"LOTR, Dragon Rampant Style" Topic
13 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please do not use bad language on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Fantasy Battle Reports Message Board Back to the Blogs of War Message Board Back to the 28mm Fantasy Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral Fantasy
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Showcase ArticleHow does coverbinding work?
Current Poll
Featured Book Review
|
Xintao | 04 Feb 2016 6:22 a.m. PST |
Last night we played our 2nd game of Dragon Rampant. Also being somewhat neck deep in playing Frostgrave, we decided to play on a Frosty battlefield. My friend Lou didn't know what we were playing so didn't bring any armies, I had to supply both sides. My biggest collection is my LOTR's figures so that's what we went with. I took Orcs and Lou took Elves backed up by Rohan. We did a 36 point game on a 5x6 foot table. Forgot about the scenarios before we set up game, so we just went at each other. Is that Bloodbath? Also didn't use Quests, as I hadn't read that section yet, and we were pressed for time.
Orcs in the foreground, Elves and Rohan on the far table edge.
Long shot of the table, Orcs on the left.
Elves went first but blew his first activation, I made all mine and advanced.
Riders of Rohan advance backed up by Elf bows and an Ent!
The Ent was scratch built by my opponent. My ebay elves are sad and need work.
Exchanging bow fire with Rohan
"Spears shall be shaken, Shields shall be splintered"
On the left flank, a 2nd Ent wades into Orcs in some forgotten ruin.
Wargs roam the battlefield forcing back the Ent
My Nazgul charges Rohan's best and they hold. It was a fun game, I was lucky with activations early on, pushed the Elves and Rohan back, but never could destroy a unit. Even the Rohan Riders(Elite Riders) with 2/3rds destroyed loosing to a fear causing Nazgul(-1 Morale to roll) I couldn't get them to flee. We had to end it before there was a clear victor. There was still a lot of fight left in the game. Most of the action took place on my right. On the left flank, lots of fresh troops remained. For More Pics, Army Lists, and full write up visit my blog: link Cheers, Xin |
tomrommel1 | 04 Feb 2016 7:01 a.m. PST |
|
Zeelow | 04 Feb 2016 7:08 a.m. PST |
*thumbs up"! Very nicely painted table end "mountains" backdrop, and scratch built tree man. |
Zargon | 04 Feb 2016 8:35 a.m. PST |
Loved your AAR and the buildings are superb, are they scratch built? If so how did you make them? As a aside think I will rip..erm.. copy your terrain :) Thanks seems like Dragon Rampart is going to give lots of us lots of fun. |
Xintao | 04 Feb 2016 8:57 a.m. PST |
Thanks. The Tower is from the Battlemasters game. The castle ruins on the other side are scratch built. They are made from pink insulation foam. My friend and opponent made them, and the Ents btw. Xin |
John Leahy | 04 Feb 2016 1:15 p.m. PST |
Really nice looking game! So aside from ditching the 3" rule how do you like the rules as a whole? I haven't had a chance to try them out yet. Thanks, John |
Xintao | 04 Feb 2016 2:34 p.m. PST |
John, I like the game a lot. I think the game play is elegant and smooth. At first I hated the "failed activation, lose your turn", but have come around to appreciate it. It kind of injects the fog of war. Here are my main issues that would take me from like to love. 1) 3 inch rule to friends, makes no sense. 2) The General should be able to have some kind of modifier to activation. Be it a simple plus for being near, an order to a specific unit, "x" number of pluses per turn in lieu of activating(like DBA pips). I like command structure, and not abstracted. 3) I think the list of Fantastical abilities is way to small 4) I like formations, not gaggles of men wandering around. That said, I fully realize that would add a whole new layer of complications to the rules. So this is not a deal killer for me. I have this same issue with LOTR SBG which I Love. Now things I Love about the system 1) The different kinds of activations for different unit types. Can't say it enough, BRILLIANT. Ordering skirmishing archers to charge a dragon, not gonna happen. 2) The unit types and how to use them to "create" anything you want. Any figures you have can be added in. Doesn't lock you in to any figure line and lets your imagination run wild. This is where more abilities would help. 3) Uncertain activations make turns a little uncertain. I like fog of war. 4) The rules are simple and straight forward, that makes it super easy to inject house rules without major disruptions of other parts of the system. I think that is a good summation of where I am with the rules. They will definitely get some table time in my basement. Hope this helps, Xin |
Andy Skinner | 05 Feb 2016 4:34 a.m. PST |
I was partly interested in the game because it did not put men in formation--I'm looking for "large skirmish". Turns out, with the 3" radius for figures in a unit, they aren't as flexible as I thought they might be. You could get your modifier for the general with one of the traits, I think. But I'm not interested in rolling to find out what my general is like. I don't want a brutal elf general. I wish these were something you could pay for (or get a bonus for) to help characterize your force as intended. But the points system has too low resolution, I think. Though some of those traits may have the same value. I'd also like to see more fantastical abilities. There are so many numbers in this game, and you could tweak any of them to get a change. But then you'd get into balance and abuse issues. I'd just like to be able to vary a bit, in case one of the unit types didn't quite match my image of something. For example, I'm not at all sure I like my ents as greater warbeasts. andy |
Codsticker | 05 Feb 2016 9:24 a.m. PST |
) The General should be able to have some kind of modifier to activation. Be it a simple plus for being near, an order to a specific unit, "x" number of pluses per turn in lieu of activating(like DBA pips). I like command structure, and not abstracted. I have only played Lion Rampant and this is the only thing that bugs me about the game. The General should have more control over the unit he is leading than other units. Perhaps a re-roll. I understand Mr. Mersey's reasoning here but I don't think it works. |
Sealion | 05 Feb 2016 9:57 a.m. PST |
Love the pictures and the report…thanks!! |
Sealion | 05 Feb 2016 10:14 a.m. PST |
For what it's worth, we have been toying about with the leader being able to grant one other unit a re-roll if it is within 6" and not battered or auto-activating his own unit as long as the unit isn't battered. This was only allowed if the first attempted activation failed…and no other activation was allowed afterwards. |
Xintao | 05 Feb 2016 11:23 a.m. PST |
Andy, forgot about that roll for general. That is another rule we dropped already. No one wants an unworthy General. We kicked that to the curb first game. As for the 3" radius, yeah, it is hard to get 12 guys with in that circle. It's kind of clunky. We just put the leader in the center of our formations and call it a day. About 3" is good enough. Your game, make it 4" Yes they could have included Fantastic abilities for modifiers for all the stats, extra armor, movement, Attack, etc. The game is simple, balancing those wouldn't be hard. I guess it leaves room for a 2nd book, lol. Codsticker and Sealion, Good ideas. Xin/Jeff |
Andy Skinner | 05 Feb 2016 12:22 p.m. PST |
I think the problem with balancing would come when adjusting things down for a point bonus. There isn't enough resolution to charge (or give back) points for everything, and you could turn one unit into another without the balancing downsides. So not all possible adjustments will work out, I think. I'd use the negative leader traits if I could choose them for a leader that it describes well. But my motives are not pure enough to take a negative trait without some balance somewhere else. I think the main thing the 3" radius is supposed to do is keep from occupying a big part of the table with a strung-out unit. I'm not sure it would be a problem, but having a max distance between figures would be a difference between, say, a 3 figure unit and a 12 figure unit. My wife wants the ping-pong table clean for a bit longer, but I'll get to playing soon! andy |
|