"Thinking of designing a rule set for 28mm Fantasy. " Topic

I know, why design a rule set for 28mm when there is already a plethora out there? Well, because I could and I am currently not satisfied with what is out there. I think this is a common war gamer affliction and it may be that this is an exercise in futility.

Anything I designed would borrow from elements of existing systems I like. The rules would be purely a non-profit venture and available for free download once I had worked up the initial system. Perhaps I would even start a yahoo group for folks to play test and help provide input and tweaks. This would be a mass combat system and not necessarily a skirmish game.

The other problem that I see endemic to fantasy rules is if they are generic they lack interest. Therefore, one of the challenges is coming up with a background that is engaging, yet allows for the scope of miniature collections that are available.

Here are some of the mechanics I am considering and would want for the game system:

• A command and control that would reflect everything from a poor commander to an excellent commander. The command and control would also have elements that would affect orders either as a positive or negative modifier.
• I would want the rules to be scenario based and not points based. There are plenty of points based games out there for fantasy. I want something that would stimulate interesting conflicts. However, I realize there may be the need to have at least some kind of order of battle as a guideline.
• Magic would be effective but not a game changer after all what is a fantasy game without wizards, sorcerers, etc.?
• I am debating whether to go with 6 sided dice or use variable dice to reflect troop quality. I am partial to the latter or just using 10 sided dice.
• I think I would like to use random movement distance instead of a set movement. For example infantry in Brother against Brother roll two d10 for moment and cavalry roll three d10.
• I want to have a system that has all the charts and tables clearly visible on one page.
• I also think a break point system similar to Battle Group Kursk makes for an exciting game as you do not know exactly when the game will end, but end it will when one force quits the field due to losses.
Thoughts?

Thanks,

Kim

I am debating whether to go with 6 sided dice or use variable dice to reflect troop quality. I am partial to the latter or just using 10 sided dice.

I'm currently working with variable dice in a starship game, and my only advice is that combining it with bucket-o-dice resolution might be a bad idea.

My game is currently working because I have a collection of dice color-coded by type -- but it's not something most gamers have, and not something you can easily get at your FLGS.

If I were a dice manufacturer, I'd love my game.

So: if you're going bucket-o-dice, pick a die type and stick with it. D6's are best, but D10's aren't bad, either.

(Though that is a case of "do what I say, not what I do.")

I do not have an issue with bucket o' dice, I mean I love games like The Sword and the Flame, Warhammer, et. al. However, I want to make sure that there is the opportunity for your opponent to react to your actions, i.e. counter rolling or opposed rolling. And of course I want alternative activation of units, characters, etc. I think the best miniature wargames are easy to learn but take time to master. but I hear what you are saying. One reason I like the d10 is it gives you more variables than the old stand by d6. I like how Force on Force uses quality dice but has a set success number, i.e. 4. A unit with troop quality of a d6 has a 50 % chance of success (rolling a 4 higher) while a unit that is troop quality d8, d10 have a much better chance of success but could still blow it and roll all threes or less and the d6 unit might roll all fours or higher. I have seen it happen and I like that kind of fog of war element.

I assume you've tried Song of Blade and Heroes? I really like their activation system, but yeah, otherwise it definitely goes the route of generic fantasy.

I'm not a fan of random movement. It depends on what you're trying to simulate, but I generally find strategy is a little tougher if you can't rely on your troops to be at a certain place. That and players might blame a loss on "Well, I rolled 2 inches for my move out of a possible 8".

Otherwise sounds cool. I'll be interesting to see what you come up with for scenarios over point based armies.

Varying die types do seem popular now. A bit harder for some people to get into, but I guess it depends on your target audience. I thought Outrider (weaponized cars) did a good implementation of die types (basically build you cars by allocating D6, D8, D10 to different features like engine, guns, etc.).

I think I would like to use random movement distance instead of a set movement.

Then I'd view this as your command-and-control system, and build on it, rather than creating a separate one. Use the leaders to better control how a unit moves.

Thunderman I have Song of Blade and Heroes and read the rules but have not had a chance to play a game. While I liked the mechanics it seemed more geared to small unit action much like Mordheim. I am looking for something more in line with larger battles. As to strategy being harder with variable moment it is one of those things that depends on the type of player. Those who want their troops to move exactly when and how they want them to might not like what I am going for. One of my favorite games is Warmaster and I have even considered just converting that to 28mm. But I am not sure the abstraction would translate well with 28mm. I know that Hail Caesar! has similar mechanics to Warmaster and is designed for large 28mm games and perhaps that is what I am trying to do. I am just sure as of yet until I actually sit down and start writing things out and see if this is even viable.

Ah you posted while I was writing Meiczyslaw. Yea that idea did occur to me that having both a command and control mechanic and a variable move mechanic might muddy the waters too much. Again my example of Warmaster is exactly that, your units move a specific amount barring terrain, etc. if you can get your orders relayed your forces move. Hmmm…yea do not want to have both, it has to one or the other.

I would want the rules to be scenario based and not points based.

If you have the opportunity, take a look at Napoleon's Battles. It includes a points system, but it's designed towards scenario creation. It takes into account mission, posture, and terrain.

It's a nice compromise between the two approaches, and allows players to run pick-up games, but it also gives a GM a good handle on creating properly balanced scenarios.

I am currently working on a modified Battlesystem 2nd edition, so I like buckets-o-dice, and having multiples of d4-d12. It's not really a problem, and dice aren't expensive. We usually end up rolling dice in batches, say we need 10d10 so we roll 5d10 twice. Sounds slow, but we get fairly large battles finished in 2-3 hours.
I'd be interested to see what you do for command. This is something I am currently working on, without a success I and my friends both like.

Hi Kim,

It sounds good to me. I like the idea of different commander ratings and the use of dice like force on force. When I ran that 1/6 th scale ww2 game you played in, I went with d20 rules, based upon battleground.

If you need a play test I would be happy to give it a try. I have no rules for mass fantasy. I have some of those rackham orcs on rhinos for cavalry. I wish someone still made those figures.

When you mention that you want to have rules to cover product that is on the market, will you do something like the Wolfen and other interesting races out there?

Anyway, I am sure you are just starting, but let me know when you need some play testing.

Matthew.

The old Milgamex "Ancient Warefare"? rules with Middle Earth supplement might be worth a look. They have variable movement.
Example game here:
link

45thdiv you must be Matthew who ran that wonderful game so many years ago at Fall In and Cold Wars. Wow it was fun playing a WW II war game in 1/6th. Loved the 1/6th Panther tank and the convoy of jeeps.

Anyway as far as product on the market yes I would want something that anyone could adapt their collection to. And while I say 28mm if I can make it work for other scales and sizes that would be a bonus. Part of what is driving this is at least for me I have a ton of 28mm fantasy stuff that has been gathering dust. I played Warhammer Fantasy for a long time and have at least three large armies of Chaos, Bretonnians, Dogs of War, and then a scattering of other forces such as Undead, High Elves, etc. Plus there are all those great figures by Reaper, Crocodile games, Rackham, and the classic Grenadier, etc. I imagine I am not alone in this.

Let me see if I can be brief yet comprehensive. Leaving the game mechanics aside for a moment I am contemplating a setting with a primary world much like any fantasy setting with a variety of terrain and climates and all of the classic races. Now here is the twist, the world has a plethora of nexus points or gates if you will. These gates have been the source of ages of conflict and are critical to the various powers and governments. Of course, the gates are dimensional portals which would allow for just about any kind of possible races, creatures, you name it in the game.

Over time Empires, kingdoms, city states and the like have come and gone and come again due to the fluctuation of the gates. Those who know how to work the gates can traverse other dimensions or to other portals on the main world. This would allow for logical battle match-ups between just about any foe or force. I see armies of diverse races united against common foes. Alliances; however, can be tenuous and this be reflected in morale modifiers or the command and control rolls.

In other words your Wolfen could either be one of the native forces of the main world or one of the dimensional forces that is brought in by one of the powers or have arrived on their own in order to plunder, colonize, avenge a wrong, you name it.

The tough thing is to design the forces so that they are balance yet have the flavor players would expect. Although I have considered tampering with some fantasy conventions. How cool would it be to have say a Human force of Spartan-like attire and capability facing off against…well a force of Wolfen? Or maybe they are allies come to help the Centaur nation against an alliance of Undead and Gnolls and Alligator men.

But yes one of the things I want to do with this is have folks play test and give feedback. Perhaps it can turn into a kind of grassroots type of war game rules.

Thoughts?

Kim

Hi Kim, yes that would be me. I'm glad you liked the game.

I really like the gate ideas. I wonder if magic could also connect some way to the gates. Sort of like the concept of lay lines. The closer you are the stronger your ability to cast, or maybe the longer you can cast since your energy is replenished faster. It is just a thought but it might be a secondary reason the gates are so coveted in addition to the travel. I think you could devise a lot of various cultures through out the world that might treat each gate a different way. By that I mean some might hold them as religious items and others as tools. I wonder what kind of cities would be built up around them. Or would the people in that area keep it far from their cities.

I like the ideas you are presenting. There will be a balance act to make the races compatible but maybe it is okay to have some races more powerful than others.

Matthew

Some advice:

Pick a certain topic that forms really core of your rules and stick to it. This could be thematic, a game mechanic, something else. But whenever you change something, always keep in mind whether it still adheres to your "unmutable core".

As for the world: why not develop it when you play the games. We have done that in the past, and it works wonderful well. The world is the result of events in its history. Just consider all the games you play as that history.
Additionally, throw in some story elements (e.g. Mythic Game Master emulator).
Much more fun that way.

I like the maurice card activation system. Building your hand out the drawn cards adds a fair bit.

And the number of cards you hold could be based on your leader. The better the leader, the more cards you hold. Maybe you could also play more than one card for a very special leader.

Matthew

Looking at it myself for use with Renaissance dwarve/orcs and the like. Its quite hard to find what suits and who it suits. I am leaning to picking elements fomr rules I like also, namely chronopia and tweaking to fit my forces. Issue then becomes it is very specific to what I want and not always what anyone else would want…interested to see how you develop it :)

All very intriguing ideas. Of course, right now I have not put anything to paper as of yet. I am pretty busy with grad school at the moment but once I get an idea it is hard for me to let it go.

As I implied in the opening thread my thinking is to take elements of existing game systems and adapt them instead of coming up with something different. Although is it possible to come up with a completely different way to do war game rules? It seems to me that are certain basic conventions depending on the level of abstraction.

As an example there are some rules and players that want to know the ground scale and are concerned about unit frontage. While others are not worried with this issue and are more interested in how does x weapon modify y figure's attack against z type of armor. We have already had some discussion about movement but not about how detailed does one want to get into wheeling, or formations, charges, etc. And of course probably one of the most contentious issues where the fantasy genre is concerned is such and such race, monster over powered? So do you bother with a stat line or just abstract that and have modifiers instead? As you can see it can get maddening trying to decide what to leave in and what to leave out?

I am of two thoughts at this moment. On one hand I love what Bob Charette(sp?) did with the basic beer and pretzel rules Brother against Brother. He and added some very elegant details for his Valor and Steel and Flesh or VSF Colonial rules. It is one of my favorite games to play and to game master at conventions. Of course, this does not have the command and control element that I originally stated. However, it is sublime in that there is almost no book keeping required, it is an easy set of rules to learn, and it handles a wide variety of creatures, races, weapons and other chrome with little fuss. Of course units are only 10 figures but you can brigade units to move and fight with larger formations. It plays fast and is fun.

On the other had you have Warmaster. Command and control is key to this game. Your units are three stands of undetermined number but you know it is a mass force. For 28 mm you could say each stand is 10 figure for a total of three stands for a starting unit of 30 figures regardless of race with the exception of larger creatures such as trolls, ogres, etc. Frontage matters only in terms of infantry has a wider front while cavalry has a smaller frontage thus multiple units of cavalry can have a concentrated punch against a unit with a wider frontage. Weapons, armor and racial advantages and disadvantages are greatly abstracted as is moment. Formation changes are pretty open ended and have little to be fussy about.

Anyway there is some of my thinking I will have more later.

Here is the crux of designing such games:
If you go 'generic' the whole thing feels somewhat 'blah'… a big draw of fantasy/sci-fi gaming is immersion in a fantasy world/universe. Using a hodge-podge of manufacturers is still 'generic'.
If you flesh out a world and design the game around it, that it is much more interesting and addictive, but then you are bound to using a specific line of miniatures that you either have to produce yourself or depend on the (often fickle) production/availability of other producers.
So what we end up with is a plethora of 'generic' fantasy sets where the only difference is the rules used to represent abstract generic conflict in an abstract generic setting, or you get slick well-produced (sometimes) rule sets designed to support an associated range of miniatures in an interesting world… which either cost an arm and a leg or promptly go out of buisness or cease production after a couple of years…
There have been numerous atttempts at compromise, all of which have failed as evidenced by their short life-span, obscurity, and sheer number.
So, my advice is this: Create a rule set which supports an intersesting world of your design (or adoption)and make sure that you and/or your friends have all the required miniatures to play these rules. Then, you will have a rule set that you really like (because you made it) and a world that is interesting (because it is not generic). Of course, this is not going to be material for tournament style play, but tournaments are for wrestling and chess, IMHO. You can always stat up new miniatures/factions as you see fit/ as they are discovered… but once you introduce a 'build your own units' system, you are back in the bland generic world.
(cooperative writing may be an interesting excercise, but it never produces an intersting and coherent world…)
Note how GW's success hinges largely upon peoples addiction to their most excellent game worlds/universes (Warhammer/40K), and how 'generic' rules are really only intersting as an academic excercise… the best rules without a solid setting is little better than parchisi.
Just my two bits…

Billthecat,

My friend you have eloquently stated the problem. (sigh)
But it is such fun tilting at windmills.

Anyway as far as product on the market yes I would want something that anyone could adapt their collection to. And while I say 28mm if I can make it work for other scales and sizes that would be a bonus.

IMO the best way to do this is to make it a unit based game, with all units having equal frontage. That way it doesn't matter what basing system you use, or what scale figures. Combat is worked out by unit, with no figure removal. All measurement (movement, ranges, etc) should in terms of unit frontage.

I would want the rules to be scenario based and not points based

If you have a points system, people can play whatever type of games they want, including unbalanced scenarios. If you don't have a points system, the type of game you can play is restricted, and it means someone always has to put the effort into creating a scenario.
If you want this to appeal to a wide audience then a ppoints system is a must.

I prefer elements over individual figures and here again maurice is good. Units are 4 elements and distances are measured in base widths.

Whilst a bit of fantasy flavour is good, you can have too much. I will be going with fairly subtle effects and unit types. So light infantry, close order heavy infantry etc.