|Stuart M||31 Mar 2008 10:28 a.m. PST|
I really hope someone can help me on this one.
I'm relatively new to DBR and have had a few practice games to bring me up to scratch. There's one aspect I don't quite get and that's shooting.
Shooting and close combat are resolved using the same table. so here's a scenario;
An element of arquebusiers moves into range of some halberdiers. the arquebusiers roll the dice and +4, the halberdiers roll and +5, but WHY? why should the halberdiers maintain their high combat bonus when being shot at, am I doing this wrong?
Or have I chosen the wrong rules!
|losart||31 Mar 2008 10:37 a.m. PST|
in this case the halbardiers roll is to be considered as a defensive roll. So if you get more than the halbardiers they will recoil. If you get the double they will be destroyed. If you roll equal or of the halberdier roll more thant the shooter you have no effect.
Of course thing change when there is an exchange of fire between two arquebusiers units. Both may suffer form result.
|Stuart M||31 Mar 2008 10:41 a.m. PST|
So the Halberdiers wouldn't add any combat bonuses?
|Connard Sage||31 Mar 2008 10:46 a.m. PST|
why should the halberdiers maintain their high combat bonus when being shot at
Because the Great Barker said so. There's probably a very good rationale actually, damned if I could find it though. You could also ask why arquebus is Sh(I) and musket Sh(O), let me know if you find the answer to that one
am I doing this wrong?
No, but of course the halberds – sorry Bd(O)- can't shoot back, and there's a chance they may be destroyed on a poor roll
Or have I chosen the wrong rules!
yes. Probably. DBM with firearms?
|Stuart M||31 Mar 2008 10:50 a.m. PST|
Probably. DBM with firearms?
Might be worth a go, is DBM in an any more user friendly format?
The DBR army lists are great but as for the rules (Particularly the Shot (I) issue and generally ineffective cannon)
|Connard Sage||31 Mar 2008 10:56 a.m. PST|
Sorry, I meant DBR is DBM with firearms
The rules have very little period flavour IMHO. Whatever they recreate it isn't Renaissance or Pike and Shot warfare.
|losart||31 Mar 2008 10:59 a.m. PST|
I have played for sevral years DBR and well they are not exactly the best rules for the period. Their only advantage is they are similar to DBM, so if you are a DBM or DBMM player and you want to use a similar system is ok, otherwise there are many more good rules for the Renaissance.
For the 15th Cent if you are looking for popular sets you can choose between POW or (but I'm the the author so
) Impetus that covers from Ancients to Renaissance.
|Phillius ||31 Mar 2008 11:31 a.m. PST|
Stuart M, I feel the same about DBR, little period flavour. However, as they are just about the only renaissance set played in NZ, I don't have a lot of choice. So, I am starting to play them, warts and all.
As to your question, are you playing version 1.1 or 2.0? I have 2.0 adn Blades don't use the factor of 5 for ranged combat. They have a second factor of 3 in the version I have, and that is what they use for ranged combat. Their defensive involvement in ranged combat is only their to bring some reality to the engagement. Your arquebusiers get to fire at them without them firing back, but don't get to inflict a huge number of casualties. Consider the blades defensive "fire" as their armour negating the arquebusiers fire, or their ducking (as the Spanish did to the Swedes at Nordlingen) at the right time.
Are you a member of the DBR Yahoo list? The topic of Shot(I) was discussed there recently. As was the topic of Shot(F). You are not the only one frustrated with the way the rules work.
I am convinced, DBR was the start of the DBMM/FoG stoush between Barker and Bodley-Scott. Two guys who couldn't find any common ground and carried their differences into their rules. DBR has suffered as a result.
|Stuart M||31 Mar 2008 11:55 a.m. PST|
I've got ver 1.1. Might be worthwhile having a look at 2.0 then?
|Stuart M||31 Mar 2008 11:58 a.m. PST|
Sounds a bit an@l but I'm not too keen on rebasing
|Phillius ||31 Mar 2008 12:13 p.m. PST|
Join the DBR List, get V2.0. There are people out there discussing whats wrong with the rules and how to change them.
I don't think there is much momentum at the moment, or that you will always agree with what is suggested, but you will probably find some interpretations of the rules that will help you.
|vtsaogames||31 Mar 2008 12:49 p.m. PST|
Try Basic Impetus. It's free. A unit can be put togther with three of your DBR elements, no rebasing needed. If it doesn't float your boat all you've wasted is some time.
Mind, I haven't used it for Renaissance (yet) but find it gives a decent medieval game.
|lutonjames||01 Apr 2008 12:10 p.m. PST|
'Or have I chosen the wrong rules!'
As i remember the rules- you have if your a halberdier. The shot get the second rank, bringing the 5 down to a 4- but the arquebusiers only have to get a higher die role not double, to get a kill- so the arquebus should kill almost 25% of their own number- per shooting round.
| Bobgnar ||01 Apr 2008 12:23 p.m. PST|
DBR is not that old game DBM with firearms. It is more between DBA and DBM in complexity. Much less to learn than DBM. Great army lists. Our group has had many very interesting and fun historical scenario games. I like it for these, as I do not play tournaments. Edition 2.0 had lots of input from players.
|mbsparta||01 Apr 2008 5:32 p.m. PST|
DBR is the very best of the DBx family of games. And (of course) I disagree that the rules do not offer 'period' flavor. And the army lists are first rate.
Get 2.0 and give the game a try.
|No Name 3||06 Apr 2008 1:16 a.m. PST|
Have to agree with mbsparta and Bob and his dog on this. The old version of DBR wasn't bad at all, but I have certainly warmed to the 2.0 version.
At one time I used to use DBR to create scenarios based upon smaller, less well-known historical ECW battles. If you pick something relatively obscure then the people that you get to play it don't know how the original battle went. More often than not DBR gave historical results.
|The Wargames Room||06 Apr 2008 2:05 a.m. PST|
I suspect that you have sorted your question on DBR shooting by now. The troop classification of Blade does indeed have a lower value when subjected to ranged fire.
As to the comments on DBR being any good. I believe they are. I find they have a good balance between playability and historical detail. I main interest is the ECW but even out of this period they seem to model battles well.
I'm not a competition gamer but was very impressed with a small competition I attended. Great opponents, interesting armies, enjoyable games.
Have a look at my brief report on my experiences at Cancon recently:
|Stuart M||06 Apr 2008 6:36 a.m. PST|
Thanks for all the input and considered response guys. I have invested in version 2.0 and it does play better – particularly the blades / shooting issue, which was my initial gripe.