Scribbled in an elegant hand "Tactical Insight and Knowledge of a well versed General, Senior Magus Azal Vrask"

Welcome to the book of tactical teachings.

If you are reading such, you have already failed.

True tactics are not learned, but lived.

Get off your ass, and experience a true battle.

As you lose, you will learn to recover and prevent such failings in the future.

Once more scribbled in a fine hand

Welcome back to the Book of Tactical Teachings.

You're persistent. What's wrong? Scared of death?

Seeking some secret formula to win every battle?

Such is not tactics. Tactics can be flawed. Tactics can be beaten.

Tactics simply increases your and your troops' chances of of survival.

There is no "Godly Tactic' that cannot be countered. There is no end game. It is move, counter-move, counter-counter-move, counter-counter-counter move, and so on.

You simply have to hope that he slips up, for fails to see a subtlety of your tactic enough to allow you a crushing blow against his forces, moral, etc.

For Example.

As a Thayvian Magii, Battle was relentless. A Phalanx, a standard tactic of warriors, simply a wall of shields, fighting your foes, who usually also adopted a wall of shields. At this point, the two shield walls met in the middle of a battlefield.

But what happens next?

You stand by, shooting a crossbow blindly, and watching your men fight? Hardly. Such is not a tactic for mages. As Mages are generally the most intelligent, insightful, and most disconnected from combat, The key duty of any mage is to assess the situation before implementing his own strategy.

When two walls of men meet, and begin to shove and slash at each other, there are a few things to take into consideration.

1) Their endurance. How long can your men hold the line, unassisted? Are they out-numbered? Are they tired from months of campaigning? Are they starving due to a lack of supplies?

The Concept of "A wall of shields" is something that often appeals to many Magii, As it allows them to stand idly by, be it invisible or otherwise, and appraise the situation. 90% of battles are won off the field. Espionage. Feints. Ambushes. Rebellion. Desertion.These things all take place off a battlefield, yet cant have supreme impact on any conflict. If you kill a general the eve before a battle, the troups are rattled. Their determined leader is gone. If you destroy their weapon's cache, they are left with feeble tools. If you disrupt their supply routes, they are left starving. Each can have a massive impact upon the conflict. Attacking an enemy's mental, or physical endurance, before the battle, is something that will effect the outcome greatly. If your troops are in perfect form, well fed, well armed, and mentally prepared, the battle will most definetly go in your favor.

2) Moral. Something often akin to Endurance, Moral of your men is paramount to any victory. Are you overlooking the carnage from a ledge? Are you hiding under a sheath of invisibility, barking orders? Are you on the line, dispatching foes while magically enhanced? A leader's position on the field says much of his faith in his troops, all of which can effect moral.

If a leader holds camp a far distance away, what does it say to his men? "Yes, You're all grand warriors, But i'll ah...just be over here...just in case". Such doubt in a man's army can be more harmful than a dagger to the gullet.

Conversely, A close camp can amp up the enemy, their bloodlust likely for you personally, and you being almost in reach, will give them more emphasis to take the battle into their hands, break through the lines, and make their way for you.

Sadly there is no answer to this. However a visible leader, who at times partake in combat, Shows your men that you are "One of them", willing to lay your life on the line for the same cause they are, which brings me to the ultimate point.

3) The terms of Conflict. What are your men fighting for? Statistically, combating for something they -believe- in deeply, have served their life for, and are willing to die for to see accomplished, is what makes Holy warriors so dangerous compared to Mercenary hirings. A man fighting for coin, against a man who feels the presence of a deity deep inside him, is naturally going to be fighting for his life.

However, there are a few things that can trump Divinity.

Duress, Freedom, Power.

A man, who is told "Fight or I shall lay waste to your village, personally cranking the neck of your wife and children", while enraging, is more likely to turn the man against you.

A better tactic to raise an army, is to kill a unit of your foe's army, take the equipment, outfit your soldiers with it, and raid a near-bye village. Have some of your men show up, drive them out (Not killing, for you need all your soldiers), and then they are seen as heroes. Others will be eager to throttle those who dare attacked their village, and eagerly join your ranks. The most important aspect is the -secretive- aspect. Should your plot be discovered, the village will eagerly turn on you, and perhaps help your foe the way they had helped you.

The issue of Freedom, is something that often is earned. Freedom of faith, freedom to make a family, freedom to do as you wish. Such often comes in two forms I've discovered. Power, And Coin. One often leads to the other, and vice versa. However, if a man is enslaved, and you offer him a route of out his slavery, You can bolster your army exponentially. They will not be the best trained warriors, be due to their lack of combat, or their long term slavery, but a body is a body on the battlefield, and if it is in your colors, there is at least the overwhelming numbers tactic, or the use of slaves fighting for their freedom as fodder, using them to distract the main lines in a false attack, while your real soldiers make break for the rear of the line.

Last, But Not least, is Power. The aspect of "Fight for me and you shall be powerful" is a lovely harmony that those in power use to lure those in horrible situations to fight for them. The lust for power is a powerful thing. Those who wish it, often do anything in their power to get such, if they know they can get away with it. Human nature, I suppose. However the aspect of "Fighting for a powerful man to get power" is akin to riding a man's coat tails. It is a wise tactic, to get men to fight for you, but if a man truly wishes power, he will do whatever he can to achieve such. Which usually leads to double-crossing.

Trust, is what needs to be maintained. Never trust your soldiers, but earn theirs. Those without, yearn for. Such is the case for anything. Beautiful wife, Coin, Power, Successful children. While the tactics stated above can be seen as "Barbaric", or "Cowardly" or "Dastardly", The winner is the one who spreads the tales. Kill all those who oppose you, and you can tell the masses whatever you wish, in terms of the tactics you used.

If none survived to witness, but an army is slaughtered, what stops you from saying a single man did such?

If you wish to win, you will do everything in your power to see such done. "Ethics" of war are what individuals cling to in attempt to take the "Moral high ground", so they can claim themselves better to you. Allow them to think such. It is a powerful tool. Let them think such, and wipe the smug grin from their face, personally, on the battlefield.

[Scribbled in a fine hand yet again]

A few helpful proverbs:

Never show mercy.

Never give quarter.

Accept nothing but total victory

Strike first, Strike Often.

It is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission.

Hold no Ruth, Be ruthless.

Serve your men well, and they'll serve you.

Fight aside your men, and they'll fight for you.

Live to Fight, and you'll survive your fights.

And the most important thing to remember:

Soldiers. Soldiers may change in skill Blades. Blades may change in quality Spells. Spells may change in power Tactics. Tactics may change in effectiveness. However- War. War Never changes.

[A thin layer of dust is peeled off the cover]

In war, it is usual to be hated by your foes. Embrace the hatred. Make it your tool. Through your influence, you can spread such hatred to others, and nothing forms bonds like mutual hatred.

Crush a neutral man's public image, then offer him salvation through your workings, and any so called "Leader" can be made into an ally and friend. For you are both hated together, and while you may be well used to the hatred of mortals, he is not, and in time will come to you in confidence hoping for solace.

Offer it to him, and you shall gain not only a pawn, but in time perhaps a Lieutenant.

I give you the example of two hypothetical warring villages for your consideration.

The first village is outfitted with the finest, shiniest armor, where children play happily and everyone pretends to enjoy their life. The other is a graveyard, rife with history of bloodshed, corruption, and decay.

Which village is more worth it? The well equipped, well rounded? Or the desolate Nihlistics who want nothing more than coin or bloodshed?

It is an interesting thing, the choices we make.

But in the end, Who says a choice must be made?

If you are able to ghost through both, does it not mean you're more free than a man who picks either side?

Neutrality may leave you hated by both, but hatred is easy to overcome in at least a few me. For while there are always those of public opinion, there are those who disagree.

Such is the beauty of opinion.

War is not a beast of man. Something to be controlled and guided. It is Chaos. It is horror. It is conflict. You can control it as much as a mortal can predict where a tree grows in the desert. We can only give hints and advice, and see to it that what we wish required occurs.

The Dogs of War travel where they wish, but we can always leave a few pieces of steak along a path to lead it in a direction we wish.

A dog on each side of the fence, leaves you to place steaks wherever you wish, and see to it that your goals are reached.

The finest way to win a war, is to have nothing to lose, but have allies that have everything to lose. For then you can see the whole picture, that which they cannot, and make your choice.

Help them win, and reap the rewards, but be seen as the enemy in the eyes of their foes?

Use your insight to cripple them, so their foes win, but be seen as an enemy in the eyes of they?

Such are the choices to be made for any considering Neutral. Lives will be lost, but the issue is not the number of lives lost, but how many you have to spare, so your side feels less impacted.

The wealthy side can offer great fortune, status, prestige, and other things men's souls dream of.

The poorer side offers you freedom.

Such is what I have learned in these villages.

Men above and below have marked their territory, and bleed and die daily for it. Even when there is peace, there is war in the shadows.

One rich man gets mugged and decides to take it out publicly campaigning the re-absorption of the poorer village.

One poor man is berated publicly and embarrassed by a rich man and is forced to run him through to save face. The man's family in turn heads out to find the poor man and run him through for vengeance.

But the question is, when you are not a fanatical freedom fighter, or a jaded warrior for a rich lord.

Where are the rest of us supposed to stand?

Where opportunity strikes?

Where we believe we can make the most but lose the least?

Do we choose based on our friendships?

Do we choose based on who we hate?

The reasons for dragging a third party to war are few and far between.

The only advice I can give, as a third party neutral, is that no matter what you do, do it one hundred percent.

For while either side may hate you, for whatever reason you have, to double cross a man brings fury stronger than any imaginable, if you lead his army to defeat, or are the reason his army dies.

But, that is only if the man you betray lives.

War has many faces, and equally as many sides.

As you can see from this reading, nothing is ever set in stone, and whatever your reason for war,

You still join regardless.

It is impossible for that man to remain neutral. Our bodies seem hard-tied to war.

The trick is to see how to draw in the neutral third party, and have them assist you in conquest while making it worthwhile to them.

The neutral are always dragged in.

Be it helping out by smithing a weapon.

Making a few gold off of selling wands.

Not every soldier is wearing the armor, but every potential citizen could be.

And that is why people either are afraid of war, or embrace it and thrive on it.

In a sense, War is what brings humanity together.

Working for a common cause.

Sending those you hate to the hells.

The trick is, fooling or bribing we, the neutrals with power, to assist you in the process. Bringing your allies and citizens to war is simple. A few speeches, kiss a few babies, explain to them that the foe is greater than any ever faced. But for while you may have your side, we do not. For us to fall in line you must be expertly persuasive, be it through persuasion or coercion.

Be your war one of light, dark, or what have you, The collective psyche of existence is one of choices.

You just have to make our choice easier than your enemy does, and the common neutral shall join your ranks.

As for the uncommon neutral, the man of power who wishes nothing, and has his public image already crushed, but has managed to find power outside politics and war, he is a harder soldier to enlist, and an even harder Lieutenant or General to join your cause-

And a chapter for another time.