"Using Blackpowder Rules for Napoleonics?" Topic

I am getting back into Napoleonics after several decades away. The group I have met would like to use the Blackpowder rules. I am not familiar with these rules but I am concerned that they will be too generic and will not produce a good Napoleonic experience. I would love to hear from anyone who is familiar with the rules and wether or not they are a good fit for Napoleonics. When I played in the 80's we used Empire II rules.

We love BP and add or subtract rules that suit

Compared to Empire, BP are much more streamlined. Here is a detailed summary of the rules mechanisms:

link

It is a fun game. I just played the Renaissance version (Pike & Shotte) the other night. Definitely not what is often called a "simulation" but with the right fellows around the table you will get a very nice Napoleonic flair.

If you are worried about being too generic they probably are since it really is generic. Other then not allowing moving units to fire it works for me. For a less generic treatment with similar rules overhead try getting your group to try Blucher.

I use it for Napoleonic and it feels napoleonic to me.

If your group is familiar with Napoleonics then they can make it Napoleonic.

BP is no more generic than a whole lot of other "Horse and Musket" or Napoleonic rules.

Is it ever the rules that give feel? For sure some rules don't work, but it's more often the case that period feel is provided by the 'spirit of the period' of people playing.

To be honest I think "period feel" is a complete canard. Really it just means "I don't like them." But it somehow feels more "reasonable" than a simple "yuck."

There are a few silly mechanisms in Black Powder – like the Blunder rule (easy enough to ignore) – but overall for me at least the game is fun. And that's what I care about!

There are a few silly mechanisms in Black Powder – like the Blunder rule (easy enough to ignore)

Why was this included? Surely, in play testing this proved a problem.

I have not played BP but, I'm planning on using them for my up coming Napolenic Peninsular games. I've read the rules and I've already decided that the blunder rule, as it stands, is a bit rubbish.

"To be honest I think "period feel" is a complete canard. Really it just means "I don't like them." But it somehow feels more "reasonable" than a simple "yuck.""

Well I'll just step right on up and say yuck. If you take it and play AWI, SYW, ACW or Napoleonics with it, it still has the same feel (I've played it in all those periods). I feel it is Games Workshop meets historical horse & musket period warfare. The group I belong to tried hard to make these rules work and they just provide whacky feel to it.

There are a few features I like with units being able to have special attributes and being able to move about freely, that's where it ends. It is the only rules I've come across where our entire group had a unanimous opinion that it didn't satisfy us. If you find a set of rules where you're having to cut rules here and there, then it's best to find something else that's published where new members don't have to figure out what rules may or may not be in play.

For small tactical games, I believe Lasalle does well. For larger games, I think Shako handles things decent enough. For grand tactical games, I think Grande Armee gets the right balance. I think if Black Powder wasn't advertised all over Wargames Illustrated, it wouldn't be nearly as popular.

The rules are easy to pick up and play and should give you a result in 2-3 hours they don't have enough of a Napoleonic feel for me personally but some of my Wargaming colleagues swear by them

You might want to check out the "Blenheim to Berlin" blog for some reports of the rules in use and access to Bill's house rules, including a revised sequence of play, which I think are a real improvement on the original..
link

If you take it and play AWI, SYW, ACW or Napoleonics with it, it still has the same feel (I've played it in all those periods).

If you play it straight then yes, it will be the same. But that is what the "Special Rules" are for. So for example, you wouldn't use the "Form Square" special rule in ACW, because they didn't. Also in the ACW you would have Rifled Muskets rather than Smoothbore and possibly even Breechloading Rifles (in the later ACW). Taken together these will give a different flavout to an ACW game compared to a Napoleonic game.

And so on.

I really like them; probably my Napoleonic rules of choice from the last decade. For me they tick most, if not all, the boxes.

You can't really compare BP with Blucher because in the former the standard unit is the battalion, which can deploy skirmishers and you can have more artillery models rather than it being factored into certain units combat ratings. Blucher is brigade level so those touches BP have aren't there.

BP is not for gamers who like to be omnipotent generals of their armies. There's more variable outcomes with command, combat and movement than Blucher and Napoleon's Battles. Blucher's got great command rules, with lots of variables but combat mostly comes down to a weight of numbers game.

BP games I've played have been more exciting and the outcome less predictable than other Napoleonics rules out there. I'd certainly give them a go.

As for being "generic"….WRG 1685-1845. 'nuff said.

I have had the most 'Napoleonic' 'feeling' game of my life with Black Powder.

However, you do have to select your unit attributes and stats, and the select the appropriate special rules for the particular army and campaign you are trying to experience, whether Napoleonic, ACW or whatever.

The essential Black Powder rules are no more than an elegant rules engine, which emphasise the frustrations of C2, to hang the period feel onto by means of these special rules and stats.

So yes, you do have to do a little work yourself. But the good news is this is done before the game. The rules are so simple though, that during the game you only really need to think about the tactics.

BP is a little generic for me as well. Blucher hits the sweet spot for me, but it might not suit your scale.
anyway…
getting my popcorn ready and sitting down for this thread.

"If you play it straight then yes, it will be the same. But that is what the "Special Rules" are for. So for example, you wouldn't use the "Form Square" special rule in ACW, because they didn't. Also in the ACW you would have Rifled Muskets rather than Smoothbore and possibly even Breechloading Rifles (in the later ACW). Taken together these will give a different flavout to an ACW game compared to a Napoleonic game."

To a degree, yes. But the special rules were part of what I did like; the blunders and the rather unpredictable movement were just plain silly. Announcing everything first and the whole pretense of a gentleman's game just never sold me on it.

Have not played Blackpowder but I am interested. Only problem I can see is how do you handle higher level of commands.
Corp -> Division -> Brigade -> Regiment -> Battalion/Squadron

The rules seem to handle Division -> Brigades -> Battalion/Squadron(with battalions/squadrons being bunched together?). So how do you manage the higher level of commands?

Huge tables and lots of players would be my guess.

BP plays well but is not a game for higher level gaming… multiple divisions or Corps. Using a blob of miniatures to represent a brigade or Division isn't napoleonic gaming…. just a blob. Works great for the smaller Division vs. Division or smaller actions. For historical battles… the typical well known battles…. these rules need huge amounts of terrain, tabletop, and miniatures for each individual unit (ie battalion) or fall into the "representation camp" of this miniature blob is a brigade or worse… a Division.

Blucher is a card board game looking like a miniature card game. Just apply or glue miniatures to the card surface or use a replacement same size base. Unlike BP, Blucher works well for the larger battles of the period but the square blob look is in since the "miniatures" aka cards are basically rectangle / square shapes. Good basic rules and movement but it is a card board game in design without a hex or line grid on the tabletop. The miniature attachment on the cards or replacement same sized basing creates the miniature effect but without the ability to change the formation look… linear vs. column vs. square, classic to this period of warfare.

Blucher works well as 15mm or smaller miniature while BP tends to be 25/28mm should be noted.

Me… I like individual units with smaller miniature count (6-12 miniature size, sort of like your old Empire II gaming) and ability to change the formation look. Play historical uneven scenarios and set the victory conditions to hint towards the historical action while giving each side the win possibilities. Call it old school but still meets my desires for napoleonic era gaming. BP couldn't come close to individual large battle historical scenarios on individual battalion basis… unless you have unlimited funds and painting time or commission $$ in wallet. Blucher is just too "square and fixed formation" for me. My old SPI board games basically looks the same but on a smaller scale game board. My tabletop battles have every battalion unit represented with the actual painted uniformed unit…. generally no proxies required… that unit is the 4th Swiss regiment. They can form lines, squares and column formations and look the part on the tabletop. BP looks as massed blocks of miniature hitting massed blocks of miniatures but you can give somewhat the look of squares or deep linear lines. Still…24-48 infantry miniature battalion for a unit is a lot of painting the same block of "xx" unit. Want to play that historical med sized battle…You need 50 battalions for each combative side… thats 1200 painted miniatures before cavalry. artillery batteries, commanders, train units, the actual scaled terrain, and the depth required for playing the game times two.. Otherwise the "representation look comes into play… that blob is representing the 5th Division and not the 2nd battalion 124th Line. Rent a dance hall?

Both games I have played and enjoyed. Both are popular. Both have their good points and some negatives…. but napoleonic era gaming has more to offer than just these two rule sets.

I have a copy of BP somewhere back East but I haven't ha my hands on it in years. I read over it extensively and played a few games with it. I wonder how it would work with truly huge games?

1809in3mm.blogspot.com

For instance, here's two corps on my top post, over 100 units total if you count the artillery batteries. Could BP produce a good result with a game that big in a decent amount of time? Obviously, my table is a bit busy here. But the terrain is fine enough where it could feasibly work. I ask because I want to eventually get to the point where I can do convention games and I'm going to need some seriously quick-playing rules to keep things moving with as many units as I have planned (300+ per side!).

TMPWB- any big games or conventions coming up on the west coast that you're aware of? I'm up in the CV and there's isn't anything going on here…

Play a couple of games and see if you like them. It's the only way to be sure.

"I wonder how it would work with truly huge games?"

We have played MASSIVE games (12+ players a side, 000s of 28mm figures) of Borodino, a gigantic battle of Leipzig, and this year Waterloo. They worked brilliantly well. The simplicity and sociability of Black Powder lends itself to truly huge games.

May I suggest

link

I use these (with some small tweaks – I am only human after all), as I find they offer me a very Napoleonic feel to the game.

We have managed to play reasonably sized games (1,400+ figures, 8 by 6 table) on a Friday, or better still, duing a whole day Saturday.

Great rules to get a good Napoleonic game with non-Napoleonic players

I really like BP, you can crack an evenings gaming with a division of infantry and a brigade or two of cavalry aside, and still have time for a conversation. They certainly 'feel' napoleonic enough to me

Yes Paul is absolutely right, Black Powder is ideal for massive games!

it seems you lost some players?