"Coming soon - All Things Zombie Evolution" Topic

link

Hi Ed, can you please tell us some of the differences between ATZ-FFO and ATZ-Evolution? I'm a fan and will probably buy this edition but it may help convince others if you described the differences.

Will do. Am waiting on the printer for a few surprise offerings and will do lots of explanation very soon. Will post here as well as the blog, forum, etc.

As a quick note the Reaction system, combat, shooting, etc. have been folded and streamlined to speed up the game process while keeping true to the "math" in ATZ FFO.

Will be doing a lot of direct comparisons in future posts.

In a 'Perfect World', during an Apocalyptic crisis, man kind, if only in small groups would always pull together for the common good (that's simply Never gonna happen).
The fact is, Zeds would only be a small problem to face and overcome, the human factor would be the real threat.

UGH, I really need to find 'someone' in my area that's played or at least interested in ATZ and try this game.
I think for starters my 1st 2 or 3 games would be just a small group working together vs. the random Z's encountered to get experience and a feel for the game itself.
Hmm, if I must, I may just take the plunge (or shamble) into the game and see about learning the game solo.

Sounds intriguing. I love the streamlining idea. Will the other THW offerings receive the same game mechanics facelift? In any case, I'm on board with this.

People say ATZ is all about the zombies, but that's not true. In fact, there's a 50/50 chance of meeting humans.

Zombies are like movable terrain and if you get killed by one in ATZ, you're very unlucky. When we played ATZ in conventions the past ten years only a handful of players ever got killed by zeds, 90% were killed by humans, usually other players. And it's been that way since the game first came out.

As for the game mechanics face lift, ATZ is actually one of the last to get it, most of the other games have had it done – except Chain Reaction needs it to be a free sample.

Part time gamer – You've described ATZ to the core. There's also three "training" scenarios set in the first 20 days of the outbreak plus a Day One scenario based on your current real life situation as in, do you have a spouse, kids, whee do you go first when the zeds show up, etc.

It's also made to be played solo and same side, cooperatively, without drawing cards to see who moves first or "making the best decision for the enemy".

Comparing the two.

link

Uh, just an observation, if you don't mind.

1 – Roll 1d6 on the Action Table to see who has advantage. 50/50 chance unless specified by the scenario.
2 – Leaders roll 2d6 versus Rep. Want to be more detailed? Your choice, just roll for each figure.
3 – Pass more whole group acts first. If tied, the side with advantage goes first.

If the advantage only comes into effect if the 2D6 rep rolls are tied, why bother with wasting time rolling for the advantage in step one? What am I missing?

Aside from that, I like just rolling for the leader. I seem to recall sometimes it would get messy rolling for everyone and remembering who goes when and figuring out the order. Admittedly it's been a long time since i played it! (And well before FFO if truth be told!)

Hi Tony,
I could have been more clearer. Here goes.
Each Leader has a Rep from 3 to 5, usually 5.
Roll 2d6 versus Rep – if score equal or less you passed that d6.
If both sides pass 2d6 – tied – then the side with the advantage wins and acts first.

We come into contact and go to the Action Table., I roll 1d6 and score a 4 – your side has the advantage.
We both roll 2d6 and both pass 2d6.
You act first because you have the advantage.
Hope this helps.

I'm looking forward to seeing the new edition.

Hi Ed,

As ever thanks for the fast response. Your speed and patience with answering questions on TMP, or email, or THW forum has always been one of the strongest positives about THW.

Nope, I understood your initial description, and your expanded explanation. Obviously I'm the one who needs to be clearer, so I offer my apologies for that! And I'm mentioning quite a minor quibble, but one that seems – to me – obvious if you're streamlining rules. Which is why I thought perhaps the advantage roll is necessary something else, other than ties.

In your described sequence, you roll advantage first. Then roll off the leaders' reps.

But if the leaders' reps do NOT tie, then you've wasted time fumbling around looking for the advantage chart, hunting down your lucky die, shaking it around in your fist, accidentally tossing it off the table where you need to retrieve it, make a witty comment to your opponent about "anything but a one"…you know the routine.

By reversing the sequence –

Step 1. Leaders' rep opposed roll FIRST.
Step 2 Roll for the advantage. MAYBE.

If the rolls do NOT tie in step 1, then you DON'T need to waste time going to the second step. I also freely admit that a large percentage of the time, if Reps are a 5, then ties will indeed be quite common, but not always.

And some might say that rolling a die doesn't take much time at all. I would have tended to agree a few years ago, but I've played a few games of "To the Strongest" and "King & Parliament" where there are no dice rolls, but rather you flip over a playing card. I was quite startled to discover how fast combat becomes when you do not need to fumble around with dice. Never would have guessed it before I actually saw the alternative in practice.

As I said, a minor quibble, but when you're streamlining a solid set of rules, every bit helps. And, I also must extend my apologies for testing your forbearance in this matter. I can only imagine, given the number of years you've been publishing many, many rulesets, how many armchair rules authors tell you how to write rules!

Hi Tony S,
Nice way to do that by reversing the order. You can do it that way, just let the other players know ahead of time. No worries, I enjoy the feedback and that's a major reason why the rules evolve and stay successful.
Thanks again,
Ed