Hi
Thank you very much for your comments, as always they are much appreciated by Bob and myself.
Firstly leobarron2000, I am fortunate enough to have a large Edwardian dinning table which extends to 7 feet and is just under 4 feet wide. Changing movement and weapon ranges to centimetres helped a lot with the game.
PJ I know what you mean about these rules. However, if something happens in a game which Bob and I think is too odd, we either dice to see if it stands or do an on the spot modification based on the situation 'on the table' which seems to better fit the circumstance. This may be something in between. It's about enjoying the game from our point of view and if the game feels about right then that's okay.
All the rules we have played over the last 40 years or so have something odd at some point, often it is the way they are written. What my be obvious to the authors can leave me scratching my head.
My problem with Black Powder is the rules are scattered about and the Playsheets can only cover some elements, so you sometimes get to a situation where you know you've read something but finding it in the mass is difficult. 'Yes' I use tags to mark subjects, but even so! Sorry for the rant, but I was bought up in a time of indexes and cross-indexing when the aim was to help the reader/user find their way around. Ahhh…I feel better now that's off my chest!
I'll still go on using them as we have a number of armies ACW, Crimean, Napoleonic and FPW which means we only have to remember a basic set of rules with changes, rather than specific sets for each period, which I agree may be more accurate. We'll probably even steal ideas from those rules and incorporate them as we do if I think someone has come up with a novel and simple approach to naval landings/river crossing or blowing up bridges for example.
completes his initial Union force in 1:72nd scale.
