"Foundry Napoleon Rules - Thoughts" Topic

Okay, I found a new copy of these rules, cheap, on line and bought them. They will be here in a week or so.

I like the concept of the book and some of the items offered in it. however, there seems to been some negative press on them – except those on Amazon are all good though (I know – they need to sell them).

Some of you have expressed views previously on TMP but I was wondering if any of your views have changed.

So – are these rules still considered rubbish or are they decent now that a few games have been played?

Thanks!
Larry

The rules are pretty much unplayable as written.

There's a yahoo group where one dedicated group of souls has created several pages of 'house rules', but they seem to be close to giving up on them.

When you get the book and actually read it, the actual writing and painting illustrations will astonish you (with how poor they are).

Have fun, and let us know your opinion!

LOL

I will keep you posted.

You ought to read the reviews on Amazon!

Hah! Maybe they paid for those reviews? Did I get a pre-production copy?

Forget them and use Black Powder.

I recently purchased them and TRIED to read thru them. I just couldn't do it. I had even thought about making dials for them, but I just couldn't bring myself to do it. Poorly written to say the least.

Now the painting guides are good for a beginner like myself. Of course, they are geared towards the Foundry line of paints. I will be substituting my brand of paint and start using the methods they show.

I haven't tried Black Powder, so I can't comment on them. Our group has been playing with LaSalle and Rank and File. Either of those, I will definately recommend.

If I had to do it all over again (and knowing what I know now), I would have purchased Black Powder instead.

Steve
The Dial Dude
dialdude.com

Stick them back on eBay. Some other poor fool will buy them.

Buy Lasalle.

The rules are pretty simple and are a mechanism for selling foundry products. To be fair they are quite readable and the actual book is very well presented and very pretty.

One of the many clubs I go to played them on Monday nights for awhile. I did not much care for the mechanics myself, but they do actually make a great board game camapign crossover. For instance we took a Peninsular war Board Game, made each token a Napoleon unit and voila instant campaign! That was actually quite fun.

Would also work extremely well for Empires in Arms etc without any changes or amendments to fit the two together. So for campaigns it makes a good addition.

For a 2-3 hour wargame it makes a great addition to any wargamers library as a rules collector but not to actually play a game with :)

For a 2-3 hour wargame it makes a great addition to any wargamers library as a rules collector but not to actually play a game with.

And that folks, is an example of how well the rules themselves are wrote. Full of contradictions and having a certain lack of clarity.

I think the bloke who started the yahoo group has given up on them.

They had some good ideas that needed much further development and further reading by the author beyond Haythornthwaite and Osprey's.

I have the rules and noticed that the 250 point armies are the same as Lasalle and OH LOOK PRETTY PICTURES

Then you have the movement mechanics and how it OH LOOK PRETTY PICTURES

Shooting is handled by rolling a buckload of dice with OH LOOK PRETTY PICTURES

There are also campaign rules with OH LOOK PRETTY PICTURES

I note that the copy I recently sold on eBay had more 'watchers' than any of the other rules I listed. It didn't get the best price [as a proportion of original cost]. I didn't think the pictures were that good – certainly not compared to Black Powder, which may be a ruleset that sells a lot more Foundry figs than Napoleon has/will.

I picked them up cheap via Amazon's pre-order price, much like I did Black Powder. The Dallimore painting guide is the most useful part of the book for me. It'll sit on the shelf along side many other rules sets I've bought over the years and periodically flip through to remind myself why I'm not playing them.

Although I wanted to give them a chance, in the end they're poorly written. Some interesting concepts and reference material, but that's about it.

Go with Black Powder, Shako II, or Lasalle.

if you have a table or couch or chair that dose not set just right,then use your copy of Foundry's Napoleon umder one leg to brace it up…or better yet ,,recycle the paper the book is printed on after lineing your bird cage with it.I cannot truely express my true feelings for Foundry and their so called rules,,,I would be banned from TMP for life.

Runicus Fasticus

My opinion is pretty much identical to raylev3. I wanted this to be a great ruleset, and looked forward to them before their release. But in the end, I didn't think much of them at all, though the painting and uniform guides are nice. I ended up selling my copy. I also agree with the views of Black Powder, Shako II and Lasalle. all of which I like quite a bit, with Lasalle being the current favorite around here.

-Scott
djokergaming.wordpress.com

I love all the work that Jervis Johnson and especially Rick Priestley do, but I still would not recommend Black Powder as a good game for Napoleonics. I feel that its staccatto nature makes it very suitable for Colonials, ACW, Jacobin Wars. Don't get me wrong I sell them in the shop and sold quite a few copies now, as I said RP is my rules writing icon, its just that BP is not really suited to Napoleonics. At the very best perhaps a bit of Spanish vs French in the Peninsular or a few early Revolutionary bash's. The Mechanics for BP are wonderful and once again a testament to RP's originality. Because they are designed around 200 years of warfare some era's are going to lose out on feel and this happens for BP with Napoleonics and also SYW, WAS. Great for everything else!

I also sell Lasalle although not a big audience here for it, a few enthusiasts furhter south though. I have read the rules and sat in a few games and I am not that much fussed over the rules. But then games are a personal choice. I feel that Lasalle caters for the disenchanted Empire player, who enjoys all the micromanaging of Empire without quite so many charts! If you like that aspect of the game then Lasalle is definantly for you. The game is well laid out and a lot of thought has gone into the mechanics and I respect Sam for that. Horse for cCourses I suppose.

Right now my Top 3 wargames are Black Powder for Colonials, Napoleonic Fire and Fury for Napoleonics and Rate of Fire for WW2. I sell lots of FOG books but I am very unimpressed by the game and have bought and sold two different armies in the hopes of getting into the game, but alas pretty publishing is not always enough! Just my thoughts!

"OH LOOK PRETTY PICTURES"

Now you hit on the reason I bought them!!!

Seriously though – you guys are brutal!!!! To be honest, I'm more interested in the 'other' parts of the book more than I am the rules.

For rules I'm reading through 'LaSalle' and 'ITGM'. I don't have a copy of 'Black Powder' (yet!) nor do I have 'Fire and Fury' for Napoleonics (yet!).

Thanks for all the input.

Larry

Oh Brutal! Ooopppsss!! Not what I wanted to convey to the public as I do actually sell each set of rules, from Napoleon onwards. I do not sell Naps Fire and Fury though, but I have always referred customers to the game for Napoleonics.

I think what I am trying to say is each set of rules will appeal to different people. They may not appeal to me personally but that is why I stock a selection of them. Napoleon for instance is in my opinion very bland but is probably the best game to play campaigns without any fuss at all. Lasalle appeals to the player who wants the Battalion commandr feel of Napoleonics and allows that degree of micro managing that many wargamers are attracted too. Black Powder appeals to more my mindset of a game. 2-3 Hours, lots of blood, guts and dice rolling. Fun is the name of the game and gentlemen play. That said I do not personally recommend it for Seven Years War and Napoleonics, but for more free fowing battlefields like ACW, Colonial and the like. I hope I have cleared that all up. By the way pretty is GOOOOODDDD!!!! :)

Not all the pictures are that pretty and the rules smell, I'm afraid. I'll be Ebaying mine sooner or later, I suspect. If I want pretty pictures I can Google them up in a few seconds without the feeling of being Foundried.

Lasalle appeals to the player who wants the Battalion commander feel of Napoleonics and allows that degree of micro managing that many wargamers are attracted too.

I feel that Lasalle caters for the disenchanted Empire player, who enjoys all the micromanaging of Empire without quite so many charts! If you like that aspect of the game then Lasalle is definantly for you.

You keep bringing 'micromanaging' in Lasalle up. Have you played a game? Have you even read the rules? Whatever else Lasalle requires of its players, it doesn't bring much micromanagement to the table.

And the game's about as far away from Empire as it's possible to get. Thank God. :)

Yeah, the Empire/Lasalle comparison was an eye-opener. I'd like to hear more! (Because I wouldn't make the same comparison)

For my part I would like to defend Black Powder for Napoleonic games. We played a game set in 1805 and the rules worked really well to reflect the Russian/Austrian command diffculties compared to the Grand Armee's flexibility and dash…

"For my part I would like to defend Black Powder for Napoleonic games. We played a game set in 1805 and the rules worked really well to reflect the Russian/Austrian command diffculties compared to the Grand Armee's flexibility and dash…"

There you go, just like I was saying, its all about your own perspective on things. My impressions are no less or no more valid than anyone else's and each player sees what they like or dislike about a game and then run with that.

If you do not think Lasalle has an Empire feel, (and yes I have read the rules now twice and been present at games played), than thats fine, or you wish to defend Black Powder for Napoleonics, then that is fine too.

I really enjoy Warmaster, but some of my best friends wouldn't touch it with a ten foot barge pole! The guys I played Napoleon with on Monday nights at one of the clubs swore by Napoleon, as opposed to others who say that the rules "smell and the book has been foundried". Another group I know will defend Shako rules to the death, while others I know will exclusively play Empire or at the opposite extreme, Naps Battles.

There is also a group I have sold a number of Lasalle books to that swear by this set of rules. I am sure they will get huffity if they read my thoughts on micro-managing and empire, but that is my opinion, and unless I was mistaken I still live in a democracy with the right to voice my own opinions.

Perhaps because I have sold a number of various types of Napoleonic rulesets to customers I am in a better postion than others, I at least will sell them what they prefer and gear that sale towards what they are looking for in a set of rules as opposed to just my own perspective.

Just my 2 cents worth :)

Oh by the way when the big storm broke on TMP a couple of months ago with Sam and the release of Lasalle, I defended him to the hilt. Just because I personally do not like a set of rules does not mean I do not appreciate the effort gone into creating and publishing them.

So fella's, try not to fire up too much, when I present my own opinion.:)

No-one's getting fired up, I (and Clay) simply wondered how you arrived at the conclusion that Lasalle were an 'Empire Lite'.

Oh by the way when the big storm broke on TMP a couple of months ago with Sam and the release of Lasalle, I defended him to the hilt.

Your profile says you've only been here 6 days though.

TMP link

Also surf around as BavoisSYW :)

The rules are pretty much unplayable as written.

Really? I've played a few games and never had any major problems. If anything crops up (as it does in all games)
we apply common sense. The only rule mod I use is the official one of a column taking 2 hits from artillery shot.
I ditched Black Powder after a couple of games. Lasalle I have, but not found anyone to play it yet.

Fred, I'm obviously a biased observer, but our whole club pretty much shook our heads trying to understand the Foundry Napoleon rules. There are just so many things left unwritten or unconsidered. For example, on page 63 and 64 you can't cross an obstacle or a river in a single move; you have to move up to it on one move, and then you're put completely across it on the next move. But then in the very next sentence there's a rule for what happens if you're "caught" while in the midst of crossing ?? So what does that mean, and when and how does it happen?

Or the combat results on page 57: if you and your opponent score the same number of hits, it's a draw, and "both units our [sic] moved directly back one inch facing each other."

What does "directly back" mean if you charged somebody in his flank or rear? What does "facing each other" mean in this context? If they weren't facing each other in the first place, do they change facing after having fallen back? Before falling back? (Because that would in turn change the meaning of "directly back.") And what about squares on the next page? They automatically win if they score at least one hit, but what if neither they nor the cavalry score a hit? Isn't that a "draw," then, and does the square fall back? There's literally no mention of the possibility of that outcome, despite the sentence: "Infantry in square formation fight as normal by rolling 2d6 and applying any bonuses." Does an unlimbered battery fall "directly back" in a draw? What if you have two attackers against one defender, and a draw results? Which attacker does the defender fall back "facing" ? What if I charged your march column in the flank and a draw resulted? Do you swing the whole column around, then move it back 1", facing me?

Then you get sentences like:

"Your army may ally with Austrian Division or Prussian (which may not exceed three four divisions), your cavalry and artillery entitlement is taken from each army on an individual basis."

The whole thing is pretty baffling, and Foundry hasn't exactly tried to help by offering any support; not even an FAQ on the web.

"directly back" sounds like something you need to do with the rules….

What does "directly back" mean if you charged somebody in his flank or rear? What does "facing each other" mean in this context? If they weren't facing each other in the first place, do they change facing after having fallen back? Before falling back? (Because that would in turn change the meaning of "directly back.") And what about squares on the next page? They automatically win if they score at least one hit, but what if neither they nor the cavalry score a hit? Isn't that a "draw," then, and does the square fall back? There's literally no mention of the possibility of that outcome, despite the sentence: "Infantry in square formation fight as normal by rolling 2d6 and applying any bonuses." Does an unlimbered battery fall "directly back" in a draw? What if you have two attackers against one defender, and a draw results? Which attacker does the defender fall back "facing" ? What if I charged your march column in the flank and a draw resulted? Do you swing the whole column around, then move it back 1", facing me?

Well that's what I mean about common sense! We take a look at the situation on the table and decide which is the most sensible option. Now this wouldn't work with a bunch or rules lawyers, but I don't want to play with those sort of people anyway.
The problem with trying to write rules that cover every eventuality is that you invariably forget something and players have to work out for themselves what to do in that situation or the rules are so rigid that applying them to the letter creates ridiculous outcomes on the table top.

Fred, you sound like a fanboy. If the rules work for you then I am genuinely happy for your group, because all that matters is having fun with it.

Fred, you sound like a fanboy.

Hardly a fanboy. Have played a few games and had a good time. Not encountered anything that couldn't be sorted with a bit of common sense – not that many things have come up. I do wonder how many people who claim they are unplayable have actually tried to play them.

Not to belabor the point, but surely any game is playable if a friendly group of easy-going guys can agree to make up rulings on the spot and do it "their way." If that's how your group operates, then it's a very nice atmosphere, but it also raises the question about why you paid 30-40 dollars for the hardback color book that you're not really using.

I have great sympathy for the difficulty of getting rules right. But no customer should have to improvise basic movement rules and combat results because they simply aren't covered by the book.

Not to belabor the point, but surely any game is playable if a friendly group of easy-going guys can agree to make up rulings on the spot and do it "their way." If that's how your group operates, then it's a very nice atmosphere, but it also raises the question about why you paid 30-40 dollars for the hardback color book that you're not really using.

Oh we are using the rules allright, just using common sense for the few occassions when something comes up that isn't covered in the rules. Something that happens with all rules I've played. And it has been only a few occassions.
I'm perfectly happy to ditch a set of rules I'm not getting on with. I sold my copy of Black Powder as the games were too bland for our taste.

Man!!! I'm REALLY looking forward to getting these rules.

You guys are so full of great info and insight – excellent!

Thanks for all the 'pros & cons'.

Even in their own advert, they describe it as "a wargamers delight, full of facts and figures and beautiful illustrations"

"Full colour and hard-backed"
"elevendy pages long"

In other words, jam packed with fluff and a nice coffee table read, but forget the rules part of them, slim thought they may be.

Hi
I have a copy, but not played a game.
What I did read seemed ok, (though probably not my cup of tea). Nice book with plenty of eye candy; though some of the miniatures are not really "inspiring" works of art by any stretch.
Probably good for social games, but no way could they stand up to the rigors of "competitive" play I suspect, (not that that's important IMHO either).
Cheers

Probably good for social games, but no way could they stand up to the rigors of "competitive" play I suspect, (not that that's important IMHO either).

Even the rules that are designed for competitive play don't stand up to competition play without some changes. It is a very harsh environment.

Correus, the 'Pros and Cons' were hashed out a while back. I know I'm not interested in going over it again, because I've moved on.

There's a Yahoo group for these rules and they have even posted an extensive list of issues with the rules, if you're interested in detail.

"In the Grand Manner" is still being used in my warroom (cough- garage- cough)

Dutch508 -

Again – a game room to be admired!!! I have not cast off ITGM either!!

Fred, Black powder is 'bland'?

You should hear my more colourful description..

'Even the rules that are designed for competitive play don't stand up to competition play without some changes. It is a very harsh environment.'

Some people relish growling bearpits….8-)

My copy of 'Napoleon' arrived about an hour ago.

I haven't had much of a chance to go through it yet except for a cursory 'thumb-through'.

I can say that in the "OH LOOK PRETTY PICTURES" aspect I got more bang for the buck with this than with LaSalle.

First impression…LaSalle is a set of gaming rules and Napoleon is an avenue to showcase Foundry products and philosophy. I do like the way Napoleon is illustrated and put together though.

OH LOOK PRETTY PICTURES

Most of the pictures appear to be different angles of the same battle set up. And, in my opinion, many of the paint jobs on the Foundry figures are mediocre at best.

And the games don't look like that, because the photos are missing the casualty counters and order cards.

Well, it seems like you guys have bought the "Playtest Lite" version of the rules…..ridiculous, as there must be a dozen keen wargames clubs within 10 miles of Foundry.

To think that they passed on Frank Chadwick's Volley and Bayonet to publish this load of underdeveloped codswallop.

Might as well just dig out my old Jeffries or Grant rules by the sound of it.

[To think that they passed on Frank Chadwick's Volley and Bayonet to publish this…]

That's a really interesting point. I'd totally forgotten about that.

I really like these rules. Yes it takes a bit of sorting through, but with a bit of patience, and some common sense, you can find a very enjoyable game. Yes an errata and a FAQ would be helpful, but the game is quite playable,and has some interesting mechanics.
To reveal my bias,however, I felt the Blackpowder wasa bit tedious and warhammer-ish. the system at least bucks the trend of making games conform to "hobby standard mechnics" like WH and DBM, DBX.
I like volley and bayonet as well,and I amafan of napoleon's battles as well. These rules however,give me a different layer of napoleonics.

Hi

Late to the party …

I picked this book up in the recent Foundry -50% sale (I had no real interest in the rules, but was hoping there would be other useful material – the discounted cost equates to the price of a couple of wargames magazines).

Now that I have read through the book I am very happy that I secured a copy at the price.

The rules will give some inspiration for stuff that I am working on, the copious photos and illustrations give much useful information on uniforms and there is a lot of information that I feel is generally useful: organisation of armies, campaigns overview, painting guides.

At full price and in particular if I had intended to use the rules I don't honestly know how much value this book might be.

Whatever way you look at it, one problem wargames face with rules books in general is that prices have reached a price point where anything short of exactly what you want or had hoped for is going to hurt!

I really think people should just be patient before splashing out largish sums of money – go have a look at a copy or read a review, perhaps?!

I do agree that THIS review would not have helped you on the issue of the rules…

Get a cheap copy and glean what you can. Pretty pictures and some good painting tips. I like the "division" that it represents and I can use that organization elsewhere.