Snowydog | 04 Jun 2015 4:39 a.m. PST |
|
advocate | 04 Jun 2015 5:01 a.m. PST |
I don't have the rules to hand, but I thought courage tests are made using 2D6, and always played it that way. Always using 12D6 for a full strength unit is a handy way of managing things. If you find Bidowers too effective (and hitting at 5+ I can understand why) then I'd suggest changing the to hit value to 6, or raising their 'Shoot' command value. But they generally only get a limited number of shots, at a relatively short range and in game terms I haven't found it a problem. |
Matt Black | 04 Jun 2015 5:09 a.m. PST |
Following on from advocate (I've just left a comment on your blog) you use 2D6 for a courage test. |
janner | 04 Jun 2015 6:07 a.m. PST |
Just to clarify, wild charge only comes into play if a unit has enemy in charge range. |
Thomas O | 04 Jun 2015 7:30 a.m. PST |
2D6 for courage test and agree with Janner about the Wild Charge. |
advocate | 04 Jun 2015 7:42 a.m. PST |
Personally I found the Wild Charge rule too much, and allowed players to try to activate a unit the failed Wild Charge to MOVE (not ATTACK); and also made attempts to charge units in bad going voluntary rather than obligatory. However the many players on Dan's discussion group are happy as it stands. |
kallman | 04 Jun 2015 9:01 a.m. PST |
I am happy with the rules as they are. And yes it is 2D6 on the courage test. I also do not have an issue with the fact that units tend to break down and become battered or flee on a pretty regular basis. This is a game reflecting raids and skirmishes not mighty armies moving in large formations. The beauty of the game is its fast play. We have been able to get in at least two games on a week night using Lion Rampant. Of course add home rules and adjustments as you will, the author strongly encourages such. |
Buff Orpington | 04 Jun 2015 9:19 a.m. PST |
I dislike the idea of restricting shooting to match the numbers in a unit. Using this idea makes it too difficult for a full unit of bidowers to do any damage to a unit of men at arms. 6 dice needing 4+ will average 3 hits. If they are skirmishing they will be lucky if they get 2 hits, neither will cause a casualty on MAA. I think most of your reservations are due to the misunderstanding over courage tests. With that sorted out you should find that the rules give a much better result. |
Snowydog | 04 Jun 2015 9:20 a.m. PST |
Thanks for the comments, especially about the 2D6 for the Courage test. I've been playing it wrong, and what is worse I've been introducing the rule wrong to others! I will email my apologies to those who I have played to make sure my error is not perpetuated. I will also edit my blog post to remove this criticism of these otherwise excellent rules. |
janner | 04 Jun 2015 1:07 p.m. PST |
Don't be too hard on yourself, it was an honest mistake |
advocate | 05 Jun 2015 2:44 a.m. PST |
I remember a baordgame that we played several times (and enjoyed) before we realised that we should have been rolling a D10 for combat results rather than the D6 we had been using. |
Miniaturerealm | 05 Jun 2015 7:28 a.m. PST |
We've been playing these rules for over a couple of months now. it had been many many years since the early days of GW and citadel that id played medieval or fantasy. Thanks to these rules we have a half dozen players all actively enjoying our re birth and all other projects have been placed on the back burner while we marvel over mounted knights and skeletons !! for the Dragon rampant addition due later this year. An excellent fast playing set that actively allows house rules without lots of charts and tables…. |
kallman | 05 Jun 2015 11:22 a.m. PST |
Yes Minaturerealm I too am eagerly waiting for Dragon Rampant. I have been looking over all those old Warhammer Armies and see that at least some of those lovingly painted models might see action again under a new game system. I gave up on Warhammer after the last edition. It was just no longer my particular cup of beverage. |
MajorB | 06 Jun 2015 10:28 a.m. PST |
Yes Minaturerealm I too am eagerly waiting for Dragon Rampant. Is there any truth in the rumour of a Black Powder variant to be entitled "Dragoon Rampant"? |
zirrian | 06 Jun 2015 12:21 p.m. PST |
It's amusing how everyone praises Lion Rampant – I for one kinda regretted buying the digital version. I've played only a single game, but that was enough, and I don't think I'll ever play it again. I stood like an idiot because I couldn't activate ANYTHING, while my opponent beat the out of me. So yeah, definitely wasn't a fun experience. |
janner | 06 Jun 2015 2:19 p.m. PST |
Maybe it's because we don't all give up after losing a single game |
zirrian | 07 Jun 2015 3:28 a.m. PST |
janner, it wasn't just losing. Sitting for two hours while my opponent devastates me is anything but losing. It's not fun. The possibility of one player not doing anything is not a good thing for a wargame, especially this small scale. Which archers wouldn't shoot at the knights slowly coming towards them through a field? Oh, I know, those archers that see they don't move because they are too busy not doing anything because their controller failed a 7+. |
janner | 07 Jun 2015 5:13 a.m. PST |
I suggest you try it again, but with both generals having the commanding rule as basic, plus another trait as normal. I think you'll find that you will enjoy a better game |
warhorse | 09 Jun 2015 12:21 p.m. PST |
That has always been my concern with rules that require random activation before you get to do anything. Perhaps you could allow each player a minimum of one free action each turn? Of course that will always be the key action for the turn, but that may be a small price to pay. Alternatively, your first activation maybe gets +2? |
janner | 14 Jun 2015 9:53 p.m. PST |
The commanding rule gives you a single re-roll for a unit within 12" of the leader. Of course, you can still fail twice or forget the 12" rule and lose out on the re-roll, but it is a simple 'in-rules' fix. |