"What's Most Important for a Convention Game? Engagement!" Topic

You were asked – TMP link

What's Most Important for a Convention Game?

In the final round, you said:

every player is engaged (46%)
GM that keeps the game moving (25%)
players feel welcomed (13%)

Is anyone surprised…if anything I would have guessed a higher percentage than 46%.

This is why I prefer simple rules that play quickly and all players are engaged in the game hopefully at all points during the event. I know that it is not always possible and the different rule sets have a great variety of mechanism but I am of the opinion of keep it simple and keep it fast.

I agree, keep it simple.

Me too, some of the best games don't actually make good convention games.

I agree with oldnorthstate, having every player engaged keeps the players happy and makes their contributions feel important to the outcome of the game. I'm surprised it's that low too.

A lot of the other answers were indirect ways of getting to 'every player is engaged'.

Simple rules aren't always a guarantee of that outcome.

Black Powder is one such. Simple rules, but in every multi-player game I have witnessed (and the one and only I played in), there is always one player who consistently fails order dice rolls and winds up with very little engagement in a 4-hour game. I will only play that game again if it is being run with house rules to ensure that every command roll counts as at least 1 success.

I agree w/ mini- If the dice rolls count more than my decisions, I would rather play "craps" in Vegas.

We are getting a bit off topic here, but I can't help but to respond.

If MiniMo equates failed command rolls in BP with "very little engagement in a 4-hour game", and PJ conflates BP with playin "craps" in Vegas, then you both really don't have much experience in the game.

You may not like BP and that is totally fine. There are many other games out there, some more to your liking. But you are both misrepresenting what goes on with command rolls in BP. The long and short of it is that die rolls do NOT count more than the decisions of the players.

By the way, I'm OK with the house rule miniMo suggests. Or perhaps just raise the leadership of the commanders.

Bowman- You are saying I am confusing dislike with in-experience. I am not, in my opinion, the decisions faced by a BP player have NO parallel on the battlefield. I do understand that there should be chaos and uncertainty on the tabletop, but when the rule mechanics completely overwhelm any decisions I might make, that puts it in the "die-rolling contest" game and out of the wargame area, for me.

Actually, I like BP (when played with house rules to mitigate the dice problems).

For the person who is that player who consistently fails their command rolls using the rules as written, there is indeed very little engagement for that player in a 4-hour game. I have been that player. I have seen others be that player. That series of bad dice rolls prevents the player from ever having a chance to make meaningful decisions.

there is always one player who consistently fails order dice rolls and winds up with very little engagement in a 4-hour game. I will only play that game again if it is being run with house rules to ensure that every command roll counts as at least 1 success.

This is exactly why I've made some changes to Lion/Dragon Rampant to ensure at you get at least 1 unit to do something per turn for conventions.

I have been that player.

Then all I can say is that the GM blew it by providing your Commander with too low a Ld value. A good Gm should take that balance of action and inaction under consideration. You do want some failures as troops do NOT always do what they've been told or orders don't get through. Also, always having the failed unit get a move defeats the "drilled" attribute.

Unless the Ld is set ridicously low, it is very difficult to fail all your Ld rolls in a 4 hour period, especially having to consistently fail the first of your rolls. I suspect, even with your admitted limited experience, you can see the difference between a poor rule mechanic and a statistical anomaly.

Like I said, I'm not averse to the house rule that you or TSD101 suggest. I'll just add that a good GM doesn't need it.