The Warchief overshadows the PC's

Not to be disparaging, but it sounds like there was some miscommunication at the start of the campaign as to character goals, intentions and in game implications. You're past that now, though, so just focus on moving forward. I'm not a 5e player myself, so addressing the issue mechanically is out for me, but....

I do like the idea of actually having to deal with the burden of logistics for 100 armed men, so long as it isn't interfering with normal game play for the other players. If the Bard misses out on a night in the tavern that the other PCs RP out because he is haggling over a wagon of grain, that can keep the other players engaged and center stage.

100 attack rolls in battle ensures some degree of success, just like 100 saving throws will ensure some degree of failure. Just like real medieval armies, disease can be a BIG problem...


Getting to know 100 NPCs intimately is going to be difficult, even for a charismatic Bard. Perhaps the ranks are infiltrated by foes who turn against the party and other knights during a pivotal encounter.

The NPC knights are just that, NPCs. If the player is playing them as hive minded slaves that are reacting to his whims with perfect accuracy and without hesitation, that is a huge break from how large units actually fight. Either the DM should be dictating their battle actions or the Bard and/or other commanders should be using their actions to command the large group, with a possibility of failure. It's 3.5e, but you might get some ideas for "unit" fighting from the Heroes of Battle splat book... It could at least give you some ideas for how commands might break down and bring some fog of war to these large battles the PC is creating.

Dissent in the ranks could be a major problem too. Are 5 knights killed every time the PC goes on a "mission" and the PC comes back healed up with a pile of loot? They swore to protect the Bard (or whatever), not be cattle-esque human shields. Does 5e have any sort of modifiers to follower count like 3e had for leadership feat? Scrutinizing those a little more closely might give the Bard an incentive not to bring the whole army to everything he does.

Thanks @jesse Ross and 00dlez! 

You're not disparaging at all 00dlez, but good point.  This group is 2 years into these PC's now, and at the start they were all brand new to D&D and tabletop RPG games except my 1 friend playing the wizard in the group.  Session 0 was very unfulfilling for me, because they didn't really know what they wanted out of the game yet until we played and they learned what they liked and got to know their characters a little better.  So this is me focusing on moving forward:

His bard could very well become the BBEG for the next campaign after we conclude this one, but for now, the main campaign is facing total planar collapse and extinction so they (the PC's) view this half-orc bard (his PC) and his army as a means to an end to save the world from the current BBEG.  They've turned a blind eye to what his domination of the material plane could become.....I've considered this and have started outlining what the world might be like in 100-200 years if orcs took over as the most populous and common race in my homebrew setting.

As for elaborating more on the NPCs...its overwhelming.  He has more than just 100 knights, but also 6000 normal orcs that follow him as well.  Another PC in the group became the king of a dwarvish mountain and has ~10,000 dwarves at his disposal but he keeps no honor guards and trusts the governing to a council of advisers.  The dwarf PC even fleshed out the NPC's for who his council members were and everything. It was an RP success.

When the half-orc bard seized control of his army, he didn't view it as RP opportunity, but a #'s game at that point.  He spent all of his gold and platinum to outfit his 100 knights with mithril weapons.  Most of all, he's afraid to lose his knights. But I don't want to take them from him just because he's using them the way he wants too and not the way I (or the group) want him too.

For the Morale and Mass Combat mechanics, I speed things up with the 5e "Handling Mobs" table from the DMG and the new 5e UA Mass Combat mechanics to not bog the game down in logistics.

However, the UA is only 2 weeks old and not balanced by our playtest. And the Handling Mobs table warns that it can quickly become very unbalanced if the #'s favor one side.

Eureka! I think I figured it out!
PC combat rounds are 6 seconds long.
Mass combat rounds are 1 minute long.  If he wants to use his 6 second action to command a unit of troops to do something, it sounds reasonable that the unit of troops won't receive the orders-->get organized-->then attack until 10 normal combat rounds later.  That could set up some good RP like:
[Start boss fight] 2 rounds in, party is getting nervous.
[Bard calls for reinforcements or instructs a tactical attack or ambush to help the PC's] I as DM notify the players that Thokk's knights are on their way and will be here to help in 10 rounds!

I might try this out next. If this doesn't work, I may have to focus on his NPC's more to mess with him as per both of your suggestions. I've avoided doing this so far because Thokk already has enough time in the spotlight and trying to mess with him and his army in this way will just give him more "stage-time" on game day than the other PC's which is part of what I'm trying to avoid.

This could be a great opportunity if you all are planning to wrap up the campaign anyway. 2 PCs already have grand armies/settlements under their belts, I think it's a great idea to encourage the other PCs to pursue a world changing legacy and then fast forward... 1000 years? And see what has happened to the world as a result.

It doesn't have to be based on armies or settlement building - the wizard for examples could devote his years to founding a wizard school, or maybe researching a world changing spell - something akin to floating cities or the network of portals from 3e forgotten realms.

The next campaign can focus on the results of the current PCs actions, for better or worse, intended or unintended! You could even make this intention known and let the players craft their legacy.


In the meantime, it sounds like you have some new ideas to keep the encounters engaging. Another thought I had was to shift some of the action away from strict combat and maybe bring in "skill challenges" (a 4e term, easily adapted to any version though).

While the knights fight mobs, the wizard may need to use magic to disable a device, or identify some specific spells he can use to do very specialized tasks (trap a demons soul in a jade box, sealing or opening a planar portal, channeling his magic through a device that turns it into a devastating weapon, etc). Not sure about the rest of the party, but whatever those classes excel and specialize in, throw in some aspects that only they can handle, even if it's not combat... Assuming of course your players would like that sort of thing. Not everyone will, and that's fine too.

Also Mithral weapons? Did you brew that up? What do they do...

Also you let him buy 100+ magic items what were you thinking? There's a reason the DMG only gives rarity, it's to allow you to control supply. My PCs couldn't give me enough gold for me to hand out that much magic...