pphalen | 30 May 2007 6:30 a.m. PST |
I see the weavers have played: TMP link Any descriptions, throughts on the game would be appreciated (ir is on my Historicon "Watch" list) |
Rudysnelson | 30 May 2007 7:19 a.m. PST |
The Mcbrides were running some games at nashcon. It looked very enjoyable. |
Rodrick Campbell | 30 May 2007 7:23 a.m. PST |
David (Splintered Light Miniatures) put on a demo game for a few of us at Cold Wars. The discaimer here is that I DO sculpt for him, but I am VERY picky about the game systems I play. This one still has some rough edges to it and there are some things I would tweak for my own gaming, but over all, Pride of Lions rocks. One of my buddies here is still going on about the game. I'd definitely put it on the watch list and would even suggest that you go ahead and jump in a game if you can. It's easy to learn the mechanics and it's fast, fluid and fun. It's also highly adaptable to historical battles. I believe they are doing a Mount Badon game at Historicon. I'm not sure how close they are to a final copy or what I can really say about the mechanics. So I'll leave any actual disclosure of the nuts and bolts up to David and his dad. Rod |
pphalen | 30 May 2007 7:49 a.m. PST |
Any additional details on the rules/mechanincs? This description piqued my interest: Rules feature simple mechanics and lots of decisions (and dice rolling) by players. |
louboy06 | 30 May 2007 8:02 a.m. PST |
I thought this would be a Millwall FC thread
|
mweaver | 30 May 2007 8:02 a.m. PST |
I really enjoyed the Pride of Lions game, and I recommend it. First, there were a huuuge number of figures on the table, all nicely painted, so it was a game pleasing to the eye. The six sides were run by Doc and David McBride, me and brother Jim, Cloud Captain and a fellow whose name I didn’t catch (but he seemed like a nice fellow). David was on our left flank facing the lad I don’t know (David seemed to have a Halfling/sylvan sort of force, vs a beastmanish force – didn’t have a chance to look at that side of the battle much); Jim held our side with a leonide force (the Shadow Pride, I think it was called), which faced off against Doc’s undead force; and I held our right flank with a second lionide force (Sun Pride), facing Cloud Captain’s dastardly hyena force. Our side pushed to a fairly strong victory: I don’t know exactly how things played out on our left flank, but our woolands force apparently gave the beastieboys a thumping; on our right flank, I actually had a Cunning Plan, and it _worked_(a highly unusual combination for me) – I left about 60% of my force – the infantry – to hold CC’s horde, and sent all of my cavalry rushing at the undead to support Jim’s assault. This tactic put pressure on Doc’s necromancers, one of whom promptly blew himself up trying to gain more control of the situation (more on this later – but basically Real Bad Luck on Doc’s behalf). CC tried to close as quickly as possible, but his force didn’t have any cavalry, so it required some hard slogging. By the time he closed with my holding force and began ripping chunks out of it, my cavalry (lion centaurs and lions, mainly) had chewed through a chunk of Doc’s undead – including the second of his three necromancers – and was coming back around to hit CC’s hyenas in the rear. Meanwhile, Jim’s Shadow Pride had successfully crossed the river and taken the heights, inflicting some heavy casualties on the undead as well. We called the game after about two and a half to three hours of very fun play. Doc designed his rules to be straight forward and simple, but fun – and I think he has succeeded. Units have a die strength, ranging (if modifiers are included) from d4s to d24 – the strongest unit I had before modifiers were d20s (the lion centaurs). When you attack a unit, you make opposed die rolls with your unit’s die vs. the enemy’s die – so when my lion centaurs hit some undead knights, my base roll was a d20 (upgraded to a d24 because I was charging downhill) and Doc’s base roll was a d20 (modified to a d16 because the unit was disrupted from just crossing a river). Results depend on the opposed die roll, and range from simply pushing the losing unit back an inch to annihilating all three stands. If you knock out one of the three stands of a unit, that unit loses a dice level of effectiveness (for example, if my lion centaur unit lost one of its three stands, its base die strength would become a d16). There aren’t so many modifiers that it becomes complicated to keep up with. You don’t have to worry about how the unit is armed and armored, since those factors were taken into account when the unit’s die level was determined. The only exception I saw to that rule was with the archers, who can of course do ranged fire. We had semi-blind set up at the start – a simple but effective system where we had had strips of cardboard the size of our units for each unit (with the unit’s name and stats on them, so they could double as play aids later), plus several “blanks”, all of which had our army’s name on them on one side. Everyone simultaneously deployed their troops by placing these strips on the table, army name up, and when we were done we flipped the strips and placed the real units where their strips were and removed the blank ones. Orders are assigned secretly to each unit at the start of each game turn, and then revealed simultaneously. There were enough order options to provide some interesting variety, but not so many that they became confusing. Movement was also pretty straight forward – units with “aggressive” movement orders – like “rush” and “charge” – moved first and simultaneously (if two units were charging each other, you just had them meet in the middle, basically, although if you had a slower unit and a faster unit charging each other, you could easily have the clash moved more to the slower unit’s side). After the aggressive units move, you move the other units. Then you resolve combat. The magic system seemed a little rough still. I won’t describe them in detail, since I suspect they will have changed a fair amount by Historicon (the rules are a work in progress). After a little experimentation, I stopped trying to cast spells and used my shaman to suck magic points away from Doc’s necromancers. I did like the way necromancy worked: each necromancer generated a d20 worth of points that could be used to give orders to troops (without orders undead units are only d4 effective), cast spells, or summon new troops. A necromancer can roll a second d20 for additional points and add those points to the first d20 roll – but if the same number is rolled both times, the necromancer sort of blows up (which happened to one of Doc’s necromancers very early on, which really put the undead army in a tight spot). A necromancer can keep rolling d20s for magic points as long as he wants, until he rolls a number he has already rolled, at which point he is a goner. In short, I think the rules make for a fast and furious game, and one which I enjoyed a great deal. If I was going to Historicon, I would sign up for it again! |
mweaver | 30 May 2007 8:04 a.m. PST |
Happy to answer additional questions as best I can – or to clarify any of the above post. And yes, they are planning on a Badon Hill game at Historicon. |
pphalen | 30 May 2007 8:23 a.m. PST |
What is a d24? So for the opposed roll mechaninc, the difference between the rolls dictates the severity of the loss? |
mweaver | 30 May 2007 8:43 a.m. PST |
They had both d24s and d16s. I think the sequence was d24s, d20s, d16s, d12s, d10s, d8s, d6s, and d4s. "So for the opposed roll mechaninc, the difference between the rolls dictates the severity of the loss?" Yes. I remember Doc said that if both sides were rolling d24s or d20s, they had started shifting the rolls for that clash to d12s/d10s, since they had found otherwise large units were more likely to be trashed quickly than smaller units (since the spread on those dice are greater, there is more chance of larger differences between the rolls). |
cloudcaptain | 30 May 2007 8:45 a.m. PST |
d24 are available for purchase in lots of places: link They look like a more complex d20 :) You are spot on with the difference between the rolls. It determines the outcome. This can be pushed back, stand loss, morale changes, or combinations thereof. I don't normally do large battles due to the complexity of the rules (FR3 hurts my brain) but Pride of Lions was straight forward and still left me with tons of choices to make. Prior to playing I had sworn off 15mm completely. I left Nashcon with 4 15mm fantasy armies
|
doc mcb | 30 May 2007 8:51 a.m. PST |
Wow! Just reading this at work. Thanks, guys. Mweaver, that's an excellent summary of play. I'll add a lot more to this thread when I get home in a couple of hours. (I'm starting a summer school class today -- have to pay for Historicon!) |
Splintered Light Miniatures | 30 May 2007 9:07 a.m. PST |
pphalen, Send me an email at splinteredlightminis@earthlink.net and I can forward it to doc mcb, so you can get a copy of the rules. We are going to have them on the website relatively soon (of course, we have been saying that for the last couple of months!). Any playtesting and thoughts would be greatly appreciated. I will let dad add to the thread when he gets home since he is the mastermind behind the rules. I just make the toys to play them with! We would love to have you sign up for the Mt Badon game and dad will also be running demo games on Friday (I think) with the fantasy figures. David |
doc mcb | 30 May 2007 9:38 a.m. PST |
Anyone else who wants a preliminary look at the rules, feel free to email splinteredlightminis@earthlink.net and I'll send you the files. What is mainly lacking in what I can send right away is the "illustrations of play" that I still need to convert into downloadable files. Without face-to-face demo, those pictures are very helpful. Now that school is out David and I will get the rules posted at the SLM website in a matter of weeks. |
doc mcb | 30 May 2007 9:45 a.m. PST |
At Historicon on Friday I'll be doing a learn-the-rules demo from 11 to 2 and again from 6 to 9. It'll be a 5 minute explanation and then a walk-through several turns with players learning by doing, getting advice, and being allowed to go back and correct big mistakes. Then those who want can face off and do a for-real game. Mount Badon is Thursday and Saturday, don't recall times. Same rules, except for magic. |
Eric Burgess | 30 May 2007 9:47 a.m. PST |
I have played Pride of Lions at Siege of Augusta and had a really good time. Lots of eye candy. Lots of decisions with ordes and what magic to cast. I like that the magic is "favored" to the army\species they represent. I'll be attempting to get into one of the games at Historicon. - Eric |
doc mcb | 30 May 2007 10:41 a.m. PST |
I should apologize again to Cloud Captain -- and I'm glad he enjoyed himself in spite of my goofs -- because I put him out on the flank with an army with no cavalry, and also no effective offensive magic. Of course, my skeletons paid the price of my blunder . . . . Here's the basic shamanic magic system: spells have a degree of difficulty, from an easy 3 to a difficult 10. A shaman announces the spell and rolls a D20; if he beats the difficulty, the spell succeeds. If he fails to beat the difficulty, his turn ends. If he cast the first spell successfully, he can try again, except that fatigue has now lowered his power die to D16. If that second spell also succeeds, he can keep trying, with his power die lowered again each time. A shaman can cast spells each turn, beginning each time with a D20 power. However, anytime a shaman rolls the maximum possible (i.e 20 on a D20, 16 on a D16, etc.) he suffers a "brainburn"; the spell works, but his turn ends, and the power surge reduces his starting die level by one. The essence of spell strategy is choosing between easy/weak and hard/powerful, as well as knowing when to stop. There's also ways to mess with opposing shaman through either reducing their die rolls or INCREASING their die rolls with a view towards producing a brainburn and a permanent lowering of their power. Necromancers, as mweaver noted, have a different system, but they too must choose between the safe and (in my case) the sorry end of being torn apart by a demon as a result of pushing their luck. |
doc mcb | 30 May 2007 10:50 a.m. PST |
Another comment about the look of the game and the ease of play: Units are 3 stands, 40x40, set in a single movement tray. So while a Saxon king (one of three) at Mount Badon is going to have 170 or so figures, he only has to issue orders to and then move ten trays. I also never liked rules that forced me to play fiddly traffic cop, and so interpenetration is pretty easy. This has the added benefit of encouraging by rewarding depth of deployment. |
jweaver | 30 May 2007 4:47 p.m. PST |
Both of my first games at this kind of scale were this weekend at Nashcon (one WarMaster and the Pride of Lions scenario), so I cannot speak from experience – but the PoL mechanics seemed simple to learn and a lot of fun. I would never have been able to play WarMaster with Parzival with a similar amount of time explaining the rules if I wasn't already very familiar with GW mechanics from playing their 28mm rulesets. That said, the WarMaster experience was pretty fun as well. |
cloudcaptain | 30 May 2007 5:53 p.m. PST |
No worries Doc
I had a great time getting to play against mweaver and it was a learning experience for both of us. 10 more rounds and I would have had that Giant all over their backfield!! |
mweaver | 30 May 2007 8:10 p.m. PST |
|
mweaver | 31 May 2007 5:44 a.m. PST |
Another example of the simple-but-interesting design of the rules that I forgot when making my original comments is the use of heroes. Except for the spell-casters, heroes only have one function – they can allow the unit they are with to reroll their die in a melee
but if the second number is an odd number, the hero is dead. Doc's explanation is that the hero has done something heroic and flashy to inspire the troopies (head-butting the enemy unit's C.O., peeing on the enemy standard, or whatever), and that there is a 50% chance they died as a consequence. A simple rule, but I used it to good effect in the game (and lost two of my heroes, by the way). |
doc mcb | 31 May 2007 7:32 a.m. PST |
In the Nashcon game we didn't use commanders -- the general and subordinate captains -- who are actually the ones issuing orders. But the rules for commanders give them not only command ability, but also permit them to fight in the front rank and so inspire the unit and raise its die level. (Heroes are assumed to be fighting in the front rank routinely.) However, a general who is fighting in the front rank cannot issue orders from there, and if he leaves the fighting to go back behind the unit where he CAN issue orders, his departure triggers a morale check. |
doc mcb | 31 May 2007 7:36 a.m. PST |
Generals can also do rerolls, and come with a bodyguard who takes the first kill. So a general can reroll with only a 25% chance of death. Losing your general, however, is a very bad thing . . . Generally speak (sorry), I've tried to balance risk and reward throughout the rules, particularly in the magic and the character aspects. |
Troilus | 31 May 2007 8:32 a.m. PST |
These sound like great rules! What size armies are they made for (in figure terms)? It sounds as though they are for pretty big armies. Would they work for armies with several dozen figures on each side? Thank you! |
doc mcb | 31 May 2007 8:51 a.m. PST |
Troilus, they are designed for battles between armies. We play with armies (per player -- and they work well in games with three or four players to a side) of about eight to twelve units. A unit is three stands (40x40mm bases) of figures. We put 6 15mm infantry to a base, so a typical unit is 18 figures. Cavalry 3 figures per base, or two per base for light cavalry. loose order infantry is 4 per base. There's no reason other than aesthetics why you couldn't play with fewer minis per base, but they aren't really intended for skirmish games. We've done Battle of the Five Armies from THE HOBBIT with great success, with up to a dozen kids playing, and a thousand minis on the table. |
GeoffQRF | 12 May 2008 2:34 p.m. PST |
Ooh, just found this. Now I need time to read it, then I need David to get it out by Historicon! |
streetline | 14 May 2008 5:38 a.m. PST |
And thanks to Geoff bumping the thread, I found it too! Lovelly. Can we get copies of the rules? |
cloudcaptain | 08 Aug 2008 11:29 a.m. PST |
The Yahoo group will be opening for POL shortly. Its there currently, but its not ready to be moderated quite yet. I will post an announcement when we go live. |
dar916 | 17 Jun 2009 7:49 a.m. PST |
|
Splintered Light Miniatures | 17 Jun 2009 8:14 a.m. PST |
It has temporarily taken a back seat as dad has been getting the Song of the Splintered Lands rules done. |
kragon | 21 Aug 2009 7:01 a.m. PST |
Checking in to see if there are any updates on when these or when the yahoo group will be up. |