I do not know enough about Kublai Khan and his conquests to know if he did this, but the first place I was made aware of the tactic was in the saga of Harald Hardrada.

According to the Heimskringla, a 12th century Icelandic epic saga written by Snorri Sturluson, Harald Hardrada, who would become King of Norway, was a Varangian in the service of the Byzantines.

Among his great achievements was a series of conquests in Sicily. According to the Heimskringla, when faced with a city he could not breach, Harald Hardrada ordered his men to capture as many birds as he could, then send them, carrying splinters of tarred and smoking wood, back to their nests where they started to engulf the city in flames.

As the saga goes, the people eventually rushed from the city and begged for mercy.

This is one of several great conquests the Saga attributes to Harald, who predominently used guile and cunning to seize surprising victories. In one instance he feigned his own death to make his camp seem as though it was in disarray to embolden the defenders and cause them to slack their defenses.

After feigning his death for several days and showing them his body, the Varangians struck and seized the city for the Byzantines.

Now the issue is that while this was accepted as essentially dogma in the 19th century, there was a sharp uptick in criticism of the sagas in the 20th century. The writer was not a contemporary of Harald and there's little other evidence to suggest any of this actually happened outside of the stories herein.

It seems more likely that these are legends and myths attributed to one of Norway's kings, rather than actual events that transpired.

But if I had to guess, I would say Harald's myth was the inspiration for this particular piece of fiction. Most of Harald's myths are fascinating pieces of historical fantasy that make for excellent drama and are surefire ways (tested and proven for 700 years) to engage your audience with a character's cunning.