"28mm Plains Indians" Topic

Can anyone help. Apart from Foundry and Artizan can anyone recommend some good 28mm Plains Indians, they seem to be hard to get!
Cheers
Mike

Dixon Miniatures:
link

Connoisseur Pony Wars range is not bad – but I cannot find any pics of them. Moan to Andrew at Bicorne about that:)

link

Conquest Miniatures Plains Wars range
link

The Old Glory Chiefs and Villagers packs are very good. Other packs give results commesurate with what you put into them…

What about rules to go with them?

What about rules to go with them?

Any good skirmish rules covering the 19th century should work.

Because, obviously, Comanche warriors behave just like Prussiam dragoons.

Because, obviously, Comanche warriors behave just like Prussiam dragoons.

Um… no they they don't, but why do you say so?

Thanks all for your comments. I did think of the Dixons ones but they look more 25mm, although height i suppose isnt a concern :).

Im thinkking of using Rules with no Name unless any other ideas..
Mike

I said:

"Because, obviously, Comanche warriors behave just like Prussian dragoons."

Major Bumsore said:

"Um… no they they don't, but why do you say so?"

That would be my point, Major. Most generic C19th rules address the behviour of European-style troops and those indigenous persons inclined to take them on in a straightforward, toe-to-toe style.

The plains tribes didn't act that way at all. So you want rules for them that involve ambushes, mobility, leaving the table completely, watching your friend attack on his own while admiring his courage.

Prussian dragoons don't count coup. And they don't leave the battlefield because the medicine is bad and they've lost 2% casualties (that being the best buffalo hunter in the tribe, who is your wife's favourite nephew)

First thought – the late Greg Novak's "Yellow Ribbon".

So you want rules for them that involve ambushes, mobility, leaving the table completely, watching your friend attack on his own while admiring his courage.

As I said, any good skirmish rules would include these features.

I have no knowledge of the rules you suggest.I presume they do cover the features you identified?

Hi, I'll chime in because I have been gaming Plain's Indian Wars and have read fairly deeply on the subject for 35 years.

Mexican Jack nailed it. Simple skirmish rules simply won't provide the gamer with what separates the Plain's War gamer from other conflicts. That rules out the vast majority of skirmish sets. Indians didn't take orders or have morale like other armies. And no, most skirmish rule sets good or not don't address these things.

Yellow Ribbon does it exceptionally well. Pony Wars and The Tomahawk and the Flame both address these aspects of Indian warfare. I am working on my own set of rules for the period too.

Hth,

John

Simple skirmish rules simply won't provide the gamer with what separates the Plain's War gamer from other conflicts.

Agreed. I did not say "simle skirmish rules", I said "good skirmish rules".

That rules out the vast majority of skirmish sets.

It does not rule out those skirmish rules that allow the inclusion of specific additional rules to handle the particular ways in which Indians fought.

^^^Which most skirmish rules--including good ones--do not.

^^^Which most skirmish rules--including good ones--do not.

That of course depends what you mean by good. When I said "good" I meant the ones that do.

Equally, it is surely not beyond the wit of man to take a set of (otherwise good) skirmish rules that do not include these desirable Indian-specific features and add them in anyway? Rules, unlike the Commandments, are not set in stone (at least as far as I am aware).

So, that's why whenever anyone asks for a suggestion on rules for, say, Marcus Antonius' expedition to the Parthian borderlands, you suggest your favourite set for 1970s TV shows, right?

We've noticed that.

So, that's why whenever anyone asks for a suggestion on rules for, say, Marcus Antonius' expedition to the Parthian borderlands, you suggest your favourite set for 1970s TV shows, right?

As a matter of fact, yes. Although I didn't specifically mention them here did I? They are eminently tweakable, to such an extent that they are, to all intents and purposes, a generic set of skirmish rules that provide a very simple and fun game engine. The actual rules can be summarised on a single sheet of A4.

I find it difficult to understand why people seem to think that you need different game mechanics in order to add "period flavour". What is really needed, as recent popular games such as Black Powder, Hail Caesar and others have demonstrated, is the ability to add specific rules to cover specific cases. The basic mechanics remain the same.

Works for me, but of course, YMMV!!

Ah, I now understand. You simply don't play or have read much on the Plain's Indian War. That would seem to be the only answer. No person who has done any reading about the warfare practices and history of these wars would ever suggest that any generic rule skirmish set would be a good fit for the Plain's Indian wars.

Now, the 3 gents who are (Mexican Jack, 79th and myself) who are making this claim are all veteran gamers. I believe between us we have at least 100+ years of gaming experience and have all done some reading on the period. Now, that doesn't make us experts or geniuses. However, they are informed opinions. I value many opinions of various folks here. They have established their knowledge about various Wars, tactics, etc. on a variety of gaming periods. Do a little reading on the Old west board here at TMP and I believe you will determine that your suggestion about rules are way off the mark.

Thanks,

John

Conquest Miniatures

No person who has done any reading about the warfare practices and history of these wars would ever suggest that any generic rule skirmish set would be a good fit for the Plain's Indian wars.

I am NOT suggesting a generic skirmish set would do so on it's own. Or have you not understood what I've been saying?

Now, the 3 gents who are (Mexican Jack, 79th and myself) who are making this claim are all veteran gamers.I believe between us we have at least 100+ years of gaming experience

I have been wargaming myself for well over 30 years so I guess that puts us all roughly on a par.

Now, that doesn't make us experts or geniuses. However, they are informed opinions.

I'm not disputing your opinions and I'm not claiming to be an expert either. I think you are absolutely right that to represent the Plains Indian War you need specific rules that reflect the Indian's approach to fighting – which is completely different from that of "white men".

I fail to understand though why you are so vehemently opposed to taking a basic set of rules and adding the specific rules needed to them. The basic rules I am referring to do little more than specify a simple game sequence, how fast figures on foot or horseback move and the effectiveness of weapons. Everything else is added as specific rules to fit the historical period or genre you want to play.

"rules for 1970s TV shows"

You mean 7 TV? If yes; is there a wild west mod for it?

You mean 7 TV? If yes; is there a wild west mod for it?

Not specifically, but it would work fine for the wild west almost as written. Of course, if you want to do the Plains Indian Wars properly, you will need to add specific rules for the way Indians actually fight and behave …

Well, I guess we haven't made it quite clear. We aren't discussing 'house rules' that can be added. We are saying that after having gamed the period for 35-40 years there are period specific rules that handle the Plain's War quite effectively. If there is a skirmish set that will simply need adding 'specific rules' to make them appropriate I'd like to know 'which' rule sets those are? I'd also like you to identify 'what' rules need adding?

Bottom line about my discussing those folks with knowledge. If they all are saying the same thing and you are the only one who isn't, it possibly means they may be correct.

Thanks,

John

There's one player who tells me that my 'Astounding Tales!' Pulp era rules are great for ACW skirmish.

He may be right, I've not tried it.

But if someone asked for suggestions for refighting the night action on Lookout Mountain at a 1-1 level, I would not chip in and suggest 'Astounding Tales!'. They have no rules for rifled muskets but quite a bit on rocketmen, giant apes and airships.

That'd just confuse the guy who wanted to do Civil War skirmish.

Cool, Ive got 7 TV lying around somewhere.
I might have a crack at that. Have to read em first!

cheers

We aren't discussing 'house rules' that can be added.

As I said in a previous post, rules are not set in stone. Adding to or modifying rules is a great part of the wargaming hobby. One of the reasons why there are so many rules about! Also I'm not talking about "house rules". I'm talking about a game system that encourages players to add specific rules to cover their understanding of a particular conflict. Perhaps this is an unusual approach for you?

If there is a skirmish set that will simply need adding 'specific rules' to make them appropriate I'd like to know 'which' rule sets those are?

In case you hadn't picked that up already, the rules are 7TV.

I'd also like you to identify 'what' rules need adding?

You're the expert – you tell me! As MJS said: "ambushes, mobility, leaving the table completely, watching your friend attack on his own while admiring his courage.". I'd add to that the concept of counting coup rather than killing.

Bottom line about my discussing those folks with knowledge. If they all are saying the same thing and you are the only one who isn't, it possibly means they may be correct.

Or possibly that I haven't explained myself well enough. But actually we are not disagreeing. We agree that a purely generic set of rules just won't do. We are also agreed that Plains Indians need specific rules to cover the way they thought and behaved in action. I'm just suggesting a different way to do it. That is, think for yourself rather than rely on someone else's understanding. How often have you played a set of rules and said to yourself "Yes, but I don't think he's got this but right …"

Isn't one Mr Leahy's suggestions, 'The Tomahawk and the Flame' a variant of a set of generic colonial rules, rather than a dedicated Indian Wars game?

No, it's a period specific set of rules explicitly for the Indian wars using mechanics from TSATF as its basis. It's not Fred and Bill sitting down at a table and saying hey lets create houserules for a skirmish set that has nada to do with any colonial conflict.

Oh, I wouldn't call TSATF generic. It deals with specific Wars. The Tomahawk and the Flame is a more coherent and informative Indian Wars set than many other commercial sets available. It is packed with lots of historical organizational and background info. It is quite well done.

I'm done debating with the Major. Based on his premise gamers really only need a single set of rules for almost any gaming era. Heck, create your own houserules to cover 'any' period specific issues. Yeah, the vast majority of folks find that just as silly a suggestion as I do (and based on the comments here several other gents do too). If we can't find a logical basis to agree on discussing there really isn't much you can do to find common ground. I get that he likes those rules. Cool. I may like them for various things too. But the suggestion they cover anything (or any set can) stretches credulity.

Thanks,

John

Major Bumsore: AS Mexican Jack pointed out, "Good" skirmish rules are era and situation specific. If a gamer is already knowledgeable enough to write situation specific "house rules" or write additional rules of his own for a skirmish game, why wouldn't he just write his own complete set of rules? After all, basic skirmish rules abound and can be had for free on the internet. Doug6125 didn't ask for a modifiable set of rules, he asked for rules specifically to use for 28mm Plains Indians scenarios.

I hope Maj. Bumsore takes most of these opinions as what they are, opinions. (Besides, most of these guys think Custer hung the moon.) ;-)

If you want a ruleset that you can use off the shelf to game conflicts of the Plains Indian Wars, there is in my opinion, only one set, "Yellow Ribbon." That being said, even "Yellow Ribbon" requires some tweaking for some engagements.

There are good rule sets that can be modified to provide satisfactory games. But it requires a bit of research & leg work on the part of the gamer. Not only did the Indians fight different from the "whites", they also fought differently from tribe to tribe & band to band. And it isn't just the Indians. Custer's approach to battle was much different than that of Mackenzie, Davidson, Crook, or Miles. And you have those engagements where a small detachment was commanded by a Sgt. or a green Lt.

With the difference in customs, culture, equipment, & leaders, you also have to look at the terrain as well. The Llano Estacado is very different from the Dakota Badlands & very different from Kansas. Some battles took place in the confines of a few acres while some battles took place over 20 miles in a single day.

And then there is luck. Hanrahan getting advanced warning of the impending attack on Adobe Walls. The horse holder getting shot & losing the horses at the Buffalo Wallow. A sudden winter storm allowing the Comanche to escape at Blanco Canyon.

The gamer has to decide how much of this to abstract & what he can include to approximate the "feel" of what it was like to fight in those conditions. If you are willing to put in the research, then there are many good rulesets out there that can be modified to give a good game. However, if you just watched a few movies & skimmed a few articles, then using a good set of 19th century skirmish rules really won't give you an accurate portrayal of these conflicts.

What is frustrating with this period is that after all of this talk about rules, scenarios, & history, most gamers will only game the Little Big Horn.

--Elaine

AS Mexican Jack pointed out, "Good" skirmish rules are era and situation specific.

Agreed.

If a gamer is already knowledgeable enough to write situation specific "house rules" or write additional rules of his own for a skirmish game, why wouldn't he just write his own complete set of rules? After all, basic skirmish rules abound and can be had for free on the internet.

Indeed why not? Why be spoon fed when with a bit of research you can do your own thing?

Doug6125 didn't ask for a modifiable set of rules, he asked for rules specifically to use for 28mm Plains Indians scenarios.

Perhaps what would have been more helpful then would have been a discussion about what sort of specific effects should be included in a set of rules to cover this specific conflict. Then Doug6125 would have been able to either develop his own rules from a simple framework or check out the available more specific sets to see if they conform with his view of how such conflicts were fought.

After well over 30 years of wargaming, I have come to the conclusion that there are many rules sets out there that purport to model more or less specific conflicts when in fact all that they do is cloak the history in what the designer thinks are the best game mechanics to represent them. Woe betide anyone who challenges his approach!

I think you will find the article "Whose history? answered" by William Haggart in MW&BG No.362 has quite a bit to say on this subject.

Dear Doug 6125,

Apparently no one has taken the time to answer your question as they are too busy

You may wish to re-post at a different time

Dear Nasty Canasta

>>Apparently no one has taken the time to answer your question as they are too busy <<

Now pay attention. The Tomahawk and the Flame, Yellow Ribbon, and Pony Wars were all suggested by Mr. Leahy. I would have also suggested Pony Wars and Yellow Ribbon if he hadn't already mentioned them. Now go elsewhere.

Sigh…

Reading through the conversation, you did not answer Doug6125, but you responded to another comment. Pardon me for noticing.

Sorry. We don't feed the s.

Wargames Illustrated do a chief on foot.

If I hadn't decided to check put the Dawghouse, I would have missed this lovely exchange.

Nasty Canasta? Who is this man with 5.23 posts per stifle?

That's about as as popular as a dead skunk hurled through a dining room window.

He would be even worse but some of us never stifle because even the world worse knucklehead may someday say something worth read. just probably not today.

owen

Well, with the word 'nasty' in your nom de plume I'd say you tend to encourage suppositions about your presence here.

Thanks,

John

This thread is worth a laugh every time I read it through. Thanks guys!