Thread: War Planning for a Fantasy Novel

Okay, most of my book so far has come pretty easily, practically writing itself. But now war has broken out in my story, and I'm completely stuck. For weeks I've been staring at the screen trying to figure out how I'm going to do this, and nothing is coming to me. I don't know anything about war planning or battle strategy!

Anyone else had this kind of block? Any suggestions for getting this thing going again?

I don't know much about it either, what's helped me is asking myself a few questions.

What are the most important areas? Why are they important?
Which are hard to defend?
Which must be defended for security?
Is the loss of anything a plot point?
Does either side have a good grasp of the enemy landscape?



Asking myself this gave me an idea of where the attacks were going to be. And ideas about best defenses of each area and escape routes. I'm doing some research on strategy and everything, but these did help get me thinking. Hope this helps at least a little.

This probably wont help you at all... but I played a game of war hammer and basically wrote down how it went. I had to re-write it though because the good guys lost. It helped me a lot, being able to actually see where the armies were on the board and the random call of the dice made it all very unpredictable. It got quite hairy when I sent a squadron round to sneak attack her main army... they died horrifically which worked for my story as the commander was a bit useless and prone to sending people on suicide missions.

Edit: I forgot to mention I set the board up to match the various scenarios, the objective of the battle etc. So I was playing the game as a mission

How fleshed out is your world? Wars are pretty big, and you need to know the physical layout of your world, because it's so critical at this juncture. Imagine 300 if that narrow pass wasn't the only way into Greece. Territory becomes critical to that story, especially the plot turn when then antagonist actually finds out the pass isn't the only way through.

Best piece of advice I can give you is this: figure out what you need your story landscape to look like at the end of the war. Do certain towns need to be spared? Do some need to be razed to the ground? What generals need to be where to build the key interactions and plot points you're envisioning. Once you've mapped your requirements you start getting some solid milestones and scenes you can start navigating to.

As for describing battles and getting ideas for interesting twists/creative strategies, I recommend a deep dive into the history books to see what's happened in the past. Are some battles won simply because the invading army can't stand the inclement weather? Do the elephants of the deep south inspire terror amongst the defenders? Is the key to holding the Great Plains a strategic (but suicidal) raid on the opposing supply lines?

Oh, and read the Art of War. It's great way to see how cultural belief and military strategy blends. What sort of strange situations occur as your different peoples clash? Do your barbarians strike fear into their opponents because they never surrender, and does this leave them vulnerable to a trap that will see their hosts wiped out against the shores of the sea? Will the general disgrace himself forever by ordering his troops to submit, losing his honor but saving his people from extermination with the hope that one day they might rise up to throw off their shackles?

War, hunh! What is it go for? Absolutely nothing, but plot advancement. Say it again, ya!

Originally Posted by Capulet

How fleshed out is your world? Wars are pretty big, and you need to know the physical layout of your world, because it's so critical at this juncture. Imagine 300 if that narrow pass wasn't the only way into Greece. Territory becomes critical to that story, especially the plot turn when then antagonist actually finds out the pass isn't the only way through.

The world is semi-fleshed out. I picture it in my mind pretty well anyway. At the moment, the world is composed of a small isolated island with three tribes living on it, each dominating one of four mountain peaks (the fourth is a low mountain used as a hunting ground. Because the area is more vertical than spacious (i guess that would be the right word, maybe) it makes drawing a map fairly difficult (another difficulty in planning the war. Maybe I could create a 3D model out of clay or something.

I haven't run into this problem yet - yet - but I imagine reading a few books on military strategy, playing loads of chess, and reading other authors who have done similar things would be the best course of action. Not the quickest, by any means, though...

At their most basic level, strategy and tactics are all about analyzing your strengths and weaknesses and your enemies' strengths and weaknesses, then employing one or more of your strengths against one or more of his weaknesses. So how are your tribes different from each other? Think of these differences in terms of strengths and weaknesses. What natural resources do each tribe have, how did these resources influence each tribes technological development, and how did different technology lead to different weapons? For instance, if one tribe only had access to wood they may have developed bows and arrows while another tribe with access to iron ore may have developed swords. The tribe with bows and arrows would prefer to fight at a distance while the tribe with swords would want to fight hand to hand. The tribe with bows would prefer to fight in open terrain so they could see the enemy a long way off. The tribe with swords would prefer to fight in forests or other closed terrain so they could sneak up on their enemies and get close without being shot at. Tribal differences = strengths and weaknesses. C.M.

Originally Posted by C.M. Aaron

At their most basic level, strategy and tactics are all about analyzing your strengths and weaknesses and your enemies' strengths and weaknesses, then employing one or more of your strengths against one or more of his weaknesses. So how are your tribes different from each other? Think of these differences in terms of strengths and weaknesses. What natural resources do each tribe have, how did these resources influence each tribes technological development, and how did different technology lead to different weapons? For instance, if one tribe only had access to wood they may have developed bows and arrows while another tribe with access to iron ore may have developed swords. The tribe with bows and arrows would prefer to fight at a distance while the tribe with swords would want to fight hand to hand. The tribe with bows would prefer to fight in open terrain so they could see the enemy a long way off. The tribe with swords would prefer to fight in forests or other closed terrain so they could sneak up on their enemies and get close without being shot at. Tribal differences = strengths and weaknesses. C.M.

This is actually really helpful. I've been going about this all wrong. Obviously the tribe being invaded can't fight the invaders face to face. There's no way they'd survive. They need to employ gruilla warfare.

Thank you for the great advice!

Originally Posted by themooresho

The world is semi-fleshed out. I picture it in my mind pretty well anyway. At the moment, the world is composed of a small isolated island with three tribes living on it, each dominating one of four mountain peaks (the fourth is a low mountain used as a hunting ground. Because the area is more vertical than spacious (i guess that would be the right word, maybe) it makes drawing a map fairly difficult (another difficulty in planning the war. Maybe I could create a 3D model out of clay or something.

Mountain peaks, or "defensible hard points" as I like to call them, make invasion in your world practically impossible, to the point that it's likely just accepted reasoning that you don't attack the mountains. They're probably so fortified that losses would be prohibitive trying to take one, so nobody does. Likely all your violence occurs on the low-level hunting ground, where not only is combat not so drastically tilted in favour of the defenders with the high ground, but the actual resources worth fighting over are right there. Control of the hunting ground is incredibly important, and likely a point of constant contention.

I think the read in this story would be how does this balance get broken? Does one tribe invent the glider? Do off-worlders come with incredible flying technologies? Is a secret cavern discovered that leads right to the top of one of the peaks, allowing them to bypass all the defensive hardpoints of one of the people? Read about the Maginot Line in WWII to see how great static defenses prooved to be in modern warfare!

Geography is incredibly important to not only war, but the formation of your people and their culture. I'd suggest you really flesh out all the territory on your island and not only think how it would affect the battles you're currently planning, but rewind and see how it may have influenced the cultural history of the region over the last thousands years.

Is there only one fresh water spring on the whole island? Has everyone agreed that, rather than constantly war over it it would be considered a neutral ground where everyone can come to drink? Because it's neutral territory, is this where all negotiations are handled as well? Has a priesthood/industry developed around the area because it's so safe and sacred?

Uh oh! The well's running dry, and there isn't enough water to support demand! What happens now?

Seriously, with such a small setting I would develop the snot out of it. Any time you spend doing so will be repaid a hundred-fold with story ideas sparked by the exercise.

Do you need to write the whole war? It depends on POV -- if you are following one fighter, for example, s/he might not know much of what's going on in the broader scope.

My current work is all about war. The best tips I can give are:

1) Don't worry about scope if you think you can't work with it well - work inside the war, not on otp of it or around it. You're characters are the ones we really care about, and what we think of the war will mostly be down to them.

2) Consider strengths of factions - is there an inevitable element to this conflict? Is one side far stronge than the other? Make sure that struggle is at the centre of you war, because that makes the reader care about it.

3) Demonstrate levels of power, whenever possible, in any way. In my war, the main baddie has a Greater Daemon behind his throne that guards him night and day. I don't show him off, but instead tell of his power through anecdotes (he is known to have devoured many who have failed the antagonist). The next part of the story sees the baddie march into a peaceful town and slaughter everyone, but he is halted by one of the good guys who I don't really introduce until a few chapters on. In war, I find that the best way to introduce someone is by showing their level of power.

4) Kill some people. A war without death will make the reader doubt the struggle you are trying to present.

5) Start small - who's fighting who, why, what are important places, what are the soldiers like etc.

6) Then develop things that need developing, like stratergies and opinions that hlep personalize the war.

7) Play some real-time or turn-based stratergy games. For a futuristic fell, I'd go for Supreme Commander (the original, not the sequel, because it's rubbish). For general warfare, any of Sid Meier's Civilization games is good.

8 ) Don't just fight for the sake of it - fight because they have to, and because you know that you can make a good battle scene. If you feel like a battle isn't going anywhere, don't write it regardless. A bad battle spells doom for any war story.



That's about it, I think. Hope that helps you.

Tactics and strategies and technologies are all fine and good, but when I think of scenes that I saw as "realistic," when I was reading them, I think of scenes that get down to brass tacks. Things that readers do not consider when they start thinking about such a scene themselves. These bits of detail (I call them insider information) don't even actually need to be *real* in order to work, but they need to be believable.

Some items that come to mind: the depth of rivers and waterways that might need to be crossed and/or used as natural barriers; the season and expected weather; the amount of food available vs. the amount required to sustain an army of a given size for a period of time; train schedules; disposal of bodies; wages for troops; the list goes on and on, I'm sure.

Individual preparations also present an opportunity for this kind of detail. An experienced campaigner might make the purchase of several extra pairs of good socks, a personal supply of sugar or fruit, or perhaps secure a supply of ammunition for a non-standard weapon he intends to use (sidearms in particular seem commonly to be individual choices). One less experienced could blow a pile of money on a pair of fine new boots, or possibly even some protective talisman.

The point, in a scene like that, is to show the reader something new and unexpected. War is outside the reader's experience, and so it should be alien in some way. Of course, because war is outside the reader's experience, most anything will do.

Play some Total War games. Among other concepts that will get hammered into your skull....

High ground is almost everything. The last thing you ever want to do is order an infantry charge uphill.

Payroll is everything even more. Fielding a full stack or three of killer troops requires an ungodly amount of income. Which makes low-quality garrison troops a must in order to allow your field armies to have a shot in hell of winning.

Mercenaries can turn a lone general into a ravaging horde overnight. You have to pay them- a LOT- but they work well, especially in augmentation to what you've already got. Merc crossbows in Medieval II are a must for factions lacking long-range missile punch.

Shock cavalry can end a battle in one stroke if you use them well, especially against lighter foes.

On the other hand, entrenched spearmen can end your shock cavalry very quickly. And cavalry are no good against walls. You need artillery or enough quality infantry to make a painful assault. Or you can just try and wait it out, though it does take LONG while against well-fortified places.

Horse archers are a pain in the butt against you, and an infinitely abusive weapon for you, assuming you've enough patience to make them pay off.

Or you could just study the Thirty Years War. As a blend of both medieval and more modern tactics, as well as a lesson on strategy and politics, I can't think of a better conflict.... Massively screwed-up.

I think it depends on your story. War can be very big OR very small. Just think about it this way, if you are writing about an epic tale like Romance of the three kingdom with load and load of characters, yes, you should think more about strategy.

but if it's about the tale of a hero, it can be in a smaller scale, like you put him on a mission or something. A big war is made up by many small story like that. Remember WW2? There are hundred thousand of stories, including novels, movies, video games talk about it and each told a different story. You don't need to think too big too cope with the scale of your war.

Talk to some veterans. Those who I've worked with in the past have said that war does not lend itself to reflection. On the battlefield, there is only the forward motion of the battle. Most of their memories of battle were of the initial engagement, the death of their friends, and being frightened.

If this civilization lives on an island, it is unlikely that anyone remains untouched by the war. The (perhaps) logical progression of war is only seen by those watching CNN, where a narrative is built, not those in the midst of it.