Help support TMP


"Shattered Lances" Topic


Shattered Lances

12 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please remember not to make new product announcements on the forum. Our advertisers pay for the privilege of making such announcements.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Shattered Lances Rules Board


Areas of Interest

Medieval

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Recent Link


Featured Ruleset


Featured Showcase Article

Fighting 15's Teutonic Order Command 1410

Command figures for the 1410 Teutonics.


Featured Workbench Article

Jay Wirth Paints 15mm Crusaders for DBA

Jay Wirth Fezian shows how using inks makes it easier to paint a 15mm scale army.


Featured Profile Article

Crusader Jerusalem

Our man in Jerusalem reports on the sights of Crusader-era Jerusalem.


744 hits since 22 Feb 2017
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Marcus Brutus27 Dec 2005 10:38 p.m. PST

In my own quest for an accurate and fun game for late Dark Ages (say 1000-1090 A.D.) I've noticed the rules set Shattered Lances mentioned on more than one occassion. Could someone give me a rough idea of how the rules work. Where does it sit on the complexity scale? How finiky are the rules? How does it compare with other sets in its approach? What makes these rules stand out for you? Thanks for any info.

Mark

Chthoniid28 Dec 2005 1:36 a.m. PST

Well, from the author's perspective, let me offer the following.

1. How do they work-
* SL is a unit-based (not element-based) system of rules
* Troops are classed by battlefield function- e.g. horse-archers, chevaliers, shieldsmen.
* Units are given an initiative rating, reflecting motivation and training. This drives their ability to respond to battlefield conditions. It is partly random.
* The game has 'macro-incentives' to deploy and employ your army historically. Given many armies deployed in several lines, there are explicit incentives to get this right. I didn't assume that just by getting the 'troops classed right', the overall tabletop battle would somehow fall into place.

2. Complexity-
* Many mechanisms are 'paper-less', using random walks to generate a variety of outcomes.
* Given mechanisms are 'unusual', it takes longer to become familiar with the mechanics.
* Mechanisms are not finiky (say compared to DBM)- to quote from the design notes: "…Warfare in this period could be fast and fluid. This effect should be experienced on the tabletop. Less tables, less measurement and less paperwork should give the game tempo and imbue it with an exciting pace"

Chthonic regards

B

trooper15328 Dec 2005 9:43 a.m. PST

Anyone know a merchant in the US that currently stocks this set of rules?

Thanks,
Brian

Chthoniid28 Dec 2005 11:24 a.m. PST

An initial stock was sent to 'On Military Matters' in the USA on 19 Dec, so should be available in early January.

Chthonic regards

B

shurite728 Dec 2005 11:50 a.m. PST

Here is the link for On Military Matters. onmilitarymatters.com

The rules were not listed on the website so I called them. As of today they have not received them. They are expecting to have them available in the middle of Jan. They didn't have the cost at hand but gave a rough estimate of $20.00 USD – $25.00 USD + shipping. Another way to get a rough estimate of the cost is to check the UK price and figure in the exchange rate.

cheers

Chris

on way, double price of

$20.00-S25.00

shurite728 Dec 2005 11:52 a.m. PST

Ignore the info after my name on above posting. I was taking notes while speaking with them and forgot to delete it.

Chris

trooper15328 Dec 2005 8:13 p.m. PST

Thanks for the information. I'll be watching their site for when the rules become available.

Brian

Marcus Brutus28 Dec 2005 9:20 p.m. PST

I just ordered the rules from Outpost. What's the big deal Brian ordering from over the pond? It seems quite simple.

Since I've ordered the rules I guess my inquiries are a bit moot. But are there any other comments about the rules available from those who have played the game. I liked the battle report from Chthoniid on the yahoo sight but I'd sure appreciate some more detailed commentary on the rules. How do they compare with Warrior/WRG 7th or DBM for instance? My impression from the above is that they are not an entry level rules set.

Marcus Brutus28 Dec 2005 9:24 p.m. PST

I just ordered the rules from Outpost. What's the big deal Brian ordering from over the pond? It seems quite simple.

Since I've ordered the rules I guess my inquiries are a bit moot. But are there any other comments about the rules available from those who have played the game? I liked the battle report from Chthoniid on the yahoo sight but I'd sure appreciate some more detailed commentary on the rules. How do they compare with Warrior/WRG 7th or DBM for instance? My impression from the above is that they are not an entry level rules set.

Chthoniid29 Dec 2005 12:07 a.m. PST

I liked the battle report from Chthoniid on the yahoo sight but I'd sure appreciate some more detailed commentary on the rules. How do they compare with Warrior/WRG 7th or DBM for instance?

Well, accepting all potential biases from this side…

I think rules have a learning curve. Rules that deliver poor games, have a gentle beginning and a flat tail. That is, they are simple to learn, but have little depth. It's easy to work out the optimal strategies. The game then becomes boring.

Most good games (IMO) do have a steeper initial stage, then start levelling off. It takes time to refine your skills. I think SL, WRG 7th and DBM fall into the second category. The issue is just how steep the initial stage of the learning curve is.

I don't think SL is as "complex" as WRG 7th or DBM, as there are fewer troop types (the benefit of not being a generic 'Sumer-to-Swiss' set). There are probably analogous relationships with WRG 7th. The SL status D1, resembles 'tired', and the state D2, resembles 'exhausted'. Nontehless, in SL, these states are achieved without the need to record and track casualties.

In contrast to comparable DBM-sized games, we finish much sooner on average (but roughly the same number of turns). There is less dithering with geometry etc. It is more streamlined.

I think that often, the problems players 'initially' have with SL, is that it doesn't follow conventions they are habituated to. For instance, DBM-type tactics lead to a 'crash-and-burn' phenomena in SL. Many wargame rules, also owe a lot to the conventions and doctrines of classical warfare. I departed from this, by drawing upon medieval doctrine as much as possible. This gives (IMO) a far more interesting game- it feels different to games 'standardised' to a classical-warfare model. Mamluks don't behave like 'Romans on horse-back'.

My impression from the above is that they are not an entry level rules set.

They are probably not an ideal 'entry level' set. I don't think that was ever my aim.

Nonetheless, I've had battle reports from players in France, Italy and Spain. I think this suggests they are generally comprehensible, and the diagrams, examples etc, make it possible for gamers with limited English skills, to 'pick-up and play' the rules. So, they are possibly not impossible for the novice gamer to master.

Chthonic regards

B

Marcus Brutus29 Dec 2005 9:14 a.m. PST

Sounds like what I'm looking for. Look forward to trying them out. Thanks for the comments Chthoniid. I actually like it when the author feels passion for his rules. Bias is less important to me than passion.

Chthoniid01 Jan 2006 12:10 a.m. PST

Marcus Brutus-
Sounds like what I'm looking for. Look forward to trying them out. Thanks for the comments Chthoniid. I actually like it when the author feels passion for his rules. Bias is less important to me than passion.

Thanks- I appreciate you're willing to give them a go. (Apologies for delay- I'm not getting in much computer time at the moment).

Chthonic regards

B

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.