answerable to the King, or did all the guilds involved sign a treaty with each other agreeing to aid Stormwind to the best of their abilities, or something else entirely?

I personally believe it is of greatest importance that every guild participating must have OOC say in organization and the form the events are going to take, and no guild should be 'mightier' than others. I do however not mind if one person has a 'prominent' position, ie: makes forum-posts and acts as contact to the outside world.

Yo, speaking up for a smaller guild here. I don't want to be participating in such a gathering if we were to run about on unequal footing because of either IC or OOC reasons. I think if we're going to see the best in terms of effort and desire to make this work then we should stick to said treaty idea as proposed. Fashion it ICly however you wish, I'll leave the details to the people who like to argue over such things; what is important is that each guild is joined into a group, army, whatever you wish to call it, at acceptance of whatever IC proposal you come up with to serve Stormwind. As food for thought, those already sworn in loyalty to the king could be simply requisitioned to join the fight, perhaps some begrudging RP moments abound.

2) How should the IC leadership of this group be handled?

I believe that this coalition (again, whatever you wish to ICly call it) should be equally governed by those in command of the respective organizations that are attending, headed by an opted member of the group to over-see the current state of affairs or battle plan. Or hell, you could have someone who has quite a bit of experience/organizing these types of events to ICly lead the group on some character or another to smoothen the OOC to IC transfer of thoughts. I don't give too much of a crap how it's structured in terms of who gets what title and leads which parts of the event, only that it make sense to their specialities. Easy example is for any Naval warfare plans or the ferrying of troops to give Drazial a smack around the back of the head and told to get it done.

Brigade-system sounds like fun, but may be it can be adjusted to suit the situation? Not brigades, but groups in charge of . For instance, if situation demands it we can have a group&officer in charge of Patrols. If there is insubordination and chaos in the camp, we have some in charge of 'internal' security. It might be a bit more flexible than brigades, while keeping the 'spirit' of the idea intact. However, Brigades overall are a great concept!

*I like the flexibility of this idea. Whilst we are all from our respective guilds, I dare say I'd like a little co-operation and integration of the guilds, give a few like minded members of different guilds the chance to integrate by assigning the group out to scout a location for example.

3) In what way does your guild wish to participate? (ex: just frontline soldiers, spies and scouts, suppliers and campfollowers etc)

Would be looking to lend as much support as I can muster from the ranks of the Proudmoore if such a thing gets going and underway. We'll likely be responsible for the voyages if the location is set by sea or across the continent, aswell as some front line presence. Obviously, we are one of the smaller guilds so it's more likely our presence will be fragmented at best. Personally, I'd put my boot in for whatever post you'll have me. I missed out on the last one, and Legraine needs his glory.

4) Any other point you may wish to bring up regarding this whole idea.

Only that I would hope we not get too bogged down in discussions of this and that, things that really are only polish to a (at present) dirty something metaphorical. Maybe it's my naivety showing here, but whilst I believe preparation to be important, I don't want to be reading a novel's worth of shite that clouds the true topics. Perhaps then again it's just my sleep depravity and the wall of text is intimidating my weary gaze.

Hope I got where I stand on it all, across.

Wonderful! Inclusion of unguilded folks and guilds from outside Stormwind is a brilliant idea, Vale! So, returning to the 'brigade' idea...

How about:

Frontline Soldiers (your soldier&holy brigades)
Support (medics, wizards, preachy priests, camp-related people)
Scouts (spies, scouts etc)
Logistics (quartermasters, suppliers etc etc)

In this way people from different guilds can more easily interract with one another, there are not too many 'brigades' and this can be kept as purely IC division. Basically IC 'officers' to keep the campaign going, providing immersion as well as focal point for RP.

Would be fun if the staff included could be civilian! Seeing as they cannot fight the good fight they do their part by helping around with what they can during the campaign. (Cooks etc etc.)

And I might add that division into 'brigades' rather than guilds does not exclude an IC war-council. Since that would be the only way to keep the army together, since if a guild feels ICly that they are not consulted on strategy and expected to charge into an unknown, they can simply leave. So, holding such warcouncils will be an IC necessity NOT because some rule forces it, but because it makes sense story-wise and is the only way to keep the whole thing together.

Well, I might just insert my 2p, considering I do have some experience in organising campaigns.

I believe there's should be a balance between between, OOC leadership and IC leadership, for the sake of communication during the campaign and off.

And I also agree with Valestrion on the part that there should be "Something" when there's no campaign for people interested in Soldiering.


Well, I like the idea of a General Staff, compromised of all the participants appointed officers, and including people that generally organise lots or interested in the organising of events army related. which naturally should be an IC and OOC position.

Now, the overall commander that's chosen out from and by the general staff, should be more of a non-wartime manager of the armed forces as a whole. which is more a political function to keep the member guilds working together and having events together of a military nature while at home.



while a Field commander is appointed to actually lead the campaign on a by campaign basis. Which Imo should indeed be the campaign organiser, because naturally that person has contact with the opposing faction, knows the plan of the campaign and can colour it in ICly to participants. this keeps the lines of communication short. since its annoying if you're the ooc organiser to talk everything over with the opposing faction, then tell everything oocly to the appointed field commander, for him to then tell it to the troops ICly. that will lead to delays and to confusion.

The exact nomenclature isn't that important to me. though if we're basing an army for stormwind/alliance, why not use the ranking system that's given to us by blizzard on the npc we encounter everywhere?

as in, lieutenant, captain, commander, marshal, field marshal, grand marshal? and admiral's for fleet commanders?

what I do dislike is unitary nomenclature like "Holy" Brigade "Noble" Brigade. but that's more a personal preference, to not be pigeon holed into a specific little box.

New idea...conscription...that is all!