"FoG(N) - any use for the non competitive? " Topic

So as someone who has no interest in competition games or the genre in general, would Field of Glory Napoleonics, points, army lists, etc. etc. send me screaming from the room, or do the rules work outside of those who like that kind of thing?

Do you like the FoG system?

We'll find out on August 4 when our group tries out the rules.

We've done FoG in a non-competition setting using one of our group's Roman armies. Seemed to work OK.

Jim

I honestly don't see why it would make a difference with any ruleset.

Yes, I would have to agree with Clay.

Competitive gaming has no interest to me. I ran a trial play test of the rules, they are very easy to apply to historical OB's. The rules are nice and simple and you can add whatever level of complexity you want.

So yes, I believe that one would have no problem with them in the non competitive sphere of gaming.

John

Clay,

Do you like the FoG system?

That would pre suppose I knew what the "FoG System" was!

I've never played the Ancients version(s) so I haven't a clue, much less how 'the system' would transfer to Napoleonics.

To date I've only thumbed through the rulebook in a shop so have no idea of what in the contents would pertain to a system.

You may want to look elsewhere, as the 'FoG' system has a learning curve, which doesn't make it good for multi-player games where new players are common.

So on that basis you can't learn it unless someone already knows it – Sounds a bit Catch 22 to me!

Learning curves don't worry me that much, I'd have chucked wargaming 30 years ago if they did! Besides, the target audiance in this case have all played Napoleonics for 20+ years.

Anyhow what is 'the system' you refer to?

Field of Glory….there are Ancients, Renaissance and now Napoleonic rules that BASICALLY use the same system. It's not exactly the same, but the concepts are all there.

Some rules have a steeper than normal learning curve and I just think this is one of them.

Yes, it helps tremendously to have somebody 'teach' you how to play.

Field of Glory….there are Ancients, Renaissance and now Napoleonic rules that BASICALLY use the same system

Yes I understand all that, one rule set for Ancients, one for Renaissance and bucket loads of supplements – I've seen them.

So what is the 'system'? Same level of command, same command systems, same approach to organisation of forces, same movement methods, same moral methods, no casualty removal – (there's none in FoG Naps, I got that far)"cohesion" instead, shed loads of dice etc.

Throw me a bone here!

FoG Napoleonics doesn't share much with the other periods of the rules.

FoG: Renaissance does share with the ancients version but there are too many differences to mention them all.

The terms are similar between the rules such as CMT tests (cohesion), getting to re-roll 1s, 2s and 3s based on grade of troop (morale) and some other mechanisms. So some concepts are the same but you really aren't necessarily helped by knowing one edition and playing in another period!
I know folks who love FoG: R and don't care for FoG as an example (V2 of the rules does incorporate some more elements that are similar to FoG: R now though; at least my Beta test version of the rules do ;-)

My understanding of FoG: Napoleonics is that it might as well be written by another publisher as things are that different.

FoG does have a learning curve. I do agree that someone to teach helps but you don't need this as the rules are clearly written and there is a Player's Index that some gamers have put together that really helps learn things. There is some detail and you can forget things but if you walk through the rules as written, you can learn it without a teacher. The Player's Index just helps when you don't want to walk through things. The rules are written in the order of turn sequence to aid the new player to play.

IMO, it is easier to learn than DBM and certainly much easier than Warrior/WRG 7th/6th editions. Probably slightly higher complexity than Might of Arms and Tactica.

Well that sounds altogether more posative, thanks for the info.

One of my main interests is in the "cohesion" rather than figure or stand removal.

I've played too many rules where units get shot to bits rather than leave, or have there ablity to fight so drastically reduced buy loseing figures or stands that the first side to fire in an IGOUGO system has a mamouth adavantage.