"TtS: For King & Parliamentary review" Topic

Morning all. Hopefully you have all survived the turkey and dried fruit induced coma of yesterday's festive excess.

Here's my review of FK&P to help you rebalance your gaming world.. link

Thank you for a good, incisive review. I agree with the grid system as a deal breaker but I would add Igo/Ugo and card activation.

Thanks for a very fair review KYPD. As a co-author, I must admit that, unsurprisingly, the grid is not a deal breaker for me! I accept, however, that it seems to be for a lot of people. What I am less clear about is precisely why? Is it the look of the grid on the table, or something about how it affects the mechanics of the game, or a combination of the two? Personally, by simply marking the corners of the grid boxes, I think I have disposed of the former to my satisfaction, but am still somewhat puzzled by the latter. I find the removal of the need for measuring distances and angles a blessed relief, leaving me free to concentrate on what I am trying to get my units to do. But others find it detracts from what they are looking for in a game?

Grids cut out various disagreements etc and movement is pretty clear cut in what is represented . Grids on our table are very unobtrusive. The timid and waffling movers are forced to act, speeding up game play..,.

Well I dithered over grids for ages before trying out 'To the Strongest!' but after a couple of games I was hooked at least for ancients and then for the ECW when 'For King and Parliament' came out. As Mollinary alludes to the fact that there is no measuring or worrying about angles etc. lifted a weight off my shoulders and enabled me (and the group I play with) to simply enjoy the game and just worry about if my battle plan was working, or not……

Cheers Paul

Great set of rules. We've adapted them to TYW and GNW and they work well. Never had a game we didn't enjoy.

I agree with the others about the grid system. It removes all the gaminess of measuring distance and angles and lets the commander(s) concentrate of the best sequence to activate units to accomplish the tasks at hand.

We've used both TtS! and FKaP! here at the Jackson Gamers for a number of years.

Jim

To the Strongest is my favorite ancients rule set. I have also played For King and Parliament and love it too. Squares can be marked very subtly and do not detract from the look of the thing. There are some very nice commercial terrain clothes with very subtle markings made especially for these rules. Great elegant system that allows you to concentrate on the game. The activation system is great because it introduces an element of uncertainty. I have even adapted it to the Spanish American War and played San Juan Hill and El Caney with stands representing American and Spanish regiments. I find the elimination of measuring liberating and the rules can be mostly memorized after becoming familiar with the system. What more can be asked for in a set of rules?

I will be trying a variation for the War of the Spanish Succession with each regiment on a base. Should work just fine!

Had doubts about gridded systems, but nothing else to play during covid (played TtSt online) – the gridded system is a blast. To many it's not a deal-breaker anymore but almost a prerequisite for playing tabletop wargames in the future.

I was dubious about grids, but after playing a couple of games I bought a mat with a very discreet 15cm grid. It is so discreet that I happily use it for all my games with other rules.
I am not as sold on the use of cards. They are a bit obtrusive on the table but we will probably go with D10s in future.
I like the fact that Horse are not supermen, they run out of stamina quite quickly, so have to be used carefully.
We have played historical scenarios quite happily, without worrying too much about "points".

Steamingdave2 if you do not like cards. (I don't like them either) go with chips out of a bag. You can make your own out of small wood circles or buy them on the Big Red Bat Shop. They are much less obtrusive than cards.

Andrew, yes the look of grids is my most immediate dislike. Even trying to disguise grids by marking corners with scatter terrain doesn't work (for me).

Yes the argument for grids is very compelling, but I just don't like them. Maybe my dislike of grids is irrational (we all have irrational dislikes – for me it's pasta, Scott bicycles, brown sauce, the thought of going on holiday to Spain… all bonkers, totally without reason)

I like grids. They stop all the micro-millimetre, angle-sensitive piddling about that makes me detest a number of, say, Ancients rules sets designed for the competition gamer mindset. I'm quite fond of stablemate rules set To The Strongest, partly because it gave me the most fun game of Greek on Greek action I've ever had with two hoplite armies. Very much tempted by For King And Parliament to put new life into my ECW gaming. All the grid-based games I've played have been quick and easily playable in an evening because the movement is so much faster. A system that allows me to come up with a plan and enact it without knowing much of the detail of the rules gets my vote.

I was of the opinion that grids made it a board game with figures. Then I actually played a couple of games and changed my mind.
What I like about For King and Parliament is precisely the grid. The games actually look like the woodcuts depicting battles from the period, with the regiments in depth and multiple lines.

Really good review! I like the detail of the rules and would hope for some 30YW unit stats. However still wrapping my head around the grid. I really appreciate your time and effort in these rules reviews….very helpful.

Takeda, what are you looking for in the way of TYW unit stats?

Hi Mollinary, just looking for unit values,point costs and special rules for 30YW etc.

Hi Takeda, and I was just looking for what you think is not currently covered in FK&P!

Hi Takeda. Sorry, on re-reading that post I realise it sounds a bit snarky! Not my intention at all. What I was hoping was that you could identify some units you felt the rules didn't cover, and I could then make some proposals as to how they might be incorporated into the system. Two or three would be enough to get me started.

Hi Mollinary, I was looking to model Swedish brigades, Finn horse and Imperial units. Interested in Lutzen period units. I just didn't know where to hunt for unit characteristics?
Btw, thank you.

A few basics to start with. FK&P averages about 150-200 foot and 100-150 horse for each ‘hit', and c 100yds frontage for a box. A standard foot battalia is 4-600 strong, and occupies a 100yd box 6 deep. Each ‘hit'or strength point for a unit usually costs 3 points. Now the Imperialist foot units at Lutzen see to have averaged about 1,000 strong, and were formed some 10-12 deep. So in FK&P terms they would be 5 hit units, deployable in a single box. The Swedish brigades varied in size between 1,100 and 2,000 strong. You have two choices, as I see it, as to how to represent them. Either in separate squadrons (equivalent to various size and p/stations battalia in FK&P) probably 3 in number, maybe with a commanded shot reserve for the big brigades. Or as a single large unit. The latter would cover two boxes, but might be anywhere from 5 to 10 hits. The latter fact makes me prefer the former option. Happy to hear your views.

Andrew

Excellent ideas! Thank you for your thoughts and reply. Very heloful.
Thank you!