"New WRG company to be formed, new DBA in the pipeline?" Topic

Phil Barker posted this overnight on the DBMM list – should be good for WRG fan's for them to come into the 21st century! :)

At a meeting on the 31st October (an appropriate date you might think), it was agreed that a new company will be created to publish new editions of existing WRG rules and books and new rule sets that would formerly have been printed under the WRG banner.

This has become necessary since Paul Bailey has both lost faith in hard copy publishing and claims the old company Reg Games (Sussex) Ltd cannot finance new printings, copyrights therefore reverting to the authors.

The new company will be refinanced and will have 4 directors:
Phil Barker.
Sue Laflin-Barker.
Steven Bowns (who owns a military consultancy company), who will be company secretary.
Nigel Spinks (who is on the staff at Henley and specialises in layout and graphics).
Both Steve and Nigel are long time wargamers and were officers in the Royal Anglians. Some of you will have met them at DBMM events.

The company will have a name as close as possible to WRG and use WRG as a trade mark. It will have quarterly board meetings and quarterly financial reports. Its commercial policy will be unrestricted sales and no advertising of other wargaming products. All of the directors are primarily interested in spreading the rules rather than profit, and profits will be ploughed back into extending the range.
Royalties to external authors will be increased from former levels to 10% of retail (not net) price (5% for internal authors).

The first products will be:
Horse, Foot & Guns.
Sharp End
DBMM 2.0
DBA 3.0
DBR 3.0

We will be using print on demand and quite small runs. We want to out-source trade distribution and welcome proposals. Failing that, we will provide single sales via Amazon.

the cross posting to various boards is because the rules noted above are all new or new versions, and so are probably of interest to some.

Sharp End is his low level modern ruleset that has had some interesting battle reports ceom from it, Horse Foot Guns is his grand tactical 17-early 20th century set – IIRC both are available on his website.

and this little snippet about DBA for its fans:

Sue wants me to tell you that DBA 3.0 will be accompanied by an all-singing, all dancing, colour companion called START WARGAMING with DBA. This will have the same role as the old much-loved Purple Primer with advice on painting, terrain making, and a sample DBA game pictured at each stage.

I applaud this move and look forward to WRG moving in the new century.

Cheers,

I hope DBA 3.0 armies are structured more like HOTT, rather than just 12 elements.

A long awaited move . A lot of wargamers will very happy.

I hope they are not, no offense. Long live the 12 elements!

pdfs

Let's see:

DBA, with points (hopefully) but still about 50 figures
Readable rules
High production value book with lots of eye candy.

Oh yeah, sign me up.

A new DBA? The old one still works well enough, but I think this will be a must-buy for me.

Good luck to the new company. A way to get DBA locally would be wonderful for our club – it is very popular but the current distributors have nothing. The Amazon solution would be fine for us.

I understand the conflict, but a simple "thank you" to the Baileys for many long years of handling their end of this enterprise would have been a gracious note.

Allen

Thought the same Allen. Not sure if copyright reverts to the authors just because the publisher can't/won't publish copies, but there's probably some contract they have that covers this.

Keen to see if they can make the writing comprehensible.

I wonder who holds the copyright for George Gush's 1420-1700 rules then?

And PB doesn't do 'gracious'. He's a Brummie.

Sorry Howard

Phil and Sue were quite gracious when we visited them in Birmingham (tho' I wouldn't stay at that B&B down the road again) and they went around the Welsh Borders with us. That was before I was a WAB persona non grata (sigh).

It would be really nice to see all the "Armies and Enemies' series updated and in print again, although I suspect that's not likely. Some had become unavailable because the masters had been lost and Paul had not grokked what could be done with a scanner.

Allen

It's a Black Country thing.

As far as any copyright issues for the Armies and Enemies series go. Well, it keeps the lawyers in holiday homes in Tuscany I suppose…

It reverts to the authors – Duncan Had has indicated he's not particularly intersted in a reprint of AMPW when PB suggested it on the DBMM list…aparently PB thinks it is still better than the latest offering on the era he'd just read.

It's still better than most of what's out there, but it could still use a revision--including those things about which Duncan has subsequently changed his mind.

Allen

Any thoughts as to whether Phil will include a lexicon/glossary of Barkerisms to help out the novice players?

I love the man to death, but he had a way, when writing, of convoluting the language that was way beyond anything I've ever seen since…

"Any thoughts as to whether Phil will include a lexicon/glossary of Barkerisms to help out the novice players?"

DITTO!

"I love the man to death, but he had a way, when writing, of convoluting the language that was way beyond anything I've ever seen since…"

You said it as good as anyone could.

The man needs to learn how to communicate with the general public, (Gamers).

Yes I think there is a movement out there to teach "proper" English comprehension again……

;)

Fat chance. I met Phil at Historicon a couple of years ago. We sat and had a nice talk. I think the world of him. However, at his age I doubt there is a lot of change with regards to his writing. It's pretty much firmware now.

I wonder who holds the copyright for George Gush's 1420-1700 rules then?

If it went back to the authors then George Gush would hold the copyright.

Rich

DBA 3.0:

1. Start with WADBAG's excellent "The Unofficial Guide to DBA."

2. Change "Unofficial" to "Official."

3. Append army lists.

Done.

Hi
DBA, probably my favourite rule set ever for it's simplicity and playability.
DBA3.0 will be a "must buy" for this little black duck!
I hope it's not screwed up,…
trailape.blogspot.com

I wonder who holds the copyright for George Gush's 1420-1700 rules then?

George had already confirmed for me by e-mail that he still holds the copyright to the "1490-1700" rules and army lists. Apparently they were not a part of the contract with the Bailey's to begin with, as they were replaced (in Phil's mind) with DBR. However, George has also indicated that he has no interest in producing a new or updated set of the rules at this time. If you look inside the cover of the last printing of the 2nd edition, the copyright was still held by George at that time. George was, according to Phil's terminology in the new announcement, an "external author".

Bill
Sir William the Aged
warsoflouisxiv.blogspot.com

Any thoughts as to whether Phil will include a lexicon/glossary of Barkerisms to help out the novice players?

I love the man to death, but he had a way, when writing, of convoluting the language that was way beyond anything I've ever seen since…

The man needs to learn how to communicate with the general public, (Gamers).

Yeah, where does Phil Barker get off crediting the general gaming public with the English comprehension level of an educated adult? I mean, the nerve of that guy Barker, giving gamers credit for English comprehension far beyond their actual limited abilities. When will he bow to the inevitable, concede that most gamers can't comprehend written English beyond a 4th grade reading level, and dumb down his rules accordingly? Who does Barker think he is, anyway?

"It would be really nice to see all the "Armies and Enemies' series updated and in print again, although I suspect that's not likely. Some had become unavailable because the masters had been lost and Paul had not grokked what could be done with a scanner.

Allen"

You'll be glad to know that someone has.

Re "Who does Barker think he is, anyway?"

God?

The trouble is that this an age of atheism

Flippancy aside.

Not necessarily a bad thing. WRG Rules were the state of the art in their time and some still have a loyal following.

Yes, it would be an opportunity to address the presentation/readability issues. It probably won't happen though.

Kilroy 44 and there you have it. Mental effort in pursuit of a good game it seems is a step too far for many. Fair enough you pays your money and makes your choice or not as the case may be.

I will be interested to see HFG and the may well buy all of these offerings.

WRG rules by PB were my introduction to wargaming so I have a great deal to thank him, and the other members of WRG, for. Now, if only he would add DBM3.1 to the list of published rules I would be in heaven. By the way, I agree with those who do not see the need to pressurise PB into changing his writing style. If you don't like it then don't buy the rules. He wrote them so I guess he has every right to write them in whatever style pleases him. The market is the test – if hardly anyone buys them then maybe he'll change his style but if enough people keep buying the rules to make them financially viable then why should he let himslef be pushed around by others. If someone thinks they can write better rules then there is nothing to stop them doing so. WAB, Tactica, Newbury to name but a few have managed to achieve success.

Well, I for one am impressed with those directors.

We've recently had a discussion where the merits of PB's writing style (or lack of same) were discussed.

TMP link

I'm a pretty strong advocate of DBA as "A great game concealed inside the sort of instructions associated with furniture assembly".

Others believe that Barkerese is clear-yet-concise, and that those of us who find it opaque to the point of incomprehensibility are mere boorish illiterates.

You pays your money and you takes your choice.

(Choice (S) is available to individuals money in possession of)

Phil is certainly not about to change anything in his writing style, so there is no point even suggesting it. What I'd certainly hope to see is a larger font and a better layout.

Thoughts that there might be better diagrams or examples, or even pictures, seem like wild-eyed dreams. Could there ---? Oh, don't get our hopes raised!

Then again, PB did make massive improvements to the second edition of Armies and Enemies of Imperial Rome by NOT doing his own illustrations, so one never knows.

Seriously, I welcome this venture.

It's a good thing.

A good thing it, is.

I agree about the font size and illustrations, especially now that my eyes are 60 years old – when I first used WRG rules they were only 20 years old! For DBM I had to resort to photocopying my set of rules on a copier that would enlarge the original, so I ended up paying twice for them. That, however, was better than suffering more eye strain.

cotedelachevre is right on about the WADBAG guide to DBA. Phil Barker is the author, and will write the rules in his own manner. I think that is a good thing. But the WADBAG guide is an excellent explanation of how the rules work. Considering how much effort goes into dressing up published rules books these days, it has long seemed a good idea to include a users' guide section following the main indexed rules section, to show simple and complex game situations and how they should be worked out.

Lets hope the new company presents the new rules in a form more easily readable than previous editions.

From the DBMM list – PB didn't realise there is a DBR yahoo list, and says work on DBR 3.0 will start next winter (Nthn Hemisphere) – so not so far away.

also some discussion with Duncan Head about APMW…possibility of a limited run of the existing version. DH is not so enthused about the work required to update it for the 27 years of info gained since it was last done! And he has a long litany of excuses why the Ancient China one was never updated in the first place..although since he didn't write it I'm not sure what he means! :)

Richard Nelson (Greek & Persian Wars) & Nigel Tallis are amenable or even keen to have theirs updated. Ian Heath hasn't ben contacted yet, and PB says he will "be given no choice by my associates"….by which I presume a new AEIR will be on the cards too.

From Mr Barker:

It would be very sad if the poor punters had to depend entirely on Osprey and Ebay

So who owns HOTT now as v2 was Richard's work (plus others from the revicion group) but had to be run by PB.

Steve P

Who's name is on the front cover or on the title page?

Phil Barker, Sue Laflin Barker, and Richard Bodley Scott.

Phil wrote some time ago on the DBMMlist that neither he nor Richard sees any need for an update of HOTT.

I like the 12 stand armies for DBA, I really don't see the need for a new version.

I would have to repectfully disagree with you, Rathicus – one of the things that puts me off DBA is the artificial restriction which keeps armies at 12 units.

DBA is an abstraction – an intellectual exercise.

Compare it with chess. Small square board. Limited number of playing pieces a side.

Jeremy Sutcliffe

Yes – I accept this and each to their own.
Just not my cup of tea.

More elements please……

And where will we be able to get DBA 3.0 on our side of the Pond (N. America)?
On Military Matters, perhaps?

So does this mean an Ancients 8th Edition?

"Ancients 8th Edition?"

Depends how you count editions

WRG 1st-6th editions
7th Edition when change started
DBA 1.0
DBA 2.0
DBA 2.2

10th if 2.0 and 2.2 are counted as one edition, 11th if not.

Sad to say I have all the editions less 1st and 2nd. I started my ancients gaming on 3rd.

And I will buy the new edition …..

Pft…only 10th or 11th (and your math is wrong – that's 9 if you count 2 & 2.2 as a single edition, 10 if not….)?

If you go the DBM/M route then (IIRC) ther are the following published editions (with revision sheets for some in between and 3.1…):

1-7th
DBA
DBM
DBM 1.1
DBM 1.3
DBM 2
DBM 2.1
DBM 3
DBMM
and DBMM 1.1 coming up……

Of course "8th edition" is not possible any more, since Phil sold the rights for 7th to the 4 Horesemen & it became Warrior.

I suspect history will be repeating itself
DBA -- major paradigm change in ancients gaming, with some foreshadowing in WRG 7
DBM -- based on DBA concepts for big armies, much modification from huge player base.
DBR -- Pike and Shot, based on DBM concepts
DBA 2 -- Revisions of DBA to incorporate DBM/DBR concepts and revised army lists
DBMM -- slight paradigm change to differentiate from RBS ideas that led to FOG
DBA 3 -- Revision of DBA 2 to incorporate DBMM concepts and revised army lists.

So if you know DBMM, you know what the changes to DBA 3 will be.
------------
As to DBA 2. mikeygees, BullDog69, et al 12 elements is just the _basic game_. You can use as many elements as you want per side. At Historicon, 2009, I ran a 10 player Hussite vs Imperialists game with about 80 elements per side. Likewise, at the 2008 con where I did 25mm Sparticus game with 60 elements per side. At the same time, there was the same giant game with 15mm figures. Expand the table size, the width, not necessarily the depth.

I actually think the 12 element size of DBA is one of its virtues. I hope it's retained. I don't think points systems work that well, and I don't like the fiddle of trying to make an army fit a certain point size.

Having said that, the point system for HOTT works for that game, but I don't think it would work so well for DBA. The value of an element varies in my opinion depending on what it's mixed with and in what proportion of the army it forms. A few Ps, for instance, are great excellent supporting Bd or Sp, and are fairly valued at 1/12 of an army! The system may not be perfect, but a points system would not make things better.

For the "more elements" guys there is always Big Battle DBA.

I applaud Phil for getting past the 4 elements.
Air, Earth, Fire, Water.