"What's the Most Impressive Single Mechanic in a Game Ever" Topic

So in any game you've ever played for the first time and you've gone, "That's brilliant…I love it"

I know it may not be exactly unique but when I played Wings of War I thought the Movement Card system was an excellent idea and then in the X-Wing Miniatures game I really thought the movement dial was very clever…

TFL's using Blinds or Ghost tokens to represent hidden troops….Nordic Weasel's 5Core system's activation "Scurry and Firefight" rule was different in that it wasn't an immediate hit with me but later realized how brilliant it shape a battle

So then what mechanic in a game really has really impressed you?

In terms of 'short rules, large impact' it would probably be the THW Rep check system; it captures a lot of useful outcomes in a short table, and also makes solo play a snap.

In terms of play aids the AVID from Ad Astra Games for representing a ship's orientation in 3D space in a way that actually makes intuitive sense.

-Will

The patrol phase in CoC.

That being in your headquarters in Junta is a coup excuse. that is, actually doing our job is a revolutionary action.

I liked the command system in Warmaster.

That being in your headquarters in Junta is a coup excuse. that is, actually doing our job is a revolutionary action.

That must be from a later edition. The first edition managed to miss that piece of cynicism. Too bad.

(I do think Junta was the first board (or other) game to invoke assassination.)

The initiative system in Crossfire, even though some of our crew don't get it (and so we don't play it any more).

I like the variable number of commands you can issue in ColdWar Commander, and the variable movement distance in Peter Pig's AK-47.

I like not knowing if every unit will be able to move/fire etc… and not knowing how far a unit will move with 100% certainty.

It's the musketry system in 'King of the Battlefield' SYW rules. Instead of working out musketry casualties, and then taking a morale test based on the casualties, you simply say, for example, 'these two units are firing on that unit of grenadiers, so take a morale test' with the unit being able to take a limited number of failures. It's very streamlined. Pity I don't play those rules!

Probably the "infinite movement until stopped by enemy fire" system, first established in Crossfire and later used in games like Tomorrow's War.

1HW combat resolution.
Fatigue system in Brigadier General.

Individual combat in massed battles. Who would have thunk it? Element basing and abstracted combat is the norm and always was. Having each figure have its own combat results is just so fun. Doesn't make for a long game either, like you'd suspect it would….

Hit and save combat mechanic. It was among the first wargame mechanics for "modern" wargaming. It is still used quite a bit today even after 53ish years.

King of the Battlefield – again. The cavalry melee mechanic (which allows multiple units to get involved but requires you to consider whether to throw your reserves in now or later). Apart from the added decisions, it differentiates infantry and cavalry combat in a way that no other game does.

A couple of my favorites, which I ripped off for my home rules.

Song of Blades and Heroes activation system – roll 1-3 dice to activate a figure; 2 failures ends your turn. You can play it safe and roll 1 die for a figure but that limits what that figure can do. Or you can take a risk and roll more dice and possibly gain more actions.

Command & Colors combat system – modifying the NUMBER of dice instead of the roll on the dice was a new concept to me when Battle Cry was first published.

A few which spring to mind:

Move then shoot (Panzerblitz, WRG 1925-50). Never thought about it at the time, but a simple way of modelling the advantage of the defence in modern warfare.

DBA Opposed dice combat system. Simply brilliant, brilliantly simple.

AK47 random movement. Ripped off endlessly for my own rules.

Probably the "infinite movement until stopped by enemy fire" system, first established in Crossfire and later used in games like Tomorrow's War.

Eh? Tomorrow's War doesn't have infinite movement like Crossfire.

For me the first mechanic in a long time that made me say – that is pretty cool – elegant and simple – is the advantage/disadvantage from D&D 5th edition

Outdating virtually all of the above, Larry Brom's use of cards and dice to randomize order and distance of movement in "The Sword And The Flame."

I grew up in the tyrannical and abusive environment of early 70's Napoleonic war games that processed all the suspense and uncertainty out of the game, and when first reading TSATF in '79, it made NO sense to me.

But when I played my first game a couple of years later, I had my Road To Damascus Moment, and ah seen de light!!

TVAG

I don't know if this is the greatest, but one I really remember was a Taranto Bay game at…one of the HMGS cons, probably Historicon. There were several interesting things about it, but this one ran thus: at the start they handed out 2 pieces of candy. At the time I thought, "Oh, that's nice of them," and tucked them in my shirt pocket -- I don't really like sweets that much. But, as the game progressed, it turned out the candy represented fuel use/luck in your Swordfish. Some players had eaten theirs and they got one try at a successful torpedo run. I ate none of mine so I got 3. Clever and completely unexpected.

It's the musketry system in 'King of the Battlefield' SYW rules. Instead of working out musketry casualties, and then taking a morale test based on the casualties, you simply say, for example, 'these two units are firing on that unit of grenadiers, so take a morale test' with the unit being able to take a limited number of failures. It's very streamlined. Pity I don't play those rules!

That sounds suspiciously like the system used in "Quick Tricorne" that was developed by Fr. Aelred Glidden which was in turn developed from Wally Simon's account of Stephen Simpson's rules for the ARW which appeared in "Wargames Illustrated" #75.

Jim

But to keep on theme, the command and control system Sam Mustafa developed for his Blucher rules where you opponent rolls three D6 command dice for your activations and then tells you when you equal or exceed that number. Tends to make you think about the prioritization of your unit activations since you don't know if you have 3 points or 18 points to spend.

Jim

Opposed die rolls. Don't know who came up with it but it makes games better.

That sounds suspiciously like the system used in "Quick Tricorne" that was developed by Fr. Aelred Glidden which was in turn developed from Wally Simon's account of Stephen Simpson's rules for the ARW which appeared in "Wargames Illustrated" #75.

That's because it is. Twilight of the Sun-King has the same mechanic. But it should definitely be credited to Fr. Aelred.

The Dervish deployment rules in Peter Pigs PITS. Terrain is laid down as area templates, then Mahdist units are deployed as half-units in each of two seperate terrain pieces. Either one could be the actual unit.

Terrain can also be moved, changed or removed entirely as the result of scouting.

Together these give a great feel of marhing through hostile territory.

Harassing morale test in Chris Parkers Day of Battle.

The command roll in all warmaster (Rick Priestley) inspired games.

Dice.

Patrol phase of Chain of Command. Big leap forward in game design that one.

The so called 'combat black box' in Le Feu Sacre. I'm sure it's influenced by board gaming but it's such a brilliant way of resolving so much in such a streamlined way.

One thing that bugs me in games is where you have muskets firing the equivalent of a couple of hundred yards and scoring hits when in reality they may well opening fire at 50 yards and often much less. The LFS 'black box' resolves all of the close combat and the outcome of close combat very neatly. I love it.

The patrol phase in CoC is also a brilliant, brilliant idea.

But to keep on theme, the command and control system Sam Mustafa developed for his Blucher rules where you opponent rolls three D6 command dice for your activations and then tells you when you equal or exceed that number.

I second this one and fully intend to shamelessly abscond with it at some point. ;)

I'm also a fan of opposed rolls and die-shifts – these feature heavily in my rules, but weren't premiered in them by any stretch of the imagination.

Shawn.

Second Song pf Blades activation. Every turn is a tactical choice between being playing safe, but knowing you lose the attrition battle, or going for broke and maybe nothing moves.
Failing that, the Zombiecide mechanic where the more damage you do the harder the game gets. This applies to each figure, so you cannot level up one guy and blast a path or the others will be wiped out, you must coordinate everything.

THE Sword and the Flame: Using cards for randomized activations -- keep in mind it came out in the late 70s so this was a really interesting approach for the time.

Two Hour Wargames' reaction system for solo gaming. It makes each character behave on it's own in a realistic way. It makes games unpredictable and replayable, important for solo gaming.

There are tons of good ones, but most of the ones that really stand out to me are oriented to command and control/unit activation. In that vein, I'll add another vote for the SoB&H system, perhaps with the closely related OG&M reaction thrown in for good measure.

Doug

My favorite is the Medicine Number rule in Greg Novak's She Wore a Yellow Ribbon. Each Indian unit is assigned a Medicine Number, which can be reduced due to casualties or other unfortunate happenings. Each band also scores Victory Points for inflicting enemy casualties, counting coup, taking captives, getting loot, etc.

When the band's Victory Points equal or exceeds its Medicine Number, the band pulls out. In other words, the Indian act like Indians.

I like Two Hour Wargames use of Potential Enemy Forces. The mechanic allows an easy method for fog of war that works especially well solo.

"Two Hour Wargames use of Potential Enemy Forces"

Can you describe how that works Paul

The Possible Enemy Forces or PEFs are hidden units, friend or foe. They will move around the table top. When your group or character has LOS with a PEF you roll for results. Depending on the game, the results can be nothing (just the wind), enemy units – one or several, vehicles, a building, civilians, a hostage, person of interest, etc. The revealed unit will have a movement "AI" by rolling on tables. If not enemy units, they can be questioned, reveal new missions, further the story. Along with the reaction system, THW games are great to play solo.

Thanks Tekawiz sounds like I'll have to take a look

Opposed die rolls, with modifiers being a change of die type rather then a +- 1 on the result of the roll.

When you use same colors for the same dice, e.g. all D8 are yellow, all D10 are red, it provides a very fluent and quick gaming mechanic.

Blood Bowl; It's you turn until you fail an action.
This means that you evaluate risk vs benefit for every single action you take. You can play it safe and slow, or risk it by setting up a chain of moves and passes which risks falling flat if a single roll fails.

Using dice to determine hits instead of throwing clods of dirt at figures. What a step up in my miniature gaming. Though I do miss the impact of a good toss where the clod breaks up and the pieces knock down multiple figures.

I agree with Doug.

Had good fun with that, back in the day.

Used rocks for rifle and bow fire, when playing cowboys and Indians. Dirt clods were cannon shots.

Things that left an impression on me, when I read them, regardless of whether they were original at that point:

Stargrunt using leaders to activate squads a second time.

Crossfire's lack of measurements.

Warzone's idea of each squad member getting a number of actions each turn.

For sheer playing fun, the saving throw. It involves the player who's figure has been hit and adds to the excitement/tension of play.

The opposed die rolls and results table in Totten's Strategos, an American kriegsspiel published in the 1880s, IIRC.

Whats new with the Blucher activation roll? Its like DBA with hidden scores. And you have to prioritize your actions in DBA too.

The very concept of the role-playing game, with persistent characters that change in ability and equipment over time, resulting in a game that never repeats, and doesn't need to be "won." That may be the single most significant game mechanic of the modern era.

On the more mundane side, I'll second the Warmaster command roll and the Wings of War card maneuver system.

Warmaster command roll.

DBA PIP roll.

DBA combat results table (different results depending on whether you beat the enemy, or double him).

Very few mechanics are unique.

Back in the 1980s, we adopted the Objective Zone system for villages, towns, factories or other significant structures on a battlefield.

The movement delay, the protection of a garrison vs a unit marching in the streets, the sponge effect of committing troops to the capture/defense of a zone and other concepts made the use of zones important in a battle.